Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (
More info?)
Hi, Michael.
To cut to the chase...
> So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.
Multibooting WinXP and Win2K is easy and automatic, so long as you (a)
install them into separate volumes and (b) always install the newest Windows
last. If either of these caveats is violated, it still is possible, but not
automatic and not so easy.
When the computer boots, it knows nothing except what is in the BIOS chip.
That lets it located the first physical HDD and read the first physical
sector on the HD. At this point, it knows nothing of partitions, but the
64-byte partition table is in that first sector, along with the ~400 bytes
of the Master Boot Record, which is just enough for the computer to locate
the Active partition, load the first physical sector of that partition into
memory, and start executing it. This Active partition becomes the System
Partition until the computer is rebooted. (This is the System Partition,
NOT the "Boot Partition". At least, not at this point, although it may
later become the boot volume for Windows, but let's leave that for later.)
The first physical sector of the System Partition is the "boot sector", and
it is critical to the dual boot process. It is only 512 bytes long, of
course, so it can't do much. The MBR code loads this sector into the
computer's RAM and starts executing it.
When MS-DOS (or Win9x/ME) is installed on this computer, good old Sys.com
writes code into this boot sector; this code searches the Root of the System
Partition (C:\, typically) for two "system files": io.sys and msdos.sys.
It loads io.sys and turns control over to it, which uses msdos.sys to locate
and load Win9x/ME and start it. This boot sector knows nothing of WinNT or
any of its descendants.
When an NT-based Windows is installed, Setup overwrites the boot sector on
the System Partition with a different 512-byte code. This NT-style boot
sector looks in the Root of the System Partition (C:\, typically) for the
file NTLDR, which looks in C:\ for NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini. At this
point, after loading the BIOS, the MBR, the boot sector and NTLDR, the
computer is smart enough to start using partitions and folders. NTLDR reads
C:\boot.ini to find out how many instances of Windows are installed and
where they are (by disk and partition NUMBER, not by "drive" letter). It
presents the menu onscreen and waits for your selection. When you choose
(or it times out to the default choice), NTLDR and NTDETECT.COM loads your
choice and starts it running.
Once NTLDR loads one instance of Win2K/XP, that instance is in total control
of the computer. There is no way for any other Windows installation to
interfere until the computer is rebooted. At each reboot, the process
starts again at Ground Zero, with the BIOS chip. This session has no memory
of any prior session. So, if you boot Win2K this time and WinXP next time,
neither has any effect on the other. If you install Quicken while booted
into Win2K, then boot into WinXP, you can't run Quicken until you install it
again in WinXP. WinXP can read the Quicken files that were installed on the
hard drive while booted into Win2K, but it can't actually run the program
until Quicken's install program has made the required entries into the WinXP
Registry - which is completely isolated from the Win2K Registry. (Many
simple programs, of course, can be run without installing them, and those
may be run from any version of Windows - or even from DOS.)
When Win2K or WinXP Setup is run (by booting from the Windows CD-ROM), it
detects the existing environment before installing Windows. If it detects a
later version of NTLDR, it will refuse to install its older version; that's
why we can't easily install Win2K after WinXP. But if it detects an earlier
NTLDR, it overwrites the boot sector, NTLDR and NTDETECT.COM with the newer
version and updates C:\boot.ini to add the new installation to what is
already there. (If the boot sector is the MS-DOS style, Win2K/XP Setup
copies it to a new file, C:\bootsect.dos, before overwriting it, then
modifies C:\boot.ini to allow the opening menu to include a choice to boot
to MS-DOS or Win9x/ME.)
>>>Bolume? Partition? Same/same for me.
The terminology problems were not created by me - or by you - or even by
Microsoft, in many cases. But, unless we speak the same language, we're not
going to be able to communicate. Unfortunately, we all use terms
ambiguously and indiscriminately to mean different things at different
times. We use "drive" to mean a physical hard disk drive, or to mean a
partition, or a logical drive. We use "boot" in many different ways.
Usually, the difference is not important, but sometimes it is critical to
understanding what is being said.
A "volume" might be a partition, but an extended partition is not a volume.
