I have compiled kernel 2.6.0. i managed to make bzlmage, make modules and make modules_install.
I did copy the bzImage to the /boot/vmlinuz-ide-2.6.0
i did copy the System.map to /boot/System.map.
I did modify the lilo.conf so that image =/boot/vmlinuz-ide-2.6.0.
I did /sbin/lilo to make the new Linux Loader.

After i rebooted, it still booted into kernel 2.4.22????


Note: i used a previous .config file from my previous partition but this partition already destroyed. Now i have created a brand new partition that is different with the old one. Can i still used back the old partition's .config file to make bzImage??

For the old partition, i install Lilo into MBR and for the new partition i install Lilo into superblock of the root partition. Will the lilo in the MBR still exist and i still boot from my old lilo from the MBR. (I already make my root partition as the only one active drive in my hd)??

How can i delete or restore back the MBR in Windows 2000. I dual boot my Slack with Win2k. I couldn't use fdisk /mbr in Windows 2000.

Please help me.Thanks

if you uncommented line 450 in the Makefile (export../boot something) then you could just run "make install" in the /usr/src/linux directory and watch it do its thang... make install also runs the lilo command. The make install command, after you do a make && make bzImage, will install your kernel and other files where they need to go. Your system will boot the new kernel if you set the lilo.config file up right.

99% of all problems that I read about are ussually a direct result of Lilo...... I don't see why people use it..... The syntax is overly complicated, and doesn't it still look like crap? If you multiboot, you have to symlink/copy kernel images, place them here, place them there... Stand on your head, hold your breath and count to 10........ When will people just start using grub and throw the asprin away....... What if the new kernel doesn't work? Do you really want to do a make install? For some reason, Lilo will never install on my computer with slack either........ Grub has the ability to look on different partitions for the required kernel images. One unified bootloader in the MBR that goes directly to each source partition to use the individual kernel image. If you install lilo on one distro but use 3 others it can't look on those partitions, right? Eh...... I prefer elegant simplicity..... I'll admit, I learned with grub and tried messing with lilo and it just made no sense whatsoever to use it.... So I'm speaking out of half ignorance/half preference...... </rant>

I suspected the previous version of LILO still exist in MBR.

This is why it is always booted to the old kernel(2.4.22) even though i have compiled a new kernel and edited lilo.conf and run /sbin/lilo.

So any one knows how to restore MBR using linux command.

Note: hda1 is Win2k(NTFS) ->C Drive
hda2 is FAT32 extended partition
hda3 is swap partiotion
hda4 is linux root partition
hda5 is FAT32 logical partition->D Drive


Thanks.

Grub is same style as lilo? what are you talking about? To configure grub you have to go through almost identical steps as lilo. YOu the user must define the root partition. You the user must define the windows partition. And worst of all in Grub, they throw the standard definitions for partitions and drives out the window, and decide to use (0,0) or (0,1) or etc...Just read teh fricken comments above the selected line in lilo and you're pretty well off, I don't see anything like that in Grub. Most of the time, if you tried the exact same thing in grub as you did in lilo you get the same problems, notbeing able to write to the MBR. In grub you can install from floppy so hat's off to them. I like the plain jane red lilo screen, oh wait I think grub stole that from them too and just gave the user an option to add graphics to it. And if the user is having problems configuring Lilo I highly doubt they will be able to use the graphics in Grub.

lilo -u to uninstall lilo. This should restore the MBR

I have been re-compiling my kernel for a bit, always using LILO without any problems.
> the same way.
>
> I boot the install with the xfs.s kernel so keep in
> mind that when
> doing the makeconfig make sure that xfs has built in
> kernel support.
>
> I also seem to have the better luck by compiling out
> of x, just goes
> smoother IMO.
>
> loggin
> cd /fat-32
> cp linux.2.6.0-test11.bz2 /usr/src
> tar xjvf linux.2.6.0-test11.bz2
> rm linux
> ln -s /usr/src/linux.2.6.0-test11 /usr/src/linux
> cd linux.2.6.0-test11
> make mrproper
> make clean
> make menuconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> cp arch/i386/boot/bzImage /boot/dub1
> cp System.map /boot
> cp .config /boot/config
> vi /etc/lilo.conf
>
> # Linux bootable partition config begins
> image = /boot/dub1
> root = /dev/hda5
> label = Slack-2.6
> image = /boot/vmlinuz
> root = /dev/hda5
> label = Slack
> read-only # Non-UMSDOS filesystems should be
> mounted read-only for
> checking
> # Linux bootable partition config ends
save your modifies lilo.conf
>
> /sbin/lilo
>
> reboot and everything should be fine, you will see
> the new addition to
> lilo, enter Slack-2.6 and check it out.

Never said they were the same style. Quite the opposite. My big beef with lilo is the whole multi boot among linux distro's thing. No need for them to make it so complicated. Why should you have to copy something from hda3 to hda1 when it's already on hda3? Makes no sense that it can't read off another partition completely for another kernel image.... hd0=hda, hd1=hdb, 0=1 1=2... Not too tough of a concept to grasp there.... Grub is all black with a white border and lettering unless you specify an image or color scheme to use, not red..... If I have 5 different distro's on one drive, I just grub-install /dev/hda and add all my entries to menu.lst and I don't have to worry about reinstalling lilo all the time. Seems like people like to do that often for some reason... Eh...... Whatever your used to using I guess..... Last time I used lilo, it was a horrible red and blue scheme that looked like it was coming from an old TRS-80....... That could have been an individual distro's modification, not sure. Probably the same with your "red" grub unless it was an older version that I'm not aware of.... Any way.... Not too sure I want to argue over bootloaders this evening... I just felt like slamming lilo, thats all..... I'm sure the compile is just fine. Something in your lilo config file is not right. it's still pointing to vmlinuz-ide-2.4.22 instead of bzImage or whatever you might have renamed it to...