Windows install *after* Linux
It's fairly straightforward to install Windows and then install Linux. But what is not so straightforward is to do Linux first. I got into that situation because my Windows partition was clobbered but my Linux was still working perfectly. I went through the Windows CD install, but afterwards I got an "invalid partitioning" message when Windows rebooted after the first phase of its install. I've googled "windows xp install SLE site:lists.suse.com" but could not find anything useful. To make matters worse, the Windows partition is a logical, not a primary. Should I just give up and install everything from scratch, Linux as well as Windows? Fortunately this system doesn't yet have any data that I need to preserve. Paul
On 06/09/21 19:21 (GMT-0400) Paul Abrahams apparently typed:
It's fairly straightforward to install Windows and then install Linux. But what is not so straightforward is to do Linux first. I got into that situation because my Windows partition was clobbered but my Linux was still working perfectly. I went through the Windows CD install, but afterwards I got an "invalid partitioning" message when Windows rebooted after the first phase of its install.
o_O How did it ever get started I wonder. :-p
I've googled "windows xp install SLE site:lists.suse.com" but could not find anything useful.
To make matters worse, the Windows partition is a logical, not a primary.
Maybe that's the problem. Doze must have a primary to get its foot in the door. I don't know how it would have installed without a primary. It needs about 40M of primary C: to install, because it isn't smart enough to put any installation files on the actual logical target D: or elsewhere while it is performing its install. Its C: requirement isn't really a lot different from using a separate /boot for Linux, except that with doze it isn't optional to use a primary for it.
Should I just give up and install everything from scratch, Linux as well as Windows? Fortunately this system doesn't yet have any data that I need to preserve.
I install doze after Linux as a matter of course, usually putting C: on hda3, and D: after some logical ext3 partitions. It sounds fixable, but maybe not so easy for free. I use the cross-platform shareware partitioning utility DFSee from http://www.dfsee.com/ for all my partitioning. It has an excellent support system from its author and its users primarily from http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dfsee-support/ . DFSee is a power user's tool. It has a dual command line/menu interface, but it still ain't easy to use without a lot of practice and understanding. Luckily, the group and/or author can usually bail you out of any confusion or trouble you get into with it. It has scripts that are easy to run to do common tasks, like analyse and log output for its author to use to diagnoze what needs doing to fix problems. http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/tmp/s2846ecs2.log is a portion of some DFSee log output from a system with doze installed to logical D:, but booting from primary C: on /dev/hda3. That system has SUSE 10.2 Factory, SUSE 10.1, Knoppix, eComStation 1.1, and eComStation 2.0beta2, besides doze XP. What it sounds like XP might have hit is a propensity of Linux partitioning tools to get the extended partition chain out of logical order. Linux has no problem with that, but doze always rules it invalid. I know DFSee can fix the logical order of the logical chain, but have no idea what might be available for free that also has that capability. There are a number of partitioning tools on the http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/ CD that might possibly be of use. Another possible reason for doze to rule the scheme invalid is finding multiple "active" partitions. Doze only allows one active primary per disk, but Linux tools don't care and will happily let them all be active. This too I know DFSee can fix, and quite simply and quickly. What might be the easier way out would be to do as I suggested Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:02:04 -0400 and following, and go ahead and wipe and start from scratch, and put the /boot on cylinder 1 (start of disk) is to ensure that its partition begins before LBA sector 1,032,192 (1024*16*63), with doze following. But if the HD was here, I'd find attempting recovery the more enjoyable challenge. Oh, and when this is all behind you, consider how cheap HDs have become. I just bought a 250G for $80, the same price I paid for only 80G two years ago. At these prices, it hardly pays to not have an extra HD or two just for backing up. I use the cloning method of backup. It isn't particularly fast or convenient, but with a cloned HD, you can experiment all you want, screw it up royally, and not have lost anything but some time having fun learning and experimenting. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. Esteem her, and she will exalt you; embrace her, and she will honor you." Proverbs 4:7-8 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/
On 22 September 2006 00:21, Paul Abrahams wrote:
To make matters worse, the Windows partition is a logical, not a primary.
I observed that you received lots of useful advice. My only contribution is to remember that Windows must boot from a physical partition. Lívio
On Friday 22 September 2006 10:59, Lívio Cipriano wrote:
On 22 September 2006 00:21, Paul Abrahams wrote:
To make matters worse, the Windows partition is a logical, not a primary.
