How to install and boot 145 operating systems in a PC

Hi Saikee!

Great reading!!! But there is something that is driving me crazy!


Here is my situation. I installed Ubuntu and installed its GRUB in the MBR, and it auto detected my windows XP loader, and from there i can load my multiple XP installations. So everything works so far.

But i want to move GRUB to a data only partition like you suggest. So i created a new partition (FAT) (primary) , installed GRUB in /boot/grub and then to the MBR. That works, i get a grub prompt only. But this is where i have a problem, i cant get it to work to load my old linux installs, i have 2. Basically i took the config file from my original install and copied it over to my new GRUB menu.lst file. I dont understand why it wont work, should be exactly the same no???

What happens when i select windows, i get an error unrecognised file system!

And when i select linux, i get a similar error i believe.

I must be missing something........... Any ideas?

Thanx,

thesnork ,

Welcome to JustLinux !

It should work just fine if you copy the /boot/grub/menu.lst off the Ubuntu partition and put it in the data-only partition.


The instructions in the menu.lst are the same one if you boot up each system manually, except in the manual booting you omit the "title" statement and finish everything with a "boot" statement.

Lets us know if you have further problem and post the Ubuntu's menu.lst plus the terminal output of "sudo fdisk -l".

also.... When installing Linux Mint 3.1, to put the boot loader in the root partition, what is the syntax?

if i put / it doesnt work
if i put /boot it changes it to /dev//boot which doesnt work


grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

OK... si i did some more reading... WOW booting LINUX is FUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :P



Ok....need explanation.... and then an install question...

i installed mint again, boot loader in MBR. I created a GRUB boot CD. Then i used the commands root (hd0,5)...... setup (hd0,5) to install the boot loader in the root partition. Now i can boot it easily...

Question - i thought that the boot loader was ALREADY in the root partition. I know that the folder /boot/grub already existed and has a menu.lst. Is that not the ROOT partition????????????????

2nd question. When i make a new linux install, how do i tell it to set up the boot loader in the root partition? The default is the MBR (hd0,0), how do i tell it to "PUT IT IN THE ROOT PARTITION" ?????? just use "/" or "root" ?????



Thanx..... SOOOO CONFUSED..... but enjoying it!!!!!!!!! Once i get booting down cold i can try and learn more about LINUX!!

thesnork,

If you want to enjoy Linux and its boot loaders there is few places better than Justlinux.

To answer your question you have to think like a Linux. Somebody installs you may want you to boot from the MBR. However if the MBR has already another boot loader then you must be able to reside inside the root partition. Afterall each Ext2/3 or Reiserfs partition reserves the first track as the "boot sector" just for the boot loader to use. So as a Linux you give the user at least two choices; (1) in the MBR or (2) in the root partition of the Linux.

There is nothing to stop a user after installation to make a bomb-proof scheme

(1) Has the boot loader in the MBR
(2) Duplicate the boot loader in the root partition (inside the boot sector)
(3) Duplicate the boot loader on a floppy.

May be the installer is lazy it always just allows only one choice from the above three.

The method to tell the installer to put the boot loader into the root partition and not in the MBR varies between distros. Red Hat family use Anaconda installer and it has a box for "Advance boot loader option" or something similar to click. If the box isn't check you get the default destination or MBR. Ubuntu family is similar and you need to look out for it but Mandrica, OpenSuse, Knoppix and most other Linux show you the choices in advance. Lilo-based distros like Slackware and Slax families have changed and seem to go directly into the MBR.

Since you have made a Grub CD you can always re-arrange the boot loader any way you want, without even waking up the Linux. For example if you want a Linux (with Grub) in the 7th partition of the 3rd disk to take over the MBR, just boot up the Grub CD and type

Code:

---

root (hd2,6)
setup (hd0)

---

If you have Grub in the Linux from 5th to 10th partitions you can put their Grub in to their root partitions in one single shot

Code:

---

root (hd0,4)
setup (hd0,4)
root (hd0,5)
setup (hd0,5)
root (hd0,6)
setup (hd0,6)
root (hd0,7)
setup (hd0,7)
root (hd0,8)
setup (hd0,8)
root (hd0,9)
setup (hd0,9)

---

To do it by Linux you have to boot one Linux up, chroot to the one you want to put boot loader into the root partition and issue "lilo -b /dev/sda?" for Lilo and "grub-install /dev/sda?" for Grub. Check out Section B of Just booting tips for details.

