[opensuse] A small nuisance I'm seeing with double boot of Windows 10 and openSUSE 13.1.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi, First I explain how I have setup booting of this laptop. BIOS, not UEFI. Traditional partitioning. MBR: generic. partioning (numbers as in fdisk): 1 -> Win boot 2 -> Windows 10 3 -> old HP recovery 4 -> extended, marked bootable. Contains Grub loader. 5 -> swap 6 -> Linux /boot 7 -> root (/) (openSUSE 13.1) So, the BIOS loads the MBR program, this searches for the first bootable partition, sees it is #4, loads the first sector there, which is grub code, which takes control and boots either Linux or Windows as I choose. Now, the nuisance. When Windows (I boot it about once a month) tries to do certain updates (not others) it says that the update failed to be applied for some obscure reason (no, they are unable to figure it out in their help sites). I figured long ago that this is because it does not see partition #1 as bootable. Ie, that Windows is not in control of the boot process. When this happens, the remedial procedure is: Boot Linux, mark partition #1 bootable, unmark #4, boot machine, now without grub in the way. Windows downloads again the updates, reboots, applies them. Boot from external USB stick with Linux, and change mark back to partition #4 to reactivate grub. Boot machine now normally. With Windows 7 this procedure I needed to apply only once in years, for the service pack. But with Windows 10 this is happening more often: there has been a SP already, and another normal update that required this procedure. Twice in almost a month. This is becoming a nuisance. So I wonder if there is another method, where it is Windows which thinks it is in control and presents a menu asking what to boot. I have done this previously with Windows 7 and 2008, using a program for the purpose that configures Windows own boot system. But I have been told it doesn't work with Windows 10. I have not tried it yet, I have to find out first the name of such program, which I have forgotten... BSD or BSC, perhaps :-? Ah! It is BCDedit... No, easyBCD! The article in the Wikipedia is not clear if W10 is supported. I'll have to try, I figure. After I do a real backup. What do you think? Anybody tried this with W10? - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlcX4+IACgkQja8UbcUWM1zE6AD9ElWK0CO2qPouACl/nNhNaILy OkiEz/X3KuK8jLo5nzgA/15RYV9Its6LVT+BpxwEHY7UxmdakQK4jxMWAUgKEPRn =QT48 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. schreef op 20-04-16 22:17:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi,
First I explain how I have setup booting of this laptop.
BIOS, not UEFI. Traditional partitioning.
MBR: generic.
partioning (numbers as in fdisk):
1 -> Win boot 2 -> Windows 10 3 -> old HP recovery 4 -> extended, marked bootable. Contains Grub loader. 5 -> swap 6 -> Linux /boot 7 -> root (/) (openSUSE 13.1)
Just one question. Generally when you install Grub in MBR, you don't install it in a partition. Can you not install it in MBR and keep sda1 flagged bootable? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 22:24 +0200, Xen wrote:
Generally when you install Grub in MBR, you don't install it in a partition.
You do if you're chainloading for whatever reason. PS Sorry, Carlos, no idea of the answer to your question. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-04-20 22:24, Xen wrote:
Carlos E. R. schreef op 20-04-16 22:17:
Just one question.
Generally when you install Grub in MBR, you don't install it in a partition.
That's right, but grub is not installed in the mbr.
Can you not install it in MBR and keep sda1 flagged bootable?
No, because then Windows sees it is not in control and also refuses to do service packs. Hibernation fails, and possibly quick power off in 10. Windows needs to see generic boot code in the mbr. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlcX7owACgkQja8UbcUWM1w3JgD+I7ShKBwIkeeQNi5QKOKrv7sd BmaR1vg+jd0RryX0rGoA/1StYYGBJwY2L7e7V3zK9rdex3lZWgZYOEeSEMDXIuOa =uzh1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. composed on 2016-04-20 22:17 (UTC+0200):
What do you think?
I think it's creator wouldn't make the claim it does if it did not: http://neosmart.net/EasyBCD/ Don't you have an extra HD you can clone to and substitute for experimentation?