I observed that you received lots of useful advice. My only contribution is to remember that Windows must boot from a physical partition.
Additionally: in my experience, installing Win *after* linux will replace your grub/lilo launcher and boot directly into Windows. It might be necessary to launch your Suse system from the DVD and re-install grub after installing Windows. When given a choice, i recommend installing Win first, then Linux, to avoid this minor annoyance. -- ----- stephan@s11n.net http://s11n.net "...pleasure is a grace and is not obedient to the commands of the will." -- Alan W. Watts
Hi Stephan, On 22 September 2006 10:14, stephan beal wrote:
installing Win *after* linux will replace your grub/lilo launcher and boot directly into Windows
Now that you mention, I remembered the same experience. If possible, the simplest solution is to have to independent boxes (win and linux) and connected them with samba. It works perfectly to my needs. Regards Lívio
On Friday 22 September 2006 5:56 am, Lívio Cipriano wrote:
If possible, the simplest solution is to have to independent boxes (win and linux) and connected them with samba. It works perfectly to my needs.
Because of the licensing issues, it's not cost-free to put Windows on all your boxes. But it is cost-free to put Linux on all your boxes in these days of huge disks, so why not do that? An interesting solution along the lines you suggest is to put the two boxes side by side and hook them both into a KVM switch that enables you to operate them both from the same keyboard, mouse, and video terminal -- and even with the same speakers and microphone. Just press the hotkey combination and your keyboard, etc., switch from one to the other (Ctl - Ctl- Enter in rapid sequence in my case). The only disadvantage of that setup, I've found, is that there's some degradation of video quality because of the extra cables involved. And there's no difficulty in networking the two boxes together. Paul
Hi Paul On 22 September 2006 18:16, Paul Abrahams wrote:
An interesting solution along the lines you suggest is to put the two boxes side by side and hook them both into a KVM switch that enables you to operate them both from the same keyboard, mouse, and video terminal
That exactly the solution I have. I should had be more precise : One Win box and N Linux boxs. Regards Lívio
Paul Abrahams wrote:
On Friday 22 September 2006 5:56 am, Lívio Cipriano wrote:
If possible, the simplest solution is to have to independent boxes (win and linux) and connected them with samba. It works perfectly to my needs.
Because of the licensing issues, it's not cost-free to put Windows on all your boxes. But it is cost-free to put Linux on all your boxes in these days of huge disks, so why not do that?
An interesting solution along the lines you suggest is to put the two boxes side by side and hook them both into a KVM switch that enables you to operate them both from the same keyboard, mouse, and video terminal -- and even with the same speakers and microphone. Just press the hotkey combination and your keyboard, etc., switch from one to the other (Ctl - Ctl- Enter in rapid sequence in my case). The only disadvantage of that setup, I've found, is that there's some degradation of video quality because of the extra cables involved. And there's no difficulty in networking the two boxes together.
Or, install Xming on the Windows box and run a remote Linux desktop.
HI all.. On Friday 22 September 2006 19:16, Paul Abrahams wrote:
On Friday 22 September 2006 5:56 am, L�vio Cipriano wrote:
If possible, the simplest solution is to have to independent boxes (win and linux) and connected them with samba. It works perfectly to my needs.
Because of the licensing issues, it's not cost-free to put Windows on all your boxes. But it is cost-free to put Linux on all your boxes in these days of huge disks, so why not do that?
An interesting solution along the lines you suggest is to put the two boxes side by side and hook them both into a KVM switch that enables you to operate them both from the same keyboard, mouse, and video terminal -- and even with the same speakers and microphone. Just press the hotkey combination and your keyboard, etc., switch from one to the other (Ctl - Ctl- Enter in rapid sequence in my case). The only disadvantage of that setup, I've found, is that there's some degradation of video quality because of the extra cables involved. And there's no difficulty in networking the two boxes together.
