Multi-boot boot manager problem

[Joe Samangitak]

I'm trying to setup a multi-OS boot system with 2 hard drives, to be
selected at startup by a boot manager I want to use called "Boot-US".
I want 1st drive to have Win2K (NTFS) in the first partition, Win98
(FAT 32) in the 2nd partition. 2nd drive is entirely WIN98 (Fat 32).
I've succeeded at getting Boot-US to boot into Win2K and Win98 on the
1st hard drive. HOWEVER, I am unable to get it to boot into the 2nd
hard drive (which has a single active primary partition). I've tried
hiding it, unhiding it... all sorts of things, and I just get a
flashing cursor on boot.

Boot-US is said to have the unique capability of "true hiding" an OS
from any other OS (necessary under Win2K). Still, I find all this
partitioning/multiboot stuff pretty confusing, so I'm not sure if
there's something I'm overlooking?

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

I'm trying to setup a multi-OS boot system with 2 hard drives, to be
selected at startup by a boot manager I want to use called "Boot-US".
I want 1st drive to have Win2K (NTFS) in the first partition, Win98
(FAT 32) in the 2nd partition. 2nd drive is entirely WIN98 (Fat 32).
I've succeeded at getting Boot-US to boot into Win2K and Win98 on the
1st hard drive. HOWEVER, I am unable to get it to boot into the 2nd
hard drive (which has a single active primary partition). I've tried
hiding it, unhiding it... all sorts of things, and I just get a
flashing cursor on boot.

Boot-US is said to have the unique capability of "true hiding" an OS
from any other OS (necessary under Win2K). Still, I find all this
partitioning/multiboot stuff pretty confusing, so I'm not sure if
there's something I'm overlooking?

The facility you're after is included with XOSL (which is free).
It does it by "swapping" disks on the fly. I don't know if Boot-US
can do this.

You write "Boot-US is said to have the unique capability of "true hiding"
an OS from any other OS (necessary under Win2K). This is incorrect
on two counts. Firstly, it's not unique - XOSL can do it too. Secondly,
although it's recommended, you don't have to hide OSs from each
other under Win2000.

 

[Joe Samangitak]

Basically, I just want to know how to set my partitions on both my
drives for booting the operating systems I described - which I still
don't know how to do. There are options such as Primary, Logical,
Active, Not Active, Hidden, Not Hidden etc... Which options do I set
to have the multi-boot system I described, that allows me to boot into
the separate OS's? (Win2K in the first partition on the master (C
drive, Win98SE in the 2nd partition on the master (C drive, and
Win98SE on the slave (D drive). If someone could tell me that or
point me in the right direction, thanks.

FYI, the reason I'm now using "Boot-US", even though I like XOSL a
lot, is because XOSL won't install under Win2K. It gives a "display
controller" error (before anyone says its a problem with my display,
let me point out that it works fine under the same graphics
card/monitor under Win98SE). It looks like it requires a DOS-like full
screen VGA mode that Win2K doesn't allow (even in the command mode,
Win2K produces a windowed-environment when the DOS XOSL installer is
run). Even if I set Win2K for the most basic video mode (640 x 480,
256 colors), XOSL installer still won't run in that display mode (even
though it says it supports this mode). Furthermore, I can't install
XOSL off a DOS diskette, DOS won't even see the Win2K drive. (And
forget about installing it on a Win2K diskette, that'll just bring up
the same display problem).

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

I can't tell you anything about Boot-US.

XOSL is NOT a Win2000 program, hence you cannot install
it under Win2000. Get yourself a Win98 boot disk from
www.bootdisk.com, then install XOSL, preferably in its own
dedicated partition. Above all, read the manual and experiment
with an old hard disk until you're comfortable with XOSL.
If you have any XOSL-specific questions then I'll try to
answer them.

 

[Joe Samangitak]

I can't tell you anything about Boot-US.

XOSL is NOT a Win2000 program, hence you cannot install
it under Win2000. Get yourself a Win98 boot disk from
www.bootdisk.com, then install XOSL, preferably in its own
dedicated partition. Above all, read the manual and experiment
with an old hard disk until you're comfortable with XOSL.
If you have any XOSL-specific questions then I'll try to
answer them.