Anybody tried this with W10?
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent Windows bootloaders could get away with making it significantly harder. M$ isn't quite that evil I don't think. This obligatory Windows 10 updates process make me glad to have so little need for Windows. I still have none newer than 7 installed, and boot 7 maybe once every other month, and just for a few minutes of actual use. :-) Most of my Windows uptime is spent waiting on updates processing. :-p -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 21/04/2016 00:20, Felix Miata a écrit :
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent
uefi makes this obsolete, no more need to a boot flag jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
jdd composed on 2016-04-21 09:03 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata composed:
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent
uefi makes this obsolete, no more need to a boot flag
Only on machinery that provides UEFI, and then only if it is enabled. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 21/04/2016 09:27, Felix Miata a écrit :
jdd composed on 2016-04-21 09:03 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata composed:
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent
uefi makes this obsolete, no more need to a boot flag
Only on machinery that provides UEFI, and then only if it is enabled.
obviously, but every new machine is like this since some time already jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
jdd composed on 2016-04-21 09:38 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata composed:
jdd composed on 2016-04-21 09:03 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata composed:
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent
uefi makes this obsolete, no more need to a boot flag
Only on machinery that provides UEFI, and then only if it is enabled.
obviously, but every new machine is like this since some time already
That's no help to people who don't replace what ain't broke. My newest machine has UEFI, but since it has no Windows, I don't see any point in enabling it, especially since I have >25 with working openSUSEs that do not have UEFI, and am comfortable with BIOS functionality. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 21/04/2016 09:54, Felix Miata a écrit :
jdd composed on 2016-04-21 09:38 (UTC+0200):
obviously, but every new machine is like this since some time already
That's no help to people who don't replace what ain't broke.
yes, but I hope these machines do works already and don't need any change :-) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Felix Miata schreef op 21-04-16 09:27:
jdd composed on 2016-04-21 09:03 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata composed:
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent
uefi makes this obsolete, no more need to a boot flag
Only on machinery that provides UEFI, and then only if it is enabled.
You know I notice how a lot of people make very smart remarks that are all completely irrelevant to the question at hand as if only to prove how smart they are. Carlos is clearly not using UEFI right, so yeah Felix, I agree. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 09:03, jdd wrote:
Le 21/04/2016 00:20, Felix Miata a écrit :
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent
uefi makes this obsolete, no more need to a boot flag
Not when the laptop is BIOS only, which is my case. Also recently there was a thread recently where the UEFI native menu refused to display anything but the original Windows. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 21/04/2016 10:21, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Not when the laptop is BIOS only, which is my case.
yes, but if I read the subject I see "windows 10". Why install windows 10 at all on such machine? every machine natively with windows 10 is uefi AFAIK :-) of course I sometime do, just for the fun :-) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 10:59, jdd wrote:
Le 21/04/2016 10:21, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Not when the laptop is BIOS only, which is my case.
yes, but if I read the subject I see "windows 10". Why install windows 10 at all on such machine?
The machine was initially W7. The update to W10 was almost mandatory and automatic. My initial post said the machine was BIOS only, not UEFI. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 21/04/2016 11:14, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
The machine was initially W7. The update to W10 was almost mandatory and automatic. My initial post said the machine was BIOS only, not UEFI.
OK. My advice is to search the web to know how to prevent W10 install and restore w7, it's what I did in a similar situation after some time playing with w10. w7 is the less troublesome win version fore example jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 21/04/2016 11:22, jdd a écrit :
fore example
http://www.howtogeek.com/228551/how-to-stop-windows-7-or-8-from-downloading-...
jdd
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 11:22, jdd wrote:
Le 21/04/2016 11:14, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
The machine was initially W7. The update to W10 was almost mandatory and automatic. My initial post said the machine was BIOS only, not UEFI.
