RE: Red Hat 6.1

[Bob Ham <nospam [at] dcs.shef.ac.uk>]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Paul Sims wrote:

> Windows/dos doesn't care where the partition is as long as it's set active. 
> The mbr is outside the partition scheme entirely and thus unaffected by how 
> the disk is carved up.

My Win95 partition is currently not set to active but it still boots.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Bob Ham [SMTP:u9rah [at] dcs.shef.ac.uk]
> Sent:	Tuesday, February 15, 2000 3:07 PM
> To:	sheflug [at] vuw.ac.nz
> Subject:	Re: Red Hat 6.1
> 
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Alastair Donlon wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2000 at 10:13:13AM -0000, Foz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 	Any ideas what to do with this one.  I can't imagine that a dual
> > > > boot script in /etc/lilo.conf  has had this effect on Win 98 config.
> > > A dual boot, hmm....they should still be separate anyway. Where
> > > have you installed lilo? MBR? that is a no no for a start, 98
> > > ALWAYS install to the MBR and takes over what is there on every
> > > boot up. Or at least corrupts it anyway.
> > >
> 
> I was under the impression that the MBR had nothing to do with Windows
> (NT or 9x.)  From what I do understand, any M$ bootable partition must
> be the first partition on the hard disk and that's it.  I'm sure I've
> had lilo sat on the MBR with NT on the same machine (tho I'm not 100% on
> that.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.