Re: Dual boot solution
I haven't done enough installations recently to answer. Are you saying that if you leave the fdisk screen with no primary partition marked active or with the MSFT one marked active, then it switches it to the soon-to-be-FreeBSD one? One of the installer's help files says: If no slice is marked Active, you will need to either install a Boot Manager (the option for which will be presented later in the installation) or set one Active before leaving this screen. This was my experience. I didn't set either of them active (even though the windows partition was active prior to running fdisk) and it defaulted to setting the BSD partition active. Why couldn't sysinstall set the active bit to the other partition? It could, but that wouldn't always be a good choice, would it? IMO, if any are already set active, it should leave them alone and not set any others; else, set active the primary partition of the soon-to-be FreeBSD root file system. After I realized that something wasn't right, I tried to run sysinstall to set the windows partion as the active partition (which worked when I was installing 5.4). In the fdisk screen in sysinstall, when I tried to write the changes (make the windows partition active) it would give me an error. Is this something you can only do on installs, not after the fact? I just submitted a PR, I'll CC you when it is processed. Thanks for your help. Kristopher ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dual boot solution
All, I have a dual boot setup with windows 2000 and freebsd 5.4 (amd64). Everything was set up using ntldr to dual boot so I could learn freebsd meanwhile my wife could still use the computer. I recently wiped 5.4 and installed 6.0B4 and in the setup chose not to load any boot managers (NONE). I finished installing, everything working fine. Until I rebooted. Freebsd booted! So, after googling (lots of misinformation) and trying many things, I thought I would post here to save some poor soul a repeat of the week I have had. First, this is what worked: Boot into freebsd and changing the active partition back to the windows partition (if it is /dev/ad0) ala fdisk /dev/ad0 -a yes 1 (vs 2, the freebsd partition) yes reboot! What didn't work: 1. using sysinstall in freebsd to set the partition as active. For some reason this gave an error. 2. windows recovery CD, fixmdr, fixboot, fdisk /mbr, repair installation of windows 2000 (screwed up windows big time, btw!) Apparently if you do not choose an active partition in sysinstall, it defaults to the freebsd partition. Even if you choose not to alter the MBR. I didn't have an error of ntdlr not found, it was just booting into freebsd right off the bat. Also, some people solve this problem by reinstalling windows, which I am sure when you do this, it sets the install partition to be the active partition. If anyone could add to this I would be interested. Thanks, Kristopher ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual boot solution
K Wieland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If anyone could add to this I would be interested.
I suppose that you say
Even if you choose not to alter the MBR.
because of the last install menu item below
{ { BootMgr, Install the FreeBSD Boot Manager,
{ Standard, Install a standard MBR (no boot manager),
{ None, Leave the Master Boot Record untouched,
(from src/release/sysinstall/menus.c)
That last one is clearly misleading, even if it is in the context of
picking a boot manager, because later fdisk operations are certainly
able to change the MBR's primary partition table, including the
active bits that gave you trouble.
I'll try to get the menu items changed to something like:
{ { BootMgr, Install the FreeBSD interactive boot manager,
{ Standard, Install the FreeBSD non-interactive boot manager,
{ None, Don't Install any boot manager,
If you'd like, you could file a formal PR about this (and CC me,
please) and maybe someone will beat me to it.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual boot solution
On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:22 PM, Gary W. Swearingen wrote:
K Wieland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If anyone could add to this I would be interested.
I suppose that you say
Even if you choose not to alter the MBR.
because of the last install menu item below
{ { BootMgr,Install the FreeBSD Boot Manager,
{ Standard, Install a standard MBR (no boot manager),
{ None, Leave the Master Boot Record untouched,
(from src/release/sysinstall/menus.c)
That last one is clearly misleading, even if it is in the context of
picking a boot manager, because later fdisk operations are certainly
able to change the MBR's primary partition table, including the
active bits that gave you trouble.
I'll try to get the menu items changed to something like:
{ { BootMgr,Install the FreeBSD interactive boot manager,
{ Standard, Install the FreeBSD non-interactive boot manager,
{ None, Don't Install any boot manager,
If you'd like, you could file a formal PR about this (and CC me,
please) and maybe someone will beat me to it.
I have never filed a PR, do you have a link for how to do that?
Like you mentioned, it is misleading to say the least!
The problem as I see it has a much larger scope: On one hand, you want
to make it easy for people to just install and go. This would tend
toward fewer options, more streamlined, automatically set the active
bit for the freebsd, etc. On the other hand, some people definitely
need control over those issues.
Maybe a solution is to see if a partition is set as active after the
sysinstall disk setup part. If not, instead of defaulting to freebsd,
ask? Are these issues covered in the advanced installation?
I foresee this being a bigger and bigger problem as more people are
enticed to try freebsd but want the familiarity of windows - leading to
dual booting. Basically, they can't/don't want to go cold turkey,
which I can't blame them.
Is sysinstall simply unable to tell which partition is set as active?
Why couldn't sysinstall set the active bit to the other partition?
Thanks,
Kristopher
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
