Jonathan Arnold wrote: > At the installation screen, Expert Options tab, the Change... button lists > the Booting option. Here you can set up both the Grub menu and where the MBR > gets installed. > >
When it works, which it didn't, plus it didn't offer to put it where I needed it anyhow ... 2 bugs >> >> The release notes are displayed *after* a successful installation is >> complete. Perhaps they should be displayed BEFORE the installation starts. >> > > Big button at the lower left of the installation screens says: > > Show Release Notes > > Which says nothing about overwriting OS installations on those renamed drives > When you are installing a new OS, sharing the drives with an old OS, whether > it is a dot upgrade or a brand new Linux, I would think making sure of where > it was installing the MBR would be of a primary importance, and "assuming" > you know where that is would be a bad idea in any case. > > We seem to have a failure to communicate here. I have repeatedly said that the damage was NOT to as shared drive but to a separate drive that was not supposed to be affected in any way by the installation and in all previous versions had in fact, been immune. The BUG caused the 'sharing' of the drive against my expectations and will. I get the impression that you think I'm stupid or something for deliberately causing 10.3 to overwrite a perfectly good 10.2 installation boot partition. Of course it is a bad idea if you know it is going to happen and the release notes didn't imply anything about that possibility. Renaming meant squat....as long as it was smart enough to keep the old installation separate from the new installation the way previous installation programs had done since 9.3 through 10.2 and probably earlier. It was a BUG that caused the damage, along with poor design implementation. Thank you for your rather myopic viewpoint Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