Paul
This is not a bad idea. But I did it another way. Now that VMware has a free server version I run only Linux with XP running under VMware. I've had very little problem with it. One neat thing is that XP is one (huge) file that once I had it like I wanted, I backed up this file. Now whenever I mess up XP I just delete the file and replace it from the backup. Hope this helps, JIM -- Jim Hatridge Linux User #88484 ------------------------------------------------------ WartHog Bulletin Info about new German Stamps http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/bulletin/index.php Viel Feind -- Viel Ehr' Anti-US Propaganda stamp collection http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/collection/index.php
On Friday 22 September 2006 3:31 pm, James Hatridge wrote:
Now that VMware has a free server version I run only Linux with XP running under VMware. I've had very little problem with it. One neat thing is that XP is one (huge) file that once I had it like I wanted, I backed up this file. Now whenever I mess up XP I just delete the file and replace it from the backup.
What are the limitations of the free server version versus the paid version? I hadn't heard that there was a free version of VMWare. How much of a performance hit, if any, have you noticed? Paul
HI Paul et al.. On Saturday 23 September 2006 20:54, Paul Abrahams wrote:
On Friday 22 September 2006 3:31 pm, James Hatridge wrote:
Now that VMware has a free server version I run only Linux with XP running under VMware. I've had very little problem with it. One neat thing is that XP is one (huge) file that once I had it like I wanted, I backed up this file. Now whenever I mess up XP I just delete the file and replace it from the backup.
What are the limitations of the free server version versus the paid version? I hadn't heard that there was a free version of VMWare. How much of a performance hit, if any, have you noticed?
Paul
Very little, its much better than trying to use wine. At one point I had KDE running with audio going and two or three programs, Kmail etc, at the same time I was installing a program and running Photoshop under XP the audio started skipping a bit. So I stopped XP (suspend) until the music stopped (it was my wife's music, ie better to wait for it to finish than to stop it) She can get gumpy! :) As far as the free vs paid version, I understand that the paid version has tools to allow you to program VMware itself. Since I only want to run XP etc under it, I don't need all the bells etc. BTW, I have a 2.3ghz system with 1gb main memory. You can use this link to get to the page with the free download: http://vmware.rsc02.net/servlet/cc5?NuOpQSAYSQTUVcHuLkQaHljpKnLxnuzfQKLV2VAU Please note that its a bit over 100mb download. Hope this helps, JIM -- Jim Hatridge Linux User #88484 ------------------------------------------------------ WartHog Bulletin Info about new German Stamps http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/bulletin/index.php Viel Feind -- Viel Ehr' Anti-US Propaganda stamp collection http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/collection/index.php
Hi Jim On 22 September 2006 20:31, James Hatridge wrote:
Now whenever I mess up XP I just delete the file and replace it from the backup.
That is a very attractive solution. But is there a problem when you want to install new XP software (or Linux)? Regards Lívio
Lívio Cipriano wrote:
Hi Jim
On 22 September 2006 20:31, James Hatridge wrote:
Now whenever I mess up XP I just delete the file and replace it from the backup.
That is a very attractive solution. But is there a problem when you want to install new XP software (or Linux)?
Restore image, make changes, save new image.
HI LÃvio! On Sunday 24 September 2006 12:06, Lívio Cipriano wrote:
Hi Jim
On 22 September 2006 20:31, James Hatridge wrote:
Now whenever I mess up XP I just delete the file and replace it from the backup.
That is a very attractive solution. But is there a problem when you want to install new XP software (or Linux)?
No problem at all! I started playing with VMware on 10.0 with W$98. When I installed 10.1 I just moved the W$98 file from my 10.0 disk to the 10.1. So far I've not had any problem with installing anything on XP. As far as XP knows, its alone on the computer. JIM -- Jim Hatridge Linux User #88484 ------------------------------------------------------ WartHog Bulletin Info about new German Stamps http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/bulletin/index.php Viel Feind -- Viel Ehr' Anti-US Propaganda stamp collection http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/collection/index.php
On 06/09/22 11:14 (GMT+0200) stephan beal apparently typed:
Additionally: in my experience, installing Win *after* linux will replace your grub/lilo launcher and boot directly into Windows. It
That need not be a problem.
might be necessary to launch your Suse system from the DVD and re-install grub after installing Windows. When given a choice, i recommend installing Win first, then Linux, to avoid this minor annoyance.
