Hello everyone, I thought I would share my experiences
with Suse Linux 9.1.

Before I do, I want you to know that I searched a lot thrugh
GOOGLE, for GRUB howto's , read the man pages, and on several online
forums. From what I found it seems the "usual" problem is where
Windows trashes GRUB and you can't boot into LINUX or GRUB IS SOMEHOW
CORRUPTED.

My problem is the OPPOSITE, GRUB boots up and it can boot into
Linux, but can NOT boot Windows. Now most Linux users will tell me
hey that's not a problem , but it is.

I have my first IDE master drive it's a 100gig drive it is
split 50/50 for windows and linux, the first primary partition is set
up as my Windows NTFS drive aka c:\. the second half was dedicated to
SUSE, I let it install GRUB on the MBR of this first drive.

I also have a secondary HIGHPOINT RocketRAID 404 ide card which is
ONLY used in the Windows enviroment, and SUSE just says it's got
problems and I have it to ignore those 3 harddrives on that card.

the last 2 times this happened I ended up having to DELETE and
repartiton the whole thing. this last time I ALSO had to end up doing
it. I managed to write down some things I noticed to share and see if
I can get some advice and pointers from you more experienced users.

When I ran into GRUB not being able to boot windows I wrote down some
of the errors, but lost it, basically it just said root (hd0,0)
and it would just sit there, I would reboot, then would choose Linux
and LINUX would boot.

I then rebooted USING the Suse disk 1 and choose"install" then choose
REPAIR. the first 2 times I tried AUTO, no good, then I tried the
manual and expert and the repair program inside YAST ? would put up a
small window in which it displayed this error....

root (hd0,0)
file system type unknown
partition type 0xf
chainloader+1.

I tried several things like rewriting the MBR setting it active and
changing the settings like hidding the RAID drives on the line where
it says the order in which the drives are booted?

I tried changing the windows line to

rootnoverify (hd0,0) / I also tried (hd0,1)
chainloader +1

both ways also failed.


I then did a regular boot of SUSE as root user and the found the

/boot/grub/menu.lst

and tried changing those settings and nothing ended up helping


NOW HERE IS THE WEIRD THING, at one point I gave up frustrated and
decided to KILL windows and re-install Windows, I figured this would
WIPE the MBR and at least I would have a working Windows and all my
files. the install program SEES the partition that windows is on goes
on trugh the full install, reboots and HERE COMES GRUB BACK AGAIN
with the same error.

Somewhere around here I went back into SUSE, booted played around with
/boot/grub/menu.lst and somehow SCREWED it up to where GRUB could no
longer boot into SUSE either. this really pissed me off cause I had
SUSE running good, I had my HP printer workling good, finally found
how to half ass set the hertz on my monitor to where it would not
flicker, had rsync and ssh the way i wanted it.

so I figure, ok let's just kill the fist (WIN) partition using the
windows install app, do a quick reformat and that will SURELY re-write
the MBR so this time it wipes GRUB and I can go back later and REPAIR
suse,
I finish re-installing windows, reboot and now GRUB comes up but it
locks up, and I can not do a manual re-install of grub from the GRUB>
prompt

I tried find /boot/grub/stage1 and no go it was locked, before it
at least it would give me a answer of (hd0,5)

so I ended up having to KILL the second and third partition on the
drive (linux and swap) make it ALL into ONE partition

only this way did it, rewrite the MBR so that windows could finally
boot.

I guess I'm counting this tale so maybe I can get some good points /
advice, but it looks like I'm going to have to get a second drive or a
safer way (no MBR modification)

go ahead let me have it.

ps. I've been installing many Linux distributions lately, and I must
say SUSE really looks good except for this MBR fiasco, is this a GRUB?
thing? would LILO be any safer?

should I just make a boot floppy and burn that image to a cd?

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:14:45 GMT
res <suse.rtoledo@spamgourmet.com> wrote:

> root (hd0,0)
> file system type unknown
> partition type 0xf
> chainloader+1.

If this is, indeed, accurate then your Extended Partition (type 0xF)
starts at the beginning of first disk. While this is workable, you
*cannot* boot from the Extended Partition, you need to use a logical
partition inside of it, which would start numbering at 4, I believe,
with grub (hd0,4) which would be analagous to /dev/hda5.

It's usually easiest to have a Primary Partition at the beginning and
then follow it with an Extended Partition -- not absolutely required,
but *easier* . . . :-)


--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.

Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
6:33pm up 12 days 22:11, 8 users, load average: 0.79, 0.36, 0.25

res wrote:
> Hello everyone, I thought I would share my experiences
> with Suse Linux 9.1.
>
Do you realize this is a SLACKWARE group?

<snip>

--
Leo (Bing) Whiteway in Canada:
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
< running Slackware 10 >

res wrote:

> Hello everyone, I thought I would share my experiences
> with Suse Linux 9.1.
>
<snip>

First, You should have searched google groups or the suse site. In version
9.1 of suse ( actually it is a kernel 2.6 issue ) there was an issue with
repartitioning NTFS file systems. The problem you ran into has happened to
many and the Suse Support Database has a write up on the problem. The
actual issue is ( if I remember correctly ) the 2.6 kernel and versio of
parted with suse 9.1 reports the wrong fs type and sets it incorrectly on
the disk. This causes the partion to be un bootable via grub or lilo...