An extended partition cannot be assigned a "drive" letter, but each logical
drive within the extended partition is assigned a "drive" letter. Each
primary partition and each logical drive is a "volume". Each volume is
assigned a "drive" letter, so maybe it should be called a "volume letter",
but there's not much chance of changing names at this late stage. Rather
than "format a drive", we create a partition on the physical drive and
format that, unless it is an extended partition, in which case we can't
format until we create a logical drive within the extended partition, then
we can format that.
Only a primary partition can be an Active (bootable) partition, so only a
primary partition may be the System Partition (where NTLDR resides). But
the \Windows "boot folder" can be installed on any volume on any HD in the
computer. That volume becomes the "boot volume" for THAT installation of
Windows. A multi-booting computer will have multiple boot volumes, but
still only a single System Partition. The System Partition MAY also serve
as the boot volume for one installation of Windows, but it is important to
recognize that partition's dual roles.
>>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>>problem. It's a goner.
In your case, Drive C: is your System Partition, D: is the boot volume for
your newer Win2K, and E: is the boot volume for your corrupt Win2K.
D;\WinNT is the boot folder for the "good" Win2K and E:\WinNT is the boot
volume for the "bad" Win2K.
>>>1. I don't want to reformat E:\ volume
OK. No need. I concur with Colon Terminus:
>> edit boot.ini and remove
>> the reference to the install on E:. Then boot to your D: install and
>> remove
>> the following folders on E:
>> Winnt
>> Documents and Settings
>> Program Files
>>>2. I don't want to disturb the boot volume.
No need to disturb C:, the System Partition (NOT the boot volume - those are
D: and E
. The only change needed is editing C:\boot.ini - and even that
is not critical; it just eliminates the nuisance of seeing an invalid menu
item.
>>>Yeah, I could do a repair
>>>of the install in D:\ and it might go quick and easy (or not). Again,
>>>why risk it if the boot volume -- which is barely related to the volume
>>>which contains the corrupt W2k? (other than the boot.ini entry)
You could do an in-place upgrade, also known as a repair install, of Win2K
on D:, but why? If that installation of Win2K is working fine, don't touch
it. Not that a repair install would be harmful, just unnecessary.
> So, am I looking for trouble with XP and W2k in the same machine?
Not at all! Win2K never heard of WinXP, but WinXP is designed to live right
neighborly with Win2K. Except for all those files and folders taking up
disk space, neither will know the other is installed on your computer. When
you are booted into Win2K, E:\Windows will be "just another folder"; to
WinXP, D:\WinNT will be "just another folder". Neither will see the other's
Registry as "just files", and neither will interpret or work with the
other's Registry. If you have Microsoft Office installed in Win2K, you can
boot into WinXP and install it again into the same D:\Office (or whatever)
folder; WinXP will use the same application files (rather than use up disk
space for duplicates), but will write entries into WinXP's own Registry (in
E:\Windows) so that you can run Office. You can work on the same Office
documents and other data files when booted into either Win2K or WinXP.
Start a letter in Word in WinXP in the morning, then reboot into Win2K and
finish it in the afternoon.
> Anyone running W2k & XP as a multiboot?
Yes!! Well, not now, but for several months while WinXP was still in beta
(RC1, Release Candidate). As soon as WinXP "went gold", I retired Win2K.
But over the past 7 years or so, I've multibooted various combinations of
Win95/98 with WinNT4/2K/XP. Currently, I have 2 parallel installations of
WinXP, plus rarely-used installations of Win2003 Server and Longhorn.
Normally, I boot from my SCSI hard drive, so its first partition (formatted
FAT16) is my System Partition. My main WinXP is in D:\Windows. Others are
in X:\Windows, F:\Windows and L:\Windows. None of them interfere at all
with the others, but I can read/write all of the volumes when booted into
any of them. Just for insurance, I've created minimal (8 MB) primary
partitions at the front of each of my two IDE drives, changed to BIOS to
make each in turn my boot device, and run WinXP Setup to put the boot sector
and system files (NTLDR, etc.) in each of those partitions, so any of them
can become the System Partition. By changing the boot order in the BIOS, I
can boot into D:\Windows (or into X:\Windows) from any of these partitions.
