Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [linux-dell-laptops] LILO/GRUB in MBR or /boot - pros and cons?

Expand Messages
  • emil kirschner
    All I can say si that I have XP and slackware on an i8k2 with LILO in MBR and it works just fine. I don t know about GRUB, but using LILO in MBR didn t bring
    Message 1 of 9 , Jul 31, 2002
      All I can say si that I have XP and slackware on an
      i8k2 with LILO in MBR and it works just fine. I don't
      know about GRUB, but using LILO in MBR didn't bring up
      any problems in my case.

      cheers,
      e.


      --- "D. D. Brierton" <darren@...> wrote:
      > I have i8200, and will be dual booting Windows XP
      > and Mandrake 8.2.
      > Windows XP doesn't use a s2d partition, and
      > apparently attempts to get
      > s2d working in Linux on an i8200 have so far been
      > unsuccessful.
      > Therefore, the most compelling reason for NOT
      > installing LILO or GRUB on
      > the MBR doesn't seem to apply. I think I will format
      > my disk so that
      > /boot is hda1, and WinXP's NTFS partition is hda2,
      > with everything else
      > going in an extended partition. What are the pros
      > and cons of installing
      > LILO or GRUB in the MBR given that setup - are there
      > still reasons for
      > preferring installing it on /boot and making hda1
      > the active partition?
      >
      > What is the likely future of s2d on the i8200? I've
      > heard it mentioned
      > on this list that kernel 2.6 will support s2d in the
      > way WinXP does -
      > i.e. by writing to a file. So I'm thinking that I
      > will probably never
      > need to reserve a partition for s2d - am I right in
      > that assumption?
      >
      > TIA, Darren
      >
      > --
      >
      ======================================================================
      > D. D. Brierton darren@...
      > www.dzr-web.com
      > Trying is the first step before failure
      > (Homer Simpson)
      >
      ======================================================================
      >


      =====
      take a poor man to the disco and he will dance for a night.
      teach him how to scratch, and he will dance for ever!
      ----------------------------
      from ali g's words of wisdom

      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
      http://health.yahoo.com
    • D. D. Brierton
      I have i8200, and will be dual booting Windows XP and Mandrake 8.2. Windows XP doesn t use a s2d partition, and apparently attempts to get s2d working in Linux
      Message 2 of 9 , Jul 31, 2002
        I have i8200, and will be dual booting Windows XP and Mandrake 8.2.
        Windows XP doesn't use a s2d partition, and apparently attempts to get
        s2d working in Linux on an i8200 have so far been unsuccessful.
        Therefore, the most compelling reason for NOT installing LILO or GRUB on
        the MBR doesn't seem to apply. I think I will format my disk so that
        /boot is hda1, and WinXP's NTFS partition is hda2, with everything else
        going in an extended partition. What are the pros and cons of installing
        LILO or GRUB in the MBR given that setup - are there still reasons for
        preferring installing it on /boot and making hda1 the active partition?

        What is the likely future of s2d on the i8200? I've heard it mentioned
        on this list that kernel 2.6 will support s2d in the way WinXP does -
        i.e. by writing to a file. So I'm thinking that I will probably never
        need to reserve a partition for s2d - am I right in that assumption?

        TIA, Darren

        --
        ======================================================================
        D. D. Brierton darren@... www.dzr-web.com
        Trying is the first step before failure (Homer Simpson)
        ======================================================================
      • D. D. Brierton
        ... Thanks Emil! -- ====================================================================== D. D. Brierton darren@dzr-web.com
        Message 3 of 9 , Jul 31, 2002
          On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 13:04, emil kirschner wrote:
          > All I can say si that I have XP and slackware on an
          > i8k2 with LILO in MBR and it works just fine. I don't
          > know about GRUB, but using LILO in MBR didn't bring up
          > any problems in my case.

          Thanks Emil!

          --
          ======================================================================
          D. D. Brierton darren@... www.dzr-web.com
          Trying is the first step before failure (Homer Simpson)
          ======================================================================
        • epark
          ... Hi Darren, I see 2 questions here: 1. which is better: LILO or GRUB? I ve used both, and IMO GRUB is better. GRUB supports LBA by default, and you don t
          Message 4 of 9 , Jul 31, 2002
            --- In linux-dell-laptops@y..., "D. D. Brierton" <darren@d...> wrote:
            > What are the pros and cons of installing
            > LILO or GRUB in the MBR given that setup - are there still reasons
            > for
            > preferring installing it on /boot and making hda1 the active
            > partition?

