Except that if you fail to install the bootloader - which happened to me many times - then you do not have a working system. So really the prior argument makes sense.

IMO the guy is right - LFS could be way better. But it has this current structure and does not deviate from it. That's the bad part.

> If you do things step by step incrementally, you keep having to go further back in the process. Starting over repeatedly gets tedious, boring and frustrating. And it'll take ages to finish the complete OS.

Pray tell how that is necessary for the bootloader? The chain used in LFS isn't the only one that makes sense or is required. IMO it would indeed be better to have a system you boot into as quickly as possible, on real hardware, then continue from there.

If you're going to run the OS, you have to make sure it compiles and runs the bootloader and its installer. The toolchain could be different enough for that to fail. And you do boot into a reasonably small OS and continue from there. That's what BLFS is all about.

TBH, though, the only lesson you learn from BLFS is that value of package managers.

If you like the idea of everything being purpose built for your computer, then after you do LFS you should switch to gentoo.

You build it on your non-lfs computer. What is the other option?

And you dont need to boot anything, just a busy loop after a log "Hello World" is enough, if you feel fancy, maybe make a simple shell ?

You could do that, but if that were to happen to me I'd say the installer sucks and my boss should hire someone else ;)

Agreed, it's near the end of the Gentoo installation as well. If you forget to install GRUB, just chroot back into it and continue.

If I installed the bootloader first, I'd have to remember to run dracut after the system was installed. Or I install it last, create the init at the same time and make a habit of it.

Debian and Arch are the same, grub at the end.