OK. My advice is to search the web to know how to prevent W10 install and restore w7, it's what I did in a similar situation after some time playing with w10. w7 is the less troublesome win version
fore example
Well, thanks for the link, but now it is too late. I'm not downgrading to W7 now, too much work. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 21/04/2016 11:42, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Well, thanks for the link, but now it is too late. I'm not downgrading to W7 now, too much work.
:-) I have an old machine on which I can make tests. I have w10 on my small tablet (too hard to install linux, only used on travel) but also on a more recent laptop (uefi). the update process is a nightmare jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
jdd schreef op 21-04-16 10:59:
Le 21/04/2016 10:21, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Not when the laptop is BIOS only, which is my case.
yes, but if I read the subject I see "windows 10". Why install windows 10 at all on such machine?
every machine natively with windows 10 is uefi AFAIK :-)
of course I sometime do, just for the fun :-)
jdd
I don't get it, Windows 10 boots fine on a none UEFI machine. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 14:03, Xen wrote:
jdd schreef op 21-04-16 10:59:
Le 21/04/2016 10:21, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Not when the laptop is BIOS only, which is my case.
yes, but if I read the subject I see "windows 10". Why install windows 10 at all on such machine?
every machine natively with windows 10 is uefi AFAIK :-)
of course I sometime do, just for the fun :-)
I don't get it, Windows 10 boots fine on a none UEFI machine.
I never said it doesn't boot. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Carlos E. R. schreef op 21-04-16 19:29:
On 2016-04-21 14:03, Xen wrote:
jdd schreef op 21-04-16 10:59:
Le 21/04/2016 10:21, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Not when the laptop is BIOS only, which is my case.
yes, but if I read the subject I see "windows 10". Why install windows 10 at all on such machine?
every machine natively with windows 10 is uefi AFAIK :-)
of course I sometime do, just for the fun :-)
I don't get it, Windows 10 boots fine on a none UEFI machine.
I never said it doesn't boot.
First off, I was responding to JDD, not to you. Second off, if I hear UEFI I hear "booting". I don't know what other reasons there could be not to install Windows 10 on a machine based solely on booting parameters. You can really stop making these weird attributions you know Carlos. I don't know what's going on, but you seem to take everything personal. Now you're having me respond to a statement I didn't make. By alluding or insinuating that I responded to a statement you didn't make. I did not. It's in your head. Really. I just expressed my bewilderment at any statement regarding Windows 10 not being fit for a non-UEFI machine. That's all. If you were helpful, you would provide information as to explain why this sentiment exists. You are not being helpful at all now. You're just attacking my statement this way, without providing any form of positive help. Please stop it. When I said "Generally people install Grub in MBR" and then "so why aren't you doing it" you first said "I don't have it installed in MBR" as if I didn't know that. How on earth could I have asked the following question if I thought you had it installed in MBR? I was SUGGESTING you install it in MBR, how on earth can I then think you are currently doing so? Jeez. So many helpful replies constantly just trying to break down some statement. Yes I'm holding back too. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 00:20, Felix Miata wrote:
Carlos E. R. composed on 2016-04-20 22:17 (UTC+0200):
What do you think?
I think it's creator wouldn't make the claim it does if it did not: http://neosmart.net/EasyBCD/
Ah, good! This was not true when I looked some months ago.
Don't you have an extra HD you can clone to and substitute for experimentation?
No, not at the laptop size. All my HDs in working condition are big. I'll make a full image backup to an external hard disk. Takes some time over USB2, though.
Anybody tried this with W10?
Given how well NTLDR managed to get Grub loaded when the Windows partition was active, it's a bit of a stretch to think the more recent Windows bootloaders could get away with making it significantly harder. M$ isn't quite that evil I don't think.