That's all fine and dandy with a start from scratch, but it's no help when time comes for the inevitable reinstallation of windoz. The better approach is to install such that windoz changes nothing that isn't dead easy simple to undo. How? 1-partition completely first, preferably with a cross-platform and/or OS-agnostic tool, to prevent balks by unruly installers. Reserve for /boot on hda1, and put a tiny FAT16b on hda2 or hda3 for windoz to boot from. Make hda1 "active". 2-install Linux, but put the bootloader on hda1, not the MBR 3-add a stanza to menu.lst or lilo.conf for the windoz primary. do not include "makeactive", unless you want to always start boot from the NTLoader menu on the successive boot 4-set the FAT partition "active" 5-install windoz 5b-(optional) add the Linux hda1 to doz's boot.ini 6-use any of a zillion DOS or windoz or open source tools to change the "active" partition back to hda1 (changing 2 bits in the MBR partition table) At this point you're ready to boot any OS from the Grub or Lilo menu, with a fallback to booting either doz or Linux using NTLoader if you chose option 5b, and you're doing it with pure generic MBR code. Generic MBR code simply transfers boot control to whichever primary is set "active". Any OS installations beyond the first two are easily added to the boot.ini and/or lilo.conf/menu.lst menus. Just remember to place additional Linux boot loaders on their respective boot/root partitions, and set the doz primary active before every doz (re)installation. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. Esteem her, and she will exalt you; embrace her, and she will honor you." Proverbs 4:7-8 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/partitioningindex.html
Hi Felix On 22 September 2006 15:04, Felix Miata wrote:
At this point you're ready to boot any OS from the Grub or Lilo menu, with a fallback to booting either doz or Linux using NTLoader if you chose option 5b, and you're doing it with pure generic MBR code. Generic MBR code simply transfers boot control to whichever primary is set "active".
You have a point : the important is the boot loader. Regards Lívio
On Friday 22 September 2006 10:04 am, Felix Miata wrote:
1-partition completely first, preferably with a cross-platform and/or OS-agnostic tool, to prevent balks by unruly installers. Reserve for /boot on hda1, and put a tiny FAT16b on hda2 or hda3 for windoz to boot from. Make hda1 "active". 2-install Linux, but put the bootloader on hda1, not the MBR 3-add a stanza to menu.lst or lilo.conf for the windoz primary. do not include "makeactive", unless you want to always start boot from the NTLoader menu on the successive boot 4-set the FAT partition "active" 5-install windoz 5b-(optional) add the Linux hda1 to doz's boot.ini 6-use any of a zillion DOS or windoz or open source tools to change the "active" partition back to hda1 (changing 2 bits in the MBR partition table)
My question is about step 5. Windows (XP anyway) seems to insist on having about a 1.5GB partition for its installation. So how do you convince it to install in two pieces, the boot section in hda2 and the rest in some secondary partition? Where do you point it for its installation partition? Paul
On 06/09/22 13:29 (GMT-0400) Paul Abrahams apparently typed:
On Friday 22 September 2006 10:04 am, Felix Miata wrote:
1-partition completely first, preferably with a cross-platform and/or OS-agnostic tool, to prevent balks by unruly installers. Reserve for /boot on hda1, and put a tiny FAT16b on hda2 or hda3 for windoz to boot from. Make hda1 "active". 2-install Linux, but put the bootloader on hda1, not the MBR 3-add a stanza to menu.lst or lilo.conf for the windoz primary. do not include "makeactive", unless you want to always start boot from the NTLoader menu on the successive boot 4-set the FAT partition "active" 5-install windoz 5b-(optional) add the Linux hda1 to doz's boot.ini 6-use any of a zillion DOS or windoz or open source tools to change the "active" partition back to hda1 (changing 2 bits in the MBR partition table)
My question is about step 5. Windows (XP anyway) seems to insist on having about a 1.5GB partition for its installation. So how do you convince it to
It needs about 40M for its initialization files and temp storage on a primary to get installed to a logical. The OS demands about 1.5G, but gets useless very fast if you give it less than about 3G. I tend to try and give it about 7G, and any more space available I make a separate FAT32 to facilitate access on non-doze boots.
install in two pieces, the boot section in hda2 and the rest in some secondary partition? Where do you point it for its installation partition?
