I'm having a problem with a Linux/Windows 2000 Professional SP2 multi-boot
installation on a large hard drive (500g) on a Gateway Pentium 4 computer
with an old (2001) bios. The bios sees only ~137g. No newer bios is
available.

These were the installation steps;

1) Created small (300m) first primary partition for Linux /boot.
2) Created large (100g) Second primary partition for Windows 2000.
3) Installed Windows 2000, and install all updates.
4) ** This step was missed** The Windows registry should have been edited as
described here;
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098
but it was not
5) Partitioned the remainder of the harddrive during the Linux installation,
with the Linux partitions being on logical partitions between 100g and 250g,
and the last primary partition on the remainder of the harddrive (250g-500g)
as a shared NTSF data partition. Linux does not seem to use bios to
determine harddrive size.
6) I'm using grub as a bootloader.
7) Linux works fine, and boots to Windows boot screen fine.
8) Windows 2000 locks up hard early in the boot process, even if the F8 safe
mode is chosen.

What options do I have to repair this Windows installation? If I reinstall
Windows 2000, I know from experience that I will have to delete any
partitions above 137g first, which I would prefer not to do, if at all
possible. Can I edit the registry manually from outside of Windows with a
text editor, in order to add the missing key as described in the Microsoft
link I listed above? Would installing XP over 2000 fix the problem, or does
it still use bios to determine hard drive size? I would prefer not to
buy/install vista, because the purpose of the Windows installation is to run
already purchased software written for 2000/XP.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Linux kernels have their own disk drivers, they don't rely on the BIOS
for 48-bit addressing, that is why it can see and use the whole drive
but Windows cannot. If there are no BIOS updates available for your
board then you will have to use a PCI controller card for the drive.
These controller cards have their own BIOS and they will permit Windows
to use the whole drive, just make sure that the controller card is
compatible with Linux.

John

akbrian wrote:

> I'm having a problem with a Linux/Windows 2000 Professional SP2 multi-boot
> installation on a large hard drive (500g) on a Gateway Pentium 4 computer
> with an old (2001) bios. The bios sees only ~137g. No newer bios is
> available.
>
> These were the installation steps;
>
> 1) Created small (300m) first primary partition for Linux /boot.
> 2) Created large (100g) Second primary partition for Windows 2000.
> 3) Installed Windows 2000, and install all updates.
> 4) ** This step was missed** The Windows registry should have been edited as
> described here;
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098
> but it was not
> 5) Partitioned the remainder of the harddrive during the Linux installation,
> with the Linux partitions being on logical partitions between 100g and 250g,
> and the last primary partition on the remainder of the harddrive (250g-500g)
> as a shared NTSF data partition. Linux does not seem to use bios to
> determine harddrive size.
> 6) I'm using grub as a bootloader.
> 7) Linux works fine, and boots to Windows boot screen fine.
> 8) Windows 2000 locks up hard early in the boot process, even if the F8 safe
> mode is chosen.
>
> What options do I have to repair this Windows installation? If I reinstall
> Windows 2000, I know from experience that I will have to delete any
> partitions above 137g first, which I would prefer not to do, if at all
> possible. Can I edit the registry manually from outside of Windows with a
> text editor, in order to add the missing key as described in the Microsoft
> link I listed above? Would installing XP over 2000 fix the problem, or does
> it still use bios to determine hard drive size? I would prefer not to
> buy/install vista, because the purpose of the Windows installation is to run
> already purchased software written for 2000/XP.
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.

Your step four really doesn't matter.

Operating systems that do not have 48-bit LBA support enabled by default
(such as Microsoft Windows 98, Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition (Me), or
Windows 2000) that are installed on a partition that spans beyond the 28-bit
LBA boundary (137GB) will experience data corruption or data loss.

