Issue installing Vista

  • Thread starter Thread starter joseph2k
  • Start date Start date
J

joseph2k

Mobo Gigibyte GA-M55plus-s3g (nForce4), cpu 64-bit dual-core 4600; 300MB hd
on ide1, dvdrw & dvdr on ide2; ~45gb on *nix partitions, 120 GB NTFS
(primary), unallocated; Vista 64bit RC1 (oct2, 2006) refuses to install.
Says "no acceptable partitions available". What the hell is this? What
are the rules for an acceptable partition?

For many years other OS's would install anywhere on the disk. Is MS still
so lame (in the dark ages) that it cannot boot from anywhere on the disk?
Why can't it deal with not being C:\ and on first partition of first disk,
most other os's do this with aplomb.
 
Hmmm... I have Vista installed on the 2nd partition on my secondary drive,
and it works just fine. I think the only requirement Vista has is that it be
able to plunk it's bootloader down into the MBR on the primary hard drive
(which is actually kind of a pain if you are trying to dual boot with Linux).
Long story short, however, Vista will install in places other than the
primary partition on the primary drive. Not sure why it isn't working for
you...

-Sean
 
You need to create a partition during setup, then format
that partition. Your "unallocated" means there is no partition.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:

| Mobo Gigibyte GA-M55plus-s3g (nForce4), cpu 64-bit dual-core 4600; 300MB hd
| on ide1, dvdrw & dvdr on ide2; ~45gb on *nix partitions, 120 GB NTFS
| (primary), unallocated; Vista 64bit RC1 (oct2, 2006) refuses to install.
| Says "no acceptable partitions available". What the hell is this? What
| are the rules for an acceptable partition?
|
| For many years other OS's would install anywhere on the disk. Is MS still
| so lame (in the dark ages) that it cannot boot from anywhere on the disk?
| Why can't it deal with not being C:\ and on first partition of first disk,
| most other os's do this with aplomb.
| --
| JosephKK
| Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.
| --Schiller
 
Sean said:
Hmmm... I have Vista installed on the 2nd partition on my secondary drive,
and it works just fine. I think the only requirement Vista has is that it be
able to plunk it's bootloader down into the MBR on the primary hard drive
(which is actually kind of a pain if you are trying to dual boot with Linux).
Long story short, however, Vista will install in places other than the
primary partition on the primary drive. Not sure why it isn't working for
you...
Click to expand...

Sean:

I don't think this is correct. All Windows OS's put their "boot files"
on the active primary partition. The IPL code in the MBR always just
transfers control to the boot sector of this active partition.

It is Linux that likes to put its boot code (LILO or GRUB) into the MBR
(though it can also persuaded to put it on the boot sector of the root
partition).

David Wilkinson
 
Hi,

Where/what is the active partition? You can install the OS files anywhere,
but setup must be able to write to the active partition (and yes, it will
overwrite any existing bootloader with its own and change the mbr to point
to it as well).

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
David said:
Sean:

I don't think this is correct. All Windows OS's put their "boot files"
on the active primary partition. The IPL code in the MBR always just
transfers control to the boot sector of this active partition.

It is Linux that likes to put its boot code (LILO or GRUB) into the MBR
(though it can also persuaded to put it on the boot sector of the root
partition).

David Wilkinson
Click to expand...

I find it troubling that so many do not know that MSwin NT4 through XP puts
about 40 MB of crap in hidden files on C:\ if installed elsewhere on the
disk subsystem.
 
Please correctly read my post. A 120 GB NTFS partition was provided!
You need to create a partition during setup, then format
that partition. Your "unallocated" means there is no partition.
Click to expand...
the OP

:

| Mobo Gigibyte GA-M55plus-s3g (nForce4), cpu 64-bit dual-core 4600; 300MB
hd
| on ide1, dvdrw & dvdr on ide2; ~45gb on *nix partitions, 120 GB NTFS
| (primary), unallocated; Vista 64bit RC1 (oct2, 2006) refuses to install.
| Says "no acceptable partitions available".  What the hell is this?  What
| are the rules for an acceptable partition?
|
| For many years other OS's would install anywhere on the disk.  Is MS still
| so lame (in the dark ages) that it cannot boot from anywhere on the disk?
| Why can't it deal with not being "C:\" and on 
| first partition of first disk,
| most other os's do this with aplomb.
| --
| JosephKK
| Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.
|  --Schiller
 
