Re: Juggling partions?

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: Ron Sommer (rsommer_at_nospam.ktis.net)
Date: 04/02/04 

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 04:44:55 -0600

Jim,
I put your post in my keep folder.

It seems to me that Noozer is wanting to use fdisk as a "boot manager". 

-- 
Ron Sommer
"Jim" <null@null.com> wrote in message news:kg6bc.4565$zh.1526@fed1read07...
> Ok, let's backtrack a second here.
>
> In your initial post, you indicated a desire to boot both WinMe and WinXP,
> correct?  That means dual-booting is the problem/issue.  So when you say
> "Where did I say I wanted to use ANY boot manager", you're absolutely
right,
> you didn't say that, and THAT'S the problem.  You are essentially trying
to
> dual-boot WITHOUT a boot manager!  Instead, you're mucking w/ PM and
trying
> to fanagle everything MANUALLY.  Even assuming you can do it (and for
> reasons I won't elaborate here, it's mighty tricky unless you understand
all
> the issues), its not necessary nor a good idea.  You're encountering many
of
> your current problems ONLY because you insist on avoiding a boot manager.
>
> Your statement: "Is there any way I can repair these installations so both
> installs will work?
>
> Yeah, install a boot manager!
>
> But you resist the boot manager, in fact, you specifically insist you
never
> indicated a desire to use a boot manager.  Well, what can I say, you want
to
> dual boot, a boot manager is specifically designed to avoid the problems
> you're currently having, so someone (me) suggests a boot manager, and you
> say "I don't want a boot manager", then you list several problems that are
> directly related to not using a boot manager, then wonder why people are
> suggesting you use a boot manager!  And around and around we go.
>
> As far as using the XP boot loader (it's not really a boot "manager",
that's
> an overstatement), yes, this is an option for managing the dual boot.
BUT,
> you also indicated in a follow-up post the following:
>
> "I wanted to avoid the XP and ME installations having anything to do with
> each other."
>
> Well, that's another problem. When you use the XP loader, it will
dual-boot
> both OSs, BUT, they will NOT be independent of each other!  Let's step
thru
> the process.  Assume WinME is on partition #1 as C:.  You now what to
> install XP on partition #2.  Because the XP loader cannot hide partitions,
> the WinME partition will always be exposed when XP boots.  This is why the
> XP installation will be booted as D:!  The XP partition will still see C:
> (WinME), albeit as data.  If we also assume the XP installation is FAT32
> (and I believe WinME sees FAT32 partitions), when WinME boots, it will see
> the XP partition as D: (again, as data).  IOW, the partitions are NOT
hidden
> from each other.  In fact, the dependencies are much worse than cosmetic.
> The XP installation will install all the boot files in C:'s partition!  So
> now, if you need/want to delete the C: partition some time in the future,
> you're in a mess.  XP needs C: to be there for its boot files *and* to
make
> sure that the XP partition remains D:.  You can't move the XP partition
too
> easily either, since it's boot files specifically point to that partition,
> and moving it may alter its drive letter assignment (such assignments are
> determined, by default, by the BIOS).
>
> I know it's all rather complicated, but the point is, dual-booting either
> manually or using the XP boot loader is in direct conflict with your
stated
> objectives.  Yes, the XP loader is FREE, but it's severely limited too.
I'm
> suggesting BootIt NG, Boot Magic, heck, even the free XOSL boot manager,
are
> MUCH better alternatives based on your stated objectives.  You can NOT
have
> total partition/OS independence using the XP boot loader.  You *may* be
able
> to achieve this manually using PM, but it's very tricky and takes a deep
> understanding of what a boot manager does in order to prevent an even
bigger
> mess.
>
> To get back to BootIt NG, I suggested a third partition, again, to
maintain
> your stated desire to keep these OS partitions independent.  Now, to be
> honest, you can certainly install it (or any other boot manager) into an
> existing partition if you like.  I don't recommend it, but you can.  But
if
> you create a small third partition ONLY for the boot manager, you won't
have
> any boot manager dependencies associated with your OS partitions either.
> For example, if you install BootIt NG (or any other boot manager) into the
> first partition, w/ WinME, it will work fine. BUT, you know have to be
> careful not to move, delete, or alter the first partition, lest you risk
> mucking up the boot manager!  In fact, all the boot manager files/folders
> will be EXPOSED whenever the C: partition is visible (which without a boot
> manager is ALWAYS).  Why take that risk?  Why introduce that dependency
too