Open s deposit box in a bank and lock up the Grub bootable CD. It can boot any operating system that has ever been invented on a PC and possibly some new operating systems that have not yet been invented. Guard it with a shot gun if you have to but don't lose it. :D

Great stuff. Fascinating. Makes me want to run out and buy a few big hard-drives.
Slackware gives you a choice of where to put the bootloader. Not sure (can't remember), but I don't think Ubuntu does.

I would say out of 100 distros there may be 3 to 5 of them only permit the boot loader to be installed in the MBR and nowhere else. The big majority always allow its boot loader to be installed into its root partition and that include Ubuntu too but you have to look out for it because it is hidden under "advance" or "Advance boot loader option".

When a Linux has the boot loader inside its root partition it cannot be booted by itself but must be booted by the boot loader controlling the MBR.

I recommend chainloading before you don't have to worried about what boot loader is inside. Grub, Lilo, NTLDR (xp), bootmgr (Vista), etc, etc are all booted identically by command in grub

Code:

---

title OS in (hd0,6)
root (hd0,6)
chaonloader +1

---

If you use Lilo in the MBR the same (assuming (hd0,6) is sda7) applies

Code:

---

other=/dev/sda7
label=System_in_sda7

---

That is all one needs from booting the 2nd to 200th operating systems by changing just the booting partition reference. Lilo's has a static screen and objects to more than 27 images after the screen is completely filled. For MS systems (Solaris and most BSD too) you have to be aware of their characteristics and ask Grub or Lilo to do extra work to keep them happy.

People in Justlinux has taught me that I can keep every operating system I install and I can have as many as I want. Currently sky is the limit.

How do you tell ubuntu to put the boot loader in the root partition?
I know its under advanced.... But then what do you type in the box???

ROOT?
/?

I typed (hd0,6) for the 7th partition of the 1st disk. Grub counts from 0.

In any case you can choose to do it before rebooting after the installation by

say you have made a msitake to let Ubuntu overwrite the MBR and your original Linux that controls the MBR is in (hd0,2) you can restore the original Grub (while you are still inside the Ubuntu boot up Live CD and is about to reboot to try the newly installed Ubuntu) at the terminal by command

Code:

---

sudo su
grub
root (hd0,2)
setup (hd0)

---

At this point if you want the newly installed Ubuntu, say in (hd0,6) which accidentally put Grub into the MBR, to have Grub inside its root partition you continue to type

Code:

---

root (hd0,6)
setup (hd0,6)

---

Piece of cake, isn't it?

If Ubuntu has nuked away a Lilo (and not Grub in the above example) in the MBR and you want your Lilo back, easy piece, just follow Task B3 of the "Just Booting tips".

Ok..... Can you explain exactly what these 2 lines do

root (hd0,6)
What does this do exactly


setup (hd0,6)

What does this do exactly.



I dont understand how it is putting the boot loader in the root.

The "root (hd0,6)" is to tell Grub the root filing system is in the 7th partition of the 1st disk. Grub counts from 0 so 1st disk is (hd0), 2nd disk (hd1) etc. For a partition we add a second digit. So 1st partition of 1st disk is (hd0,0). The 15th partition of the 2nd disk is (hd1,14).

The "root" command tells Grub which partition of which disk holds the operating system you wish to boot.

The "setup (hd0,6)" tells Grub to set up itself in (hd0,6). Since (hd0,6) is a partition therefore Grub will set up itself in the boot sector of the partition "formally", or in other word you install Grub in the root partition of (hd0,6).

When the partition number is missing Grub will say "Ah you want me to set up myself in the whole of disk (hd0) the only logical position is the MBR".

Grub can execute the above instructions as long as there is a /boot/grub directory in the root partition and inside it there is a set of Grub system files. The fact that you can invoke a Grub shell means all the necessary Grub systems will be there.