Rick said:
Hi,

Where/what is the active partition? You can install the OS files anywhere,
but setup must be able to write to the active partition (and yes, it will
overwrite any existing bootloader with its own and change the mbr to point
to it as well).
Click to expand...
OP

joseph2k said:
Mobo Gigibyte GA-M55plus-s3g (nForce4), cpu 64-bit dual-core 4600; 300MB
hd
on ide1, dvdrw & dvdr on ide2; ~45gb on *nix partitions, 120 GB NTFS
(primary), unallocated; Vista 64bit RC1 (oct2, 2006) refuses to install.
Says "no acceptable partitions available".  What the hell is this?  What
are the rules for an acceptable partition?

For many years other OS's would install anywhere on the disk.  Is MS still
so lame (in the dark ages) that it cannot boot from anywhere on the disk?
Why can't it deal with not being C:\  and on first partition of first 
disk,
most other os's do this with aplomb.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with MS MVP's that they cannot either read or include OP in
their postings. The NTFS active partition _WAS_ provided!!!
 
What's wrong with MS MVP's that they cannot either read or include OP in
their postings.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? The OP is included in my response. They always
have been. But, if all you want to do is rant and not talk rationally, read
no further and I will respond no more. There are many others that require
assistance, and I have no desire nor the time to engage in this type of
diatribe.
The NTFS active partition _WAS_ provided!!!
Click to expand...

Nowhere did you mention what the active partition was, you stated you have a
120GB NTFS formatted primary partition. Primary does not mean active, you
can have 4 primaries on a single drive, but only one can be active. As you
have a 'nix variation installed, it is quite possible that your active
partition is of the ext variety. Does GRUB/LILO load first after POST? If
so, guess what - they are most likely on an active ext partition.

By the way, I am assuming that "300MB hd on ide1" is actually 300GB.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
Rick said:
What are you talking about? The OP is included in my response. They always
have been. But, if all you want to do is rant and not talk rationally,
read no further and I will respond no more. There are many others that
require assistance, and I have no desire nor the time to engage in this
type of diatribe.


Nowhere did you mention what the active partition was, you stated you have
a 120GB NTFS formatted primary partition. Primary does not mean active,
you can have 4 primaries on a single drive, but only one can be active. As
you have a 'nix variation installed, it is quite possible that your active
partition is of the ext variety. Does GRUB/LILO load first after POST? If
so, guess what - they are most likely on an active ext partition.
Click to expand...

No, Grub did not appear.
By the way, I am assuming that "300MB hd on ide1" is actually 300GB.
Click to expand...

i made sure the NTFS partition active and still no soap. peeled the disk
clean and put a new 120 GB NTFS primary active at the beginning of the
drive and it installed. The disk is a little over 300 GB.

The copy of my original post did not show up in Knode. i have to judge by
what i can see.
 
Hi,

Ok, never had that problem with knode myself. Odd.

Curious as to where the problem may lie. What bootloader was previously
coming up after POST?

FWIW, I've installed Vista in a number of different locations on various
types of drives just to see if it could be done.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
Rick said:
Hi,

Ok, never had that problem with knode myself. Odd.

Curious as to where the problem may lie. What bootloader was previously
coming up after POST?

FWIW, I've installed Vista in a number of different locations on various
types of drives just to see if it could be done.
Click to expand...

Posted without adding previous.

Unless i went away for many minutes, none; and no GRUB. At least once it
finally booted a SCSI drive instead (a little 18 GB) running Win98
(2940UW-pci).

I have Vista booting now, but it does not support the SCSI card. I have
seen other posts about SCSI not being included for whatever reason. Do you
know where i can find SCSI drivers for X86-64?

It does not like my interim radeon 9250 either, but it displays just fine on
primary channel.
 
I was having this problem last night. I even went as far as making sure
there were no issues with the upgrade advisor but, I still could not
complete the install and it would roll back over and over again.

I found that when I removed my antivirus ( McAfee Corporate) It upgraded
like a champ.


Hope this helps
 
Sorry posted to wrong thread


I was having this problem last night. I even went as far as making sure
there were no issues with the upgrade advisor but, I still could not
complete the install and it would roll back over and over again.

I found that when I removed my antivirus ( McAfee Corporate) It upgraded
like a champ.


Hope this helps
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top