I've read the manual for XOSL, but it doesn't tell me how to set the
partitions for the different operating systems I plan to use, and I've been
using XOSL for about two years now. So I'm about as comfortable with it as
I'm going to get. But if I don't know how to set up the partitions for the
multi-boot program, I risk losing my entire drive(s) through trial and
error. (I did in fact lose access to my D: drive after trying to set up
BootMagic, and had to recopy the drive and reinstall the OS). But maybe you
can tell me what happens to the drive letters when you install XOSL on its
own partition - does this generate an extra drive letter, making your C
drive a D drive, and D becomes E etc.?

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

If you install XOSL in a dedicated partition then it will
be invisible to Win2000, hence there will be no drive
letter change.

In my book, "comfortable" means that I have explored
XOSL with a spare disk (some cheap 4 GByte disk)
until I knew very well how it worked, what drive letters
(if any) it reserved, and how I could preserve existing
OS installations.

The simplest way of installing XOSL goes like this:
1. Install XOSL in its own dedicated partition. 15 MBytes
will do nicely.
2. Create a primary partition. Make it active.
2. Install Win2000 in this partition.
3. Re-activate XOSL.
4. Include Win2000 in the XOSL menu, and test it.
5. Create a further primary partition. Make it active.
Call it "Win98" (for example).
6. Install Win98 in the Win98 partition.
7. Include Win98 in the XOSL menu. Hide the Win2000
partition.
8. Create an extended partition, and a logical drive, for
your shared data.

That's all. XOSL will now let you select between Win2000
and Win98. If you wish then you can add further OSs. If
you add them on the same disk then you will need to
apply a couple of tricks to get around the limit of 4 partitions
per disk.

I repeat: Get a cheap second-hand disk and try these things
for yourself. You lost one installation before - buying this
disk will be money well spent.

 

[Joe Samangitak]

I guess that's the best option for me, to install XOSL in a dedicated
part. But does it have to be the first partition on the drive? (which
means I'll have to reformat and reinstall Win2K a 3rd time, including
any software I installed...). Since the XOSL files are only about 1mb,
can the partition be no larger than enough to fit the files, or is
there some reason it has to be 15mb min.? If I hide the Win2K
partition in order to boot into Win98, do I have to unhide it every
time I want to boot into Win2K, or is this process done automatically
every time you just select the OS boot entry upon startup?

One good thing about Boot-US, it will allow you to make a test floppy
that simulates the bootup of your hard drive - you just take out the
floppy if it doesn't work.

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

See below. I note a reluctance on your part to
go out and play with XOSL, to find out for yourself.

I guess that's the best option for me, to install XOSL in a dedicated
part. But does it have to be the first partition on the drive?
No.

(which
means I'll have to reformat and reinstall Win2K a 3rd time, including
any software I installed...). Since the XOSL files are only about 1mb,
can the partition be no larger than enough to fit the files, or is
there some reason it has to be 15mb min.?
No.

If I hide the Win2K
partition in order to boot into Win98, do I have to unhide it every
time I want to boot into Win2K, or is this process done automatically
every time you just select the OS boot entry upon startup?
Automatically.

One good thing about Boot-US, it will allow you to make a test floppy
that simulates the bootup of your hard drive - you just take out the
floppy if it doesn't work.


"Pegasus \(MVP\)" <[email protected]> wrote in message

If you install XOSL in a dedicated partition then it will
be invisible to Win2000, hence there will be no drive
letter change.

In my book, "comfortable" means that I have explored
XOSL with a spare disk (some cheap 4 GByte disk)
until I knew very well how it worked, what drive letters
(if any) it reserved, and how I could preserve existing
OS installations.

The simplest way of installing XOSL goes like this:
1. Install XOSL in its own dedicated partition. 15 MBytes
will do nicely.
2. Create a primary partition. Make it active.
2. Install Win2000 in this partition.
3. Re-activate XOSL.
4. Include Win2000 in the XOSL menu, and test it.
5. Create a further primary partition. Make it active.
Call it "Win98" (for example).
6. Install Win98 in the Win98 partition.
7. Include Win98 in the XOSL menu. Hide the Win2000
partition.
8. Create an extended partition, and a logical drive, for
your shared data.

That's all. XOSL will now let you select between Win2000
and Win98. If you wish then you can add further OSs. If
you add them on the same disk then you will need to
apply a couple of tricks to get around the limit of 4 partitions
per disk.