It's really very much like a Linux text mode installer. Other than the absolute necessity to have a recognizable (FAT/FAT32/NTFS) primary for it to init from, it's just like having separate / and /boot for Linux. So presuming you partitioned in advance, its installer will initialize itself and inspect your system, after which it will present you with a catalog of options which partition to install to, delete, format, etc. You need merely choose one you already created as the installation target for it to proceed. It will automatically use the C: primary you previously marked "active" for initialization and boot loader. I recommend your partitioning scheme put at least one swap and one / on hda5 and hda6 before you create your doz target, follow that target with any other doze format partitions you want, and then follow with all the rest of your Linux partitions. This will immunize both doze and your hda6 Linux against trouble from any later updisk manipulations or installations. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. Esteem her, and she will exalt you; embrace her, and she will honor you." Proverbs 4:7-8 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/partitioningindex.html
On Friday 22 September 2006 2:35 pm, Felix Miata wrote:
It's really very much like a Linux text mode installer. Other than the absolute necessity to have a recognizable (FAT/FAT32/NTFS) primary for it to init from, it's just like having separate / and /boot for Linux.
So presuming you partitioned in advance, its installer will initialize itself and inspect your system, after which it will present you with a catalog of options which partition to install to, delete, format, etc. You need merely choose one you already created as the installation target for it to proceed. It will automatically use the C: primary you previously marked "active" for initialization and boot loader.
That's very interesting. So even if you install into what Win calls the F: partition, say, it still puts boot stuff into the C: partition. Will it manage to do that even if the C: partition is Reiser, say? Or is C: necessarily the first FAT or NTFS partition that Win sees? Are there conflicts if that partition is also the one you've specified to grub as the boot loader location (which, I gather, can be distinct from /boot)? Or does grub's boot loader partition have to be the one where /vmlinuz and /initrd live? (I didn't think so.) Paul
On 06/09/22 14:55 (GMT-0400) Paul Abrahams apparently typed:
On Friday 22 September 2006 2:35 pm, Felix Miata wrote:
It's really very much like a Linux text mode installer. Other than the absolute necessity to have a recognizable (FAT/FAT32/NTFS) primary for it to init from, it's just like having separate / and /boot for Linux.
So presuming you partitioned in advance, its installer will initialize itself and inspect your system, after which it will present you with a catalog of options which partition to install to, delete, format, etc. You need merely choose one you already created as the installation target for it to proceed. It will automatically use the C: primary you previously marked "active" for initialization and boot loader.
That's very interesting. So even if you install into what Win calls the F: partition, say, it still puts boot stuff into the C: partition.
Exactly, just like a Linux installer told to use a separate partition for /boot will put grub, kernel, initrd and little else on it, and put the OS on the partition to be mounted as /.
Will it manage to do that even if the C: partition is Reiser, say?
If it isn't FAT12/FAT16/FAT16b/FAT32/NTFS, it can't be C:.
Or is C: necessarily the first FAT or NTFS partition that Win sees?
The answer to this last question is right up there in the first paragraph you quoted, with the qualification that "sees" is equivalent to "visible" primary. Doze will "see" as many as 4 primaries, all of which could be FAT/FAT32/NTFS, but will pretend that only the "visible" one exists. Also, if more than one active one or visible one exists, it will claim the disk partitioning is invalid/corrupt/unusable. See URL below if you need clarification on the meaning of visible or active.
Are there conflicts if that partition is also the one you've specified to grub as the boot loader location (which, I gather, can be distinct from /boot)? Or does grub's boot loader partition have to be the one where /vmlinuz and /initrd live? (I didn't think so.)
I wouldn't dream of putting Grub on any partition doz needs for booting purposes, even though the Grub docs indicate FAT is an acceptable type to install it on. AFAIK, vmlinuz and initrd can be anywhere that stage1.5/stage2 can read. If you install Grub to ext2, I doubt you could have it read vmlinuz or initrd from FAT, and can't imagine why you would want to anyway. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. Esteem her, and she will exalt you; embrace her, and she will honor you." Proverbs 4:7-8 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/partitioningindex.html
On 06/09/22 10:04 (GMT-0400) Felix Miata apparently typed:
On 06/09/22 11:14 (GMT+0200) stephan beal apparently typed:
Additionally: in my experience, installing Win *after* linux will replace your grub/lilo launcher and boot directly into Windows. It
That need not be a problem.
