dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2066
share rss forum feed

bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus

1 edit

Linux 2.6.x drive geometry problems: POST HERE

As per some requests from the peanut gallery, this thread is dedicated to the problems associated with partitioning drives with Linux kernel version 2.6. It will remain stickied until we get some answers on how to correct and avoid he problems users are having.
--
Want to annoy conservatives and liberals ? Use facts.

No, I'm not a libertarian... I'm a proud, registered Independent [thinker].

yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

»lwn.net/Articles/86835/

»linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-List···682.html

»portal.suse.com/sdb/en/2004/05/f···g91.html

»mlf.linux.rulez.org/mlf/ezaz/ntfsresize.html

»qa.mandrakesoft.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7959

»bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/sho···?id=1159

»groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&l···tab%3Dwg

Dear Friends,

The links above detail problems,solutions, etc. For those of you thinking of installing Suse 9.1 on dual boot with Xp, the suse link is a must.

Although I have not tried it, the fc2 with the boot parameters described seems to work.

In order for the LBA in BIOS to work, it has to have been enabled before the XP install - for people with xp already on the hd, this is useless. Also, few laptops allow the LBA change in BIOS, although there are tools in linux to do it.

Likewise, the after the fact solution using the newly booted linux and fdisk may work - if you have already had the problem, there is no need to wipe the hd and lose the data, as one can, at least in theory, re-write the partition table.

What does not work is to use the command console in windows repair or DOS from an old floppy to repair MBR as it will still point to a place on the disk which is different than where BIOS says it will be.

Whether the suse parted driver could be made to work with all distros I cannot fathom and am unwilling to try unless someone tells me how to get a different distro to install using the different parted driver.

Gurus take note, please, that what we as newbies do no know, and what is the one thing google does not reveal is what parameters we can use in the original install that are available to anyone installing a 2.6 kernel.

In other words, the fc2 solution to the kernel/parted problem is to install with the parameters hda=xxxx,xxx,xx, (c,h,s) but I, and I suspect a few others, cannot know if this would work with debian sarge, or mandrake, or gentoo - the gentoo folk tend to prefer the LBA solution, but this is impractical for someone with windows already installed on a laptop.

So, please post if you have an install where a preexisting ntfs partition remained accessible and how you did it.

Best wishes and gratitude,

Martin
--
Support the Bill of Rights - boycott the RIAA and stop stealing intellectual property. Together, the actions will make America America again.

tagazta

join:2003-09-06
reply to bmn
First of all, *thank you* for setting this up, it'll be great to get some centralized information.

Secondly, how do I reset my drive geometry. I *swear* I've done everything and yet the FC2 installer still bugs me about incorrect geomtry. Would there be anyway to know the number of Cylidiners, heads, and sectors I had before this problem, and reset it?

yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
kudos:1

1 edit
reply to bmn
Hang in - I am having a free space problem, but the good news is:

when I ran the anaconda installer with the parameter
linux hda=7692,255,63, at the disk druid page in the gui(how I hate guis in installers!!!), it did indeed read partition ends at 7692.

this means that the workaround with the install parameter works for fc2, and barring other issues, windows will boot.

tag, can you tell us exactly what is happening?
Do you have fc installed already, and cannot boot in windows, or can you not install on your current disk?

Do you perhaps own a knoppix live cd?

Best wishes,
M
--
Support the Bill of Rights - boycott the RIAA and stop stealing intellectual property. Together, the actions will make America America again.


alien9999999
Your Head Looks Nice
Premium
join:2002-05-21
B-3000

1 recommendation

reply to tagazta
it seems with the 2.6.x kernel, there is no way to get the real physical cyl, heads, sectors, check your BIOS.

however,most recent drives have 255 heads and 63 sectors and in LBA state.
--
Alien is my name and headbiting is my game.


AR
Premium,ExMod 2001-04
join:2000-09-21
Toronto, ON
reply to bmn

The lwn.net solution works perfect (I think).

I have a triple boot system: win2k, winxp and FC2. I couldn't get into win2k but I can get into XP just fine.


