Jim said:
Ok, let's backtrack a second here.
In your initial post, you indicated a desire to boot both WinMe and WinXP,
correct? That means dual-booting is the problem/issue. So when you say
"Where did I say I wanted to use ANY boot manager", you're absolutely right,
you didn't say that, and THAT'S the problem. You are essentially trying to
dual-boot WITHOUT a boot manager! Instead, you're mucking w/ PM and trying
to fanagle everything MANUALLY. Even assuming you can do it (and for
reasons I won't elaborate here, it's mighty tricky unless you understand all
the issues), its not necessary nor a good idea. You're encountering many of
your current problems ONLY because you insist on avoiding a boot manager.
Your statement: "Is there any way I can repair these installations so both
installs will work?
Yeah, install a boot manager!
Ok...
What I want is...
My PC to *ALWAYS* boot to Windows XP and NEVER show any kind of boot
manager... UNLESS I set the Win ME partition active. At that point I want it
to boot ME and ONLY ME until which time I set the XP partition active again.
When a user is on this PC I don't want them to know that the other OS is
installed and I don't want them choosing the other OS during boot.
But you resist the boot manager, in fact, you specifically insist you never
indicated a desire to use a boot manager. Well, what can I say, you want to
dual boot, a boot manager is specifically designed to avoid the problems
you're currently having, so someone (me) suggests a boot manager, and you
say "I don't want a boot manager", then you list several problems that are
directly related to not using a boot manager, then wonder why people are
suggesting you use a boot manager! And around and around we go.
The *ONLY* reason I need a boot manager is that Win XP won't keep it's
grubby fingers to itself. It should have no need to touch any other
partition except its own. If it isn't on the active partition it should be
be booting so why would it need to do anything with the rest of the drive?
I could live with the default XP boot loader if I had some way of editing
BOOT.INI from WinME, but I don't since XP is on an NTFS drive. Why aren't
the BOOT.INI options stored on the boot sector with the rest of the boot
loader?
As far as using the XP boot loader (it's not really a boot "manager", that's
an overstatement), yes, this is an option for managing the dual boot. BUT,
you also indicated in a follow-up post the following:
"I wanted to avoid the XP and ME installations having anything to do with
each other."
Well, that's another problem. When you use the XP loader, it will dual-boot
both OSs, BUT, they will NOT be independent of each other! Let's step thru
the process. Assume WinME is on partition #1 as C:. You now what to
install XP on partition #2. Because the XP loader cannot hide partitions,
the WinME partition will always be exposed when XP boots. This is why the
XP installation will be booted as D:!
*sigh*
The XP installation is *NOT* seen as D:
When I boot into XP I get a single hard drive with letter C:. XP works fine
and operates normally. I go into My Computer and I see only one drive. If I
go into Disk Manager I see Disk 0 with the Win ME partition there at 1.96GB
and Fat32 marked as Healthy (Unknown Partition). Right next to this I see
(C
at 25.96 gigs and NTFS. It's marked Healthy (System).
This is exactly what I would expect to see with my current setup.
PLEASE STOP TELLING ME MY LETTERS ARE GETTING MIXED UP.
The XP partition will still see C:
(WinME), albeit as data. If we also assume the XP installation is FAT32
(and I believe WinME sees FAT32 partitions), when WinME boots, it will see
the XP partition as D: (again, as data). IOW, the partitions are NOT hidden
from each other.
See above
In fact, the dependencies are much worse than cosmetic.
The XP installation will install all the boot files in C:'s partition! So
now, if you need/want to delete the C: partition some time in the future,
you're in a mess. XP needs C: to be there for its boot files *and* to make
sure that the XP partition remains D:. You can't move the XP partition too
easily either, since it's boot files specifically point to that partition,
and moving it may alter its drive letter assignment (such assignments are
determined, by default, by the BIOS).
Drive letters are not assigned by the BIOS at all. BIOS can determine the
order than hard drives are detected and that will affect drive lettering
though. Active primary partitions on all drivers are given letters before
any logical drives. Primary partitions that are not marked active don't get
drive letters at all. Since I only have one drive this whole point is moot.
I know it's all rather complicated, but the point is, dual-booting either
manually or using the XP boot loader is in direct conflict with your stated
objectives. Yes, the XP loader is FREE, but it's severely limited too. I'm
suggesting BootIt NG, Boot Magic, heck, even the free XOSL boot manager, are
MUCH better alternatives based on your stated objectives. You can NOT have
total partition/OS independence using the XP boot loader. You *may* be able
to achieve this manually using PM, but it's very tricky and takes a deep
understanding of what a boot manager does in order to prevent an even bigger
mess.
To get back to BootIt NG, I suggested a third partition, again, to maintain
your stated desire to keep these OS partitions independent. Now, to be
honest, you can certainly install it (or any other boot manager) into an
existing partition if you like. I don't recommend it, but you can. But if
you create a small third partition ONLY for the boot manager, you won't have
any boot manager dependencies associated with your OS partitions either.
For example, if you install BootIt NG (or any other boot manager) into the
first partition, w/ WinME, it will work fine. BUT, you know have to be
careful not to move, delete, or alter the first partition, lest you risk
mucking up the boot manager! In fact, all the boot manager files/folders
will be EXPOSED whenever the C: partition is visible (which without a boot
manager is ALWAYS). Why take that risk? Why introduce that dependency too
when you don't have to? Instead, keep the boot manager in its own partition
(you have a maximum of four primaries anyway, and currently are using only
two). But again, if you want to use an existing partition for the boot
manager, go ahead, be my guest.
Anyway, that's my last word on the subject, if you don't feel that 12+ years
of experience has much to offer, what can I say, keep rolling that snowball
uphill, maybe you know something I don't, I gave it my best shot. Good
luck, god bless, and have a happy life.
Only 12 years? Still a newbie? : )
I've dealt with CP/M, Windows 286, TRSDOS...etc... I've was burning Eproms
for projects on Commodore PETs before IBM even had a personal computer.
Anyhow... I didn't come here for a shouting match.
I'm used to "whatever primary is set active will boot"... That's what I
expected when I did my install. XP (and 2K and I assume NT) stomped on the
drives boot record. I didn't expect XP to touch any partition info except
the partition it was being installed on. The last time I had to deal with
this issue was during my OS/2 Warp days.
....so XP can't boot unless it had control of the drive, regardless of
whatever partitions and OS's are on the drive. I'll convert ME to a logical
partition and edit the XP Boot INI and HOPEFULLY be able to switch between
the two.
I also am not going to touch this thread again once I'm finished with the
rest of the posts today.