I repeat: Get a cheap second-hand disk and try these things
for yourself. You lost one installation before - buying this
disk will be money well spent.

http://www.opera.com/m2/

 

[Joe Samangitak]

See below. I note a reluctance on your part to
go out and play with XOSL, to find out for yourself.

Well of course there's a reluctance to 'play' with XOSL. If I wanted
to do that, I wouldn't be asking questions on a newsgroup to find out
how to setup an XOSL multi-boot, would I? I gave some very good
reasons for that reluctance; notably having to reformat my hard drive
and reinstall everything on it again. I'm not going to "play" with my
data, because it's not much fun to me to lose gigabytes of data or
waste a lot of time reformatting, repartitioning, reinstalling and
installing OS's. Nor am I going to buy a hard drive and start
installing operating systems and such just to see if XOSL will work as
advertised. I should be able to determine in advance whether XOSL will
work with the simple set up I have in mind. If I can't, then I won't
use XOSL. This is why Boot-US is better than XOSL; it allows you to do
trial and error on a floppy disk.

I guess that's the best option for me, to install XOSL in a dedicated
part. But does it have to be the first partition on the drive?
No.

(which
means I'll have to reformat and reinstall Win2K a 3rd time, including
any software I installed...). Since the XOSL files are only about 1mb,
can the partition be no larger than enough to fit the files, or is
there some reason it has to be 15mb min.?
No.

If I hide the Win2K
partition in order to boot into Win98, do I have to unhide it every
time I want to boot into Win2K, or is this process done automatically
every time you just select the OS boot entry upon startup?
Automatically.

One good thing about Boot-US, it will allow you to make a test floppy
that simulates the bootup of your hard drive - you just take out the
floppy if it doesn't work.


"Pegasus \(MVP\)" <[email protected]> wrote in message

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

Just two observations in closing this thread: Good luck,
and a little note of appreciation for the advice you got
so far, totally free of charge, would have been well received.

"Pegasus \(MVP\)" <[email protected]> wrote in message

See below. I note a reluctance on your part to
go out and play with XOSL, to find out for yourself.

Well of course there's a reluctance to 'play' with XOSL. If I wanted
to do that, I wouldn't be asking questions on a newsgroup to find out
how to setup an XOSL multi-boot, would I? I gave some very good
reasons for that reluctance; notably having to reformat my hard drive
and reinstall everything on it again. I'm not going to "play" with my
data, because it's not much fun to me to lose gigabytes of data or
waste a lot of time reformatting, repartitioning, reinstalling and
installing OS's. Nor am I going to buy a hard drive and start
installing operating systems and such just to see if XOSL will work as
advertised. I should be able to determine in advance whether XOSL will
work with the simple set up I have in mind. If I can't, then I won't
use XOSL. This is why Boot-US is better than XOSL; it allows you to do
trial and error on a floppy disk.

 

[Joe Samangitak]

Just two observations in closing this thread: Good luck,
and a little note of appreciation for the advice you got
so far, totally free of charge, would have been well received.

You're right. Sorry. I got the information I needed from other
sources, but I do appreciate your effort to help me all the same. It's
been taking so long for me to try to find out how to set up a boot
manager for such a simple multi-boot system (easily over a week), and
in consideration of the fact that I have a LOT of work to do setting
up the new OS (ie. installing every program and setting I have from
scratch) and couldn't begin to do it until the boot mgr problem was
solved, I just found the whole process an excercise in frustration.
Thanks a lot for your patience and input. - Joe.

"Pegasus \(MVP\)" <[email protected]> wrote in message

See below. I note a reluctance on your part to
go out and play with XOSL, to find out for yourself.

Well of course there's a reluctance to 'play' with XOSL. If I wanted
to do that, I wouldn't be asking questions on a newsgroup to find out
how to setup an XOSL multi-boot, would I? I gave some very good
reasons for that reluctance; notably having to reformat my hard drive
and reinstall everything on it again. I'm not going to "play" with my
data, because it's not much fun to me to lose gigabytes of data or
waste a lot of time reformatting, repartitioning, reinstalling and
installing OS's. Nor am I going to buy a hard drive and start
installing operating systems and such just to see if XOSL will work as
advertised. I should be able to determine in advance whether XOSL will
work with the simple set up I have in mind. If I can't, then I won't
use XOSL. This is why Boot-US is better than XOSL; it allows you to do
trial and error on a floppy disk.