> when you don't have to?  Instead, keep the boot manager in its own
partition
> (you have a maximum of four primaries anyway, and currently are using only
> two).  But again, if you want to use an existing partition for the boot
> manager, go ahead, be my guest.
>
> > Do you even know how disk partitioning works? You can only have one
active
> > primary partition. The other primary partitions (up to three) are not
seen
> > by the OS.
> >
>
> I've been multi-booting for nearly 12 yrs. (since NT 3.1).  I've used
> virtually EVERY boot manager ever invented (System Commander, Boot Magic,
> BootIt NG, XOSL, MS boot loader, you name it, ALL OF THEM).  I've been a
> software developer for 20 yrs.  I manage 5 machines in my own home office,
> including 2 servers (W2K, W2K3) and Win98, XP, NT, and W2K clients for
> development purposes.  Virtually ALL of them are multi-boot machines, ALL
> using BootIt NG (most on this particular boot manager for the past 4 yrs).
> Most clients boot at LEAST three or four OS's, including MS-DOS 6.22,
MS-DOS
> 7.0, WinXP, Win98, to name a few.  Even have a dual boot of Lindows 4.5
and
> Win98 on my laptop.
>
> Yes, I'm am VERY aware of how partitioning works, my knuckles are raw from
> many years of being whacked by mistake after mistake, learning the hard
way
> what does and doesn't work.  Trust me, you don't know the half of it,
there
> are TONS of caveats and gotchas involving multi-booting that I haven't
even
> touched on, lest this conversation get even longer.
>
> So, back to your statement, an "active" partition is nothing more than a
> "mark", an "indicator" on the partition that says "this partition is
> bootable".  Thats' it, nothing more than that.  In fact, nothing prevents
> ALL the partitions from being marked "active", you can easily do this (not
> sure why you would, but you could) using a partition manager (e.g., BootIt
> NG).  When the system is booted, the system will only boot the *first*
> bootable partition it encounters in the partition table (where the active
> indicator resides) of the mbr (master boot record).  When you install a
boot
> manager, like BootIt NG, it automatically changes/moves the active
indicator
> for you, so that the correct OS is booted.  But, unless you take
provisions
> to hide the other partitions, they *will* be seen *if* the current OS
> recognizes those partition types (FAT32, NTFS, etc.).  THAT'S WHY YOU NEED
A
> BOOT MANAGER!  The other partitions don't just magically disappear once
one
> of the partitions is booted.  And it doesn't matter a wit whether the
other
> partitions are marked active or not, that only affects what gets booted.
> Once an OS is chosen by the system, the OS will see the other partitions
> (according to the conditions I've already stated) irrespective of the
active
> indicator (it has no bearing on hidden vs. not hidden, none).
>
> The simplest, easiest, most OS independent solution that comports with
your
> stated objectives is a boot manager.  I recommend BootIt NG, it's a steal
at
> the current price since it functionally replaces Boot Magic, Partition
> Magic, and Drive Image, all of them, in one inexpensive, integrated
package.
> Heck, I bought it four years ago for $30, and haven't had to pay a dime in
> upgrade costs in all that time!  And there have been MANY enhancements
since
> that time.  Consider what all three of those other packages cost over that
> same period, initial and upgrade costs combined.  But this is not an
> advertisement for BootIt NG, use Boot Magic, XOSL, whatever, almost
ANYTHING
> is better than attempting this manually OR using the XP boot loader.
>
> I recommend BootIt NG because it's nearly foolproof.  Simply install
BootIt
> NG into its own partition.  Assuming WinME is already installed, it will
> boot immediately from the Direct Boot Menu.   Now Create a new partition
for
>  XP, create a boot menu item, and add the new partition as the bootable
> partition to the definition.  Set the one-time boot option to "CD", save,
> and reboot.  Now run your XP install as normal, it will only see the new
> partition, so install XP there.  When complete, XP will run normally, but
> will have overlaid the BootIt NG boot loader.  Just insert the BootIt NG
> disk, reboot, reactivate it, remove the floppy, and reboot.  Now you have
> two OS's installed, each bootable directly off the Direct Boot Menu, or
> create a boot menu item for WinXP too, if you prefer.  Each will boot as
C:,
> XP will keep its boot files in its own partition, and when booted, will
> automatically hide the other partitions (including the one belonging to
> BootIt NG).  How does BootIt NG do all this magic?  Simple, if it's not in
> the boot menu definition, then it's not placed in the partition table of
the
> mbr when the OS is booted, thus the OS never sees it.  IOW, BootIt NG
> actually manages the "mbr", NOT the partition IDs like other partition or
