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

Re: never try WINXP boot , NEVER!

Expand Messages
  • thomas.wawersig
    Hi Robyn, thanks for the information. Yes, I already checked priority in BIOS and XOSL setup (when I still had it). Actually I removed XOSL and just wanted to
    Message 1 of 11 , Jan 26, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Robyn,

      thanks for the information.

      Yes, I already checked priority in BIOS and XOSL setup (when I still
      had it).
      Actually I removed XOSL and just wanted to re-install, but it got
      stuck at "reading disk structure" (with this said external drive still
      plugged in...).

      Since I had it all up and running with an external disk before, it is
      probably not related to disk size, but number of primary partitions.
      The only difference (except for disk size of course) is another
      logical partition on the new drive. But what I forgot ist, that
      creating a logical partition requires a primary extended partition
      first. So all together XOSL now sees 5 primaries instead of 4. I think
      I remember that there is an issue with having more than 4 primary
      partitions (though I am not sure wehther I read this relating to
      XOSL). In your setup, are all partitions hosting an OS set up as
      primary partitions?

      yours,
      Thomas




      --- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "Robyn" <robyn_peel@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Thomas,
      >
      > I too use XOSL with a large drive and a mix of different partitions
      & O/Ss.
      >
      > I actually am currently using 3 large drives, all internal (500Gb,
      1Tb & 1.5Tb). XOSL hides the OS partitions that I am not using in
      each session, keeping them theoretically safe from virus attack.
      >
      > The 500Gb is split at follows:
      >
      > 24Mb - XOSL
      > 100Gb - XP Pro
      > 100Gb - XP Home
      > 265.74Gb - Images for OS partitions
      >
      > The 1Tb Drive is split as follows:
      >
      > 100Gb - O/S to be installed (Perhaps Linux or Vista or next ver of
      Windows)
      > 100Gb - O/S to be installed (can be used for testing new software,
      to ensure it won't crash my PC)
      > 731.51Gb - Data (documents, images, clipart, email, general work
      storage)
      >
      > The Final drive is just for my MP3s and movies.
      >
      > I have a fourth drive (500Gb) which is used for backing up my data.
      This is not plugged in except when I wish to use it. In the past I
      have had a PC struck by lightening and was able to recover via a tape
      drive.
      >
      > I plan to purchase another large drive in the future and I do not
      foresee any problems.
      >
      > My point is that XOSL is working well for me, with large drives.
      Limiting each O/S to a 100Gb partition should be sufficient IMHO as I
      am keeping my personal documents on a separate drive and have
      redirected the "My Documents" folder accordingly.
      >
      > The issue that you are experiencing with your external drive only
      appears to occur when it is plugged in at bootup. I would suggest
      that you take a look at the priorities of the drives in your BIOS,
      XOSL and the Computer Management tool in Windows.
      >
      > Yours,
      > Robyn
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      >
      >
      > Hi Norman,
      >
      > thanks for your incouraging comment. Is your 1TB an external drive?
      > If so I will give it a new try.....
      > .
      >
    • norman@thebacks.co.uk
      Hi Thomas Success with an external drive might depend on BIOS and connectivity used. I have used it successfully with a 1TB esata connected external drive. As
      Message 2 of 11 , Jan 26, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Thomas

        Success with an external drive might depend on BIOS and connectivity
        used. I have used it successfully with a 1TB esata connected external
        drive. As you have had success with a smaller USB drive it might be
        worth reinstalling XOSL and trying again.

        Regards
        Norman Back

        thomas.wawersig wrote:
        > Hi Norman,
        >
        > thanks for your incouraging comment. Is your 1TB an external drive?
        > If so I will give it a new try.....
        >
        > regards,
        > Thomas
        >
        > --- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "norman@..." <norman@...> wrote:
        >> Hi
        >>
        >> In my experience XOSL alread supports large drives. I'm currently using
        >> it successfully on a 1TB (1000GB) drive with multi boot XP, W2K & linux.
        >>
        >> Regards
        >> Norman Back
        >>
        >> thomas.wawersig wrote:
        >>> Hi there,
        >>>
        >>> this is a serious warning to NEVER try WinXP boot manager.
        >>>
        >>> Unfortunetaley I had to look for an alernative to my beloved XOSL,
        >>> since I bought a 500GB hard disk, which somehow crashed my XOSL.
        >>> So in a fit of naive stupidity (after looking at various other boot
        >>> loader, that did not really come close to XOSL), I thought I give the
        >>> XP-thing a try.
        >>> What a total desaster!
        >>> Ok, I could boot into two different systems, but strange enough when
        >>> booting into the second XP, residing on a logical partition, I had the
        >>> system drive mapped as H: and still had good old C: (i.e. the first
        >>> system). Consequences were bitter: quite a lot of nice little apps did
        >>> not work properly anymore......
        >>> So well, of course I went back to scratch (I thought...). So I
        >>> pondered booting with a floppy (still have one:-)) and erasing the MBR
        >>> would be an easy way to get things back to normal.. What a childish
        >>> belief in the good of this world. I really forgot that these Redmond
        >>> guys do not tolerate any other gods beside them. Though I checked my
        >>> Bios a again and again: no way to boot from floppy or CD. No, Sir,
        >>> nothing. I had to use my XP installation CD instead to get rid of that
        >>> shit.
        >>>
        >>> So I wondered: will there ever, ever be XOSL supporting large external
        >>> drives?
        >>>
        >>> Thomas
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >
        >
        >
      • Antoine W. Campagna
        On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:07 PM, thomas.wawersig ... The limit of four primary (including extended) partitions is per disk. It is not a limitation of XOSL, it
        Message 3 of 11 , Jan 27, 2009
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:07 PM, thomas.wawersig
          <thomas.wawersig@...> wrote:
          > Hi Robyn,
          >
          > thanks for the information.
          >
          > Yes, I already checked priority in BIOS and XOSL setup (when I still
          > had it).
          > Actually I removed XOSL and just wanted to re-install, but it got
          > stuck at "reading disk structure" (with this said external drive still
          > plugged in...).
          >
          > Since I had it all up and running with an external disk before, it is
          > probably not related to disk size, but number of primary partitions.
          > The only difference (except for disk size of course) is another
          > logical partition on the new drive. But what I forgot ist, that
          > creating a logical partition requires a primary extended partition
          > first. So all together XOSL now sees 5 primaries instead of 4. I think
          > I remember that there is an issue with having more than 4 primary
          > partitions (though I am not sure wehther I read this relating to
          > XOSL). In your setup, are all partitions hosting an OS set up as
          > primary partitions?
          >