Ha :-)
This obligatory Windows 10 updates process make me glad to have so little need for Windows. I still have none newer than 7 installed, and boot 7 maybe once every other month, and just for a few minutes of actual use. :-) Most of my Windows uptime is spent waiting on updates processing. :-p
Indeed! Same here. But the W10 update is almost mandatory. My laptop downloaded it without asking me, then it proposed the upgrade. I could say no, but then it would ask again and again. Imagine those on a metered Internet... I never start Windows when the connection is that way. I'm forced to use Windows to apply updates and maintenance to certain gadgets, that although they all run Linux, none allows using Linux on the host computer. A TomTom car navigator (maps updates), a Kobo epub reader (buying books), a Nikon camera (for the firmware updates). All those need Windows. :-( -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 21/04/2016 10:29, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
say no, but then it would ask again and again.
no. It's not obvious but you can disable this. windows 10 on old hardware is a problem nest (I tried it :-)) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 11:02, jdd wrote:
Le 21/04/2016 10:29, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
say no, but then it would ask again and again.
no. It's not obvious but you can disable this.
I did not see how. And now it is too late.
windows 10 on old hardware is a problem nest (I tried it :-))
It works almost fine. The only problem I have is with the touchpad (vertical displacement does not work. Two finger does not work, either). -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
* Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> [04-21-16 04:30]: [...]
I'm forced to use Windows to apply updates and maintenance to certain gadgets, that although they all run Linux, none allows using Linux on the host computer. A TomTom car navigator (maps updates), a Kobo epub reader (buying books), a Nikon camera (for the firmware updates). All those need Windows. :-(
No need for windows to apply new firmware to any of my nikon dslrs, unzip new firmware, transfer to {cf,sd}card, insert into camera, use camera menu to apply. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 21/04/2016 13:24, Patrick Shanahan a écrit :
No need for windows to apply new firmware to any of my nikon dslrs, unzip new firmware, transfer to {cf,sd}card, insert into camera, use camera menu to apply.
yes, same for Canon jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 13:24, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Carlos E. R. <> [04-21-16 04:30]: [...]
I'm forced to use Windows to apply updates and maintenance to certain gadgets, that although they all run Linux, none allows using Linux on the host computer. A TomTom car navigator (maps updates), a Kobo epub reader (buying books), a Nikon camera (for the firmware updates). All those need Windows. :-(
No need for windows to apply new firmware to any of my nikon dslrs, unzip new firmware, transfer to {cf,sd}card, insert into camera, use camera menu to apply.
The windows program searches for the updates itself, it automatically tells me some time after boot if there is some update to something. And, as I absolutely have to use Windows to update the TomTom, it becomes less hassle to use it for the rest of the hardware. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
20.04.2016 23:17, Carlos E. R. пишет:
So I wonder if there is another method, where it is Windows which thinks it is in control and presents a menu asking what to boot. I have done this previously with Windows 7 and 2008, using a program for the purpose that configures Windows own boot system. But I have been told it doesn't work with Windows 10. I have not tried it yet, I have to find out first the name of such program, which I have forgotten... BSD or BSC, perhaps :-? Ah! It is BCDedit... No, easyBCD!
Bcdedit is native Windows tool to configure Windows boot manager. So I am not sure what "no" above signifies :)
On 2016-04-21 05:48, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
20.04.2016 23:17, Carlos E. R. пишет:
So I wonder if there is another method, where it is Windows which thinks it is in control and presents a menu asking what to boot. I have done this previously with Windows 7 and 2008, using a program for the purpose that configures Windows own boot system. But I have been told it doesn't work with Windows 10. I have not tried it yet, I have to find out first the name of such program, which I have forgotten... BSD or BSC, perhaps :-? Ah! It is BCDedit... No, easyBCD!
Bcdedit is native Windows tool to configure Windows boot manager. So I am not sure what "no" above signifies :)
That the tool I was trying to remember the name of, was not BCDedit but easyBCD :-) BCDedit is the native tool. easyBCD is a third party tool (Felix posted the link), free for personal use, and really easy to use. I never managed to use BCDedit -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/20/2016 03:17 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Now, the nuisance.