Roundboy
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Drexel Hill, PA
reply to bmn
Was setting the actualy geometry needed like that? Editing the BIOS config was not sufficient to initialize the partition tables at the correct address ?
--
512 man lan
Coming soon
»www.thegxl.com


AR
Premium,ExMod 2001-04
join:2000-09-21
Toronto, ON
I didn't change the BIOS config. I figured it's easier/better to run the installer with the proper values.

efflandt

join:2002-01-25
Elgin, IL
reply to bmn
Is it really a kernel problem, or just broken partitioning software other than fdisk (I always hated Disk Druid, because it did not tell you what it was doing, like consuming your drive with an extended partition)?

When I ftp installed SuSE x86_64/9.1 I thought something looked fishy with its YaST Partitioner when it showed the last cylinder as 24320 when I knew I had just fixed it to 240 hds/25841 cyls when 64-bit XP Pro beta had changed my heads to 255 (and could not even reboot itself because partitions no longer ended on cylinder boundaries). I managed to fix that with fdisk expert mode from a Linux rescue CD with no data loss.

Yet while the YaST Partitioner showed that it wanted to use incorrect geometry, fdisk from another vt on that box showed the correct geometry. So I told the partitioner not to change any partitions, just assign mount points to existing partitions, install GRUB on a partition (instead of MBR) and everything worked smoothly for 64-bit Linux, 64-bit XP and the original XP Home that apparently set the original geometry (which I had ntfsresized from a Mandrake 9.2 based rescue CD).

So fdisk seems to work properly from 64-bit Linux 2.6 kernel, but apparently some other Linux partitioners (and apparently 64-bit XP) try to change disk geometry on the fly without asking.

Probably best to record your original geometry from fdisk before installing any new OS. I was lucky to be able to fix mine when 64-bit XP messed it up knowing only start/end cyls. of 1 partition and guessing that I thought I had seen 240 heads originally. But others may not be so lucky.

yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
kudos:1

2 recommendations

reply to bmn
What you are saying is exactly correct - at the moment, if the partitioner uses geometry read from the 2.6 kernel, is re-writes the partition geometry. However, this is only a problem if one has xp isntalled first, which depends entirely upon the older .c.255.63 readings. Now, if one sets bios to lga before installing xp, the issue obviously disappears, as does manually telling the partitioner what geometry to use.
Likewise, if there is an already written partition table, for instance, hda1 is xp, hda2 is ext3, hda3 is swap, some partitioners will simply overwrite hda2, and some will not. The sarge installer will not. Thus, without the eu knowing it, the table is changed.
It appears as if one is only wiping the second partition, but, in fact, on is re-writing the partition table to match the lga or "physical" reading of the disk. Therein lies the problem for most of us. Yes, one can indeed re-write the tables, using cfdisk, but this is hardly what someone trying linux as a dual boot is expecting when it asks "do you wish to write....?" One is expecting that grub or lilo will be able to boot both systems.
The kernel folk feel, with some basis in fact, that the current geometry read is less prone to error, and that the system windows uses ought to be deprecated. the partitioners use whatever kernel the eu tells the installer to use. Thus, the sarge installer with no paramters installs 2.4.26, and windows boots, no problem. The person who uses the parameter linux26 with no other parameters will end up with unbootable windows. Since the newest rpm type distros use 2.6 as default, the unsuspecting eu ends up with all his data intact but no easy way to access it.
Joey Hess, the Debian boot wizz, told me that it is not an installer issue, either, and that debian still considers the 2.6 kernel experimental.
The underlying issue is whether we, the community, want to look at theory or reality. The forums are full of newbs who just gave up and reformatted, now hating linux forever. I am sure that someone wil reply, "good, less peeople to besmirch our religious purity of open sourced benediction." I, however, feel we need a solution whereby the installers, where druid or drake or yast make sure that whatever the kernel says the geometry is, a normal person can install the OS, with the kernel that acutally supports recent hardware, without having to learn the theory and practice of partioning.
I have been able, with the parameters as described the links above, install everything except debian with a 2.6 kernel, and gentoo, for which I cannot right now, justify tying up my main source of contact to the world for a week while compiling things.
Efflandt possesses a level of skill far beyond that of the person who downloads fc2 "to try" and ends up with problems concerning things he never even knew existed.