An example in a Grub shell

Code:

---

grub> root (hd0,13)
 Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0x83

grub> setup (hd0,13)
 Checking if "/boot/grub/stage1" exists... yes
 Checking if "/boot/grub/stage2" exists... yes
 Checking if "/boot/grub/e2fs_stage1_5" exists... yes
 Running "embed /boot/grub/e2fs_stage1_5 (hd0,13)"... failed (this is not fatal
)
 Running "embed /boot/grub/e2fs_stage1_5 (hd0,13)"... failed (this is not fatal
)
 Running "install /boot/grub/stage1 (hd0,13) /boot/grub/stage2 p /boot/grub/men
u.lst "... succeeded
Done.

grub>

---

Outside the Grub shell my /boot/grub has these files inside

Code:

---

ls /boot/grub
default        fat_stage1_5      menu.lst          stage1
device.map    iso9660_stage1_5  minix_stage1_5    stage2
e2fs_stage1_5  jfs_stage1_5      reiserfs_stage1_5  xfs_stage1_5
root@saikee-Mint:/home/saikee#

---

The files used by Grub to setup itself are coloured in red, pink and orange. The blue bits are the commands you have to enter.

For Red Hat distros, like Fedora, Grub's "root" command should be pointing to the /boot directory because a normal installation of this Linux is in multiple partitions involving possible a LVM too.

Maybe u could explain this one to me...

I installed a new linux on a new HD, installed boot loader to MBR (hd0). Then i put back my original boot loader from hd0,0 to hd0. So grub loads up and i have the option i created to boot the new linux (chainload). But it fails, i was getting grub 18 error, but now it just says GRUB with a flashing cursor, and u cant do anything.....

So i then configured grub to boot it directly, and it works! But i dont understand why i cant chainload it. Any idea to fix this?

Thanx

Grub can report Error 18 if an old version is asked to chainload a newer version.

The error should disappear if you use the newer one.

The current version is 0.97 and you should have no problem with it as the one in the MBR.

Hmmmm.... I am almost 100 percent sure that i had .97 in the MBR to begin with. And i assume that the grub on the UBUNTU live CD is .97 also.

Actually, i do remember a difference. One of them tells you the partition type, but the other one does not.... HMMM, i guess i will have to check again.

Thanx

Hi, i'm just registered, so 'Hello World!'

Thanks for the great post, i learn a lot of things!

Now i start to explain my grub problem:

I have a notebook(hp 6710s) with vista, and i would install Gentoo Linux from the minimal cd. The problem is hd that is pre-partitioned from hp: the first primary partition is for Vista, i resized it to make space for linux; the second primary partition is for restore; the third partition is for hp's tools.
So, I create a logical partition that is partitioned for swap, /boot, /
Most important thing is that i can't install grub into MBR because is modded from hp and if i erase it i can't restore Vista anymore (and this is a great problem because i don't have rescues cd and the restore partition is locked, so i can't make a install cd with vLite).
During Gentoo's installation when i install grub with the commands:

Code:

---

(chroot) Livecd #grub
grub> root (hd0,5)
 Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0x83

grub> setup (hd0,5)
 Checking if "/boot/grub/stage1" exists... yes
 Checking if "/boot/grub/stage2" exists... yes
 Checking if "/boot/grub/e2fs_stage1_5" exists... yes
 Running "embed /boot/grub/e2fs_stage1_5 (hd0,5)"... failed (this is not fatal
)
 Running "embed /boot/grub/e2fs_stage1_5 (hd0,5)"... failed (this is not fatal
)
 Running "install /boot/grub/stage1 (hd0,5) /boot/grub/stage2 p /boot/grub/menu.lst "... succeeded
Done.

grub>quit

---

In my fstab file:
/dev/sda6 is the /boot partition (ext2)
/dev/sda5 is swap partition
/dev/sda7 is / partition (reiserfs)

This is my grub.conf:

Code:

---

# Quale opzione viene avviata in modo predefinito. 0 è la prima, 1 la seconda, ecc.
default 0
# Quanti secondi attendere prima di avviare l'opzione predefinita.
timeout 30
# Un'immagine gradevole
# Da commentare se non si dispone di scheda grafica
splashimage=(hd0,5)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz

title=Gentoo Linux 2.6.22-r9
# La partizione dove si trova l'immagine del kernel (o il sistema operativo)
root (hd0,5)
kernel /boot/kernel-2.6.22-gentoo-r9 root=/dev/sda7

title=Gentoo Linux 2.6.22-r9 (rescue)
# Partizione dove si trova l'immagine del kernel o il sistema operativo
root (hd0,0)
kernel /boot/kernel-2.6.22-gentoo-r9 root=/dev/sda7 init=/bin/bb

# Le prossime tre righe vanno messe solo se si ha un dualboot con Windows.
# In questo caso, Windows è in /dev/hda6.
title=Windows Vista Home Premium
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
makeactive
chainloader +1

---

After grub installation i reboot, but automatically start Vista without grub's prompt! :mad:

P.S. Sorry for my bad english but i'm italian :rolleyes:

00700,

Welcome to JustLinux !


