Disk Partition problem

saikee · 11-04-2007, 03:40 PM

I thought I could help as I run 3 Dos, 5 versions of Windows in a box with a few Linux.

I just wrote a thread to show how one can write a script to automate a Vista booting 150+ Linux. One can always make it as easy as one wishes or go the opposite way.

jiml8 · 11-04-2007, 04:54 PM

Saikee, you are der bootmeister.

I have no idea why you do it. I have never run across anyone else who does do it. But there is no doubt that people had better pay attention when you talk about grub and about booting multiple operating systems.

saikee · 11-04-2007, 06:16 PM

jiml8,

Kind word indeed. Thanks.

For the OP benefit. I leave this thread as what I consider to be an easy way.

sujoy mukherjee · 11-04-2007, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiml8

WIth this post of mine, the thread is now 60 posts long.

Everyone here is a volunteer; we look at your problems and we offer suggestions for no reason other than we are interested.

I come wandering by, and I can assure you that I DO NOT re-read the entire thread every time. I merely pick up where I left off and depend on my memory to support me. I am sure that pretty much everyone here does the same thing.

You should expect in this case exactly what you are getting, which is a discussion among people who know a lot more about this than you evidently do, as we look it over as merely a part of our busy days. If you look through the thread, what you see is a dialogue. If one or another of us misses some fact that proves critical, then you have every right to point that out to us, but you have absolutely no right - at all - to EVER shout at us.

To put it bluntly, there is nothing wrong with me, there is nothing wrong with jay73, and there is nothing wrong with saikee.

You yourself have posted incorrect information (when you hand copied fdisk output rather than cut/paste), and you yourself have posted several long posts in a row about this and that, and often not on the point of questions you have specifically been asked. You yourself have therefore led us off of the track in this thread.

If you want help, what you say is: "I did previously post this information; see for instance post 22". And that is all you say.

In other words, YOU WILL BE POLITE IF YOU WANT HELP.

Clear?

Personally, I am done now with this thread. I won't be shouted at or insulted by someone who comes looking for free help, the more so when that very someone has himself led everyone off the track by providing false information.

Well I know everyone here is a volunteer and everyone here is helping me out.
But then again as you don't have the time to read every older posts I really DON'T HAVE the time to post same old things again and again.
And about the cut+paste methods.....I already clered it out by putting the correct info.....its you who did not went through it.....

You see, if you really want to help somebody, you first need to be patient, and then find out what the problem is and then only try to solve that out.

BUT YOU ON THE OTHER HAND, ALWAYS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT I DID NOT PUT ON THE THREAD(WHICH ACTUALLY I DID), AND BEING SO RUDE.

You also said ...."I won't be shouted at or insulted by someone who comes looking for free help, the more so when that very someone has himself led everyone off the track by providing false information."
See your problem? You here coming as if you are not helping me....but you are doing a social service..., donating something as if you are showing how kind you are
And EXCUSE ME? WRONG INFORMATION? IT WAS ONLY ONE POST THAT I DID A TYPO ERROR.....ONE WITH MY fdisk -l, But then I came back and correct it, I did post the fdisk -l twice again with the proper information.....BUT THEN AGAIN, DO YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW IT? I RATHER DOUBT THAT. YOU JUST COME HERE AND COMPLAIN

INFACT WHEN I'M GIVING YOU THE LINK OF MY OLDER POST, SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO WASTE YOUR PRECIOUS TIME IN FINDING IT, YOU STILL WAS RELUCTANT.

See you said I'm shouting to you.....actually its you who is shouting at me and repeatedly saying I'm not giving this or that info to you while I'm constantly trying to provide the same old things again and again.

So jim,it should be you who seriously think about your attitude, not me.
Remember if you think you don't like my attitude, then no problem...you can leave this thread.....

Clear?

sujoy mukherjee · 11-04-2007, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saikee

jiml8,

Kind word indeed. Thanks.

For the OP benefit. I leave this thread as what I consider to be an easy way.

saikee, your so kind and helpful indeed.
Thanks again for all your links.

I'll go through it..let's hope for the best.....

And thanks again to all others for your helps.....I really owe you a lot

jiml8 · 11-04-2007, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sujoy mukherjee

So jim,it should be you who seriously think about your attitude, not me.
Remember if you think you don't like my attitude, then no problem...you can leave this thread.....

Clear?

Congrats, twit.

You've made my ignore list.

sujoy mukherjee · 11-04-2007, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiml8

Congrats, twit.

You've made my ignore list.

Oh thanks....what an honor for me

Actually you also encouraged me to start my ignore list.

saikee · 11-05-2007, 02:28 AM

I am no different from jiml8. We are just a group of Linux users help others with our own experience. Our advices don't always go down well.

brianL · 11-05-2007, 05:11 AM

I hope this thread won't put people off trying dual-booting XP and Linux. I've successfully tried several distros - some using Grub, some Lilo - with no problems. The trouble in this case seems to be caused by trying to get XP & 98 to coexist.

saikee · 11-05-2007, 06:02 AM

Th method I used for booting multiple MS systems have key steps as follow

(1) Always install MS system as the first boot disk so it is in a "C" drive.

(2) Move the system to its final destination, say as the 4th disk in the booting queue.

(3) When this system is booted I hide all the MS partitions in front of it and re-map the disk order back to No. 1 position.

Hiding a MS partition only changes its partition ID temporarily, making a MS system treating it as "foreign". A fat16 partition has Type 6. Hiding it changes the Type to 16. Unhiding it changes back to Type 6. Here is a thread I wrote to explain it in details. This the the method a MS system use to disregard partitions not belonging to its own kind. We might as well make some use out of it.