If you install a copy of Windows 2000 that includes SP3 (SP3 integrated) on
a large hard disk that has already been preformatted by using a 48-bit
LBA-enabled operating system, the ATAPI subsystem may report hard-disk space
greater than that which is addressable without the 48-bit LBA support
(larger than approximately 137 GB) during the text-mode portion of Setup. In
this case, the hard disk's partition table information has already been
created. To fix the incorrect disk information, delete the partition by
using either a disk partitioning utility or by deleting and then re-creating
the partition during the text-mode portion of Setup. After you create the
new partition, quit Setup by pressing F3, and then restart the Windows
installation process. The ATAPI subsystem now correctly shows approximately
137 GB of hard disk space.

The operating system must be installed on the first partition that is
smaller or equal to 137 GB when the EnableBigLba registry value is enabled
but when you do not have a 48-bit LBA compatible BIOS.

The operating system must be installed on the first partition that is less
than or equal to 137 GB and the rest of the hard disk divided into one or
more remaining partitions when the EnableBigLba registry value is enabled on
a computer without a 48-bit LBA compatible BIOS that has a hard disk with a
capacity of more than 137 GB.


--

Regards,

Dave Patrick ....Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"akbrian" wrote:
> I'm having a problem with a Linux/Windows 2000 Professional SP2 multi-boot
> installation on a large hard drive (500g) on a Gateway Pentium 4 computer
> with an old (2001) bios. The bios sees only ~137g. No newer bios is
> available.
>
> These were the installation steps;
>
> 1) Created small (300m) first primary partition for Linux /boot.
> 2) Created large (100g) Second primary partition for Windows 2000.
> 3) Installed Windows 2000, and install all updates.
> 4) ** This step was missed** The Windows registry should have been edited
> as
> described here;
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098
> but it was not
> 5) Partitioned the remainder of the harddrive during the Linux
> installation,
> with the Linux partitions being on logical partitions between 100g and
> 250g,
> and the last primary partition on the remainder of the harddrive
> (250g-500g)
> as a shared NTSF data partition. Linux does not seem to use bios to
> determine harddrive size.
> 6) I'm using grub as a bootloader.
> 7) Linux works fine, and boots to Windows boot screen fine.
> 8) Windows 2000 locks up hard early in the boot process, even if the F8
> safe
> mode is chosen.
>
> What options do I have to repair this Windows installation? If I reinstall
> Windows 2000, I know from experience that I will have to delete any
> partitions above 137g first, which I would prefer not to do, if at all
> possible. Can I edit the registry manually from outside of Windows with a
> text editor, in order to add the missing key as described in the Microsoft
> link I listed above? Would installing XP over 2000 fix the problem, or
> does
> it still use bios to determine hard drive size? I would prefer not to
> buy/install vista, because the purpose of the Windows installation is to
> run
> already purchased software written for 2000/XP.
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.

First, thanks for both your responses, perhaps this will clarify the question.

The windows C: partition is entirely below 137g. If partitions existed
beyond 137g during installation (sp2), the correct partitioning would show up
in the windows installation, but then the install would lockup when trying to
format the target partition for C: . If I delete all partitions above 137g,
then the installation proceeds fine, and the install can be updated using
Windows update.

I'm assuming that if I had done the registry edit prior to adding the
additional partitions, then Windows would load as normal, instead of locking
up. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, as I will have to delete my
functioning Linux installation in order to give it try, so any insight is
appreciated. I don't have access to a Windows SP3 CD. I might consider
buying Windows XP-SP2C, if I knew it would work for sure, but otherwise I'm
happy with 2000 for my Windows uses.

While I would like Windows to be be able to access the last partition on the
drive as a data partition, If that is not possible, or unsafe, then I can
live with Windows being limited to the C: drive (below 137g). As there is no
data on the last partition yet, deleting it, and then recreating it from
windows is not a problem. I don't read/write my Linux partitions from
Windows, so that is not an issue.

Well this is certainly a different story. If the entire windows system/boot
partition is less than 137 gB from the start of the disk then I'd think no
problems.