Regards to all,
Martin
--
Support the Bill of Rights - boycott the RIAA and stop stealing intellectual property. Together, the actions will make America America again.

yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
kudos:1
reply to bmn
If anyone is as fascinated by this as I am, the sarge installer uses the install parameters "hd=c,h,s" where the letters stand for the numbers one would hope they would in the older system.
Thus, on my lappy, "hd=7296,255,63" enabled dual booting with windows, but, of course, the x windows still cannot recognise the ati drivers....
At any rate, other than mandrake(which says it works) and gentoo, all the major distros are known to work to me personally if one uses the installation parameters of c,h,s - however one must type them in.
Now, this is a far cry from making the installed distro useful, but, I am rpm challenged....
(I think Suze's solution was overkill....even for Novell )

Best to all,
M
--
Support the Bill of Rights - boycott the RIAA and stop stealing intellectual property. Together, the actions will make America America again.


alien9999999
Your Head Looks Nice
Premium
join:2002-05-21
B-3000

1 recommendation

mandrake says something like this: when installing and using the installer to partition your HD, it may cause mandrake to reset the drive geometry to 16 heads, when you have your BIOS set to auto; if you set LBA mode, this will not be a problem, afterwards, if you have installed linux and can't dual boot into windows anymore, you can run diskdrake with some options about drive geometry to set your drive correctly again...

hope this helps
--
Alien is my name and headbiting is my game.


Raghu GS

@202.9.x.x
reply to bmn
Hello i have a few ideas

1> Does Suse providing kernel 2.4 with Suse 9.1?
if yes, then choose kernel 2.4 in installation (kernel 2.4 is not prone to this bug,), after finishing installation, upon reboot we can manually install kernel 2.6 and remove kernel 2.4.

2> Why don't install Suse in fat32 partition?
keep, or arrange an empty fat32 partition,
upon installation of Suse 9.1, in file system type select fat32, then select any of your empty fat32 partition. AFAIK Suse no need to change\create\format Partition, so it won't touch your Geometry.

3> Why don't use PC virtualization software until this bug fully fixed?
it may hard to setup when using open source PC virtualization software softwares, but it is dam-safe to use linux operating system you want,

PC virtualization software links (Open source)
»www.colinux.org/
»www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a...n···l?page=1
»bochs.sourceforge.net/
»plex86.sourceforge.net/

PC virtualization software (Commercial)
»www.vmware.com/
»www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/virtualpc/

please give your feedbacks

Raghu GS


alien9999999
Your Head Looks Nice
Premium
join:2002-05-21
B-3000
said by Raghu GS:
Hello i have a few ideas

1> Does Suse providing kernel 2.4 with Suse 9.1?
if yes, then choose kernel 2.4 in installation (kernel 2.4 is not prone to this bug,), after finishing installation, upon reboot we can manually install kernel 2.6 and remove kernel 2.4.

2> Why don't install Suse in fat32 partition?
keep, or arrange an empty fat32 partition,
upon installation of Suse 9.1, in file system type select fat32, then select any of your empty fat32 partition. AFAIK Suse no need to change\create\format Partition, so it won't touch your Geometry.

3> Why don't use PC virtualization software until this bug fully fixed?
it may hard to setup when using open source PC virtualization software softwares, but it is dam-safe to use linux operating system you want,

PC virtualization software links (Open source)
»www.colinux.org/
»www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a...n···l?page=1
»bochs.sourceforge.net/
»plex86.sourceforge.net/

PC virtualization software (Commercial)
»www.vmware.com/
»www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/virtualpc/

please give your feedbacks

Raghu GS

thanks for the ideas:

1. i think it's that the kernel loaded when using an partitioner is the problem, mostly the installer is the problem, i don't know if suse 9.1 has kernel-2.4 or if you can select it at install time... (that means the boot of the install)

2. i seriously disagree there, FAT32 is way too unstable...

3. that's all fine, if you have fast PC and lotsa RAM,... allthough, i'm not for such software...
--
Alien is my name and headbiting is my game.

yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
kudos:1
reply to bmn
I did nasty two nights ago, but this may help someone who thinks he is in deep shit with a debian install -

there is currnetly no possible way to being the cuurent testing release of the sarge installer in 2.6, as partman will only, and that means only, no matter what, read the OS geometry values.

