I am trying to install grub-pc's primary boot loader to the MBR and I am repeatedly failing even though I am using the right command syntax. For some weird reason, update-grub is creating repeated menu items pointing at the same installation.

Before I run grub-setup, I mounted the partition containing the /boot/grub directory. This was mounted on /mnt/sda1. The command was this:
Does anyone know why grub-setup is failing? I am tempted to use dd on the MBR but I have no idea how the primary boot loader is 'wired' to load the correct sequence of sectors from the HD and somehow it must know, but how?

sorry, how do I delete a post?

I was suggesting to use the linux notation for device, but grub has changed that syntax across versions (distros did some changes too), so I'm not sure if that applies to you.

Is your system booting or is it dropping to a grub prompt.
If it is booting then are you having the same problem I'm experiencing? I added linuxmint to my grub menu & I now have 5 or 6 entries for linuxmint.

Why are you using "grub-setup" to install grub on the MBR?

Try;

It is a matter of philosophy. I don't agree that a bootloader is modified by any installed OS because of its central importance on a computer. For me it doesn't make sense that an installed OS, in the event of an error, impacts the bootability of an entire multiboot system: it simply doesn't make sense.

I cannot use the given command because that command assumes that I am linking grub with the currently loaded OS. I am attempting to install grub to an ext2 15MB partition.

I used an ext2 filesystem because the file system is used only by the bootloader, hence, a journalling file-system is not necessary. I think, the fact that it is ext2 may be the cause why grub-setup fails.

Yes, you are probably right. Why won't you try a regular install with any Linux and just put the grub bootloader in the mbr when asked for it during the installation process? After install you can still change your bootloader sequence. That'what I do with my multiboot system and most of the time it works. Solaris is a tricky one (not a Linux) but I finally got that one too.

Take a look at the bottom of the page in the link below. The method for a standalone grub on a separate partition is basically the same except for Grub2, it should not be on a fat partition which should not be a problem as you state you already have an ext2 filesystem:

http://library.techguy.org/wiki/Inst...d_alone_system

Bootloaders are almost always modified by the OS but during installation (and sometimes during updates), you do have a choice, at least on Linux. Usually three options, install to mbr, install to partition or don't install a bootloader. However, it is obviously not necessary to modify the bootloader and that is the primary reason to have either a /boot partition or standalone grub partition so you are not dependent on the boot,grub files which are usually on the partition on which the primary OS is isntalled.

I enlarged the partition which contained the original bootloader so that it could fit a small (less than 1 GB) installation of Debian without a window manager or desktop. The installation created its own bootloader saving the primary bootloader to the MBR as I required.

I will not use this installation so that grub.cfg would not be changed.