--

Regards,

Dave Patrick ....Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"akbrian" wrote:
> First, thanks for both your responses, perhaps this will clarify the
> question.
>
> The windows C: partition is entirely below 137g. If partitions existed
> beyond 137g during installation (sp2), the correct partitioning would show
> up
> in the windows installation, but then the install would lockup when trying
> to
> format the target partition for C: . If I delete all partitions above
> 137g,
> then the installation proceeds fine, and the install can be updated using
> Windows update.
>
> I'm assuming that if I had done the registry edit prior to adding the
> additional partitions, then Windows would load as normal, instead of
> locking
> up. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, as I will have to delete my
> functioning Linux installation in order to give it try, so any insight is
> appreciated. I don't have access to a Windows SP3 CD. I might consider
> buying Windows XP-SP2C, if I knew it would work for sure, but otherwise
> I'm
> happy with 2000 for my Windows uses.
>
> While I would like Windows to be be able to access the last partition on
> the
> drive as a data partition, If that is not possible, or unsafe, then I can
> live with Windows being limited to the C: drive (below 137g). As there is
> no
> data on the last partition yet, deleting it, and then recreating it from
> windows is not a problem. I don't read/write my Linux partitions from
> Windows, so that is not an issue.

At this point, should I assume that there is no reasonable method to repair
the Windows installation, and I should proceed with the partition deleting
and Windows re-installation?

Thanks again for the responses.

"Dave Patrick" wrote:

> Well this is certainly a different story. If the entire windows system/boot
> partition is less than 137 gB from the start of the disk then I'd think no
> problems.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Patrick ....Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
> Microsoft Certified Professional
> Microsoft MVP [Windows]
> http://www.microsoft.com/protect
>
> "akbrian" wrote:
> > First, thanks for both your responses, perhaps this will clarify the
> > question.
> >
> > The windows C: partition is entirely below 137g. If partitions existed
> > beyond 137g during installation (sp2), the correct partitioning would show
> > up
> > in the windows installation, but then the install would lockup when trying
> > to
> > format the target partition for C: . If I delete all partitions above
> > 137g,
> > then the installation proceeds fine, and the install can be updated using
> > Windows update.
> >
> > I'm assuming that if I had done the registry edit prior to adding the
> > additional partitions, then Windows would load as normal, instead of
> > locking
> > up. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, as I will have to delete my
> > functioning Linux installation in order to give it try, so any insight is
> > appreciated. I don't have access to a Windows SP3 CD. I might consider
> > buying Windows XP-SP2C, if I knew it would work for sure, but otherwise
> > I'm
> > happy with 2000 for my Windows uses.
> >
> > While I would like Windows to be be able to access the last partition on
> > the
> > drive as a data partition, If that is not possible, or unsafe, then I can
> > live with Windows being limited to the C: drive (below 137g). As there is
> > no
> > data on the last partition yet, deleting it, and then recreating it from
> > windows is not a problem. I don't read/write my Linux partitions from
> > Windows, so that is not an issue.
>

If any part of the windows system/boot partition is greater than 137 gB from
the start of the disk then I would say yes. Please read carefully *all* of
the conditions here.

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098



--

Regards,

Dave Patrick ....Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"akbrian" wrote:
> At this point, should I assume that there is no reasonable method to
> repair
> the Windows installation, and I should proceed with the partition deleting
> and Windows re-installation?
>
> Thanks again for the responses.

Yes the linux /boot and Windows partition are both below 137g It was only
after the addition of partitions (that were never "mounted" in Windows) past
137g, that Windows began to lockup when it begins to load.
snip
---
1) Created small (300m) first primary partition for Linux /boot.
2) Created large (100g) Second primary partition for Windows 2000.
---
Going to go ahead with the reinstall route, Thanks for the help.

"Dave Patrick" wrote:

> If any part of the windows system/boot partition is greater than 137 gB from
> the start of the disk then I would say yes. Please read carefully *all* of
> the conditions here.
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;305098
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Patrick ....Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
> Microsoft Certified Professional
> Microsoft MVP [Windows]
> http://www.microsoft.com/protect
>
> "akbrian" wrote:
> > At this point, should I assume that there is no reasonable method to
> > repair
> > the Windows installation, and I should proceed with the partition deleting
> > and Windows re-installation?
> >
> > Thanks again for the responses.
>