I thought by partitioning first, then keeping the partitions, I would be able to beat the, no way, reb oot to windows, no os found, check geometry 16 sector read.

Then, the cheat occured to me - go back, reinstall from the 2.4 kernel, partition from there, see what happens, worst case theory a working system with a necessary kernel recompile.

Ah, but at the very end, before reboot, sarge gives the following option - "what the hell kernel do you want when you reboot?"
They phrase it with more gentility, of course.
Choose the 2.6.x, and, at reboot, you have an installable debian, ready for the half hour of apt getting hair raising excitement.

there is no, absolutely no way to upload firmware in the install by the way, so I still ahve to get prism54 .arm files into the place where they go, but, at any rate, the sarge installer can be made to install a 2.6 kernel without destroying the necessary dual boot geometry.

Any bets on my figuring out how to get the firmware to the appropriate place to have a usable wireless card?

If not, do not expect to hear from me soon

Best to all,
M
--
Support the Bill of Rights - boycott the RIAA and stop stealing intellectual property. Together, the actions will make America America again.

efflandt

join:2002-01-25
Elgin, IL
reply to bmn
»portal.suse.com/sdb/en/2004/05/f···g91.html may shed some light on this.

I was able to avoid this problem during SuSE 9.1 install by utilizing existing partitions, instead of letting it create or change any (which maybe could have been created during install, from another vt, since its fdisk works correctly).

But 64-bit XP Pro beta changed my heads/cyls when I just installed it on an (unformatted) existing partition, making itself unbootable (because it put its 64-bit compatible 'ntldr' on XP Home partition, that became no longer accessible). So it is not just a Linux problem (maybe it uses the same broken 'parted').

I hope future Linux distros are fixed to not alter existing partition table geometry without asking. Otherwise Linux will get a bad reputation for trashing existing systems.


Raghu GS

@202.9.x.x
i am happy to know somehow you cleverly escaped from that bug,
please provide your partition information,


ttt2525

@cpe.net.cable.rogers
reply to yazdzik
yadzik, I had a problem with choosing the 2.6 kernel to install the sarge installer, only 2.4 would work. It would not apply my settings at all!

yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
kudos:1
reply to bmn
Thel ast few daily releases have made it possible to use grub again - for about a week, grub was fubarred - ouch!
At the moment, you must install with the 2.4 kernel, partition, then add the 2.6 kernel when it asks you at the end of the base install, which kernel you want to install. Otherwise, there is currently no way to use the sarge installer and keep the dual boot, as partman will, in the sarge_d-i only use the kernel based readings, and the parameter hd=c,h,s does not work with partman, as of yesterday, anyway.
There is now a string freeze, so the final should come out by the end of the month, and the only way it seems to me, without a major revision of partman, that you can install is to begin with the 2.4 kernel to boot from cd, and install the 2.6 when asked. This creats a not very pretty hardware .config, but this is cleaned up at the first recompile.
Your observation, is therefore, totally correct, and, at this moment, likely to remain so for a few years.

If you need help with a sarge install, let me know in the forum here.

Bst wishes,
Martin
--
Support the Bill of Rights - boycott the RIAA and stop stealing intellectual property. Together, the actions will make America America again.

efflandt

join:2002-01-25
Elgin, IL
reply to Raghu GS
said by Raghu GS:
i am happy to know somehow you cleverly escaped from that bug,
please provide your partition information,
I guess 2.6 kernel (SuSE 9.1) does ignore partition table geometry. Note 255 heads boot.msg, while partition table (fdisk) shows 240 heads (after I fixed it when XP64 mangled it):

# uname -srvm
Linux 2.6.5-7.95-default #1 Thu Jul 1 15:23:45 UTC 2004 x86_64

# grep sectors /var/log/boot.msg
hda: 390721968 sectors (200049 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=24321/255/63, UDMA(100)

# fdisk -l /dev/hda

Disk /dev/hda: 200.0 GB, 200049647616 bytes
240 heads, 63 sectors/track, 25841 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 15120 * 512 = 7741440 bytes

