mntview64

Letter Assignment when dual booting win98 & XP

65 posts in this topic

I have 2 hard drives in my computer and 2 DVD's. Both hard drives are EIDE/PATA. Right now I am running win98se and I want to install XP pro sp3 so it will dual boot both OS. Drive 0 is 250gb and Drive 1 is 40gb. Drive 0 has 5 partition volumes. C drive is primary/active with win98se installed on it. My other volumes have other programs installed into them except G drive, which I left empty. All volumes are FAT32 on both hard drives. So I have:

(Drive 0) ---------------------------------------------- (Drive 1) is extended partition with 4 volumes.

C:\ primary/Active win98se 35gb ------------- H:\ programs installed 10gb

D:\ programs installed 33gb -------------------- I:\ programs installed 10gb

E:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- J:\ programs installed 9gb

F:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- K:\ programs installed 9gb

G:\ empty 105gb

The order in which MS-DOS (*) enumerates partitions is :

a) First primary partition of each drive, in turn

B) All extended partitions of each drive, in turn

c) All remaining primary partitions of each drive, in turn

Drives that are not recognized are not enumerated.

* At least as far back as version 7.0, perhaps even 6.22

(earlier than that, only one primary partition was supported).

Assuming NT uses the same rules, what you should do is make

that 105G partition a primary partition. Then it will get

enumerated last for NT, & ignored for DOS/W9X. So all other

partition drive letters will match between the two O/S.

BTW, if you get phantom drive enumeration or other LBA problems

in W9X, you might want to try my revised patch for V7.10 'IO.SYS'

(based on original patch by Steven Saunderson), available at :

http://jds.com-t.com/general.html

Joe.

Thank you JDS (Joe) This sounds interesting to me, but am still a little confused here. If I make my G volume into a primary partition, then install NTFS on it, win98 won't see it, so then win98 will change the drive letters on my second hard drive, because there won't be a G volume on my first hard drive. Then what happens when I boot into XP, where it can see all volumes, to the letter assignment? Do you know if XP has to be installed on a primary partition? I have read XP will run from a logical drive as long as it can install it's drivers in the first primary partition of the hard drive.

Another question, what is this V7.10 - IO.sys patch for? I downloaded all the win98 updates from MDGx web site and installed them in order to get my 250gb hard drive to run win98se, and so far everything is working great.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am finding now, with IE6, that a lot of web pages won't open or run right as they used to do.

Give Firefox 2 a try. It is much newer than IE6, it can be customized to look almost exactly like IE6, and there is an Addon (PlainOldFavorites) that will allow you to use the IE6 style Windows\Favorites folder instead of Bookmarks.

I have an old Logitech Cordless MouseMan Wheel mouse that I love, (I have 3 of them) but on my XP machine, it won't work, at least that is what XP told me when I installed it.

I can't give you a definite Yes or No on this, but I can't imagine that there is not a way to get it working in XP. :unsure:

If I make my G volume into a primary partition, then install NTFS on it, win98 won't see it, so then win98 will change the drive letters on my second hard drive, because there won't be a G volume on my first hard drive. Then what happens when I boot into XP, where it can see all volumes, to the letter assignment? Do you know if XP has to be installed on a primary partition? I have read XP will run from a logical drive as long as it can install it's drivers in the first primary partition of the hard drive.

AFAIK, XP cannot be installed to a logical partition, however, if one first installs it to a primary partition, and then copies it to a logical partition, (this is a tedious process described in the link I provided), it will run and function normally as if it were in a primary partition.

Windows 98 assigns drive letters on each boot. It will only assign drive letters to partitions that it can read, the others just won't show up at all. One possible solution no one has mentioned is SysInternals NTFS for Windows 98 (if it can still be found) as it will assign a drive letter to the NTFS partition.