When Windows (I boot it about once a month) tries to do certain updates (not others) it says that the update failed to be applied for some obscure reason (no, they are unable to figure it out in their help sites). I figured long ago that this is because it does not see partition #1 as bootable. Ie, that Windows is not in control of the boot process.
Here's why that happens. Windows booting uses BCD (boot configuration database). And windows uses the active flag on the partition to locate the appropriate BCD. When booting Windows, it uses the boot partition to locate the BCD. But for anything else, such as applying updates, it uses the active flag. It turns out that there is a very simple solution to this problem. I'm currently using that on my laptop (with Windows 7) and on and older desktop (with Vista). I described it in a blog post https://nwrickert2.wordpress.com/2015/06/15/generic-boot-code/ In any case, here is the quick and dirty solution: echo -e -n '\004' > x ### should create x as a 1 byte binary 4 cat /usr/share/syslinux/altmbr.bin x > altmbr.4 ##### That creates the file "altmbr.4" which is based on the syslinux "altmbr.bin" generic boot code. It will always boot partition 4, regardless of the active flag. So now install that in the MBR, and set the active flag for partition 1 (to keep windows happy). And you will still boot with the grub menu. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJXGNjfAAoJEGSXLIzRJwiFrRsH/iNpi9OKAMUUvbPcLBKRv0D/ fmkaldwp5oTGDUI8K397A2mnt7FqxFEXdyw9VtIZNjvIx9nCeLmUnHUIcO5XWlQj U8L0cSiuGDTlkLxUThQFq/NMaF2tZ3H8Q7kUmf5M1QgFlTQch0cQhVna120gS5eC dntlaUjVBNjdevkwixZpEGhR+Gbeh5qPxxvSqoPpcvESfQVphhqOFzoYIyRn40Wk HLgxu14vtG0BHN3LdrAsPtq0wnSxBal2Obup0Emw4cc7JuBiaWThRBgihs0PP06X BA6bNc53EUUBDY5ILG/rQKYdW3lwDnAd1cpmrCv/6GDGgDQ3RsR4R9qmb79wjZo= =V0Ll -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Neil Rickert <nrickert@ameritech.net> wrote:
That creates the file "altmbr.4" which is based on the syslinux "altmbr.bin" generic boot code. It will always boot partition 4, regardless of the active flag.
But that's basically the same as installing bootloader (e.g. GRUB) in MBR, in which case you can also set active flag to any partition. Still there were reports that in this case Windows will refuse updates sometimes. May be MBR was not the only change though and both MBR and active partition were changed at the same time. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 16:00, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Neil Rickert <> wrote:
That creates the file "altmbr.4" which is based on the syslinux "altmbr.bin" generic boot code. It will always boot partition 4, regardless of the active flag.
Wow! :-o :-) Very interesting!
But that's basically the same as installing bootloader (e.g. GRUB) in MBR, in which case you can also set active flag to any partition. Still there were reports that in this case Windows will refuse updates sometimes. May be MBR was not the only change though and both MBR and active partition were changed at the same time.
Well... I will try Neil's method first, and see what happens in a month or two. The problem updates are not all, and it is unknown in advance when a W10 update will cause this problem, so even if this method appears to work at first it will be no proof. Only if I see a service pack update will I know if it works. If it doesn't, I will then revert and use easyBCD instead. I will try this tonight. Thanks! If I forget to comment back in a month or two, ping me. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On Thu, Apr 21 08:09:11 PM Carlos E. R. wrote:
Well...
I will try Neil's method first, and see what happens in a month or two. The problem updates are not all, and it is unknown in advance when a W10 update will cause this problem, so even if this method appears to work at first it will be no proof. Only if I see a service pack update will I know if it works. If it doesn't, I will then revert and use easyBCD instead.
I will try this tonight. Thanks!
Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site, with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database. Consequently, the tools that update the W10 boot database can no longer even access those records or create any new (non-W$) ones. The vendor offers a couple solutions. One is to install grub to the mbr pointing your linux boot partition and then chainload from there to W10. Apparently you are already doing this, but that doesn't solve your upgrade problem. The other suggestion is to use another tool the vendor offers called Recovery Essentials. The vendor claims it can enable the system to use either the EFI or the traditional boot method, presumably switching back and forth between the two. Personally I would not use this without knowing first exactly how it works; the bcd is very complex and the MS bcd tool is a nightmare to use. It is not difficult to make a multi-boot bcd system unbootable. In the past I had the same issue as you describe. Because easyBCD no longer works with non-W$ multi-boot, I used essentially the same workaround as you are now. My next step was to search for a different software tool, but a machine upgrade eliminated the need. Good luck. Dennis -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 22:57, Dennis Gallien wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21 08:09:11 PM Carlos E. R. wrote:
Well...
I will try Neil's method first, and see what happens in a month or two. The problem updates are not all, and it is unknown in advance when a W10 update will cause this problem, so even if this method appears to work at first it will be no proof. Only if I see a service pack update will I know if it works. If it doesn't, I will then revert and use easyBCD instead.
I will try this tonight. Thanks!
Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site, with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database. Consequently, the tools that update the W10 boot database can no longer even access those records or create any new (non-W$) ones.
ARGH :-( Yes, this is, I think, what I read somewhere, saying that W10 was not supported by easyBCD.
The vendor offers a couple solutions. One is to install grub to the mbr pointing your linux boot partition and then chainload from there to W10. Apparently you are already doing this, but that doesn't solve your upgrade problem.
No, this is not the method I use. I have grub in partition 4. I do not use this method because it causes problems on some Windowss upgrades. Having MBR generic, and grub in a partition, you can change the boot mark to the windows partition to make it temporarily happy during certain upgrades, and is easy to undo.
The other suggestion is to use another tool the vendor offers called Recovery Essentials. The vendor claims it can enable the system to use either the EFI or the traditional boot method, presumably switching back and forth between the two. Personally I would not use this without knowing first exactly how it works; the bcd is very complex and the MS bcd tool is a nightmare to use. It is not difficult to make a multi-boot bcd system unbootable.
In the past I had the same issue as you describe. Because easyBCD no longer works with non-W$ multi-boot, I used essentially the same workaround as you are now. My next step was to search for a different software tool, but a machine upgrade eliminated the need.
The method Neil posted looks promising. I have already made the changes, but I still have to reboot to test. And then wait for a service pack. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On Thu, Apr 21 11:09:43 PM Carlos E. R. wrote:
The vendor offers a couple solutions. One is to install grub to the mbr pointing your linux boot partition and then chainload from there to W10. Apparently you are already doing this, but that doesn't solve your upgrade problem.
No, this is not the method I use. I have grub in partition 4. I do not use this method because it causes problems on some Windowss upgrades.
Right, only pay attention to what I mean, not what I actually write. :)
Having MBR generic, and grub in a partition, you can change the boot mark to the windows partition to make it temporarily happy during certain upgrades, and is easy to undo.
Are you aware that you can change the partition table boot flag with the grub command "makeactive"? (Not in grub2 though.) Perhaps this would give you the flexibility you need?
The other suggestion is to use another tool the vendor offers called Recovery Essentials. The vendor claims it can enable the system to use either the EFI or the traditional boot method, presumably switching back and forth between the two. Personally I would not use this without knowing first exactly how it works; the bcd is very complex and the MS bcd tool is a nightmare to use. It is not difficult to make a multi-boot bcd system unbootable.
In the past I had the same issue as you describe. Because easyBCD no longer works with non-W$ multi-boot, I used essentially the same workaround as you are now. My next step was to search for a different software tool, but a machine upgrade eliminated the need.
The method Neil posted looks promising. I have already made the changes, but I still have to reboot to test. And then wait for a service pack.