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 1 619 4679608+ b W95 FAT32 recovery
/dev/hda2 620 22600 166176360 7 HPFS/NTFS XP Home
/dev/hda3 22601 24226 12292560 7 HPFS/NTFS XP64 Pro beta
/dev/hda4 * 24227 25841 12209400 83 Linux SuSE x86_64/9.1


jdong
Eat A Beaver, Save A Tree.
Premium
join:2002-07-09
Rochester, MI
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to Raghu GS
said by Raghu GS:


2> Why don't install Suse in fat32 partition?
keep, or arrange an empty fat32 partition,
upon installation of Suse 9.1, in file system type select fat32, then select any of your empty fat32 partition. AFAIK Suse no need to change\create\format Partition, so it won't touch your Geometry.
GOD no! There's serious limitations in that approach. I'll begin listing:

(1) You can _NOT_ have FAT32 as a Linux root partition. FAT32 does not have the permission/ownership features required for such use. UMSDOS is an implementation of FAT32 that supports such features. You must use UMSDOS to install Linux's root partition as FAT32. UMSDOS requires a kernel patch...

(2) UMSDOS is the slowest thing I've seen! It's absolutely unacceptable performance-wise, except as a console-only experimental system -- in which case, Cygwin under Windows actually is faster!

(3) You can also install a big LOOPBACK file under FAT32... The only problem is that FAT32 has a 2GB file size limit, so you'll have to split up your filesystem into 2gb chunks. Again, a big mess.

(4) Even if you do this, where do you want to put your bootloader? If your geometry is bad, grub-install will seriously screw up, usually installing a copy that just says GRUB and hangs...

So, that's not a solution to the problem!
--
WASTING TIME spelled backwards is...

karim18

join:2002-11-01
Oak Creek, WI
reply to yazdzik
My God that is a complex way of getting fc2 up... Why don't you try this, install fedora core 2 and when XP's boot bombs (It will dont worry) Do as follows:
1)Reboot and get back to grub menu and select XP then Press "E" which will show you something like
rootnoverify(hd0,0)
chainloader +1
2) jot this down then press "esc" and then hit "c" this will give you Grub's command prompt
3) Type the first line from the XP entry in grub (i.e.rootnoverify(hd0,0) ) and then type:
makeactive
chainloader +1
boot
----------This should solve your problems, so long as you are using grub this solves the MDK 10 issue as well, and it only needs to be done once. Let me know if you find this an easier procedure.


rtcy
FACTS only please
Premium
join:1999-10-16
Norwalk, CA
reply to yazdzik
said by yazdzik:
What you are saying is exactly correct - at the moment, if the partitioner uses geometry read from the 2.6 kernel, is re-writes the partition geometry. However, this is only a problem if one has xp isntalled first, which depends entirely upon the older .c.255.63 readings. Now, if one sets bios to lga before installing xp, the issue obviously disappears, as does manually telling the partitioner what geometry to use.
Likewise, if there is an already written partition table, for instance, hda1 is xp, hda2 is ext3, hda3 is swap, some partitioners will simply overwrite hda2, and some will not. The sarge installer will not. Thus, without the eu knowing it, the table is changed.
It appears as if one is only wiping the second partition, but, in fact, on is re-writing the partition table to match the lga or "physical" reading of the disk. Therein lies the problem for most of us. Yes, one can indeed re-write the tables, using cfdisk, but this is hardly what someone trying linux as a dual boot is expecting when it asks "do you wish to write....?" One is expecting that grub or lilo will be able to boot both systems.
The kernel folk feel, with some basis in fact, that the current geometry read is less prone to error, and that the system windows uses ought to be deprecated. the partitioners use whatever kernel the eu tells the installer to use. Thus, the sarge installer with no paramters installs 2.4.26, and windows boots, no problem. The person who uses the parameter linux26 with no other parameters will end up with unbootable windows. Since the newest rpm type distros use 2.6 as default, the unsuspecting eu ends up with all his data intact but no easy way to access it.
Joey Hess, the Debian boot wizz, told me that it is not an installer issue, either, and that debian still considers the 2.6 kernel experimental.
The underlying issue is whether we, the community, want to look at theory or reality. The forums are full of newbs who just gave up and reformatted, now hating linux forever. I am sure that someone wil reply, "good, less peeople to besmirch our religious purity of open sourced benediction." I, however, feel we need a solution whereby the installers, where druid or drake or yast make sure that whatever the kernel says the geometry is, a normal person can install the OS, with the kernel that acutally supports recent hardware, without having to learn the theory and practice of partioning.
I have been able, with the parameters as described the links above, install everything except debian with a 2.6 kernel, and gentoo, for which I cannot right now, justify tying up my main source of contact to the world for a week while compiling things.
Efflandt possesses a level of skill far beyond that of the person who downloads fc2 "to try" and ends up with problems concerning things he never even knew existed.