Windows XP however sets "permanent" drive letters, and then remembers them by entering them in the registry. (Can be changed by editing/deleting the relevant registry entries, also described in my link)

Neither OS will "Change" the drive letters assigned by the other OS if this is what you mean. They may assign different drive letters when they are booted, but this will not affect the other OS. You could manually edit the drive letter assignments in XP to match those of 98;

or

If you use a 3rd party bootloader (examples above and in my link) simply hide the 98 System partition when booting XP, and hide the XP System partition when booting 98, this way each OS sees it's own partition as C: and the other drives would not be affected, they (should) be assigned the same letters in both OS's.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK, XP cannot be installed to a logical partition, however, if one first installs it to a primary partition, and then copies it to a logical partition, (this is a tedious process described in the link I provided), it will run and function normally as if it were in a primary partition.

Notwithstanding the "AFAIK", this is a bestiality :realmad: .

Windows NT family of OS are DESIGNED to be installed on logical volumes inside extended partition.

Their booting must be initiated (normally) from a primary active, but there is NO need WHATSOEVER to install to primary and then clone it somewhere else!

That is one of the workarounds to be able to install 9x on a logical volume inside extended, see XOSL help:

http://www.allensmith.net/OS/XOSL/I.htm

If you are not familiar with XP, or the way it boots or installs:

Not really.

There is no real "need" to actually re-map the hard disk drive, it is just one of the possible solutions, and you should be careful between the use of "booting XP" or "booting the XP bootloader NTLDR" (which are two very different things).

:thumbup As I said, I am unfamiliar with this, I just know that booting WinXP from the second drive did not work with my setup.

Simply DO NOT talk about it :whistle: , (or, better, GET familiar with it ;))

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notwithstanding the "AFAIK", this is a bestiality :realmad: .

Windows NT family of OS are DESIGNED to be installed on logical volumes inside extended partition.

Their booting must be initiated (normally) from a primary active, but there is NO need WHATSOEVER to install to primary and then clone it somewhere else!

I never claimed there was a "NEED" for copying/cloning to a logical partition. I just mentioned it as a possibility because I know it works, I have done it.

If you are not familiar with XP, or the way it boots or installs:

Simply DO NOT talk about it :whistle: , (or, better, GET familiar with it ;))

I speak from my own experiences and things that I DO know. If I don't know, I state clearly that I am not certain (AFAIK), or that I may be wrong.

I have tried to help the OP based on my own multibooting experience. If I have stated something incorrect without noting my degree of certainty, then please correct me.

I am reminded of something you said to me before:

All I do is trying to see if I can help, but I will do it with my methods and at my own pace, take it or leave it

:hello:

Edited by LoneCrusader
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notwithstanding the "AFAIK", this is a bestiality :realmad: .

Now, jaclaz, that was really uncalled for. I know Italians are intense (from experience, as I'm from Italian stock), but I do think you could have said it more respectfully, even so.

Let's please tone it down, OK?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LoneCrusader

No intention whatever to attack you, and I do understand that you are in perfect good faith trying to help the OP. :)

But it's the second time in this very thread that you post inaccurate information, that may confuse OP (or later readers of the thread).

I mean, with the AFAIK or "in my experience", one can post almost everything, just imagine this sentence said in 1800, in perfect good faith:

AFAIK, anything heavier than air cannot fly.

It is perfectly right and a consequence of both direct experience of the author AND of commonly available knowledge at the time.

The same sentence said in 1900, is still perfectly valid.

The same sentence said in 1905, again in perfect good faith, keeps it's validity as "direct experience" only.

Said in 1920 it would have sounded absurd.

Since the good ol' NT, it is the standard way to dual boot between Dos/9x and NT to have the NT on a logical volume:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/243896/en-us

Now, jaclaz, that was really uncalled for. I know Italians are intense (from experience, as I'm from Italian stock), but I do think you could have said it more respectfully, even so.

Let's please tone it down, OK?

Sure. :)

I am sorry, I was trying to be funny, and I evidently completely failed to. :(

My apologies to all :blushing: , if feathers were ruffled, it wasn't my intention.