> How serious of a change in one in the other requires "what kind of
> attention" to either or both?
No need to create this boogeyman, Michael. You are imagining problems that
don't exist. You can delete E:\WinNT entirely, or reinstall it - or even
reformat E: completely - with no effect on D:\WinNT. Then you can install
WinXP into E:\Windows (or X:\Windows), if you like, with no effect on
D:\WinNT. When you install WinXP (into any volume), WinXP Setup will update
C:\NTLDR, C:\NTDETECT.COM and C:\Boot.ini, plus the boot sector on C:. But
it will not touch anything on D: - or any other volume.
> So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.
I've tried.
Post back and tell us exactly what you did and what results you saw.
RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc@corridor.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
"Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Q0TOd.25265$Th1.19813@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> On or about 2/10/2005 4:57 PM, Colon Terminus with due consideration,
> replied :
>
>> "Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>> news
gIOd.23480$Th1.12447@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>>>On or about 2/9/2005 10:44 PM, R. C. White with due consideration,
>>>replied
>>
>> :
>>
>>>>Hi, Michael.
>>>>
>>>>Well, your narrative meanders a bit and I might have missed some of it,
>>>>but I think I got the important parts...
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The WinNT4/2K/XP dual boot system is really pretty simple. It's kind of
>>>>like the letter "Y". The base of the Y is the System Partition; the
>>>>branches (and there can be more than two, of course) are the Boot
>>>>Folders for each installation of Windows (mix'n'match the NT-based
>>>>versions - and ignore Win9x/ME for now). And remember the
>>>>counter-intuitive terminology: We BOOT from the SYSTEM partition and
>>>>keep the operating SYSTEM files in the BOOT folder. The point is that
>>>>there is only ONE System Partition, even though there may be multiple
>>>>boot folders. There is only one set of the system files (NTLDR,
>>>>NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini), and they must be in the Root of the System
>>>>Partition (typically, C:\).
>>>
>>>Line three of my post:
>>>
>>>"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
>>>in a small Fat primary partition. "
>>>
>>>Not much meanering.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Although Microsoft (and nearly every Windows guru) strongly advises that
>>>>only one copy of Windows be installed in a single volume, it is possible
>>>>to install multiple copies in a volume. The default name of the boot
>>>>volume is \Windows, except in WinNT and Win2K, in which the default name
>>>>is \WinNT. If Win2K is installed into volumes C: and D:, the default
>>>>names will be C:\WinNT and D:\WinNT. But if Win2K is installed twice
>>>>into C:, the name of the second must be a variation, such as C:\WinNT-2.
>>>
>>>Bolume? Partition? Same/same for me.
>>>
>>>One volume (FAT) w/DOS and the boot files for two installs of W@K --
>>>each in a different volume/partition. Anyone miss that?
>>>
>>>
>>>>What happened in your case? Are both your copies of Win2K in Drive C:?
>>>
>>>No, C:\ is the FAT partitition with Dos and the start/boot files for
>>>both installs of W2k.
>>>
>>>Again:
>>>"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
>>>in a small Fat primary partition. "
>>>
>>>Try this on for size:
>>>
>>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>>problem. It's a goner.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Win2K will not obey an order to delete its own boot folder, because
>>>>that's like obeying an order to commit suicide. But it will happily
>>>>delete another installation's boot folder, because if you are booted to
>>>>D:\WinNT, then folder C:\WinNT is "just another folder". So, if all you
>>>>want to do is get rid of your "bad" Win2K, just boot into the good one
>>>>and delete the boot folder for the bad one, then edit C:\boot.ini to
>>>>remove the line that offers to boot it.
>>>
>>>Well, while the installs of W2k are in different partitions..they share
>>>the boot partition, C:\
>>>
>>>
>>>>One casualty of the deletion of the boot folder will be the Registry for
>>>>that copy of Win2K. The Registry in Win2K is a set of special files,
>>>>all in the \WinNT\system32\config folder; when you delete \Win2K, that
>>>>entire Registry gets deleted, too. The computer will forget about all
>>>>the applications that had been installed in that copy. You will need to
>>>>install those apps again, unless they had been installed already in the
>>>>remaining copy of Win2K, even if the apps files remain on the HD, so
>>>>that entries can be made in the good Win2K's Registry.