Re the 440 byte "detail", the table actually begins at byte 446. The bootstrap is inside the first 439 bytes, followed by the disk signature, then the table. Neil's code will be written to the code section, and will essentially do what grub (original) does when installed to the mbr with a pointer to partition 4. The only risk I see with this approach is that Windows has been known to rewrite the boot code in an update; I have no idea is that still happens but I wouldn't be surprised (MS sometimes messes around with other bytes in that sector). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-21 23:51, Dennis Gallien wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21 11:09:43 PM Carlos E. R. wrote:
No, this is not the method I use. I have grub in partition 4. I do not use this method because it causes problems on some Windowss upgrades.
Right, only pay attention to what I mean, not what I actually write. :)
Ok! :-)
Having MBR generic, and grub in a partition, you can change the boot mark to the windows partition to make it temporarily happy during certain upgrades, and is easy to undo.
Are you aware that you can change the partition table boot flag with the grub command "makeactive"? (Not in grub2 though.) Perhaps this would give you the flexibility you need?
No, I had forgotten this. So, you suggest to tell grub to make the windows partition active when booting windows. This is written to disk, I suppose. When is this undone? Because if it remains this way, grub will not boot again, as it is installed in another partition, not in the MBR.
The method Neil posted looks promising. I have already made the changes, but I still have to reboot to test. And then wait for a service pack.
Re the 440 byte "detail", the table actually begins at byte 446. The bootstrap is inside the first 439 bytes, followed by the disk signature, then the table. Neil's code will be written to the code section, and will essentially do what grub (original) does when installed to the mbr with a pointer to partition 4. The only risk I see with this approach is that Windows has been known to rewrite the boot code in an update; I have no idea is that still happens but I wouldn't be surprised (MS sometimes messes around with other bytes in that sector).
Yes, I'm scared of that. Which is one reason why I installed grub on a partition initially. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On Fri, Apr 22 12:10:02 AM Carlos E. R. wrote:
So, you suggest to tell grub to make the windows partition active when booting windows. This is written to disk, I suppose. When is this undone? Because if it remains this way, grub will not boot again, as it is installed in another partition, not in the MBR.
No suggestion other than to perhaps think about if that could help. GRUB has a lot of powerful commands. Just a thought. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
22.04.2016 00:51, Dennis Gallien пишет:
Are you aware that you can change the partition table boot flag with the grub command "makeactive"? (Not in grub2 though.)
parttool hd0,msdos1 boot+ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
21.04.2016 23:57, Dennis Gallien пишет:
Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site,
reference please
with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database.
Do you mean that bcdedit /create /d "Boot using real-mode boot sector" /application BOOTSECTOR no more works? Where is it documented? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-22 05:52, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
21.04.2016 23:57, Dennis Gallien пишет:
Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site,
reference please
with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database.
Do you mean that
bcdedit /create /d "Boot using real-mode boot sector" /application BOOTSECTOR
no more works? Where is it documented?
You are talking of bcdedit, the microsoft command line program. We talk of easyBCD, a third party application really easy to use, compared to the cryptic Microsoft program ;-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
On 2016-04-22 05:52, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
21.04.2016 23:57, Dennis Gallien пишет:
Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site,
reference please
with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database.
Do you mean that
bcdedit /create /d "Boot using real-mode boot sector" /application BOOTSECTOR
no more works? Where is it documented?
You are talking of bcdedit, the microsoft command line program. We talk
To quote: "MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database". Please show me the "by using easyBCD" in this sentence.
of easyBCD, a third party application really easy to use, compared to the cryptic Microsoft program ;-)
You mean it is more cryptic that your "dd" invocation? Well, as you wish. It takes three bcdedit calls that are well documented in thousand places on Internet. But if you say it is impossible to learn, use whatever works for you. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-22 12:03, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:
You are talking of bcdedit, the microsoft command line program. We talk
To quote: "MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database". Please show me the "by using easyBCD" in this sentence.