            Hi Darren,

            I see 2 questions here:
            1. which is better: LILO or GRUB? I've used both, and IMO GRUB is
            better. GRUB supports LBA by default, and you don't have to reinstall
            GRUB everytime you update the config file or recompile the kernel
            like you do with LILO. The initial install process for either is
            essentially the same if leave NTLDR in the MBR; i.e. you copy over
            the first 512 bytes of the /boot partition to C: and edit C:\boot.ini

            2. which lives in the MBR: a Linux boot loader (LILO or GRUB) or the
            Windows boot loader (NTLDR)? I've seen posts to the effect that
            antivirus software complains if the boot loader in the MBR is not a
            Windows boot loader

            HOWTO for GRUB and Win2K/NT/XP:
            http://geocities.com/epark/linux/grub-w2k-HOWTO.html

            Cheers,
            Ed
          • D. D. Brierton
            ... Thanks for the help, Ed. I m a bit confused, though. Do I actually need to use the Win XP boot loader like this whether I use GRUB or LILO? Emil replied
            Message 5 of 9 , Jul 31, 2002
              On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 17:19, epark wrote:
              > --- In linux-dell-laptops@y..., "D. D. Brierton" <darren@d...> wrote:
              > > What are the pros and cons of installing
              > > LILO or GRUB in the MBR given that setup - are there still reasons
              > > for
              > > preferring installing it on /boot and making hda1 the active
              > > partition?
              >
              > I see 2 questions here:
              > 1. which is better: LILO or GRUB? I've used both, and IMO GRUB is
              > better. GRUB supports LBA by default, and you don't have to reinstall
              > GRUB everytime you update the config file or recompile the kernel
              > like you do with LILO. The initial install process for either is
              > essentially the same if leave NTLDR in the MBR; i.e. you copy over
              > the first 512 bytes of the /boot partition to C: and edit C:\boot.ini

              Thanks for the help, Ed. I'm a bit confused, though.

              Do I actually need to use the Win XP boot loader like this whether I use
              GRUB or LILO? Emil replied earlier that he has dual boot working just
              fine with LILO in the MBR. I thought that the Win XP boot loader was
              only if you needed to use multiple version of Windows? If what you are
              saying is that *if* I install either LILO or GRUB to /boot instead of
              the MBR, *then* I also have to edit c:\boot.ini and copy the first 512
              bytes of /boot partition to c:, then in that case it sounds like it
              would be a lot easier to just stick LILO or GRUB in the MBR and be done
              with it. (I'm presuming that having LILO or GRUB in the MBR means I
              *don't* have to mess around with the Windows partition.) I'm new to
              Windows NT/2000/XP so I think that what is confusing me is the role the
              Windows boot loader has in all this.

              > 2. which lives in the MBR: a Linux boot loader (LILO or GRUB) or the
              > Windows boot loader (NTLDR)? I've seen posts to the effect that
              > antivirus software complains if the boot loader in the MBR is not a
              > Windows boot loader

              I can live with complaints from Norton AntiVirus about what's in the
              MBR. Presumably you can tell Norton that what's in the MBR is okay and
              to stop bugging you about it.

              > HOWTO for GRUB and Win2K/NT/XP:
              > http://geocities.com/epark/linux/grub-w2k-HOWTO.html

              Okay, that sounds useful. I'll go off and read it now. Thanks a lot for
              the help.

              Best, Darren

              --
              ======================================================================
              D. D. Brierton darren@... www.dzr-web.com
              Trying is the first step before failure (Homer Simpson)
              ======================================================================
            • epark
              ... WinXP (and Win2K) are both built on the WinNT code base. WinNT uses a boot loader called NTLDR. NTLDR is automatically installed on the MBR during a
              Message 6 of 9 , Jul 31, 2002
                --- In linux-dell-laptops@y..., "D. D. Brierton" <darren@d...> wrote:
                > Do I actually need to use the Win XP boot loader like this whether
                > I use GRUB or LILO? Emil replied earlier that he has dual boot
                > working just fine with LILO in the MBR. I thought that the Win XP
                > boot loader was only if you needed to use multiple version of
                > Windows?
                WinXP (and Win2K) are both built on the WinNT code base. WinNT uses a
                boot loader called NTLDR. NTLDR is automatically installed on the MBR
                during a WinNT/2K/XP installation. NTLDR supports booting multiple
                Windows OSs based on the entries in the C:\boot.ini file.

