openSUSE Tumbleweed Is Finding Success Moving From GRUB To systemd-boot

[Anux]

when you select it some packages will be installed and then the automatic configuration starts.

Which complexity are we talking about? Win, Linux, failback, memtest or just a simple "one OS" install? I'm always a little bit cautious of auto boot loader handling.

Had my fair share in my ubuntu days with their grub auto config in Win dual boot.

[User29]

After reading this post, I opened Yast-bootloader and saw that it is possible to change it even with the system installed. In fact I did it and I must say that it works well, when you select it some packages will be installed and then the automatic configuration starts.
I love openSUSE making things easy for everyone with Yast.
Obviously you will be warned that it is an experimental option.

I'm curious when will it be the default boot loader in SLES. Servers (BM/VM) are natural adapters of a simple boot loader for there is no complexity there.

[woddy]

Which complexity are we talking about? Win, Linux, failback, memtest or just a simple "one OS" install? I'm always a little bit cautious of auto boot loader handling.

Had my fair share in my ubuntu days with their grub auto config in Win dual boot.

I didn't talk about complexity, I simply wrote that I wanted to try it and it was simple and it works for me. After that I have a single boot so it's certainly easier, but if it hadn't worked, it would have been enough to do a rollback.

[openminded]

If you only need a simple boot 'manager' - why even bother? Just use efibootmgr and be done.

I do not see a reason for this. Complex stuff: grub, syslinux, lilo. Simple: syslinux, lilo. Extra simple uefi: efiboot.

Why systemd-boot?

What exactly makes you think that efibootmgr is a boot manager? It's name? You confuse managing boot entries before booting OS and after. The whole point of boot manager is to allow user to select (and probably edit) boot entries to boot from before starting the OS using an easily understandable picker.
And boot managers also help streamline and unify boot process since UEFI intefaces for boot options vary too much.

[Old Grouch]

Grub2 is over complicated piece of shit technology, but at least you receive the seal of approval from toenail eating socialists.

But the non toenail-eating socialists do not approve at all. And neither do the People's Front of Unguium, opposed by the Onychophagist Falange.

[Abacus123]

Grub from my experience works fine aside from the one time I dual booted windows and a windows update trashed my grub installation. Does systemd-boot suffer from the same issue when having a GNU/Linux and Windows dual boot setup on the same drive?

[Vermilion]

To me it's an unfortunate name, because it implies that its tied to system-d, as you assumed it. In EndeavourOS in example (which is using system-d in general), we can use grub or system-d boot.

Every component of systemd is optional just like that, and can be replaced with a different project at runtime or even excluded at compile time (with the exception of journald and systemd-udevd).

The name implies it's part of the systemd project, which it is, and can be controlled with utils such as

systemctl reboot --boot-loader-entry=BOOT_ID

[potens]

Last time I checked, grub was not able to do some of the stuffs systemd-boot is able to, i.e. from Linux asking next reboot to go to the EFI setup, or booting another os, once, next time, or counting the number of failure to start the default, and fallback passed this count (not sure anymore if it was a plan or if it does it)
Edit: yes it does: https://systemd.io/AUTOMATIC_BOOT_ASSESSMENT/

[SpyroRyder]

If you only need a simple boot 'manager' - why even bother? Just use efibootmgr and be done.

I do not see a reason for this. Complex stuff: grub, syslinux, lilo. Simple: syslinux, lilo. Extra simple uefi: efiboot.

Why systemd-boot?

Its a simple bootloader for the UEFI era? Like it or not BIOS booting has been replaced by UEFI and the old simple tools like syslinux and lilo have been dead for years. systemd-boot is small and uncomplicated and can easily be adopted by modern distros aiming for UEFI era x86 hardware, or like 85% of the consumer desktop/laptop computing market.

[J.King]

Last time I checked, grub was not able to do some of the stuffs systemd-boot is able to, i.e. from Linux asking next reboot to go to the EFI setup, or booting another os, once, next time, or counting the number of failure to start the default, and fallback passed this count (not sure anymore if it was a plan or if it does it)
Edit: yes it does: https://systemd.io/AUTOMATIC_BOOT_ASSESSMENT/

This functionality was added recently in GRUB 2.12. I don't know how well it works since I've been using systemd-boot for a while and have no need of GRUB's features, though.