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I mean, with the AFAIK or "in my experience", one can post almost everything, just imagine this sentence said in 1800, in perfect good faith:
AFAIK, anything heavier than air cannot fly.
I tend to express myself in a more hedged way, similar to an investment banker who makes an earnings forecast of a company and who does not want to risk getting sued. In this sense I would not have nailed down myself that much, my style would rather be:

"AFAIK, it may be possible that anything heavier than air may not be able to fly" ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"AFAIK, it may be possible that anything heavier than air may not be able to fly" ;)

I may completely agree with you, or, better, I may be not in total disagreement with you. :)

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you jaclaz. I was confused (again), because I know I did read somewhere, I believe it was on Microsost's web site about duel-booting, that XP could be installed into a logical volume as long as there was a primary/active partition on the same hard drive. After reading the other posting about it HAD to be installed on a primary partition, I was doubting what I had read, and was going to go searching for that article again, to make sure, this is what Microsoft stated.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was confused (again)....

Ok, now that you are not anymore confused :), let's get back to business. ;)

It seems to me like your original post misses the detail on how the first disk is actually partitioned (besides the first Active Primary what kind of partitions are the rest?)

However, for the original problem it doesn't matter, you are correct, fifth partition on first hard disk is "found" and assigned the G:\ letter BECAUSE it is formatted as FAT32 (i.e. a filesystem that Windows 98 recognizes natively) as soon as you re-format it to NTFS (or Ext2 or whatever other filesystem NOT recognized by Win 98) all subsequent drive letters will be shifted by one, i.e., as rloew already posted:

(Drive 0) ---------------------------------------------- (Drive 1) is extended partition with 4 volumes.

C:\ primary/Active win98se 35gb ------------- H:\ G:\ programs installed 10gb

D:\ programs installed 33gb -------------------- I:\ H:\ programs installed 10gb

E:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- J:\ I:\ programs installed 9gb

F:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- K:\ J:\ programs installed 9gb

G:\ empty 105gb

So, the problem right now is NOT the letters that XP will assign (XP has internally support for static letter assignments during setup that can override the default letter atttribution AND post install static letter assignment - but both these features WON'T be needed in your specific case, as we can say that drive lettering in XP - including the NTFS partition - will be the same as it was on Windows 98 with the FAT32 one), but rather the way to make Windows 98 "keep" the current drive letter assignment.

AFAIK, the only solution is the use of Letter Assigner (link already given).

Alternatively, you need to either follow the suggestion by rloew (create an additional tiny FAT16 - or even FAT12 - partition to "hook the letter "G:\" under Win98 as last partition on first disk) or live with the fact that you will have to either re-install programs on the second disk or change their settings in all related .ini files and in the Registry of the Win98 install.

The smallest partition you can create (whilst being respectful of CHS geometry) is a 1x255x63x512=8,225,280 i.e. roughly 8 Mb.

If you are allright with this, go ahead, but remember that XP will see "G:\" as 105 Gb, and Win98 will see "G:\" as 8 Mb (you can remove in XP the drive letter for the smallish FAT partition).

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again jaclaz. I was actually going to repartition the G volume into 2 partitions, like was suggested, making the G volume 1gb and the rest of the 104gb partition H. Then using the XP pro cd to install the NTFS file system to H. Then install XP onto the NTFS volume, which win98 won't see, thus my second hard drive will remain the same for win98. I know before I am able to install the NTFS system, my second drive letters will change, once I make the G volume into 2 partitions. Again thank you

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again jaclaz. I was actually going to repartition the G volume into 2 partitions, like was suggested, making the G volume 1gb and the rest of the 104gb partition H. Then using the XP pro cd to install the NTFS file system to H. Then install XP onto the NTFS volume, which win98 won't see, thus my second hard drive will remain the same for win98. I know before I am able to install the NTFS system, my second drive letters will change, once I make the G volume into 2 partitions. Again thank you

Well, this way your later drive letters will shift in XP.

