Re: [UUG/MLUG] Hdd's?

[Scott Hussey <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Even though I'm not a proponent of spending tons of cash on unneccesary
software, I have been told that PartitionMagic can do a marvelous
job of sorting out boot problems. I don't have any experience personally
because I only have Linux on my box.

scott

On Mon, Jan 03, 2000 at 05:00:13PM -0600, Jonathan King wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 3 Jan 2000, Mike Miller wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 3 Jan 2000 EMAIL:PROTECTED wrote:
> > 
> > > Sure they do, I've got Linux, 98, and W2Krc2 on the same drive as 
> > > happy as windows can be. [snip]
> > 
> > I have a colleague who told me that he's running both Red Hat Linux
> > and WinNT 4.0 on one drive, and he was accessing the NT (FAT 16, I
> > think)  partition from Linux.  One day he tried to boot NT, but it
> > failed.
> 
> And this is bad because why? :-)
> 
> > He told me that it was clearly because Linux had somehow affected NT.  
> > I don't remember the messages he was getting, but he was never able to
> > start NT.  Does anybody know more about this?
> 
> Dang, this is news to me, and I have the identical set-up: NT and Linux on
> one big drive.  And my home machine has been a dual-boot Windows/Linux
> since the 0.98 days.  I've never had a problem this way, but, truth to
> tell, I don't toss that many files over onto the non-Linux side.
>  
> > For now, until proven otherwise, I'll have to take the position that
> > there are some dangers in running dual boot on one HD.
> 
> Well, I'm an empiricist at heart, so I used google, and searched for "NT
> linux dual-boot one drive".  Hit #5 was:
> 
> http://d0server1.fnal.gov/dual_boot.html
> 
> And, lo and behold, I read:
> 
>   In order to get NT/Linux dual boot working on {dnt40}, we have tried
>   out many different combinations and sequences, most has a lot to do 
>   with boot loaders. We have started out with LILO which we believe, at
>   that moment, had a problem due to the capability of the corresponding
>   Linux fdisk which was not able to handle an IDE drive with a size
>   greater than 8.4GB.
> 
> [snip]
> 
>   In both cases of failures, we have seen that the Linux portion booted
>   well while the NT boot resulted in a crash (Blue Screen of Death) of
>   the OS at the time of Boot due to an infectious record on the
>   MBR in Window NT's point of view. In both cases we had Windows NT
>   installed in the first section of the hard drive, followed by
>   Linux partitions. 
> 
> [and then more tidbits.]
> 
> So something like this can happen, but, in this incident, anyway, seems to
> have been caused by Lilo.  A footnote to this is that my machine (babar)
> has no such problems, but has a big SCSI disk, and I use the NT
> boot-loader to load both NT and linux (via lilo).
> 
> jking
> 

-- 
Scott Hussey
EMAIL:PROTECTED