The whole paragraph is: «Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site, with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database. Consequently, the tools that update the W10 boot database can no longer even access those records or create any new (non-W$) ones.» You see, the paragraph refers to easyBCD :-) But I also would like to see a link to the point the vendor says that.
of easyBCD, a third party application really easy to use, compared to the cryptic Microsoft program ;-)
You mean it is more cryptic that your "dd" invocation? Well, as you wish. It takes three bcdedit calls that are well documented in thousand places on Internet. But if you say it is impossible to learn, use whatever works for you.
I never managed to make bcdedit work, at least from reading the manual. We were a dozen people in a training room plus the teacher. :-} -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
On 2016-04-22 12:03, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:
You are talking of bcdedit, the microsoft command line program. We talk
To quote: "MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database". Please show me the "by using easyBCD" in this sentence.
The whole paragraph is:
«Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site, with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database. Consequently, the tools that update the W10 boot database can no longer even access those records or create any new (non-W$) ones.»
You see, the paragraph refers to easyBCD :-)
I find it hard to believe that Microsoft bothered to block specific third party application from making specific changes to BCD while still allowing the same changes using native tool or other changes using the same application. For a start, how should it identify which application made changes? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-22 13:12, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:
On 2016-04-22 12:03, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
The whole paragraph is:
«Carlos, easyBCD will not help you. When you run the program, and as explained on the vendor's site, with W10 MS made some change which forbids a non-Windows OS from even being added to the bcd database. Consequently, the tools that update the W10 boot database can no longer even access those records or create any new (non-W$) ones.»
You see, the paragraph refers to easyBCD :-)
I find it hard to believe that Microsoft bothered to block specific third party application from making specific changes to BCD while still allowing the same changes using native tool or other changes using the same application. For a start, how should it identify which application made changes?
Yes... I don't know. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On 2016-04-21 15:42, Neil Rickert wrote:
In any case, here is the quick and dirty solution:
echo -e -n '\004' > x ### should create x as a 1 byte binary 4 cat /usr/share/syslinux/altmbr.bin x > altmbr.4
I take it that the partition information is beyond the 440 bytes? I never remember this "detail". -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/21/2016 01:53 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I take it that the partition information is beyond the 440 bytes? I never remember this "detail".
Yes, it is. On another point -- yes, this boot code could be wiped out if Windows rewrites the MBR. I haven't had that happen yet. However, it is far easier to restore this boot code than it is to reinstall grub. So I prefer this to putting grub in the MBR. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJXGX/gAAoJEGSXLIzRJwiFcaQH/RGOTFIwJ9MNT1+Q9l4dbrVT IgxsFHNkJZoGYOZf62oWGk9FTkHrLM3UQe7j8jt/oT7qotsbVMBqBlmi+uxmTmdA mexWDcRjmSK44Abh9sF7jRcChSdqWHTCGVrja6giBIsw0GdcIQXxpFbBQ5UXrGEJ dnv5+VHCYWrUu9uCO+PhBlhpUXDTOHWrarOY9HmjOHRCT1jJQiJaM5idGldRRkSG a4WsnGDZiR9kUDMMYHqngDc/J1gSz1Bzv6IE1Fc4SBvIlL88nbb7mm0ejR0L9hKG sc7S+6hPd2hL9pauaC1itAqH7NRIrfO0bZO0/yLaHE2dH1vs60Y8JIwBfml50fo= =Gj96 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-04-22 03:35, Neil Rickert wrote:
On 04/21/2016 01:53 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I take it that the partition information is beyond the 440 bytes? I never remember this "detail".
Yes, it is.
On another point -- yes, this boot code could be wiped out if Windows rewrites the MBR. I haven't had that happen yet. However, it is far easier to restore this boot code than it is to reinstall grub. So I prefer this to putting grub in the MBR.
Indeed. I did it yesterday night, and yes, it can boot both Linux or Windows. We'll have to wait some months to see if there are problems with updates or not. Only a SP would prove it. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
participants (9)
-
Andrei Borzenkov -
Carlos E. R. -
Dave Howorth -
Dennis Gallien -
Felix Miata -
jdd -
Neil Rickert -
Patrick Shanahan -
Xen