grub vs. me

[Mikkel L. Ellertson]

Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> 
> What is more
> interesting is that your edited version has root on /dev/sda3. Is this
> consistent with the partition you have marked as bootable (see fdisk)?
> 
> poc
> 
It does not need to be marked bootable. It does need to be the 
correct partition for the root partition. For that matter, the root 
partition does not need to be a primary partition. Depending on your 
BIOS, you may need one partition marked as bootable, but this is not 
requirement for Grub or booting Linux.

I have one system here with the /boot partition marked as bootable, 
andther where the Windows partition is marked as bootable, and an 
old RH7.3 system without a partition marked as bootable. All work fine.

Mikkel
-- 

   Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20080423/e9efab05/attachment-0001.sig>