Your command

Code:

---

grub> root (hd0,5)
grub> setup (hd0,5)

---

put Grub in the root partition of (hd0,5) or sda6. This only works if you have another Grub in the MBR or (hd0).

It appears to me you have only Gentoo Linux so you need to put it in the MBR. So try this

Code:

---

grub> root (hd0,5)
grub> setup (hd0)

---

Take not on the red bits I omitted.

It may not boot successfully if your menu.lst is faulty but at least you get a Grub screen now.

I opted for another solution:

I copied the boot sector of /dev/sd6 on a usb flash mounted before on /mnt/floppy with the command:

Code:

---

dd if=/dev/hda5 of=/mnt/floppy/GentooBoot.bin bs=512 count=1

---

Then i have copied GentooBoot.bin in C:\
Now i'm trying to use vista bootloader to add a menu item and load the boot sector; the syntax is something like this:

Code:

---

bcdedit /create <Linux> /d "Gentoo-Linux" /application BOOTSECTOR path C:\GentooBoot.bin

---

but this gives me an error:

Code:

---

Impossible to find the specified file

---

Do you have any idea?

Foot by foot i'm goin through!

Code:

---

bcdedit /create /d "Gentoo-Linux" /application BOOTSECTOR

The voice {d2634840-96c2-11dc-bf3c-0017a4e2e6c4} is correctly created

---

Then

Code:

---

bcdedit /set  {d2634840-96c2-11dc-bf3c-0017a4e2e6c4} device partition=C:
Operation complete.
bcdedit /set  {d2634840-96c2-11dc-bf3c-0017a4e2e6c4} path \GentooBoot.bin
Operation complete.

---

Now i try to reboot i hope that grub starts!

The Vista's bcdedit is a pig to work with.

I got a feeling your current error may disappear if you drop the "c:" in front of "C:\GentooBoot.bin", leaving "\GentooBoot.bin".

You may like to take a look at this thread or Task E5 of "Just Booting tips" if you Vista still not booting the Linux.

I restarted but doesn't work...

DOH! I have spent a lot of time on reading Microsoft' documentation when the perfect solution was under my eyes!
Doesn't matter, i have learned how vista bootmanager work! :-D

Thanks for your guides, they are very usefull!

The only difference from the guide is that as device i put C: instead boot, but now i have corretted the command and i try to reboot another time! :cool:

EDIT: YEAH! It works! Thanks Thanks Thanks!!! ;)

Glad you have got it sorted.

Do try different boot loaders and find it out yourself which one is the best or the easiest.

Grub is now installed in MBR by ubuntu(which is installed on sda3).
I want to install a independent grub on a prepared partition(sda1) and chainload the original ubuntu grub.
Here is what I've tried:
I mounted sda1 to /media/sda1,made /media/sda1/boot/grub,copied /boot/grub/* to there,made /media/sda1/boot/grub/menu.lst like this:
default 0
timeout 10

title Ubuntu
root (hd0,2)
chainloader +1

and reboot.

I press c when grub showed up and
root (hd0,0)
setup (hd0)
reboot

the newly edited menu appeared.

Everything seems fine to me untill I choose to load Ubuntu.
Nothing but the word GRUB stayed there.

I had to change the menu back then.


I guess something is wrong,isnt it?

Yes.

An operating system is only chainloadable if it has a boot loader occupying its partition's boot sector.

Your Ubuntu was booted directly and so it would have no boot loader inside the boot sector of sda3. There was no need to chainload it before so the installer would not implement it. This is the default situation even the boot sector is empty.

