During the GUI installation of beta1, at the LILO config screen, the bottom section includes an active "Default boot image" checkbox even if only one image is defined. While I know that just translates to the default= string of lilo.conf, it could be confusing to some users.
Assigned to developer.
I was unable to reproduce this bug - I installed a computer with a single linux boot target and my lilo.conf had a line which read default=linux There was not a default= line in the lilo.conf. This may mean this is fixed in beta2 - could you check?
Whoops :) you're misinterpreting the bug report, but in retrospect it's my fault for not being more clear about the issue. The generated lilo.conf isn't wrong at all (see the "RFE" prefix :), it's simply a matter of that checkbox at the lilo config screen of a GUI install. I apologize for the "default=" string in my initial report... it's definitely unclear that I was only talking about the checkbox during the installer. The checkbox says "default boot image" and when multiple boot images are defined the checkbox makes sense. When only one image is defined, the checkbox is still active even though it no longer makes any sense (imho). My feeling was that to be consistent the checkbox should be grayed out (inactive) for the situation where only one boot image ("linux" in this case) is defined. For example the "Workstation" "Server" and "Custom" radioboxes get grayed out if you select "Upgrade" at the installation type query screen. This is certainly a judgment call (hence RFE status), but I felt that the checkbox getting grayed out for the "typical" case (or at least a very common case) could help make the installer a little easier on Joe Average... every question is one a user will ponder whether they're doing the right thing or not :)
this will be added to our feature request list ... thanks for your efforts and your report!
The look of the check will probably change, but I think that it's okay for the check to appear even if there's only one entry. Of course, this is a judgement call and some people may disagree, but I think it's okay. From looking at the anaconda bug list, there's more important problems to solve. Maybe we'll revisit this in the future.