Your system partition does not have enough space to install

[Guest]

I have a boot partition (so I call it) C: with just enough space to boot my
various dual boot'rs of Windows XP, XP64, and whatever else I might be
installing.

Running Vista installation from the XP64 (running at D the installation is
unable to recognize massive amounts of free space on D: E: F: et. al.

You get the error message "System partition does not have enough free space"
and the installation ends. No recognition that you don't really ALWAYS want
to install to C:, that you are actively running Windows on a totally
different partition, and on and on.

No opportunity to input the true location you wish to install to. Just Nope
Sorry. And that's it.

Maybe a more flexible installation would be handy aye?

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/co...osoft.public.windows.vista.installation_setup

 

[Jon_Hildrum]

it needs space to install the installation files.

 

[Guest]

Yes, I think we all know it needs space for the installation files. The
problem is, it doesn't install them as previous releases have, on the
actively running Windows partition.

The installation requires (apparently) that the installation files _must_
install to C: regardless of the fact the Windows is running on D: (or any)
and that there are 5Gb's available on D.

Face it: on a dual/multiple boot system you want to keep your boot partition
free and clear as much as possible.

I believe that there are some things that haven't been thought out yet
related to the installation routine.

 

[Chad Harris]

Chris--

1) Maybe a more flexible installation would be handy but you should try to
bug that. I have a lot of ideas for installation but getting them to listen
is a whole other paradigm. I'm going to show you explicitly where to direct
that feedback--I'm going to give you a direct email address to Darly Gorter
and 2 other email addresses to copy at MSFT. While MSFT sometimes sees
posts here, it's not a good feedback venue for MSFT but it shouldn't stop
you from discussing your suggestions here.

2) I don't know this in as explicit detail as perhaps some of the others,
Colin, etc. might but I do know that when you are multibooting, because I do
that all the time with Vista, and let's say that you have another OS on C:\
and some more partitions we'll call D, E, F etc. that Vista still its
going to install some files to C:\ regardless. If anyone knows exactly what
they are and how much space, please post.

I have been told on occasion on a box when C:\ is full to the brim that
Vista wants about 650-700MB of space--I can't remember the exact number

I know for example C:\boot gets files that relate to and come with Vista on
a multiboot. There may be some XP boot files too there. The BCD store info
is there, as is fixntfs utility and they can be used among other 3rd party
apps to fix boot loader problems. I wish I knew more details about fixntfs.
Ko Zee who posts here occasionally has that down. Maybe Colin can help with
that.

If you have ideas/suggestions/criticism on how you think setup should run,
although it's late in the Vista game but it is still a work in progress--I
can't tell you team by team how much work is in progress--I could tell you
for a day what I think needs to be work in progress:

Microsoft says they love feedback. I think they love feedback like the Bush
ranch in Crawford Texas loves Cindy Sheehan myself. They are very sensitive
about certain feedback subjects, notably that the OEM purchasers of Vista
will be deprived of Win RE access because the media will be short the code
just as it was for 500 million unfortunate XP preinstalled desktops and will
be for x number of million Vista preinstalled desktops or so called recovery
partitions or so called recovery discs from OEM named partners (same
counterparts now exist in Windows XP).

*MSFT has a slide in circulation that claims studies show 400 million Vista
desktops OEM in 24 months.

Direct mail to the MSFT setup team:

Darrell Gorter Vista Setup Team
[email protected]

Vinny Flint Vista Setup Team
(e-mail address removed)

Copy:

Nick White Developer, Vista Team Blog Proprietor
(e-mail address removed)

Corey Snow, Developer and Connect Team Leader
(e-mail address removed)

Good luck,

CH

 

[Chad Harris]

Chris your ideas are very valid. I have made it possible for you to take
them straight to the horsey's mouth.

To extend this a bit, it has always pissed me off that many 3rd party
applications, not just Windows install files on C:\ although as I've said to
Bernie, not being a developer and not being a setup expert like these guys
are, I can't walk the necessary mile in their shoes. I don't know what
things are preventing this from happening.

Widely known cases in point are AV programs (Win One Care or Norton or any
other, and Nero).

To get another pet peeve off my chest, (I tend to be very shy and reticent
about these and like to hold any criticism very close to the chestnever
getting out how I really feel) MSFT for years has persisted in making log
information scatter in logs to the 4 corners of Windows, ectopically and
metastatically and then when you find the logs for Office or setup for
Windows (and I can back this up and name the non-intuitive mystical names of
many of these files) then when you get there they are encrypted and most
people can't interpret them. In some instances, I can take a room full of
MSFT MVPs and I guarandamntee you they can't interpret the logs without
special tools to do so.

This benefits MSFT as far as information gathering, but it is of no benefit
for the end user, and it should be. I can also point out a gamut of event
viewer messages that could not be interpreted by a room full of MSFT MVPs.

Many excellent detailed ideas that were thought out and written with great
care, have been suggested to the setup team by TBTs in droves in the early
months of Vista Beta (July-September of 2005 and subsequent months) I can
assure you, and many months ago when there was more time to do something
about it. I've done everything I can to give you the direct email address to
the guys on the planet (not all but a couple of very talented ones who are
in a position to design, fix, and remodel Vista setup at Redmond, Washington
home of Vista setup).

I can't say that the suggestions fell on deaf ears, because the ears were on
very talented heads. I can say none of them were implemented but the
reasons weren't ever offered in detail. A lot of us would love to know why.

CH