I just proved to my self that the doz installer may have no interest in doing so. See the story below.
might be necessary to launch your Suse system from the DVD and re-install grub after installing Windows. When given a choice, i recommend installing Win first, then Linux, to avoid this minor annoyance.
That's all fine and dandy with a start from scratch, but it's no help when time comes for the inevitable reinstallation of windoz. The better approach is to install such that windoz changes nothing that isn't dead easy simple to undo.
How? 1-partition completely first, preferably with a cross-platform and/or OS-agnostic tool, to prevent balks by unruly installers. Reserve for /boot on hda1, and put a tiny FAT16b on hda2 or hda3 for windoz to boot from. Make hda1 "active". 2-install Linux, but put the bootloader on hda1, not the MBR 3-add a stanza to menu.lst or lilo.conf for the windoz primary. do not include "makeactive", unless you want to always start boot from the NTLoader menu on the successive boot 4-set the FAT partition "active" 5-install windoz 5b-(optional) add the Linux hda1 to doz's boot.ini 6-use any of a zillion DOS or windoz or open source tools to change the "active" partition back to hda1 (changing 2 bits in the MBR partition table)
At this point you're ready to boot any OS from the Grub or Lilo menu, with a fallback to booting either doz or Linux using NTLoader if you chose option 5b, and you're doing it with pure generic MBR code. Generic MBR code simply transfers boot control to whichever primary is set "active".
Any OS installations beyond the first two are easily added to the boot.ini and/or lilo.conf/menu.lst menus. Just remember to place additional Linux boot loaders on their respective boot/root partitions, and set the doz primary active before every doz (re)installation.
Largely to prove the above instructions are usable, but also to burn in some new hardware, I tried it myself on a blank HD last night and this AM. Step 1 went fine, as it usually does for me. Step 2 had a glitch. I chose to use Kubuntu 6.10 for this exercise. On my hardware, its graphical installer refused to start, and I got flustered by it and managed to get into some kind of minimalist ncurses installation mode. Its partitioner had no problem allowing me to select the mount points I wanted, but there was no option as to where to put the boot loader (or what software to install). This may be a consequence of the absence of any bootable system anywhere on the disk. Also as a result of the minimalist installation, I had no mc or X when I got done, so I chose to detour and actually get those installed and working with apt-get before proceeding to step 3, even though for the purpose of the exercise it wasn't necessary. Steps 3 & 4 went fine. Step 5 produced another surprise. I chose W2K, which installed smoothly right where I wanted it. When done, I found the MBR still contained Grub! W2K's installer found it unnecessary to replace the MBR code! First reboot in the W2K install brought me to the Grub menu, where I proceeded to select W2K and continue the balance of W2K installation. Step 5b I hadn't actually tried before. My first guess at Grub entry syntax was a failure. Step 6 was simple. Afterwards I booted Linux and ran grub-install /dev/hda1. Then I Googled for boot.ini instruction, saved the Grub sector as a file to C:, correctly edited boot.ini to include the saved sector file, and rebooted to find the W2K boot menu with a Linux/Grub entry, which works exactly as advertised. I then booted a DOS floppy to install generic MBR code. It still works. No matter whether the active partition is ext2 or FAT, and with generic MBR code, I always get a menu with a choice of Linux or W2K, and in either, I can go to the other's menu, looping as long as it takes to make a decision which to boot and which loader to use. :-) Some things that might be helpful: 1-condensed version of menu.lst (minus all installer commentary): http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/share/doz+grub-menu.lst 2-boot.ini, with an appended instruction on creating the boot sector file: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/share/sample-with-comment-boot.ini 3-log output from DFSee that shows the partitioning: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/share/sample-multiboot-partitioning-doz+linuxwithgr... 4-URL below -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. Esteem her, and she will exalt you; embrace her, and she will honor you." Proverbs 4:7-8 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/partitioningindex.html
One thing I'd like to add to Felix's excellent instructions. For some sequences of setup you might get into the situation where Windows won't boot because it needs ntldr (it will tell you that). It happened to me. If that happens, and you have the XP install disk, start it up and go to the recovery option R. Assume your Windows boot partition (not the one where the bulk of Windows resides) is C: Then copy the files: d:\i386\ntldr d:\i386\ntdetect.com to C: where d: is the DVD (or CD) drive. There's a MAP command available in the recovery console that will tell you the drive letter for that drive. You might be able to do this copy under Linux, but you'll have to use Win to set the Windows boot loader onto C:. Paul
On 06/09/23 16:42 (GMT-0400) Paul Abrahams apparently typed:
One thing I'd like to add to Felix's excellent instructions....
My instructions are now in web page format at: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/install-doz-after.html -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. Esteem her, and she will exalt you; embrace her, and she will honor you." Proverbs 4:7-8 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/partitioningindex.html
On Friday 22 September 2006 5:14 am, stephan beal wrote:
Additionally: in my experience, installing Win *after* linux will replace your grub/lilo launcher and boot directly into Windows. It might be necessary to launch your Suse system from the DVD and re-install grub after installing Windows. When given a choice, i recommend installing Win first, then Linux, to avoid this minor annoyance.
Oh, I agree completely. But sometimes circumstances force you to install Windows after Linux -- as when your Windows has gotten clobbered and has to be reinstalled completely. I've gone through the regrubbing quadrille and it's not that painful or even that nonobvious, as long as you realize it's necessary. Paul
On Thursday 21 September 2006 18:21, Paul Abrahams wrote:
It's fairly straightforward to install Windows and then install Linux. But what is not so straightforward is to do Linux first. I got into that situation because my Windows partition was clobbered but my Linux was still working perfectly. I went through the Windows CD install, but afterwards I got an "invalid partitioning" message when Windows rebooted after the first phase of its install.
I've googled "windows xp install SLE site:lists.suse.com" but could not find anything useful.
To make matters worse, the Windows partition is a logical, not a primary.
Should I just give up and install everything from scratch, Linux as well as Windows? Fortunately this system doesn't yet have any data that I need to preserve.
Paul
You've already received excellent advice from Felix. The UltimateBootCD is well worth the download. It has lots of utilities to fix lots of system problems. Your grub entries for the Win partition have to be exact. I have Win booting off a second drive with the following: title Win2K map (hd0,0) (hd1,0) map (hd1,0) (hd0,0) rootnoverify (hd1,0) makeactive chainloader (hd1,0)+1 map statements rearrange the hard drive and partition order for Windows so Windows won't complain. rootnoverify tells either grub or Windows not to question what its just been told is the root partition. makeactive is for Windows benefit to boot from an active partition. grub can therefor make any partition on any drive 'active' for Window's benefit. chainloader tells Windows where to find its MBR. Your task is to modify the above to reflect your drive/partition settings and see if it works. _IF_ this works, great. If this doesn't work, blast the entire hard drive and start everything over from scratch. Do not save any partitions, delete them all. Install Windows first into a single primary partition. I believe your partition information on this drive is toast. I know you may never be able to prove that it is actually bad. From all that has happened on this drive between hardware faults and software installs I personally would never trust this drive until I totally wiped it clean and started over from scratch. But then, that's just me. Stan
On Friday 22 September 2006 8:26 am, Stan Glasoe wrote:
I believe your partition information on this drive is toast. I know you may never be able to prove that it is actually bad. From all that has happened on this drive between hardware faults and software installs I personally would never trust this drive until I totally wiped it clean and started over from scratch. But then, that's just me.
In fact, I did just that and still had problems with the simplest Windows install, which confirmed my suspicion that hardware was involved and was screwing me from the beginning. I thought I had fixed those problems, but even now, when I've installed Windows but not yet installed Linux, Windows sometimes fails on bootup and sometimes doesn't. That sort of inconsistent behavior is almost certainly caused by hardware intermittency. I've checked the drive itself several times with the Maxtor utility (from the Ultimate Boot CD) and also zeroed it out completely. I'm also going to run Steve Gibson's Spinrite on the new Windows partition, though I haven't done that yet. But I'm pretty sure at this point that the drive itself is OK. Since all my problems started when I transferred drives and motherboard to a new case, I'm suspicious of the cabling between the drive and the motherboard but have no idea of how to test it, especially given that the drive itself seems in perfect order. Paul
participants (8)
-
Felix Miata -
James Hatridge -
James Knott -
Jeff Rollin -
Lívio Cipriano -
Paul Abrahams -
Stan Glasoe -
stephan beal