Hi!
Really odd that MS DOS does not see the SATA, while FreeDOS apparently does? Maybe your SATA controller comes with an odd LBA-only BIOS? If your MS DOS is limited to 1.3 GB because of the IDE CHS geometry (which geometry is that, exactly?) then you should use the MS DOS of Win9x which supports LBA, or simply use FreeDOS, which also supports LBA and FAT32 :-) My suggestion was not to use Windows drivers for anything. There are patches for ancient Windows to let it see more than 128 GB, or in other words, LBA48 instead of LBA28, but I would expect 100 GB to be enough for your DOS desires. As you seem to get a lot of unusual effects, even with Windows, I suggest to stick to FreeDOS and Linux and double-check with for example DOSFSCK whether your FAT32 LBA is working fine. > I'm able to boot from the SATA card if the IDE drive is on the secondary > IDE channel, but not if it's on the primary channel. Apparently your BIOS insists to boot from whatever is primary, which sounds plausible, but unfortunately your SATA seems to work with your combined BIOSes when it also is primary? So why not just keep the SATA SSD as primary? You can still add the IDE as a secondary drive for any CHS-only DOSes. Which is exactly the other way round as your current setup. I think both options should be okay. Why would you want to hide your SSD from DOS by making it unsupported secondary? Eric PS: You can even tell GRUB to reassign BIOS drive numbers before booting DOS, by keeping some small resident part active, I think. _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
