hi every body
i used fedora before i found it uses grub
but when i switch to slack i found lilo
whats the different between them and whose the best
i have seen some thing strange that it still use ancient packages as if there is a new one found like kernal 2.4 and a 2.6 is found and others am i right???

You might want to read this: Boot loader showdown: Getting to know LILO and GRUB.
After I moved to Slackware and found out lilo I'm not going to use grub again, lilo is much more simple and easy to use.

To get the second opinion in:
since I learned to use grub - which is not hard, but just a little different - I much prefer it!
in the link IceChant gave here, there is a section "GRUB vs. LILO" and the reasons given there are the main ones to have me use grub and never again lilo - which is also good and I used it until last year.
Grub being able to let you boot any OS from its command-line - even if it's config-file is misconfigured is a major advantage.

i use lilo, simply becuase i know how to use it!

never used grub, or had to use it.

meh sory not a very good argument for lilo......

The following might help:

Installing GRUB

I could'nt agree more, now i see why PV uses it for Slackware, and to think it was one of the reasons that made me not to try Slackware before, now it think people like grub because of bootsplash, i could care less about that.

I've always used LILO and it's always worked for me. I'm sure there are advantages to using GRUB but until I find a pressing one I'll probably stick to LILO since it's what I'm familiar with. Just my two cents.

I use both, in my mind there as good as each other, on my machines that run slackware I use lilo because that is the default bootloader and it is added effort to go and install grub. Similarly, on my archlinux machines I use grub because that is the default bootloader.

Errmm, yeah. That makes no sense whatsoever. Are you trying to ask why Slackware doesn't use a 2.6 kernel? The answer is simply because the Slackware maintainer doesn't think the new 2.6 series is stable enough yet. Slackware's goal is to be a stable OS, not a bleeding edge one. Furthermore the kernel used in Slackware 10.2 was the most recent of the 2.4 series at the time of the release of 10.2, so I would hardly call it an ancient version.

then u say that kernal 2.6 isnt stable

I can't speak for him... but I'm sure it is safe to say "No, he isn't saying that!"

ahmed gamal,

I did not say the 2.6 kernel was unstable

I said: Slackware's maintainer (Patrick Volkerding) does not think that the 2.6 kernel is stable enough for Slackware's purposes.

It can be assumed that Volkerding is continously evaluating the 2.6 kernel because of the updated packages in /testing. I am sure he will move to 2.6 when he thinks the 2.6 kernel is mature and stable enough.

To illustrate that Slackware doesn't use ancient packages and is a fully uptodate system. Sendmail published a security vulnerability yesterday along with patches. Last night I recieved an email from the Slackware Security Mailing List telling me where I can find new official slackware packages for sendmail.

That's the reason why Slackware uses lilo