I don't need a solution so much as an explanation because I resolved my problem as described below. Here's the scoop:

I have a system with 3 SATA II drives:

1. sda - 80 GB with Windows XP Pro
2. sdb - 250 GB Data Disk
3. sdc - 250 GB with Fedora 6

I wanted to dual boot with Fedora 6 & Windows XP Pro and have Grub installed on the MBR rather than sdc and go through the extra steps of letting Windows think it's the boot loader...

Anyway I installed Fedora at least 6 times in the last 72 hours each time with the same default settings. Each time I would reboot I never saw a Grub menu and instead the machine booted right to Windows XP (even though I left the default option to have Fedora as the default boot target).

This morning I tried a different approach. Rather than letting the Fedora install automatically partition sdc using LVM and LogVol's I manually partitioned using simple partitions, /boot - ext3, / - ext3, /home - ext3, and swap and remaining free space as logical partitions on an extended partition. Proceeded with the rest of the install and rebooted, and this time I got the beloved Grub boot menu.

So please tell me why Fedora/Grub doesn't like it's own auto-partitioning (on Sata drives) but will work with basic manual partitioning. On a side note, a few months ago I installed FC6 on my laptop (no dual boot) with basic IDE drive and it was using the default Fedora LVM partitions. So does the Grub/LVM/SATA combination not play well together?

When you installed it using the non-lvm partitions, you unknowingly solved the problem by creating a /boot partition. Actually, you wouldn't need the /boot partition for non-lvm setup but you do need it when using lvm.
This site explains it quite well but in case you missed it, the bios can't read lvm. If you don't create a /boot partition, then grub files are located within the lvm partition. Therefore grub can't be accessed and is not usable.
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/l...titioning.html
I haven't felt much of a need to use lvm at home but, if you do, just make a separate little /boot partition and you should be ok.

That certainly makes sense, however if I'm not mistaken the default Fedora partitioning scheme creates a non lvm /boot partition and then using lvm creates the / and swap partitions. So it seems to me that there's more to it than simply having /boot as a standard parition outside of lvm.

Voelcker,
I'm having similar problems with Fedora's own auto partitioning, and I'm quite certain there is no /boot. On my machine FC6 simply will not install on the partitions anaconda thinks that it is making.

I finally ditched Fedora and went with OpenSuse 10.2. Excellent distro! I think it blows Fedora out of the water!

That's an interesting claim. What reasons do you have to support it?

1. I don't loose my sound every time I run an update.
2. OpenSUSE 10.2 recognized my NTFS windows drives (not partitions) and mounted them as /windows/C and /windows/D. I think Mandriva does this also, I can't remember... (granted this may be a simple manual step but the fact the the install does it for me was nice -- also I've skimmed forums where it seems getting Linux to recognize an NTFS partition/drive isn't as easy as it aught to be.
3. Between Fedora 6, Mandriva 2007, Ubuntu 6.10, and OpenSUSE 10.2, OpenSUSE 10.2 came the closest to zero-customization post install to do what I wanted to do...
4. The new KDE and Gnome start menu layout is awesome (especially in KDE)
5. I used the x64 version and all my software (as far as I can tell) is 64 bit, Firefox, Java, etc.

To be specific for # 3, I didn't have to go through installing an RPM to add a YUM repostitory to be able to install the nVidia drivers from Livna (for Fedora), and I didn't have to compile the drivers from source as with Mandriva. (OK so installing the nVidia drivers is about the same for Ubuntu and OpenSUSE -- add a repository and off you go...). I also didn't have to beat around the bush to get Beryl installed. And most importantly for me was that OpenSUSE 10.2 was the easiest to get my twin view/dual head setup working. Maybe this could have been easier with the other distros if I had been using 2 LCDs or 2 CRTs instead of 1 LCD and 1 CRT... I'll never know since I have since replaced my CRT with another LCD.

That's about all I can think of at the moment...

Well, between my researching distros and the points you've made, I am seriously considering ditching FC6 and going with OpenSUSE. Thanks for your observations. I am taking them into consideration, since I am currently having issues with booting (my bad for effing with my fstab) and not being able to modify fstab. This is, in my opinion, not necessarily a distro-specific problem, but nonetheless, I am aware of the collective weeks that I have spent troubleshooting this distro, even if I am learning more about Linux in the process, and the improvement upon this if I go with SUSE or Mandriva.
Thanks again!

I hosed my fstab once to the point where it wouldn't boot. I'm sure you've read or at least been given this suggestion (I'd be surprised if you haven't) but I'm going to offer it just in case. You should be able to use the grub prompt to modify the fstab file then reboot.

yeah, this thread is a few months old but i came across it through a search and found the supporting arguments for the claim ridiculous...

1. i've been using fedora since core 1. i've never had a problem with getting sound to work. not sure how each distro handles the sound server but i guess if you just blindly update your system, that could cause more problems than with just sound.

2. any external ntfs drive i connect to my system is auto-mounted in fedora. i'm not sure why you would need to auto-mount an ntfs hard drive that's not portable unless you're dual booting or have some type of windows compatibility need but like you said, it's simple to mount it after installation. i guess that feature in suse, which can be set up as a post install script with any distro, is for people that can't get their windows apps/hardware working in linux. poor fellows. i've never had a problem with ntfs-3g and linux. even before write support, samba, linux, and windows worked as expected. in fact, it's quite easy.

3. unfortunately, i've yet to find any distro that's come anywhere close to zero-customization. i've always had to install fluxbox and copy over my .conf files. i mean it would be nice if cedega was completely set up after an install so i could install world of warcraft out of the box but i'm sure that day will come soon. actually, with revisor, kickstart, and acronis, i could respin my own iso and just keep it up to date. as far as yum, you do realize you can include any repository during install? people use repos other than livna. some don't use livna at all. or yum for that matter. as beryl has been replaced by compiz fusion, it's the first time i've used it but i yum'd all the packages for compiz and it runs perfectly. took a minute or so to install and forever to configure. although, that's due to all the compositing features and plug-ins. i'm always finding something new to tweak in the ccsm. i can even do screencasting while recording sound from the mic. really though, in my opinion, they're all the same to me. the only difference in use i've found is with the distro's installation interface and package managers. or bsd-like init systems.