Second, If you ever need to get the windows MBR back boot into Windows from
the CD exit the install process and run fdisk /MBR. This rewrites the MBR
to the windows standard.

I'm sorry to hear you had such a rough time with the installation and hope
you will try again because it is a good environment. I have not run
windows @ home for over 10 years and only use it at work because it is
forced on me......

Have a nice day.....
--
Mark B.
Linux 2.6.5-7.95-default
6:30am up 20 days 9:26, 2 users, load average: 1.69, 1.67, 1.62

Leo (Bing) Whiteway wrote:

> res wrote:
>> Hello everyone, I thought I would share my experiences
>> with Suse Linux 9.1.
>>
> Do you realize this is a SLACKWARE group?
>
> <snip>
>

Hmmm... I could have sworn alt.os.linux.suse was a SuSe group. ;-)

--

(This space intentionally left blank)

Hello,

Mark Burgo <mfburgo@atlanticbb.net> wrote in message
> First, You should have searched google groups or the suse site. In version
> 9.1 of suse ( actually it is a kernel 2.6 issue ) there was an issue with
> repartitioning NTFS file systems.

It's not NTFS related because sometimes it happens on FAT32 too and
even if one used commercial partitioner before installation or a
second disk. Parted corrupts the partition table on 2.6 kernels.

SUSE fix:
http://portal.suse.com/sdb/en/2004/0...booting91.html

Parted fix:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bu.../msg00046.html

> The problem you ran into has happened to
> many and the Suse Support Database has a write up on the problem. The
> actual issue is ( if I remember correctly ) the 2.6 kernel and versio of
> parted with suse 9.1 reports the wrong fs type and sets it incorrectly on
> the disk. This causes the partion to be un bootable via grub or lilo...

Parted changes the geometry in the partition table therefore Windows
can't boot anymore in some rare cases. Not even if it's reinstalled.

> Second, If you ever need to get the windows MBR back boot into Windows from
> the CD exit the install process and run fdisk /MBR. This rewrites the MBR
> to the windows standard.

Rewriting the MBR doesn't help because the problem is the corrupted
partition table. But the above SUSE fix should work.

Sz. Csetey wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Mark Burgo <mfburgo@atlanticbb.net> wrote in message
>> First, You should have searched google groups or the suse site. In
>> version 9.1 of suse ( actually it is a kernel 2.6 issue ) there was an
>> issue with repartitioning NTFS file systems.
>
> It's not NTFS related because sometimes it happens on FAT32 too and
> even if one used commercial partitioner before installation or a
> second disk. Parted corrupts the partition table on 2.6 kernels.
>
> SUSE fix:
> http://portal.suse.com/sdb/en/2004/0...booting91.html
>
> Parted fix:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bu.../msg00046.html
>

Thank you for the updated information I believed it was NTFS only, Bur never
really ran into the problem just read it here and thought I would give
him/her the advice....

>> The problem you ran into has happened to
>> many and the Suse Support Database has a write up on the problem. The
>> actual issue is ( if I remember correctly ) the 2.6 kernel and versio of
>> parted with suse 9.1 reports the wrong fs type and sets it incorrectly on
>> the disk. This causes the partion to be un bootable via grub or lilo...
>
> Parted changes the geometry in the partition table therefore Windows
> can't boot anymore in some rare cases. Not even if it's reinstalled.
>

Good catch my mistake.

>> Second, If you ever need to get the windows MBR back boot into Windows
>> from
>> the CD exit the install process and run fdisk /MBR. This rewrites the
>> MBR to the windows standard.
>
> Rewriting the MBR doesn't help because the problem is the corrupted
> partition table. But the above SUSE fix should work.

He was attempting to reload the MBR and was attempting a reinstall when it
is not necessary to reinstalll windows. While it may not correct this
issue directly later it may help if it ever gives him/her trouble...


--
Mark B.
Linux 2.6.5-7.95-default
12:42pm up 20 days 15:38, 2 users, load average: 1.93, 2.01, 1.95

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:45:55 GMT, "Leo (Bing) Whiteway"
<leowhiteway@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>res wrote:
>> Hello everyone, I thought I would share my experiences
>> with Suse Linux 9.1.
>>
>Do you realize this is a SLACKWARE group?
>
><snip>

yes I tought Slackware users would probably use GRUB too and you are
known as hard core.

are these assumptions wrong?

>yes I tought Slackware users would probably use GRUB too and you are
>known as hard core.
>
>are these assumptions wrong?

slackware uses lilo by default.

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:37:29 +0000, res wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:45:55 GMT, "Leo (Bing) Whiteway"
> <leowhiteway@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>>res wrote:
>>> Hello everyone, I thought I would share my experiences
>>> with Suse Linux 9.1.
>>>
>>Do you realize this is a SLACKWARE group?
>>
>><snip>
>
> yes I tought Slackware users would probably use GRUB too and you are
> known as hard core.
>
> are these assumptions wrong?

GRUB=NO
LILO=YES
HARDCORE=MAYBE
CROSSPOSTER=TWIT
ASSUMPTION=WRONG
CLUE=NONE