          The limit of four primary (including extended) partitions is per disk.
          It is not a limitation of XOSL, it is in the standard ms-dos
          disklabel, that is, there is no place for more than four partitions in
          a normal partition table.

          I have succefully used XOSL with three disks having each 4 primary partitions.

          I do not have any experience with external disks but I think support
          for them would need to be in the BIOS. XOSL does not include any
          recent drivers so it is not aware of USB, SATA, 1394, SD or any of
          that recent stuff. For them to work correctly with XOSL (and the other
          boot loaders), the BIOS needs to allow access to these new devices in
          the old IBM PC-compatible way.

          Antoine
        • Robyn
          Hi Thomas, ... The limit of four primary (including extended) partitions is per disk. It is not a limitation of XOSL, it is in the standard ms-dos disklabel,
          Message 4 of 11 , Jan 27, 2009
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Thomas,
             
            ----- Original Message -----
             

            The limit of four primary (including extended) partitions is per disk.
            It is not a limitation of XOSL, it is in the standard ms-dos
            disklabel, that is, there is no place for more than four partitions in
            a normal partition table.

            I have succefully used XOSL with three disks having each 4 primary partitions.

            I do not have any experience with external disks but I think support
            for them would need to be in the BIOS. XOSL does not include any
            recent drivers so it is not aware of USB, SATA, 1394, SD or any of
            that recent stuff. For them to work correctly with XOSL (and the other
            boot loaders), the BIOS needs to allow access to these new devices in
            the old IBM PC-compatible way.

            Antoine

            .
             
            I concur with what Antoine has posted.
             
            In the layout that I previously described, the only extended & logical partition is the Image Partition on my first drive. All the other partitions are Primary.
             
            I'm not sure why you wanted an extended partition on the external drive.  I would consider investigating whether this is the cause of your problems.  From my experience I have only had primary partitions on the external drive.
             
            Yours,
            Robyn
          • junja
            Interesting Norman. I suggest the bios is crucial (in principle, they re improving all the time). What is yours? Junja
            Message 5 of 11 , Jan 27, 2009
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Interesting Norman.
              I suggest the bios is crucial (in principle, they're improving
              all the time). What is yours?
              Junja


              norman@... wrote:
              > Hi Thomas
              >
              > Success with an external drive might depend on BIOS and connectivity
              > used. I have used it successfully with a 1TB esata connected external
              > drive. As you have had success with a smaller USB drive it might be
              > worth reinstalling XOSL and trying again.
              >
              > Regards
              > Norman Back
              >
              > thomas.wawersig wrote:
              >> Hi Norman,
              >>
              >> thanks for your incouraging comment. Is your 1TB an external drive?
              >> If so I will give it a new try.....
              >>
              >> regards,
              >> Thomas
              >>
              >> --- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "norman@..." <norman@...> wrote:
              >>> Hi
              >>>
              >>> In my experience XOSL alread supports large drives. I'm currently using
              >>> it successfully on a 1TB (1000GB) drive with multi boot XP, W2K & linux.
              >>>
              >>> Regards
              >>> Norman Back
              >>>
              >>> thomas.wawersig wrote:
              >>>> Hi there,
              >>>>
              >>>> this is a serious warning to NEVER try WinXP boot manager.
              >>>>
              >>>> Unfortunetaley I had to look for an alernative to my beloved XOSL,
              >>>> since I bought a 500GB hard disk, which somehow crashed my XOSL.
              >>>> So in a fit of naive stupidity (after looking at various other boot
              >>>> loader, that did not really come close to XOSL), I thought I give the
              >>>> XP-thing a try.
              >>>> What a total desaster!
              >>>> Ok, I could boot into two different systems, but strange enough when
              >>>> booting into the second XP, residing on a logical partition, I had the
              >>>> system drive mapped as H: and still had good old C: (i.e. the first
              >>>> system). Consequences were bitter: quite a lot of nice little apps did
              >>>> not work properly anymore......
              >>>> So well, of course I went back to scratch (I thought...). So I
              >>>> pondered booting with a floppy (still have one:-)) and erasing the MBR
              >>>> would be an easy way to get things back to normal.. What a childish
              >>>> belief in the good of this world. I really forgot that these Redmond
              >>>> guys do not tolerate any other gods beside them. Though I checked my
              >>>> Bios a again and again: no way to boot from floppy or CD. No, Sir,
              >>>> nothing. I had to use my XP installation CD instead to get rid of that
              >>>> shit.
              >>>>
              >>>> So I wondered: will there ever, ever be XOSL supporting large external
              >>>> drives?
              >>>>
              >>>> Thomas
              >>>>
              >>>>
              >>>>
              >>
              >>
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or use the web interface at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xoslYahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.