Pccomputerdr <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> You don't think it works if you install one hard drive as cable
> select and install Windows 2000 on that hard drive. After you're
> done, remove the hard drive, and put the second hard drive in
> there and install Windows XP. So, we have two different hard
> drives. One with Windows 2000, the other one with Windows XP.
Yes, that works fine up till then.
> You can either put the hard drive with Windows XP as master,
> and the other hard drive with Windows 2000 as slave or visa versa.
It doesnt have anything to do with master/slave or cable select.
> If you want to boot with Windows 2000, you go into
> CMOS and select the slave first in the boot sequence.
And thats when it wont necessarily boot properly when
the other drive is the first drive of the pair and is explicitly
listed in the drive data in the boot data with that OS.
The problem arises when you attempt to boot the OS on the
drive which isnt the master of the pair. The installation was
done with it as the only drive on the cable, and it will get quite
confused when its later not the first physical drive on the cable.
Its possible to manually edit the drive config info so it
works again, but its not trivial for someone like you to do.
Its rather simpler for someone like you to use a real boot
manager which can hide the drive you arent booting from etc.
> If I install either Windows 2000 or Windows XP without
> the existence of another slave hard drive inside the
> computer, there is no physical drive to keep track of.
Yes, but when you boot the slave, with the master visible
and not being the drive with the OS being booted installed
on it, the OS being booted can get seriously confused.
> All that physical drive table is created if you
> have another hard drive during installation.
Not necessarily. It just keeps track of
the physical drive it was installed on.
> After both operating systems are installed on two different
> hard drives and connected as slave and master, the operating
> system on either slave or master will detect the other hard
> drive just like another hard drive without any complication.
Thats actually what happens if you do the
install with both drives physically present.
> Am I wrong to assume all this?
Yes.
> What is your recommendation for a boot manager?
http://www.osloader.com/ looks interesting. I havent actually
attempted to setup the config you are talking about with it tho.