• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Dual Booting Linux with Win 2000

 
Herbert Maosa
Ranch Hand
Posts: 289
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I do have a problem trying to dual boot Linux with windows 2000. I think it is because windows 2000 has its own loader, so the loaders are basically overwriting each other in the MBR. I wonder what I can do to work around this. Meanwhile I am having to boot from a floppy whenever I want to use Linux. Also, how can I install LILO if I opted NOT TO during the installation?
Herbert.
 
Guy Allard
Ranch Hand
Posts: 776
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi - Take a look at one of the previous discussions:
http://www.javaranch.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=000328
If that does not solve your problem, get back to us.
Regards, Guy
 
Herbert Maosa
Ranch Hand
Posts: 289
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Thanks for the info. I have read the article and found lots ofd useful info.
However, I have managed to dual boot Linux with win2000 using [B]GRUB[B], as opposed to [B]LILO[B]. I installed GRUB in my MBR, and it went just so smoothly and easily, and it is the [B]GRUB[B] loader that is booting my Windows. I did not expect to find it so easy to do this, and now I wonder why every body appears to be prefering LILO as opposed to GRUB....may someone tell me why this appears to be the case?
Thanks
Herbert.
 
Guy Allard
Ranch Hand
Posts: 776
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi Herbert - I have never used grub, so cannot help you as to why most folks use lilo.
I use Redhat systems, and grub is not even an option (as far as I remember) during the initial install. Maybe since RH is (fairly) pervasive, that is why.
Which distro' are you using?
Regards, Guy
[ March 11, 2002: Message edited by: Guy Allard ]
 
Guy Allard
Ranch Hand
Posts: 776
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Uh ..... let me ask a question - is grub capable of triple or quad boot? For example:
linux
98
W2K
XP
???
TIA, Guy
 
Herbert Maosa
Ranch Hand
Posts: 289
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Guy,
I am using Redhat Linux 7.2 and Grub is an option, actually it is the default boot loader during the setup...one has to change if one wants to use LILO instead. I can only assume that it would boot any number of systems, but I dont know for sure because I only had windows 2000 at the time....
Herbert.
 
Guy Allard
Ranch Hand
Posts: 776
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Man! I must fly through installs, and just automatically/subconsciously do lilo, because I do not remember that.
Good you have it working.
Regards, Guy
 
Tim Holloway
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 18302
56
Android Eclipse IDE Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
GRUB is a newcomer, so those of us who have been working with Linux for a while just feel more comfortable with LILO. However, I believe that GRUB is supposed to be more flexible. Recent RedHat releases gve you the option to select either one.
 
suneel Battarusetty
Greenhorn
Posts: 3
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I am successful with Win 2000(NTFS) and RedHat Linux 7.2 dual boot with GRUB (at MBR)and Win 2000 as default(17 GB for Windows and 11 GB for Linux).
Next, I Installed Windows Service Pack 2 then windows 2000 got screwed up. So I formated hard disk and installed fresh Windows 2000 with sp2 then installed RedHat Linux 7.2 with GRUB as default loader, still windows is hanging then did "fixmbr" then "fixboot", still same problem (at that time I don't realize fixboot should go first).
Any body did dual boot with Windows 2000(NTFS) sp2 and RedHat Linux 7.2 with GRUB or LILO?
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic