Re: Suse 9.1 is Multi-boot very unfriendly: a disaster.
From: linuxuser (agompel_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 06/10/04
- Next message: David Speight: "Re: Newbie needs help with gzip"
- Previous message: David Stansberry: "Re: where on where has my little root gone"
- In reply to: linuxuser: "Suse 9.1 is Multi-boot very unfriendly: a disaster."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 9 Jun 2004 18:24:41 -0700
Want to thanks here everyone who shared valuable information, related
to this problem.
There is also another post (June 9, "SuSE 9.1 upgrade - dual boot
disaster" (7 articles), which document problems somewhat similar to
mine, but not the same).
Special thanks to Bernhard Bauer for bringing a solution to the
problem.
I have downloaded the CD, not tried it yet.
Saying "it worked for me" like some of you did, is very helpful...
only if your specify the context.
Else there is way too much room for speculation!
I wish, someone post a copy of the grub.conf message succesfully
updated by the SUSE 9.1 install, with your comments. (ideally windows,
+ two linux distros including SuSE 9.1), since it could help.
I am not using anymore Lilo, but even there if there it would usefull
to post your lilo file to document a lilo post.
The latest versions of LILO are reliable, but you must run the lilo
program... and be able to do it. Not always the case!
GRUB is great in the sense that all you need is to modifythe
configuration file.
There just are so many options.... Easy to get lost in the manual.
SUSE seems to prefer LILO to GRUB, like Red-Hat seems to prefer Gnome
to KDE...
As long as everything works it is fine.
I am wondering if a less smart (but confusing), manual mode for multi
boot install would not be better?
After all, for GRUB all you need are two files, on /boot, the loader,
mount points, and an extra stanza on the linux.conf file.
Not much, really.
This is quite simple to do manually, if the SUSE installer did allow
you this option.
Another suggestion:
I like the Red-hat/Fedora approach (Mandrake also if I recall) on
this: recapitulate all the install parameters on one page before
commiting to the actual install, and issue warning (in red) where
there is a danger (e.g: reformat an existing partition, rewrite the
MBR, etc...
Somewhat like most partitions managers. (Linux fdisk, cfdisk...)
This may help someone:
I have in many instance resolved partitions format, etc... by using
knoppix, which is a great tool to have for system disk maintenance.
However my version (3.3) does not support XFS.
Knoppix is Linux bootable from a CD and it has a wealth of the useful
tools, like cfdisk, parted, etc...
Linuxuser.
===============================================================================
agompel@yahoo.com (linuxuser) wrote in message news:<6aaf28e6.0406071750.48acfd81@posting.google.com>...
> Hello:
> I have a PC with a large (120GB) disc.
> I had a triple boot, with windows, RedHat, and Mandrake.
>
> My attempt to install SUSE 9.1 and overwrite the Mandrake partition
> was a disaster.
>
> Unlike Mandrake install which is the most able, (update GRUB etc...)
> and RedHat wich is not so friendly but allows dealing with multi-boot
> install, Suse is not good at all in this area.
>
> Furthermore, my USB Logitech mouse works fine with tha standard
> install, and stop working with the "custom" install, I had to replace
> it with a PS2 mouse.
> This is an annoying bug, should be fixed.
>
> It also seems that the advertised support for XFS file system is
> bogus, did not work at all.
>
> I have used SuSE in the past and thought it was one of the top 3 best
> distros.
> But the install was "dangerous" then (it wiped out my SCSI hard disk
> without asking), and it still is. This is a shame, because the product
> is very good.
>
> At least it should allow to install the two usual files on the boot
> partition, and create an alternate grub.conf file (slightly different
> name) to allow manual integration of the SuSe stanza into "grub.conf".
> It also should be clear option to NOT install any boot loader.
> This "stuff" is quite simple, and I am pretty sure that this can
> easily be done.
> Of course I would advocate any change to grub.conf to save a backup of
> the old one, just in case, unless the changes are a simple add at the
> end of the file.
>
> The test of the install for that should consist in adding the Suse
> Linux to a system containing already, Windows as well as one Linux
> partition.
> Proper formatting of partitions for every supported file system should
> work: Reiserfs, JFS, XFS, ext2, ext3, etc....
>
> Conclusion: The standard install may work fine, the "custom install",
> in my view is an absolute disaster.
> It should be thorougly tested, bugs fixed, and allow easy install of a
> GRUB multi boot systems. Possibly LILO also, which seems to fade away.
>
> Suggestion: In order to be able to use the existing 9.1 distro CD's I
> suggest that SUSE release free downloadable small ISO CD image to
> allow proper "custom install", until then I will not dare to redo an
> install of 9.1 on my system: too risky (it was significant work to get
> my system up and running again).
>
> Linux user
- Next message: David Speight: "Re: Newbie needs help with gzip"
- Previous message: David Stansberry: "Re: where on where has my little root gone"
- In reply to: linuxuser: "Suse 9.1 is Multi-boot very unfriendly: a disaster."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
