I installed XP on my computer and the problems I had have been documented in other posts. Anyway, XP is now installed in a multi-boot situation along with Windows 2000 and Mepis (Linux).
The boot manager gives me either Windows XP and 2000 when I choose the Windows OS (was supposed to be separate choices but okay, I'll let the Windows bootloader give me that choice).
It was booting normally until I got an error and it would crash to a blue screen. XP wouldn't let me see it at first so I tried choosing 2000 and was able to read it. I reset the computer to make it boot up again and tried XP. I got the blue screen and was able to read it there, too. Here is the read-out:
*** STOP: 0x000000A5 (0x000000002, 0xFA2DE528,0xFA2584A8,0x00000001)
The ACPI BIOS in this system is not fully compliant with the ACPI specification. Please read the README.TXT for possible workarounds. You can also contact your system's manufacturer for an updated BIOS, or visit http: //www.hardware-update.com to see if a new BIOS is available.
The BIOS in this system is not fully ACPI compliant. Please conact your system vendor or visit http://www.hardware-update.com for an updated BIOS. If you are unable to obtain an updated BIOS or the latest BIOS supplied by your vendor is not ACPI compliant, you can turn off the ACPI mode during text setup. To do this, simply press the F7 key when you are prompted to install storage drivers. The system will not notify you that the F7 key was pressed – it will silently disable ACPI and allow you to continue your installation.
I didn't really know what to do but eventually my Windows operating systems just decided to boot up properly after some time. I didn't want that issue returning so I downloaded the latest BIOS for my Asus motherboard and changed the name accordingly (as they tell you) and burned the *.ROM BIOS file onto a CD to try to flash it. It worked! I now have the most recent BIOS version so I hope that issue doesn't return. My question is what was that and is a BIOS update assurance that it won't reoccur?
basically yes
XP was looking for something that your previous BIOS version didnt offer, which in your case was the needed ACPI version.
Im glad to see that you updated your BIOS correctly. Many people F*itup. Glad to see you can read and follow directions.
My only concern is 2 things
First if it works then go with it.
Second I wonder if it installed correctly (windows) with the older BIOS.
ACPI establishes industry-standard interfaces enabling OS-directed configuration, power management, and thermal management of mobile, desktop, and server platforms.
If you are not to far into the new install I (personally) would try to reinstall with the new BIOS to make sure that all went correctly.
I wouldn't mind re-installing but for two major concerns:
1) if you read earlier posts you would know that the install wiped out or hid non-NTFS partitions. Alternate boot managers (live cd) and Live Rescue CDs could not even see them! That is serious stuff.
2) Windows XP is restarting on its own. I am not sure if it is a setting from inactivity or if it's actually crashing. I haven't noticed when it's rebooted but each time it has happened, I wasn't in front of the computer. I also am not familiar enough with XP to know whether there is a timer setting to reboot from inactivity but that doesn't make sense to me. Who knows, though. I am afraid if I reinstall, I will get that problem again.
The main concern is #1, though. I would like to know how to avoid the "modification" of non-NTFS partitions (a Linux OS is on one now). I googled and still haven't found explanations, unfortunately.
As long as it's not a hidden Windows partition the partition should be OK, just make sure you're installing on the correct partition I've had my hdds partitioned for years, actually decades, and never had a problem installing Windows and not affecting any other partition on the drive. You should disconnect any other drives prior to installation t oavoid problem but the partitions should be fine
>"The boot manager gives me either Windows XP and 2000 when I choose the Windows OS (was supposed to be separate choices but okay, I'll let the Windows bootloader give me that choice). "<
That line could be a clue if I'm reading this correctly.
Windows XP and 2000 should be seperate choices on a dual (multi)boot.
In your previous post you stated that you wanted to install XP on the primary partition. The primary partition had 2000 on it already and therfore could not have XP installed there, as you cant have 2 op systems in the same partition without a huge crash.
The NTFS 45g would have been the place.
Later in your post you said that you started over so please state the current configuration.
Hope fully I looks something like this
c: primary win 2000 8GB
d: secondary win XP 45 GB
e: and f: should be where the Linux systems reside.
I'm not trying to belittle your setup, just trying to make sure that I understand completly in order to hopefully be of assistance.
Message edited by pat mcgroin on 01-15-2008 at 01:02:28 AM
>My Computer:
Local Disk C: 7.54 GB (Windows 2000), Local Disk D: 224 GB - 142GB used up (this was previously done via Windows 2000 so these are mostly associated with 2000?), Local Disk E: 53 GB (42.8 GB used up), Local Disk F: (Windows XP)
The 'original' Disk D (now called 'E') was being used for Windows 2000 and I used the large NTFS partition for sharing files with Linux. My disk arrangement and spacing got screwed up when I tried to install XP and although it is generally the appropriate setup, I am not sure what to do when installing XP-specific programs or even just to make so that XP has the desired programs (e.g. AVG anti-virus etc.). I thought I needed specific directories for it<
Ok I just found this in the sys config section.
First try to keep postings of the same nature in the same section. Its easier that way.
It does answer my previous question which is good.
To answer your question it really doesnt matter where you put your programs as long as it is in a file format that windows recognizes. Windows will keep track of where they are. The real question is can you keep track?
Disk management is more for you to be able to keep track of where you put things along with the possible eventuallity of system failure as you stated.
I know of what I speak as my system has been operational for 5-6 years with various operating systems and many multi boot setups.
To say that it is a mess would be too kind.
I finally bought a external drive to try to begin sorting it out for a reinstall. blah blah
If your system can deal with it you may think about another drive for backups Linux etc. Either internal or external it doesnt matter. Put data only on it at first so if you decide to reload your system in a more organized way you wont have to worry about songs movies documents etc.
Judging by the above you must have gotten your Linux working correctly again so good luck and happy computing!
Actually, I had to re-install the Linux distro. I never did solve that problem. If I ever have to reinstall Windows XP, who knows, it might return. I still haven't read anyone else have that problem. There must be other people who have had a version of Windows installed and a Linux distro or two installed and then wanted to install another version of Windows?!? Sure, it would probably be XP and Vista in the situation but still...
Your idea to have a 'backup' drive is a good one. I have been actually thinking about this lately, honestly. I can't decide yet between an external drive or another internal HDD. But, a HDD specifically for back up work is a good idea.
My drive is external though I dont think it would matter. If I dont want windows to see it, I dont turn it on. Currently I have nothing on it that win needs to operate. But in your case you may need to as your system seems almost as disorganized as mine. That is why I'm shuffleing things to it so I can reset the main.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.