Tranfering Linux

[Kevin E. Glosser]

On Sat, 2003-05-17 at 15:01, Cyber Source wrote:
> I have also never had a problem with it being master/slave or
> whatever, it is totally configurable in lilo

When I put XP on, neither Grub nor Lilo would enter the second boot
stage and become responsive. My machine just sat there.

I scoured the net looking for solutions. I found tons. Unfortunately,
none of them were correct. Some pointed to the BIOS, some pointed to the
boot loader being in the MBR as opposed to the first boot sector on the
hard drive.

Other people gave workarounds for using XP's bootloader and then editing
boot.ini. I didn't want to try this. There was no reason for Grub or
Lilo to not work.

In the end, although the great majority of people(including Redhat's own
documentation) said NOT to put Grub in the MBR, that is where I put it.

I have no real answer why previously it did not work, other than i
believe a newer version of Grub may be the reason I eventually got it to
work. However, it was odd that Lilo didn't work either. I had always
used Lilo in the past.

Regardless, my previous post was meant to state that 1) the solution i
used, does work 2) it IS possible to have issues dual booting NT/2000/XP
and Linux and 3) for convenience I added the other recommendations.

Peter, is there a particular reason why you favor FAT32 over NTFS 5.1?
Other, than what I already stated.

Microsoft file systems are traditionally considered crap. So, choosing
one evil over the other isn't necessarily a joyful occasion. I've never
heard anyone say they loved the FAT file system. I've never heard anyone
say they liked NTFS either, but it does have some abilities FAT32
doesn't. I'm just curious to what makes it unappealing.

Thanks for any response in advance.

KEG