Regards to all,
Martin


Martin EXCELLENT post! I got bit by this bug in parted installing Suse 9.1 pro. I just have to say one thing we NEED MORE options in all these installers specially Suse
and Redhat/Fedora anaconda.

we should have the option of using FDISK ,kernel, and boot loader. even if they are *pushing* their own favorite!

I got bit by this and not knowing enough at the time just gave up like a n00b and killed the whole thing!(luckily my important info is on my raid drives and those are backed up) and windows was on there for a year without a fresh install . I was pretty upset too at the BIOS, I remember having had it on LBA from day one, so when I read the post at SUSE on how to cure my windows partition I was shocked to see the BIOS on AUTO!. it's been a year since I last re-flashed it, so i have no idea how it happened!.

I still have a problem installing Fedora core 3 test 3 on my son's machine (wants to play a game on linux) when grub boots it hangs at loading grun stage 2.... it's on LBA so I'm puzzled. the older Redhat ES 3 works, so I will have to use that on his machine for now.

Conviction8

join:2001-08-18
Orlando, FL
Knoppix/Jollix fdisk? It grabs the right geo.

Spring Water
Hello

join:2003-11-02
reply to bmn
Is there a recent distro (Ubuntu, Mandrake, SuSE, Fedora, or any other newbie-friendly popular distro) that I can install that is not affected by this problem?


alien9999999
Your Head Looks Nice
Premium
join:2002-05-21
B-3000
i think the recent ones are not affected by this problem:

not affected: mdk10.1 Official definately, i think FC3 also, i don't think Suse ever had this problem, it's too old; i don't know about the new 9.1 though...

anyhow, if you install it, a fix is pretty easily done... this problem was mostly related to Fedora, because of their weird kernel patches; mandrake had this one only on installation, if you used their partitioner, when your BIOS is set on AUTO (not if it's set on LBA)...

Mandrake 10.1, this one is definately not affected, because they had the problem in 10.0, and i know they had worked on it. Similarly the problem was mostly with FC2, so i think FC3 is unaffected as well.

the other binary distributions, i can't be sure if they have it or not, since they hadn't used the 2.6 kernel before... and their new release is in 2.6, so they could have the problem, but they could very well not have the problem...
--
Alien is my name and headbiting is my game.


sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
reply to bmn
Can we unsticky this?

yazdzik
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-26
Honesdale, PA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to bmn
Dear Spork and Friends,
Unstickying is fine, the only issue is that when debian becomes final, the issue will arise, as there is, as of the last newsgroup discussion, no plan to ameliorate the proble.
Perhaps one could create an FAQ with the remedy for unbootable windows, with the links to salvation?

Best,
M
--
Things go better with coke...


DaDogs
Semper Vigilantis
Premium
join:2004-02-28
Deltaville, VA

1 edit

1 recommendation

said by yazdzik:

Dear Spork and Friends,
Unstickying is fine, the only issue is that when debian becomes final, the issue will arise, as there is, as of the last newsgroup discussion, no plan to ameliorate the proble.
Perhaps one could create an FAQ with the remedy for unbootable windows, with the links to salvation?

Best,
M
... You mean an unbootable windows system isn't salvation? ...

Sorry, couldn't resist. I don't even dual boot laptops anymore. I just get another one.
--
I'd rather chew sand than watch sixty seconds of 60 minutes.

bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
reply to sporkme
said by sporkme:

Can we unsticky this?
At this point in time, it appears that might be a good idea...

Consider it done.
--
FINALLY its on DVD!
Viva La Fee' Verte!