                Emil is correct, GRUB or LILO in the MBR works (i.e. you're replacing
                NTLDR with GRUB or LILO). However, people have reported that
                antivirus software may complain if the boot loader doesn't contain
                the NTLDR. From the av software perspective, it looks like the MBR
                got corrupted.

                > If what you are saying is that *if* I install either LILO or GRUB ?
                > to /boot instead of the MBR, *then* I also have to edit c:\boot.ini
                > and copy the first 512 bytes of /boot partition to c:, then in that
                > case it sounds like it would be a lot easier to just stick LILO
                > or GRUB in the MBR and be done with it.
                That is correct. If you're using GRUB, you only have to do that
                C:\boot.ini edit and 512 byte copy once. It's not so bad.

                LILO? GRUB? To put on the MBR or not on the MBR? All these options
                are viable : )

                Cheers,
                Ed
              • Rick Green
                ... There is one other consideration: on my Latitude CPi, the suspend to disk function depends upon a MBR which looks at the active flag in the partition
                Message 7 of 9 , Aug 1, 2002
                  On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, epark wrote:

                  > --- In linux-dell-laptops@y..., "D. D. Brierton" <darren@d...> wrote:
                  > > Do I actually need to use the Win XP boot loader like this whether
                  > > I use GRUB or LILO? Emil replied earlier that he has dual boot
                  > > working just fine with LILO in the MBR. I thought that the Win XP
                  > > boot loader was only if you needed to use multiple version of
                  > > Windows?
                  >
                  > LILO? GRUB? To put on the MBR or not on the MBR? All these options
                  > are viable : )
                  >
                  There is one other consideration: on my Latitude CPi, the 'suspend to
                  disk' function depends upon a MBR which looks at the 'active' flag in the
                  partition table, and chains to the loader in the first sector of that
                  partition. To my knowledge, neither Lilo or grub pay any attention to the
                  'active partition' flag, so if you wish to implement s2d, you must use a
                  MBR such as the old DOS loader which supports this algorithm.

                  Rick Green
                • epark
                  ... Hi Rick, Do you know whether NTLDR supports that active partition flag? I d assume yes, otherwise s2d wouldn t work under WinNT/2K/XP, right? Cheers, Ed
                  Message 8 of 9 , Aug 2, 2002
                    --- In linux-dell-laptops@y..., Rick Green <rtg@a...> wrote:
                    > 'active partition' flag, so if you wish to implement s2d, you must
                    > use a MBR such as the old DOS loader which supports this algorithm.

                    Hi Rick,

                    Do you know whether NTLDR supports that 'active partition' flag? I'd
                    assume yes, otherwise s2d wouldn't work under WinNT/2K/XP, right?

                    Cheers,
                    Ed
                    Linux Guide: http://geocities.com/epark/linux
                  • Stephen Lau
                    winnt/2k/xp uses its own suspend to disk/hibernate file scheme...it doesn t use a separate partition system the way linux does. it hibernates to a file on the
                    Message 9 of 9 , Aug 2, 2002
                      winnt/2k/xp uses its own suspend to disk/hibernate file scheme...it doesn't use
                      a separate partition system the way linux does. it hibernates to a file on the
                      windows filesystem.

                      -steve

                      On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 03:05:45PM -0000, epark wrote:
                      > --- In linux-dell-laptops@y..., Rick Green <rtg@a...> wrote:
                      > > 'active partition' flag, so if you wish to implement s2d, you must
                      > > use a MBR such as the old DOS loader which supports this algorithm.
                      >
                      > Hi Rick,
                      >
                      > Do you know whether NTLDR supports that 'active partition' flag? I'd
                      > assume yes, otherwise s2d wouldn't work under WinNT/2K/XP, right?
                      >
                      > Cheers,
                      > Ed
                      > Linux Guide: http://geocities.com/epark/linux
                      >

                      --
                      stephen lau :: [ldl@...] :: gpg key id: 0x09E5CD21
                      http://www.whacked.net/oss/ldl
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.