Re: Why must Windows be installed first in a dual-boot?
- From: ray <ray@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Dec 2008 16:33:46 GMT
On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 06:11:01 -0800, pc nerd wrote:
I want to build a dual-boot PC with Vista & Linux. Both Vista & Linux
have boot loaders. Why is it necessary to install Windows first? Why
can't Linux be installed first?
It's not necessary. It's just easier that way. MS will overwrite the MBR
so after the MS install (assuming Linux was installed first), you boot a
Live CD and rewrite the MBR - if you know how.
I'll admit that Vista has a pretty neat feature - one can shrink or
expand the partition from within Windows. Linux requires a separate
program to shrink or expand the partition.
It has always seemed problematic to me to attempt to resize a mounted
file system.
So, please explain why Windows must be installed before Linux or if
Linux can be installed first, what is the sequence of steps.
Outlined above. If you need more detail, we can go into that.
Why bother? Why not run one in a virtual machine within the other - that
way it's no hassle at all.
Thank you.
David
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why must Windows be installed first in a dual-boot?
- From: pc nerd
- Re: Why must Windows be installed first in a dual-boot?
- References:
- Why must Windows be installed first in a dual-boot?
- From: pc nerd
- Why must Windows be installed first in a dual-boot?
- Prev by Date: Re: Windows Vista Business No Aero?
- Next by Date: Re: Don't Know the password...
- Previous by thread: Re: Why must Windows be installed first in a dual-boot?
- Next by thread: Re: Why must Windows be installed first in a dual-boot?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