I would try making the Fat partition after the volume for XP and UNmap it in XP.

This way the driveletters on second drive will remain the same.

OR, do not create the partition if not after having installed XP. (same result, as you can re-map in XP the drive letters of the volumes on second drive).

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want to install XP into my G volume and make it NTFS, because of large video files I want to download to it.
If you installed WinXP to the G: FAT32 partition, you probably don't have to worry about your drive letters. Simply split the 105GB partition into e.g. an 80 GB FAT32 partition and a 25GB NTFS partition for huge data files. WinXP installed under FAT32 can handle huge files on the NTFS partition.

I prefer WinXP under FAT32. But I have a more complicated setup, with 2 instances of WinXP installed, one on a FAT32 partition, the other on an NTFS partition. By having 2 instances of WinXP, I can easily delete and restore the other WinXP by simply extracting a backup .rar file.

BTW, I am using System Commander, like LoneCrusader, and am quite happy with it; jaclaz prefers another boot manager.

P.S.: I am not sure whether splitting the 105GB partition will work, because of the limitation of 4 primary partitions per HDD. I had assumed C: was primary and D-G were logical.

Edited by Multibooter
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it's the second time in this very thread that you post inaccurate information, that may confuse OP (or later readers of the thread).

:}

I actually hate to ask this, because I do not consider it worth arguing about, especially since no one appears to be interested in using my method. But for my own information, and to eliminate any possibility of confusion, what specifically have I stated that was incorrect (and things not done the "Microsoft way" are not de facto "incorrect"), and what are the workarounds for said issues?

I mean, with the AFAIK or "in my experience", one can post almost everything, just imagine this sentence said in 1800, in perfect good faith:

AFAIK, anything heavier than air cannot fly.

It is perfectly right and a consequence of both direct experience of the author AND of commonly available knowledge at the time.

Technically no, because birds are heavier than air, and they were flying in 1800. :lol:

Since the good ol' NT, it is the standard way to dual boot between Dos/9x and NT to have the NT on a logical volume:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/243896/en-us

...Microsost's web site about duel-booting...

...this is what Microsoft stated.

Really that is what this whole discussion comes down to. Do you choose to dual/multi-boot the "Microsoft" way, or the "non-Microsoft" way. (This could also be extended to include partitioning methods.)

I would choose the "non-Microsoft" way, first time, every time. However, I seem to be alone in this, at least on this forum.

@mntview64

Best of luck in your endeavor. :)

Edited by LoneCrusader
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would choose the "non-Microsoft" way, first time, every time. However, I seem to be alone in this, at least on this forum.

Although not always, I do prefer doing things the "non-Microsoft" way in many instances, so you're not really alone in this forum. :yes:

For instance, I set up my dual-boot machine by installing XP after 98SE, and not the other way around (which is recommended by MS). Moreover, I use GRUB4DOS, initiated from real DOS to switch between the systems, which, BTW, are in the 1st primary partitions of separate HDDs, one booting directly to XP if set as the 1st boot device in BIOS, and the other booting to 98SE or GRUB4DOS (selected via CONFIG.SYS) if set as the 1st boot device in BIOS (which is my default). When GRUB4DOS is selected in this latter partition, it first switches hd0 with hd1 and, then, chainloads the boot sector of the XP partition, from which XP boots normally. This has the advantage that no file from 98SE is present or needed in the XP partition, and vice-versa. This is definitely one "non-Microsoft" way, and works very well. Moreover, the system which has booted is always in C: and the dormant one is in D:. All the other drive letters are the same, regardless of which OS has booted, because I set the drive letters of all other partitions or devices in XP to be the same as the one DOS/98SE assigns, using the static letter assignment facility that XP offers to do it (so this part is done in the MS way). All partitions are FAT-32, and are accessible from both OSes. And even if one of the HDDs suddenly dies, the other will still boot.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.