> boot managers.  That's why it works so effortlessly.  It keeps track of
> partition locations for you, and when an OS needs to be booted, "loads up"
> the mbr according to the boot menu item's requirements.  If something
isn't
> in the mbr, it just never gets seen.
>
> That's it!  No partition inter-dependencies, no mucking w/ active
> indicators, no moving partitions around, no boot loader dependencies
within
> OS partitions, none of that crap, all of that nonsense is gone.  Your
> grandkids will grow-up to be highly successful, flowers will bloom, the
> world will be a happier place, all thanks to you.
>
> Anyway, that's my last word on the subject, if you don't feel that 12+
years
> of experience has much to offer, what can I say, keep rolling that
snowball
> uphill, maybe you know something I don't, I gave it my best shot.  Good
> luck, god bless, and have a happy life.
>
> HTH
>
> Jim
>
>
> "Noozer" <dont.spam@me.here> wrote in message
> news:Uu4bc.8433$Pk3.5408@pd7tw1no...
> >
> > "Jim" <null@null.com> wrote in message
> news:qg3bc.4464$zh.3486@fed1read07...
> > > This is why you use a boot manager like BootIt NG!!!  (
> > > http://www.bootitng.com )  If you had, you'd have NONE of these
> problems.
> >
> > Uhm... If I wanted a boot manager I would have used the one in XP, or
Lilo
> > from a Linux install or even the OS2 boot manager.
> >
> > > Instead, install BootIt NG in a *third* partiton all by its lonesome,
> >
> > Why would I want a third partition?
> >
> > > partition you want booted, and AUTOMATICALLY all others are hidden!
You
> > can
> > > believe how incredibly simple it all is.
> >
> > Of course XP would have still stomped all over the other partition
> regarless
> > of having a boot manager installed.
> >
> > > *more* difficult by mucking w/ PM to do this job.  PM is *not* a boot
> > > manager, not unless you install the Boot Magic boot manager that comes
> w/
> > it
> >
> > Where did I say I wanted to use ANY boot manager? PM is to move the
> > partitions around or change their type without losing the data. Only
plan
> on
> > using it to correct my previous mistake.
> >
> > > People insist on making this stuff a LOT harder than it need be.
> >
> > You're the one making it more complicated by adding a third partition
and
> > extra piece of software. XP has a perfectly fine boot manager. I just
> didn't
> > want *ANY* boot manager.
> >
> > > you continue to muck w/ the MS boot loader, it will drive you nuts.
> It's
> > > major flaw is an inability to hide partitions.  Because it can't,
you're
> > > left in this mess of having to hide other partitions so, for example,
> all
> > > your OS installations can still boot as C: (i.e., you have no
> > > inter-partition dependencies).
> >
> > Do you even know how disk partitioning works? You can only have one
active
> > primary partition. The other primary partitions (up to three) are not
seen
> > by the OS.
> >
> > > NG or even Boot Magic.  Install BootIt NG, you get 30 days FREE,
> >
> > Or use the perfectly fine Manager built into XP for as long as you want
> for
> > free.
> >
> >
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dual Boot Instructions
    ... I ended up reinstalling Vista, ... The boot SECTOR is not the bootLOADER. ... finds the partition table for that HDD and sees that the first partition is ... violated, we no longer can simply install WinXP, install Vista and ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices)
  • Re: Vista/7 permissions for script?
    ... OEM Win7 yet. ... I assume the first boot environment is Windows PE, ... image's boot partition to a larger partition in a larger hard drive -- it ... After writing the install DVD I repartitioned ...
    (microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript)
  • Re: Reinstallation erases all?
    ... W2 is active on C and only visible in PM and install. ... I'll take a look at Paragon as are in that Boot CD I linked to. ... Active partition status to the partition that it was on before this mess ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: No boot and no administrator password!
    ... You'll need a new partition, ... file ownership and permissions supersede administrator rights. ... > I cannot do a clean install and lose all my data knowing> that there is an 'unconventional' way past this problem. ... Boot the system, start> tapping F8, when>>the menu appears, select "Last Known Good Configuration,"> press enter and>>see if that resolves it. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.accessibility)
  • Re: How to change Dual Boot to Single Boot?
    ... Be aware that Microsoft use the term boot partition for the partition where ... primary active partition (where the boot sector and files required to start ... If you want the partition gone and Windows ... To do a clean install, either boot the Windows 2000 install CD-Rom or setup ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.general)