You can now make sda3 chainloadable at the Grub prompt ( by pressing "c" key at the Grub screen instead of selecting s system to boot) with command

Code:

---

root (hd0,2)
setup (hd0,2)

---

Your Ubuntu will answer your Grub call from (hd0,0). In fact you can fire it up immediately without a reboot by

(1) Fire up sda3 immediately by command (as your current root is (hd0,2))

Code:

---

chainloader +1
boot

---

or

(2) Tell Grub to start from the beginning by command

Code:

---

chainloader (hd0)+1
boot

---

I learned a lot from your enlightening essay.
I've rearranged the spaces of my hardisk without losing my original OS,and I'm able to install & chainload as many new OSs as I want!
Thank you.

Glad you like it. I was hoping it could be useful to some.

I always say to others that if there something difficult in Linux it would not be in the booting.

saikee,

You are a godsend. Using a standalone GRUB install as you have described is absolutely amazing. You have allowed me to demo WinXP, PC-BSD, CentOS, Ubuntu, Debian, and Mandrake to my customers all from my laptop without having to use bulky VM's on the old antique.

I applaud your dedication, and letting this old schlub stand on your shoulders to do amazing things!

Xaiver Merlyn,

Welcome to Justlinux.

I am glad the few things I picked up and summarized from the super mods and knowledgeable members here are found useful by others in addition to myself.

It looks like you have managed a good collection of distros.

VMware has its place but it does not give us the full functionaliies of each distro. A user can boot as many systems as he/she like and still can have a couple of the systems to host VMware. Nothing needs to be compromised.

saikee,

Thanks, (in one word only, for it means all).

I have two options.
One, keep searching to find the answer. Two, ask saikee.

Question is
"How difficult is howto boot straight into LVM2. I mean no standalone /boot partition."

First option I like because It is in the search mode I came to know about your FANTASTIC article. Second option I like because I prefer an authority (yes) like you to put the quest to rest ASAP.

Why I ask this question? Because I believe it SHOULD be possible!!!
What is the need? Because in future systems, 'we may not have partitions'.

Thanks,

xpluaks

xplusaks,

Welcome to Justlinux.

Thank you for the kind word but I am just a student here. The super mods and experienced members here are the real masters.

Regarding to booting LVM2 I am afraid I have a bad news. Both Grub and Lilo cannot read a LVM and that is why a /boot partition, usually in Ext2/3 filing format, is always needed whever a Linux is held inside a LVM.

I believe one of our Villgae elders, super mod bwkaz, may have done some work on this area but it doesn't sound like an easy job to incorporate a driver into Grub to boot a LVM.

Saikee,

I expected it and you have proven it - your prompt reply. So this time thanks for keeping the faith alive.

I have been experimenting with multiple boot and multiple distros and have the handicap of starting late, I mean I already have partition scheme that is not suited for the purpose. Next round of clean up can only take care of that.

But what I am doing is already discussed in here. Multiple distros on single partition. One principle is to use the technique similar to rescue disks, and chroot may hold some helpful keys. But ultimately this business of multiple distros in one box must start addressing virtualization, at some appropriate stage.

Advantages would be
1. Coupled with LVM, there will be no concern about space required for individual distros.
2. On the fly intake and chuck-out of individual distros, adding to adv 1 above.
3. Ultimately leading to next level of virtualization where you hitch-hop-hike from one to next. Great asset for shifting mission critical boxes with minimal disruption.

Let's keep sharing.

xplusaks

Personally I agree that

(1) virtual machines and

(2) LVM

could be the key to access multiple distros either simultaneously or one at a time in future. However I don't think they are ready yet.

I am using both and the experience so far are

On Virtual machines which I used XP as the host I found this to be a disappointment. For a start one is limited by the number of systems that can be run online as each one takes away a portion of the ram. One can run about 4 guests with a host (recommended by VMware) before the slow speed becomes unacceptable as every online system is reduced to 1/4 of the ram available. For offline systems virtual machine has the advantage of mounting them without reboot the host.

The major disadvantage, which could be restricted only to the free versions I can download (but I think technically it is an uncharted area too), is that the guest is effectively in solitory confinement as in a prison isolation cell. The guest can communicate to the outside world only with the host and cannot see or communicate with fellow guests in the same PC. The very fabric of using a Unix-like system to mount a partition of a hard disk is denied because the operating system resides in a file of the host and not actually in a partition.

On using a LVM to host disfferent distros my disappointment is that many distro installers are not equipped to be installed into an existing LVM while others simply omit the LVM driver all together resulting the distro can't even recognise a LVM. Thus there is an uphill struggle to install a big population of the distros into a LVM making booting a large number of Linux out of the question at this stage. LVM is also foreign to M$ systems, Solaris and BSDs and appears to be suitable for Linux only.