>>>
>>>Um, the boot folder need not be touched -- (it stands alone on C:|)
>>>-execpt for an entry to the deleted W2k in boot.ini.
>>>
>>>I wrote: " I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the
>>>W2k install? And remove its reference from boot.ini?"
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you wanted to preserve your original Registry, you could do an
>>>>in-place upgrade (also known as a repair reinstallation). But if you
>>>>want to wipe out your original Win2K and start over, you could just
>>>>delete C:\WinNT, but don't reformat C:, then clean install Win2K again
>>>>into C:. You would need to reinstall your apps, but your data files
>>>>would remain intact.
>>>
>>>
>>>The inplace upgrade didn't take. (after the crash which wiped out the
>>>profiles, it did an in place upgrade -- all was fine - untill
>>>re-install of SP4, - It blinked out during the install of the SP and
>>>nothing will bring it back - It's history. I just want the best way
>>>to remove it)
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you have questions, please post back.
>>>
>>>One question? If I delete the W2k folders and the boot.ini entry, is
>>>that enough to prevent future problems (ex: confusion that th removed
>>>W2k once existed in that partition.
>>>
>>>Or, put better. I want to totally remove one install of W2k in one
>>>volume which is in a differrent volume than the boot volume and the
>>>other install of W2k --
>>>
>>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>>problem. It's a goner.
>>>.
>>>1. I don't want to reformat E:\ volume - Um. if that was a
>>>preference? I wouldn't be writing. Yeah, format E: was an early
>>>'solution' -- which would wipe out all the other data in the volume I
>>>wish to keep...
>>>
>>>2. I don't want to disturb the boot volume. Yeah, I could do a repair
>>>of the install in D:\ and it might go quick and easy (or not). Again,
>>>why risk it if the boot volume -- which is barely related to the volume
>>>which contains the corrupt W2k? (other than the boot.ini entry)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> If I understand your problem then you can simply edit boot.ini and remove
>> the reference to the install on E:. Then boot to your D: install and
>> remove
>> the following folders on E:
>> Winnt
>> Documents and Settings
>> Program Files
>>
>>
>>
>
> Thanks
>
> Yes, I knew removing the W2k folder (and getting the entry out of the
> boot.ini) would remove the data off the drive (freeing space) and of
> course disallow booting into an OS that was gone.
>
> My concern was: Is that good enough? As I plan to install XP in the
> volume (not the same volume as the boot which is on a small FAT for all
> OS's) I was concerned registry or various data on the disk would still be
> there an may cause problems for XP . When one install an app? The
> process goes deeper than the information one can 'see' on the drive.
>
> So, I knew your suggestion was an option but and it would provide space
> for a new install - but is deleting the folder truly an uninstall or is
> it asking for trouble in the future.
>
> However? It may be moot!
>
> Now I'm concerned whether I should even put XP in with the other W2k
> install (the one that'st OK). The problem? XP must go in after W2k --
> no problem for the first install? At least no problem for XP.
>
> But what if I need to do something drastic with the other W2k install
> after W2k goes in? As I understand it, major changes to W2k mean serious
> trouble for XP. If you know? The 'repair' for XP (from the disk, not the
> console) isn't as selective. In fact? They admit that 'R'" - Repair in
> XP amounts to an install! Not the selective repair like in W2k!
>
> So, am I looking for trouble with XP and W2k in the same machine?
> Regardless how I choose to eliminate the current install of W2k? I'll
> still have another install in another partition. Am I going to be looking
> at a lot of downtime for both OS's when one has a problem or if a major
> update changes the files in the boot partition that they will both share?
>
> Anyone running W2k & XP as a multiboot? How serious of a change in one in
> the other requires "what kind of attention" to either or both? I want to
> stay away from a boot manager...while they are working they offer
> nefits - when they fail? it's a nightmare.
>
> So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram