Subject: Re: LILO and W95

From: Randall Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 14:23:37 -0600 (MDT)

On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, nathan work wrote:

> ok, i just loaded linux after w95 for the first time.  i know very 
> little about linux or unix for that matter and i'm having a real problem 
> - 95 will not 'recognize' LILO, and boots right into 95.  i didn't have 
> this problem with 3.1.  what i need is for someone to be gracious enough 
> to take me by the hand and show me how to overcome this (to keep w95 
> from controling what's booted). please email me if you'd like:
> 					[email-masked]	
> 					http://b63826.cwru.edu
> 

what does your /etc/lilo.conf look like?  you should show include it here;
that would make things alot easier to diagnose.

Where did you load LILO?  what does the "boot=" line look like in your
/etc/lilo.conf?
It sounds like you have "boot=/dev/hdaN"  ( where N is you linux partition
number, assuming you're using the master primary IDE channel )

If you have "boot=/dev/hdaN" you can
- boot DOS ( I think you can use Win95 DOS, but reboot to DOS mode )
- run fdisk in DOS
- follow the menu/instructions to change the active partition to your
    linux partition.
- exit fdisk
- reboot

If you have "boot=/dev/hdbN" you should
- boot linux (from a boot floppy)
- edit /etc/lilo.conf
    change the boot value to "boot=/dev/hda"  (this is assuming that Win95
      is on the first partition of the primary master IDE drive (C:))
- reboot

++Randy
[email-masked]
NRAO AOC - Interference Protection

---

From: nathan work <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 13:36:31 -0400

---

From: "Susan G. Kleinmann" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 18:20:01 -0400

Hi Nathan --

You said:
> - 95 will not 'recognize' LILO, and boots right into 95.  

If you installed win95 *after* you installed lilo) you have win95's mbr.

To boot Linux now you can either install LILO as the boot manager,
with advice from Randy Jones, or you can retain win95 as the boot 
manager, but allow yourself a back door to get to Linux:

There are several ways to do this:
   -- set BootMulti=1 in the [options] section of MSDOS.SYS
      Then, next time you boot, just after you see the signal
      "Starting Windows 95", hit the 'F8' key.  This puts you into
      a menu mode, from which you can choose DOS (either 7.0 or your
      previous DOS) and then from there you can execute the LOADLIN.EXE
      command.  For example, 
          C:\BIN\LOADLIN.EXE /vmlinuz root=/dev/hdb2 ro
      boots a linux system that has its root on hdb2.
   -- set BootWin=0 in your MSDOS.SYS file which will automatically
      bring up DOS 6.22.  Then run LOADLIN from there (from an AUTOEXEC.BAT
      file if you like).
   -- create a batch file containing the single line give above, then,
      on the win95 desktop, create a shortcut to the batch file, and type
      in the name of the batch file for the command line.  
      Then right click on it, select Properties, select the Program tab, 
      and the Advanced button.  Check the MS-DOS mode check box and 
      click OK.  Now Linux is just two clicks away.

Cheers,
Susan Kleinmann
[email-masked]

---

From: Kenny Wickstrom <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 23:15:01 -0500 (CDT)

> from controling what's booted). please email me if you'd like:

What I have done is similar to what Susan suggest in using LOADLIN, but I
have setup a menuitem in config.sys to handle it.  The line I use in the
config.sys file is:

shell=c:\loadlin.exe c:\vmlinuz root=/dev/hda6 ro

This assumes my root file system is on hda6.  This way when I boot I have
the option presented to me.  It is very much like LILO, but is all done
through DOS/WIN95 utilities (when I started using linux, I was more
comfortable doing it this way).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenny Wickstrom           | gnu - a new generation in s/w devel/support
[email-masked]          | Linux - a much improved Un*x clone
(847)740-4008             | Debian - a Linux distribution setting the
#include <std-disclaimer> |    standard for future distributions

---

From: Michael Meskes <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:21:45 +0200 (MET DST)

> from controling what's booted). please email me if you'd like:

There is a mini HOWTO about this problem: Linux+Win95.

As a short explanation. Boot your machine under Linux (I hope you have a
bootdisk) and edit /etc/lilo.conf accordingly. Then run lilo. Et voila.

Here's my lilo.conf

# Start LILO global section
boot = /dev/hda
compact        # faster, but won't work on all systems.
delay = 50
vga=extended
ramdisk = 0     # paranoia setting
# End LILO global section
# Linux bootable partition config begins
image = /vmlinuz
  root = /dev/hda2
  label = linux
# Linux bootable partition config ends
# WIN95 bootable partition config begins
other = /dev/hda1
  label = win95
  loader = /boot/any_d.b
# WIN95 bootable partition config ends

Michael

-- 
Michael Meskes                   |    _____ ________ __  ____
[email-masked] |   / ___// ____/ // / / __ \___  __________
[email-masked]                  |   \__ \/ /_  / // /_/ /_/ / _ \/ ___/ ___/
[email-masked]                |  ___/ / __/ /__  __/\__, /  __/ /  (__  )
Use Debian Linux!                | /____/_/      /_/  /____/\___/_/  /____/

---

From: "James D. Freels" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 96 09:02 EDT

>comfortable doing it this way).
In my case, I started out (several years back) using LILO to dual-boot
DOS or Linux.  But, I actually have found now that the Loadlin option
not only is more convenient for Win-95, but actually makes more sense
on a PC.  The only problem is that Loadlin has some memory
limitations.  But, if you use the Menu-config.sys thing with DOS, then
booting bare with the Loadlin option works great.

-- 
/------------------------------------------------------------------\
| James D. Freels, P.E._i, Ph.D.  | Phone:  (423)576-8645  |   | L |
| Oak Ridge National Laboratory   | FAX:    (423)574-9172  | H | I |
| Research Reactors Division      | Internet: [email-masked] | F | N |
| P. O. Box 2008                  | Reactor Technology     | I | U |
| Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6392 | world's best neutrons! | R | X |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|
| out the 10Base-T, through the router, down the T1, over the      |
| leased line, off the bridge, past the firewall...nothing but Net |
\------------------------------------------------------------------/

---

From: [email-masked] (Bernd Eckenfels)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 15:36:48 +0200 (MET DST)

Hi,

>   loader = /boot/any_d.b

AFAIK any_d.b is used to swap C: and d: drive. If you OS is on the first drive
you need to run chain.b instead.

Greetings
Bernd
-- 
  (OO)      -- [email-masked] --
 ( .. )  ecki@lina.{inka.de,ka.sub.org}  http://home.pages.de/~eckes/
  o--o     *plush*  2048/A2C51749  eckes@irc  +4972573817  *plush*
(O____O)       If privacy is outlawed only Outlaws have privacy

---

From: John Tran <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 14:36:48 -0700 (PDT)

> > from controling what's booted). please email me if you'd like:

run fdisk and set bootable flag (A) to your dos partition only.  Linux does
not need this flag set.

---

From: Philippe Troin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 1996 19:33:48 -0700

> booting bare with the Loadlin option works great.

"More sense on a PC" ? Duh ! Maybe for a "Win95" user.
Anyhow, the problems with "I've installed Micro$oft Windoze 95 on my 
computer and can't boot Linux anymore" is just due to the fact that 
M$ just assumes that anyone use their piece of crap and just baldly 
recreates the MBR.

And LILO is not less safe than LOADLIN. It can causes problem if you 
configure it badly. And LOADLIN can have problem if the DOS/WIN 
drives are defragmented.

(Not starting a col.advocacy thread)

Phil.

---

From: "James D. Freels" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 96 10:17 EDT

>M$ just assumes that anyone use their piece of crap and just baldly 

I know all about the MBR thing.  Don;t try to give me that dumb-*^&%
stuff.  Been there, done that...

I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say.  Get off your
high horse just a minute and think about what you are saying.

I maintain 4 debian machines at present.  2 out of 4 are single-OS
machines and  boot up using lilo just as I have for several duel-boot
setups prior.  However, recently I have come to appreciate the loadlin
option with multi-boot machine because of the ease of configuration on
W95 machines and the [Menu] options under config.sys.

As far as the previous comment on taking longer under loadlin.  I
don't think that is true.  Once loadlin starts, it almost instantly
boots linux.  I can't really tell the difference.

I guess my point is, if you have to use W95 (which I do on two
machines for various reasons), and since W95 is going to write over
your MBR every time you install it, then loadlin makes more sense.

>configure it badly. And LOADLIN can have problem if the DOS/WIN 

This is true.  But, lilo is more difficult to set up.  Especially for
first-time users migrating from dos/w95 or just experimenting, loadlin
is definitely the way to go.

>(Not starting a col.advocacy thread)

P.S.  BTW, M$ Windoze-95 is not a piece of crap.  I think we all agree
in this group that it is wowfully behind the capabilities of Linux.
But, one cannot deny the numbers.  If it were that bad, why are there
so many people using it?  We can't isolate ourselves.  The thing to do
is figure out how to work with it.

---

From: Rob Browning <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Aug 1996 11:22:44 -0500

"James D. Freels" <[email-masked]> writes:

> If it were that bad, why are there so many people using it?

I'm not commenting on anything but this line.  IMO this may be a
reason why you have to put up with something, but it is never a good
argument for the merits of an item.

--
Rob

---

From: "Richard G. Roberto" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:52:12 -0400 (EDT)

> high horse just a minute and think about what you are saying.

Cool!

> is figure out how to work with it.

I love these threads, but maybe we should take it off of
debian-user?

I think Win95 really is a piece of crap!  In fact, I'd go as
far to say that its a piece of sh*t!  The reason its got so
many installations is because of the way Micr$oft
strong armed its corporate user base with support issues
into switching.  Although I must say, Win95 is not enjoying
anything like the success of Win3.x.  If you think about it,
Windows really is responsible for the PC explosion, so I'm
not really much of a Bill basher.  But I also know that
market share is what pushed Win95 onto people's desktops.
Here at Bear we use WinNT exclusively for a Windows platform
(more or less) and have no plans to mess with Win95.

Win95 has forced people into a stronger committment to
Micro$oft, securing future marketshare, etc.  It really
doesn't offer much else (other than instalbility and a
learning curve for Win3.x users).  The new NT4.0 workstation
will have the same interface and then everyone can upgrade
again.  This time, there will be less throw away code, and
an already familiar user interface for Win95 users.

As far as comparing it to Linux/Unix, Window$ is perceived
as being "easier" to install and maintain.  Any of us who
have ever had to trouble shoot a Window$ system knows
better, but that's not important.  Becuase Window$ is the
platform of choice for most of the computing world, that's
where all major application development efforts are focused.
People don't use really great OS's for the most part.  They
use applications they think they need.  Everybody wants drag
-n- drop, plug -n- play, point -n- shoot, WYSIWYG, net
aware, multi-media aware/capable, etc.  I can do my job on a
vt100 and be basically just as effective, but much of the
world can't read their e-mail without hearing their favorite
jingle and watching an animated icon do a soft shoe across
the screen.

I think I had a point when I started this but I'm sure I've
lost it, so I'll shut up now.

Thanks

Richard G. Roberto
[email-masked]
201-739-2886 - whippany, nj

--
*******************************************************************************
Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or
agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account
activity contained in this communication.
*******************************************************************************

---

From: "Carlo U. Segre" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 01:49:15 -0500 (CDT)

> run fdisk and set bootable flag (A) to your dos partition only.  Linux does

Just catching up on my list mail and I wanted to throw in my 2 cents 
worth.  I have been using LILO with my Win95/Linux box with no problems 
whatsoever.  I have noticed that Win95 tends to reinstall the MBR but 
there is a simple fix to this that I have noticed by accident.

I usually install Linux first and I leave a space at the beginning of the 
disk for the Win95 partition to be added later.  My Linux boot partition 
is /dev/hda2 (I resrve /hda1 for the Win95 partition).  When I install 
LILO I make all the appropriate responses telling it that I will be 
booting more than one OS and then I find that hda2 is set as the active 
partition and is fully bootable.

Later, when I install Win95, the first partition is formatted and made to 
be the boot partition automatically (as a number of people have noted 
already).  But if I run fdisk from a DOS prompt and make the second 
partition bootable once again, voila`, LILO boots Linux the next time the 
machine is restarted.  At this point all I need to do is add the 
appropriate lines to my /etc/lilo.conf in order to get Win95 to boot when 
I choose it (Linux is the default of course...):

	boot=/dev/hda2
	root=/dev/hda2
	compact
	install=/boot/boot.b
	map=/boot/map
	vga=normal
	delay=20	
	image=/vmlinuz
		label=Linux
		read-only
	other=/dev/hda1
		label=Win95
		table=/dev/hda

If you inspect the first line of this lilo.conf file, you will notice 
that the boot is set to a partition (/dev/hda2) rather than a disk 
(/dev/hda) and so LILO is installed using a boot sector on the second 
partition rather than on the Master Boot Record as would be done if only 
the disk were specified.  I believe that this is possible because the 
Linux fdisk permits up to 4 primary partitions (the DOS fdisk only allows 
1) and each can be made bootable.  The result is that if I wish to go 
back to booting Win95 only (heaven forbid), I need only activate the 
first partition and my LILO is still sitting there intact for me to use 
later.  This will allow me to reinstall Win95 to my heart's content and 
not mess up my Linux loadability and dual boot.  This method will not, to 
my knowledge, work unless the boot partitions of both Win95 and Linux are 
on teh same disk and reside under the 1024 cylinder limit imposed by DOS 
and LILO.

Anyway, just thought I'd lay my experiences out for all to use if they 
like...

Carlo

    ***********************************************************************
    *                            Carlo U. Segre                           *
    *      Department of Biological, Chemical and Physical Sciences       *
    *        Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616          *
    *   Voice: (312) 567-3498                      FAX: (312) 567-3494    *
    *                      [email-masked]                      *
    ***********************************************************************