To boot 100+ or 150+ systems and have the flexibility of using each system to the full the only easy and practical way is to install each system normally in a partition of a hard disk and boot all of them by a boot loader. I do feel all other alternatives should be judged and compared with this basic approach, of having a normal installation in a harddisk partition booted by a boot loader, because that is what every operating system is supposed to offer to a user.

Many users can regard virtual machines and LVM are superior if they have no need to use many functions, available if installed normaly, of the operating system.

If you want to do LVM, you'll have to use grub2 -- but the problem is, no distro that I know of has actually adopted grub2 as the default yet. Plus the directions on how to use it are pretty sparse -- you have to do a lot of guessing and testing and blindly trying things (unless someone has written a manual recently? nope, the "documentation" page still says "under development"; rats).

I was thinking about trying to put together an LVM stage1.4 (similar to the FS-specific stage1.5 files) for grub-legacy a while back -- but I figured that since it would never actually get added into the "real" grub (since nobody upstream is interested in adding features anymore), I never started. Plus grub2 does have support for it, so it's kinda pointless anyway (if development would ever hurry up and get done on grub2 :p).

What you can do is make a 500-meg /boot partition, and share it between all your distros. They'd all put their kernels and initramfs files there, and so each of the kernels would boot. (They'd have to support root-on-LVM natively, but I think most new-ish distros do, so hopefully that's not an issue.) Plus you don't take up a partition for each distro. It's not the greatest solution, but it should work.

bwkaz,

Greetings!

I did remember you once told me that you did hacked Grub to install your own driver.

I was close to doing a thread on putting multiple distros into LVM. My strategy was to offload the distros into a LVM; first by expanding the iso on a loop back device, secondly transfer it into a logical volume, thirdly amend the isolinux and substitute it with Grub. All these I believe can be done by a script. I abandoned the project after finding

(1) Ubuntu installer does not mount the LVM and regards it as unknown partition.
(2) Small distros like DSL, Puppy and Slax family do not entertain LVM
(3) I couldn't get Slackware or Slamp64 installed into the logical volume I want.
(4) Debian recognise the LVM but the installer want to take over the lot.

I managed to squeeze Foresight, Fedora 7, Mandriva, PCLinuxOS and Mepis into the LVM but there are too many obstacles to overcome.

I decided to let the Linux mature a bit more before looking at the LVM scheme again.

I am rather disappointed by Grub2. In the last 3 years it has not managed even with a simple documentation. Its ability to support LVM at boot time has yet to be proven. I could be wrong but there seems to be some indication of some effort may have gone to make it compatible with M$ system trust computing or the new hard disk partition table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saikee

I did remember you once told me that you did hacked Grub to install your own driver.

---

I remember talking about doing it, but I never actually did it -- if I implied that I had, sorry, but that was wrong. :(

Quote:

---

(1) Ubuntu installer does not mount the LVM and regards it as unknown partition.

---

Ouch; that's a fairly large problem, considering the usage of Ubuntu...

Quote:

---

(4) Debian recognise the LVM but the installer want to take over the lot.

---

That's probably the second large problem... :(

Quote:

---

I decided to let the Linux mature a bit more before looking at the LVM scheme again.

---

From your info above, that's probably a good idea. Hopefully by the time distros start cooperating with LVM2, grub2 might (possibly) even be used, which will help too. :)

Quote:

---

I could be wrong but there seems to be some indication of some effort may have gone to make it compatible with M$ system trust computing or the new hard disk partition table.

---

Is that EFI, or something else? I remember a bit of talk a while back about getting it to support EFI-capable BIOSes, rather than the ancient IBM PC BIOS interface. I believe EFI systems use a different partition table too. I am fairly sure Vista has some basic EFI support, though I have no idea how complete (or well-tested!) it is.

The trusted computing stuff is junk, though... if they're getting into that boat, I have even less hope for having it ever actually work.

(Of course it would probably help if they had more developers...)

bwkaz,

yes I was referring to EFI. I read some articles relating to EFI or similar schemes as basic building blocks for bringing about the trusted computing.

