Grub2 doesn't work half of the time

[perham]

I've seen like 20 threads about failure to boot or incompatibility of grub2 with windows 7, vista or even XP. it seems that it crashes most of the times, making the system unusable. I had to revert my brother's boot loader to grub legacy, and I myself am using grub legacy too. what was wrong with grub legacy that Ubuntu developers chose grub2 over grub when it doesn't work well?

[Bachstelze]

GRUB .97 is not maintained anymore, which means that if a security vulnerability is discovered, it will not be fixed by the developers.

EDIT: also, GRUB 2 Works For Me™.

[Psumi]

Protip: Don't #ofOSes-boot.

I only use one distro on a machine, and that's fine with me.

[alanjackson]

I have a netbook with XP, Karmic Ubuntu, and Karmic Kubuntu on it. Grub never fails.

[dmizer]

what was wrong with grub legacy that Ubuntu developers chose grub2 over grub [snip]?

Legacy grub can't boot ext4 partitions.

[Regenweald]

<snip>

GRUB 2 Works For Me™.

Same here. Worked dual booting Win7, works dual booting Vista. You guys are doing something wrong.

[CharlesA]

Legacy grub can't boot ext4 partitions.

Didn't know that, thanks.

Same here. Worked dual booting Win7, works dual booting Vista. You guys are doing something wrong.

I'm tribooting XP, Backtrack4 and Ubuntu 9.10 with no problems. *shrug*

[RATM_Owns]

Legacy grub can't boot ext4 partitions.

http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/pack...686/ext4.patch
http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/pack..._64/ext4.patch

?

[dmizer]

http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/pack...686/ext4.patch
http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/pack..._64/ext4.patch

?

Right. It has to be patched because:

GRUB .97 is not maintained anymore

[dragos240]

I have grub legacy and I didn't need a patch for my system running on an ext4 system.