On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 12:46:57 -0700, "ron minnich" rminnich@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Joseph Smith joe@settoplinux.org
wrote:
Maybe so for a virus. But when it allows an end user to have a
completely
configurable boot loader...
If people want it I guess. But we computer people need to be more careful about opening holes to provide features. Just look at the state of the internet for a reason why....
true. Well, how about this then. Instead of FILO writing the file we could just provide a generic filo.conf. The first time the user boots up they will have to manually boot. Once they are in Linux they can just copy the filo.conf to their first drive, first partion, root directory. Ahh, but that will still defeat the purpose, because it will still not be configurable from FILO at bootup, just read only... huh, my brain is starting to hurt.