<div>On 3/1/06, <a href="mailto:akonstam@trinity.edu">akonstam@trinity.edu</a> <<a href="mailto:akonstam@trinity.edu">akonstam@trinity.edu</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 04:46:00PM -0500, Michael Wiktowy wrote: > On 2/27/06, Mauriat Miranda < <a href="mailto:mirandam@gmail.com">mirandam@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > > > > On 2/27/06, <a href="mailto:akonstam@trinity.edu">akonstam@trinity.edu</a> <<a href="mailto:akonstam@trinity.edu">akonstam@trinity.edu </a>> wrote: > > > Using the Windows boot loader is the old way from Lilo days. There is > > > not problem double booting FC4 with Windows (XP or 2000) using grub. I > > > have done this on three of my machines. But the grub must be applied > > > after the Windows is installed. > > > > Not sure what the subjective phrase "the old way" means, but this is > > merely chainloading, which is still commonly used. If grub has never > > failed for you, then good for you. However it has for me and for > > others (multiple FC installs, multiple dual-boot machines). Using > > NTLDR is a very safe alternative to being potentially locked out of > > *both* windows *and* linux. (Been doing this since I had NT4) > > > > The MBR doesn't need to be constantly overwritten, this is a common > > source of problems (for me at least). If you have multiple Windows or > > Linux distributions installed, you can have 1 corresponding entry in > > the boot.ini for each bootable partition. This needs to be setup only > > once, and never really needs to be touched. You can preserve and test > > multiple grub or lilo installs from multiple distributions by > > installing a bootloader to the first sector of the bootable partition, > > as I do. (all Fedora installers have provided this option) > > > > Entirely optional, but highly recommended for anyone with reservations > > about possibly interfering with their windows xp or 2000 boot. > > > I would have to agree ... using NTLDR is not the "old" way, it is the only > way on some troublesome systems. Most of the time GRUB will boot Linux and > Windows just fine but there does seem to be the odd nasty > BIOS+mobo+drive+partition combo that seems to trip Windows into a > NTLDR-or-death mode. > > I have had particular trouble with systems that have both SATA and IDE drive > interfaces. There doesn't seem to be any standard way for Windows to know > which one it should treat as "C:" or GRUB to know which is hd0. With enough > messing around I can usually find a magic combination of bootloader chaining > but it usually all goes to hell when you pull a drive out. > > Maybe this is the scenario that the OP finds themselves in. > > /Mike I agree that is it does not work, it does not work and something else must be done. But grub knows which is hd0 by the entry in the /boot/grub/device.map file. We found that sometimes with SATA disks you have to fool around with the SATA options in the BIOS to make them work properly in a fedora - windows double boot. I admit I have never tried this with a SATA - IDE combination but I suspect you are ok as long as you don't depend on the IDE drive to be the one that is looked at to find the MBR by default.</blockquote><div> I know the problem in my case is that when I have an IDE drive in the machine, the BIOS treats that as "the first drive" and when I don't have an IDE drive in the machine, the BIOS treats the SATA drive as "the first drive". I think that is the main source of grub-install confusion since there is no inherent way in GRUB (or NTLDR for that matter) to specify bus/drive/partition ... only drive/partiton. You can get around it once you figure out which drive is which but it is a PITA .. especially when you have a brain-dead BIOS that doesn't give you many options. /Mike </div> </div>