Blank entries in Boot.ini file

[Rishi]

Hi all.I need help in fixing my boot.ini file in XP.My OS choice menu
displays two blank entries alongwith the XP entry which i want.My
boot.ini file looks like this.

[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS=""
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS=""
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
Professional" /fastdetect /noexecute=optin /tutag=g0wx5p /
kernel=tukernel.exe


What if i delete the two blank entries in second of the file?Did it
affect the functioning of my system.

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

Hi all.I need help in fixing my boot.ini file in XP.My OS choice menu
displays two blank entries alongwith the XP entry which i want.My
boot.ini file looks like this.

[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS=""
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS=""
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
Professional" /fastdetect /noexecute=optin /tutag=g0wx5p /
kernel=tukernel.exe


What if i delete the two blank entries in second of the file?Did it
affect the functioning of my system.

For the purpose of booting up, the two lines with blank descriptions
are identical to the third line that has a description. You can safely
remove them.

 

[Rishi]

For the purpose of booting up, the two lines with blank descriptions

are identical to the third line that has a description. You can safely
remove them.

So,what if i need to add an entry of Vista which is in another drive
than XP?

 

[kookieman]

Unless the current version of ntldr is that of Vista's, that will not work.

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

So,what if i need to add an entry of Vista which is in another drive
than XP?

Add another line like so:
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(x)partition(y)\zzz="Microsoft Vista"

Set the correct values for x, y and zzz and keep in mind
kookieman's warning.

 

[John John]

It won't work period, Vista cannot be booted with ntldr.

John

 

[John John]

Add another line like so:
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(x)partition(y)\zzz="Microsoft Vista"

Set the correct values for x, y and zzz and keep in mind
kookieman's warning.

No, that won't work, Pegasus. Vista doesn't boot with ntldr and
boot.ini, it uses a different boot manager altogether.

For BIOS computer and MBR disks the MBR loads the Boot Sector, the Boot
Code loads Bootmgr, Bootmgr reads the Boot Configuration Data store
(BCD) and uses the information in the store to load Vista.

Windows Vista no longer starts after you install an earlier version of
the Windows operating system in a dual-boot configuration
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919529

John

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

No, that won't work, Pegasus. Vista doesn't boot with ntldr and boot.ini,
it uses a different boot manager altogether.

For BIOS computer and MBR disks the MBR loads the Boot Sector, the Boot
Code loads Bootmgr, Bootmgr reads the Boot Configuration Data store (BCD)
and uses the information in the store to load Vista.

Windows Vista no longer starts after you install an earlier version of the
Windows operating system in a dual-boot configuration
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919529

John

Thanks. Looks like I have to do a little homework to catch
up on the intricacies of the Vista boot loader.

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

So,what if i need to add an entry of Vista which is in another drive
than XP?

I think you have two options:
- Convince Vista to multi-boot. A Vista newsgroup would be a good
place to ask this question.
- Use a third-party boot manager such as XOSL. It sits like an umbrella
over the various OSs and invokes whatever native boot loader you
happen to select.

 

[Uncle Marvo]

In reply to Pegasus (MVP) ([email protected]) who wrote this in
%[email protected], I, Marvo, say :

I think you have two options:
- Convince Vista to multi-boot. A Vista newsgroup would be a good
place to ask this question.
- Use a third-party boot manager such as XOSL. It sits like an
umbrella over the various OSs and invokes whatever native boot
loader you happen to select.

A third option which would work, considering it's on another drive, is to
set the desired boot drive in the BIOS before booting up.

Personally I wouldn't touch Vista yet, at all. XP works.

 

[Timothy Daniels]

"Uncle Marvo" swrote:

Personally I wouldn't touch Vista yet, at all. XP works.

Most new OEM PC systems today are only offered with
Vista pre-installed. Most people, therefore, have the option
to either re-format their HD and then install XP, or try to
add XP as a dual-boot. This question about "How do I add
XP when Vista is already installed?" will be with us for at
least another year. Fortunately, there are many tutorials on
the Web to allow repair of the MBR for Vista when XP is
installed after Vista. Here is *just one*:
http://apcmag.com/5485/dualbooting_vista_and_xp

*TimDaniels*

 

[jorgen]

least another year. Fortunately, there are many tutorials on
the Web to allow repair of the MBR for Vista when XP is
installed after Vista.

The MBR is not system-specific. And is not the one you need to worry so
much about

 

[Timothy Daniels]

The MBR is not system-specific. And is not the one you need
to worry so much about

Did you bother to read the tutorial, or did your fingers just
fly to the keyboard? Here, again, is the URL:
http://apcmag.com/5485/dualbooting_vista_and_xp .
And here is a quote from the tutorial which contains information
available from numerous other places on the Web:

"Restoring Vista and dual booting:

"Because you can't use the Windows XP bootloader to boot Vista,
we have to reinstate Vista's bootloader to the MBR and configure
it to manage both operating systems."

"Compared with scenarios involving Ubuntu where you have to
reinstall the GRUB bootloader, getting Vista up and operational
again is very easy."

"Boot from the Vista DVD and on the screen where you're
prompted to "Install now", select "Repair your computer"."


In short, the MBR contains information needed to load the
the main boot loader - which, in turn, loads the loader. And
for Vista, the part in the MBR is different from that for the
WinNT/2K/XP family of OSes.