The EFI is only being sold by Itel and there seem to be a couple of M$ systems implementing it either partially or as an alternative.

I have also read that Vista user can select it as an alternative to the legacy partition table currently used in PC Bios.

Personally I see M$ systems have a far bigger need to switch to a new partition table system because the limitations of their existing Oses trying to be backward compatible.

Linux is not in a hurry to change because a Linux can migrate freely from partition to partition, from hard disk to hard disk and has no preference of the partition type or the location in the hard disk. It is only the proprietary software requiring protection of their interest that needs to improve on the restriction against migration of the operating systems.

You introduced me about the major and minor numbers of partitions used in Linux. The EFI is not going to be of any real use unless the major/minor numbering system got overhauled in Linux or Unix-like systems.

Thus I still think the current partition table scheme will remain operational for a long time until a new replacement can prove significantly better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saikee

yes I was referring to EFI. I read some articles relating to EFI or similar schemes as basic building blocks for bringing about the trusted computing.

---

Possibly. I haven't read those articles (and I don't have a great understanding of what all is included with EFI), so I don't know if that's true or not -- but it is possible.

Quote:

---

The EFI is only being sold by Itel and there seem to be a couple of M$ systems implementing it either partially or as an alternative.

---

And Apple: most of the new Macs already use it. ;)

Quote:

---

I have also read that Vista user can select it as an alternative to the legacy partition table currently used in PC Bios.

---

Well, it's more than just the partition table. It's the whole interface to the BIOS (EFI itself is "extensible firmware interface", i.e. an interface to the machine's firmware, i.e. what the BIOS used to do). That's why it requires bootloader support before it'll actually do any good. :)

Quote:

---

You introduced me about the major and minor numbers of partitions used in Linux. The EFI is not going to be of any real use unless the major/minor numbering system got overhauled in Linux or Unix-like systems.

---

Which had actually started when I started talking about it - the dev_t type in the kernel has been 32 bits wide for a long time. It used to be only 16 bits wide (8 for the major, 8 for the minor), and splitting various major numbers up between disk drives is what gave the partition count limits. But when it moved to 32 bits wide, lots more majors and minors became available.

(Of course I'm not sure how many glibc's are compiled to have a 32-bit dev_t in their headers, so I don't know how many userspace programs will work with that yet...)

Between that, udev, and dynamic device number allocation in the kernel -- which I believe all block-devices have support for now -- a new partition table would at least be possible. Although depending on how compatible the developers make it, it may keep the SCSI-15-partition limit, I'm not sure. (There are lots of partition table schemes already supported in the kernel: take a look at all the CONFIG_*_PARTITION options. I believe most of those use the same partition split as the normal PC BIOS tables use. And actually, there is a CONFIG_EFI_PARTITION, so I bet the EFI-format partition table will already work. :))

saikee,

first of all, great work and many thx for posting such a detailed how-to guide!

Just out of interest, I am curious why you chose hda3 for the grub installation. Why not hda1 or hda2? What's in hda1 and hda2? Are they required for something else (Maybe the MS Windows OS???)?

I am interested in setting up a triple boot system with XP, Vista and Ubuntu on my laptop which only has one hard disk, so hence I am trying to gather as much information as possible before plunging into it (although I am sure I will invariably make some mistake and have to do it all again :) which is fine as one learns from one's mistakes...).

Thx!

Ah, I guess I should have looked a little bit more closely at the menu.lst example you give on the first page of this thread to see that hda1 is for DOS 6.22 and hda2 is for Win 3.11.

Silly ol' me!

rolaustral,

There are many ways to triple a Linux, Xp, and Vista because each system can boot the other two.

In the Newbies secrion I have added the Grub's method for booting two Windows. Can you do a search on triple boot there? I am currently working in Prague and had to use a key board to access Internet via a TV in a hotel room and so not easy for me to post the link.

The method of using XP's NTLDR to multi boot is given in the last link of my signature. In there I have also added the steps of using Vista to multi boot. There is a seprate thread on showing how to use Vista to boot 150 Linux too.

You will find sky is the limit as far as booting is concerned in Justlinux!

As expected you will find Grub is the easiest, most powerful and flexible to work with.

Hi saikee,

thanks for that. I have used Grub in the past before several times and have successfully used it now again. Definitely the boot loader of choice for me! Easy to set up and works like a charm.

Thanks again.