Here is an example I extracted from the Grub menu in the 145 systems thread that has 3 Dos and 5 Windows. The Win2k is the 6th MS system I boot there. It is located in the 1st partition of the 4th disk or sdb1 in Linux term. The color bits have been added to explain each step.

Code:

title        Win 2k @ sdb1 #title describing the OS & partition (partition name is for own consumption)
root         (hd3,0) # declare the root partition to be booted is 1st partition of 4th disk
hide         (hd0,0) # hide hda1 which is a Dos6.22
hide         (hd0,1) # hide hda2 which is a Win3.11
hide         (hd0,2) # hide hda3 which is a fat16 data only partition with which I host Grub
hide         (hd1,0) # hide hdc1 which is a Dos 7.1 (non MS system)
hide         (hd1,1) # hide hdc2 which has a Win98
hide         (hd1,2) # hide hdc3 which is a Vista
hide         (hd2,0) # hide sda1 which is a XP
unhide       (hd3,0) # unhide sdb1 which is Win2k I want to boot, as it may have been hidden
hide         (hd3,1) # hide sdb2 which is a FreeDos (unnecessary but stops Win2k using it as a transit storage)
makeactive           # make the declared root partition sdb1 active (bootable in Linux term)
map          (hd3)       (hd0)  # tell Bios to swap old disk (hd3) into new (hd0) position 
map          (hd0)       (hd3)  # tell Bios to swap old disk (hd0) into new (hd3) position 
chainloader  +1                 # fire up Win2k by booting its boot loader from its 2nd sector onward

Thus when Win2k in sdb1 in the 4th disk is booted its system could not see no other MS partition in sight and has no choice but agrees that sdb1 is the first MS partition to be given the "C" status. The partition is marked "active" and according to the Bios, tricked by Grub with the two map statements, it is in the No.1 disk position. Everything is exactly as Win2k was installed. So how can it not boot up?

Basically I want an easy life and let Grub does all the donkey work for me.

I dislike MS latching on the first MS partition it detects to dump the boot loader to dual boot the second MS system. If something happen to the first MS system the 2nd system is also at risk because it has no boot loader of its own.

The above technique is applicable in Lilo too. If any system goes down it does not affect system outside it. It is easier to maintain, to upgarde and to increase extra systems because there is no limit to it.

I really see no reason why a user should pull the hair out to make a dual boot system work to suit the MS approach when in the Linux approach he/she can have a holiday time in booting.

brianL · 11-05-2007, 06:55 AM

Saikee
I should think everyone on these forums would agree with what jiml8 said about you being "der bootmeister".

sujoy mukherjee · 11-05-2007, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saikee

I am no different from jiml8. We are just a group of Linux users help others with our own experience. Our advices do always go down well.

I also don't deny that. You are a group of really helpful people including jiml8. But all I wanted to say jiml8 was that he should be a little polite while talking to me. Side by side, I also aplogise if any of my words hurt anyone's sentiment.
Anyhow I don't want to argue on this matter anymore.
Thanks for your kind suggestions....actually I have decided to format my windows partition and reinstall windows. ofcourse I will keep fedora. I've come to Linux world with an urge of learning it and I'll not let it go for some silly ms file error

After reading earlier threads, I'm also considering of uninstalling win98 and keeping only win xp and fedora.
May be it'll work for me.
And if everything will be fine then I will come back and let you know.

uncle-c · 11-05-2007, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianL

I hope this thread won't put people off trying dual-booting XP and Linux. I've successfully tried several distros - some using Grub, some Lilo - with no problems. The trouble in this case seems to be caused by trying to get XP & 98 to coexist.

I whole heartedly agree. The fat32 filesystem and win98 + xp on the same drive could cause problems.
I use grub and have booted all sorts of combos without any problems. I've had no problems having several linux distros co-exist happily with XP + Win2k on the 2nd HD. The problem I think seems to be the Win98+XP issue + Fat32. Maybe if XP was on NTFS and 98 on Fat32 ?
I read elsewhere that corruption of Hal.dll has known to occur when having 2 different versions OS Win on the same HD. Replacing the corrupted dll with a new one does not often work as hall.dll is generated on the fly during installation and is specific to your own machine.
Perhaps OP should save all his valuable data which is on the XP drive. Reformat this partition to NTFS, reinstall windows xp. This will overwrite his MBR, but it is easy to reinstall grub to overwrite the windows MBR bootloader. Reconfigure grub /menu.lst and see if that works ?!

Uncle

ps: saikee is "der boot ubermeister !!!"

saikee · 11-05-2007, 07:56 AM

brianL ,

But if you see me in person in Telly Savalas hair-do you may wonder "What happen to all his hair?"

uncle-c ,

I also believe MS deliberately alters the system files if it detects multiple installations without its knowledge. The intention may be good but it can be also a way of protecting its interest.

My recent experience was cloning a hard disk with XP and Vista, with XP dual booting both. I forgot to remove the original hard disk when booting up the clone. The result was MS killed off all 4 systems. I have since installed each system separately with its own boot loader.

The hiding and unhiding of MS partitions is the reliable method I know of to keep off the M$ mischief. The trouble with MS systems is a user has to do what he/she is told by MS otherwise he/she is not protected and sabotaged by the in-build proection mechanisms.

sujoy mukherjee

It is nice that you have mentioned an apology and I am sure jiml8 is happly to participate future discussions.

brianL · 11-05-2007, 10:32 AM

Saikee
I'm bald too, but you know what they say: grass doesn't grow on a busy street.

uncle-c
You can convert a fat32 drive to ntfs without losing data. In cmd.exe:
convert C: /fs:ntfs