*TimDaniels*

 

[jorgen]

Did you bother to read the tutorial, or did your fingers just
fly to the keyboard? Here, again, is the URL:
http://apcmag.com/5485/dualbooting_vista_and_xp .
And here is a quote from the tutorial which contains information
available from numerous other places on the Web:

In short, the MBR contains information needed to load the
the main boot loader - which, in turn, loads the loader. And
for Vista, the part in the MBR is different from that for the
WinNT/2K/XP family of OSes.

I don't really care what it says, because it is wrong. The system
specific code is located in the boot sector (of the active partition),
not in the mbr

 

[Bill in Co.]

I don't really care what it says, because it is wrong. The system
specific code is located in the boot sector (of the active partition),
not in the mbr

What specific "system specific code"? And all of it, or just part of it?
It's a bit ambiguous as you stated it. Maybe the boot sector only
contains some machine language jump instruction(s) to other parts of the
disk.

 

[jorgen]

What specific "system specific code"? And all of it, or just part of it?
It's a bit ambiguous as you stated it. Maybe the boot sector only
contains some machine language jump instruction(s) to other parts of the
disk.

the program code in the mbr just look for the active partition and load
its boot sector into memory. The program code stored here is what makes
things happen. io.sys for win9x, ntldr for 2k,xp,.. and bootmgr for vista

 

[Timothy Daniels]

I don't really care what it says, because it is wrong. The system specific
code is located in the boot sector (of the active partition), not in the mbr.

This appears in the English version of Wikipedia at URL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record:

"Differences in MBR Code:

"Even different versions of the MS-DOS FDISK program,
not to mention the partitioning utilities for other types of
operating systems, may write variations of code to the
MBR sector. For example, the bytes of code written by
FDISK under MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 98 and the
Recovery Console of a Windows XP install CD are all
different. Yet, no matter how great a difference exists in
the MBR code, such as that written by an MS-DOS 3.30
install compared to the MBR produced by Windows XP,
they will all load the boot sector of any OS residing in the
"active" primary partition."

"The following table shows how the Standard Microsoft
MBR Code (created by MS-DOS 3.30 through Windows 95)
would appear in a disk editor:'

----------------- <data> -------------------

"A total of only 219 bytes (the zero-byte at 0DAh is necessary);
139 executable code bytes, plus 80 bytes comprising its English
set of error messages."

"In contrast, the MBR code created by a Windows 2000 or XP
install (seen in this next table) has a total of 383 bytes for its
English version:"

----------------- <data> -------------------

And that is just for Microsoft. Grub (the Linux boot loader)
has an MBR more different than that, although all the MBRs are
for the PC architecture.

*TimDaniels*

 

[jorgen]

And that is just for Microsoft. Grub (the Linux boot loader)
has an MBR more different than that, although all the MBRs are
for the PC architecture.

We were talking about XP and Vista, not about some linux boot loader.

And yes, when looking back there are small differences in the mbr. But
for Windows/DOS they all do the same: load the boot sector, nothing more.

 

[Timothy Daniels]

We were talking about XP and Vista, not about some linux boot
loader.

And yes, when looking back there are small differences in the mbr.
But for Windows/DOS they all do the same: load the boot sector,
nothing more.

Oh! Just Windows/DOS. OK, so talk about just Windows/DOS
MBRs. Even just for them, the MBRs are different. Let's revisit
what I just posted, then:

This appears in the English version of Wikipedia at URL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record:

"Differences in MBR Code:

"Even different versions of the MS-DOS FDISK program,
not to mention the partitioning utilities for other types of
operating systems, may write variations of code to the
MBR sector. For example, the bytes of code written by
FDISK under MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 98 and the
Recovery Console of a Windows XP install CD are all
different. Yet, no matter how great a difference exists in
the MBR code, such as that written by an MS-DOS 3.30
install compared to the MBR produced by Windows XP,
they will all load the boot sector of any OS residing in the
"active" primary partition."

"The following table shows how the Standard Microsoft
MBR Code (created by MS-DOS 3.30 through Windows 95)
would appear in a disk editor:'

----------------- <data> -------------------

"A total of only 219 bytes (the zero-byte at 0DAh is necessary);
139 executable code bytes, plus 80 bytes comprising its English
set of error messages."

Also read up on what *Dell* does with the MBR:
http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/mediadirect.htm . Follow
all the links. You'll find it facinating.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Bill in Co.]

Oh! Just Windows/DOS. OK, so talk about just Windows/DOS
MBRs. Even just for them, the MBRs are different. Let's revisit
what I just posted, then:

This appears in the English version of Wikipedia at URL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record:

"Differences in MBR Code:

"Even different versions of the MS-DOS FDISK program,
not to mention the partitioning utilities for other types of
operating systems, may write variations of code to the
MBR sector. For example, the bytes of code written by
FDISK under MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 98 and the
Recovery Console of a Windows XP install CD are all
different. Yet, no matter how great a difference exists in
the MBR code, such as that written by an MS-DOS 3.30
install compared to the MBR produced by Windows XP,
they will all load the boot sector of any OS residing in the
"active" primary partition."

"The following table shows how the Standard Microsoft
MBR Code (created by MS-DOS 3.30 through Windows 95)
would appear in a disk editor:'

----------------- <data> -------------------

"A total of only 219 bytes (the zero-byte at 0DAh is necessary);
139 executable code bytes, plus 80 bytes comprising its English
set of error messages."

Also read up on what *Dell* does with the MBR:
http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/mediadirect.htm . Follow
all the links. You'll find it fascinating.

*TimDaniels*

Oh yeah, real "fascinating"! And a bit of a pain in the butt to deal
with.
I've already had to use DSRFIX on a couple of occasions. BTDT.