hi,

i tried to use editbini but i couldnt do it because i am now using
fat partitions and editbini is only useful for ntfs partitions.
my system partitions "see" logical volumes where i dump backups,
downloads, etc. these volumes are fat partitions.

so i booted a floppy disk and edited boot.ini with edit.com - the
floppy is that generated by the installation of w98se and then the
copied xp worked fine.

before the edition of boot.ini i made control+p and then accessed the
rpm within xosl. it is necessary because i should look which is the
number of partition where xp is now copied.

it worked fine for the first hdd, but in the second one i had some
troubles.

after several unsuccesful trials where i combined all situations for
boot.ini, i tried so the following:

in xosl panel setup i unchecked the fix drive fat number box and
checked the swap drive box. it worked very good for primaries and
logicals xp.

i tried it for 4 xp in first hdd and in the second one too and they
worked fine.

i tk you everybody
bes regards.

alberto

Hmm, er, well, you see I've got the following problem:

 I recently installed Mandrakelinux with grub and installed the way you describe below. Then I decided to play around with SuSE Linux instead, which I installed over Mandraklinux, again with grub.

However I absentmindedly managed to not properly read the location proposed by SuSE Linux and installed grub at the disk root instead of the SuSE partition root and as a result I can now no longer boot XP.

Is there a way to restore this, without having to reinstall XP (not really a problem) and all the bloody applications, codecs etc. etc. (the REAL problem!!)?

 Thanks

eMiLe

<feeling very sheepish>

On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:44:06 -0000, rustyjames_2000 wrote:
> when installing linux, you must opt to place the bootloader (lilo,
> grub) at the root of the individual installation partition and not
> the disk root.

Hey Guys and Gals,

I installed XOSL on my system with the following OSes: MSDOS6.22,
Windows XP, SuSE Linux 9.1 pro.  When I booted up to dos everything
loaded, but I couldn't input to the system.  It did not recognize
anything from my keyboard at all.  When I booted to XP, it started
to load xp but froze before the logon screen came up.  I could move
the mouse, but no response at all from my keyboard.  I'm not sure
what would have happened with linux because I didn't get it
installed right.  Anyway, I read other posts about keyboard errors,
but I'm not sure if they apply to me.  I don't get a #4 at the
prompt, and I read German, but I'd prefer not to install a german
version of XOSL because if someone else logs on to my system they
may have a problem.

Anyway, right now I've set up my system with the above operating
systems and 2003 server and I'm running everything through the NT
loader because I didn't want to use the linux boot loader.  I'd
really like to use XOSL because that's what my school is using, but
if there's no fix for the problem, I don't know what next.

Dell Inspiron 5150, P4 3.06 HT, 512MB, 1300 TrueMobile mPCI

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, ": :: ::: tim ferguson" <music@e...>
wrote:
> warning : i tried this #4 method with my second copy of XP
> this weekend  ..got stuck in an endless loop when trying
> to start up ..i couldn't even boot in safe mode ..ended up
> reinstalling... .. .
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dan Goodell" <dg1261@c...>
> To: <xosl@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 7:22 PM
> Subject: [xosl] Re: hiding win xp from another win xp
>
> : So to answer your question, you only need one "fdisk /mbr" between
> : the time you create the DI image and the first time the restored
> : clone is booted.
> :
> : Note that you do not need the Kawecki trick if you use the tip in
> : www.goodells.net/multiboot/notes.htm#04.  That tip erases the
> : partition signatures directly from XP's registry *before* making
> : the DI image.
> :


Hi,

I Didn't check the messages for a couple of days, so I got your
explanations and hints first today. Thanks!


--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "novoasigma" <asigma@b...> wrote:
> i tried it for 4 xp in first hdd and in the second one too and they
> worked fine.


Alberto, your success with XPs on the second HDD is very interesting
(I understand you have all the bootable partitions in FAT). Till now
I have tried to boot Win2K (NTFS) on HDD1 with no success, thus I
just have not tried with XP yet. However, it seem that it works
rather with FAT instead with NTFS on the second HDD. I wonder why?

Regards,
Julian

At 2004-09-03 13:12, you wrote:
>Hmm, er, well, you see I've got the following problem:
>
>  I recently installed Mandrakelinux with grub and installed the way you
> describe below. Then I decided to play around with SuSE Linux instead,
> which I installed over Mandraklinux, again with grub.
>
>However I absentmindedly managed to not properly read the location
>proposed by SuSE Linux and installed grub at the disk root instead of the
>SuSE partition root and as a result I can now no longer boot XP.
>
>Is there a way to restore this, without having to reinstall XP (not really
>a problem) and all the bloody applications, codecs etc. etc. (the REAL
>problem!!)?


I've never worked with Linux, but I'd think you would only have to
re-install or restore XOSL.



Bob Coleman
rcoleman@...

> At 2004-09-03 13:12, you wrote:
> >Hmm, er, well, you see I've got the following problem:
> >
> >  I recently installed Mandrakelinux with grub and installed the way you
> > describe below. Then I decided to play around with SuSE Linux instead,
> > which I installed over Mandraklinux, again with grub.
> >
> >However I absentmindedly managed to not properly read the location
> >proposed by SuSE Linux and installed grub at the disk root instead of the
> >SuSE partition root and as a result I can now no longer boot XP.
> >
> >Is there a way to restore this, without having to reinstall XP (not really
> >a problem) and all the bloody applications, codecs etc. etc. (the REAL
> >problem!!)?
>
>
> I've never worked with Linux, but I'd think you would only have to
> re-install or restore XOSL.

If you do that in its simplest form you will lose SuSE. You need to boot
into SuSE and use the boot configuration tool to change where GRUB is
installed from the root of the drive to one of the linux partitions. Once
you have done this (I think it's quite easy to do, at least it was with
LILO so GRUB should be even easier), you should then be able to restore
XOSL.

Hope this helps.

Best Regards
John McCabe <john@...>

I've been wanting to do a Win95-WinXP windows multiboot system for a
while.  I've got two hard drives, a copy of XOSL, and a mean streak.
I've countless times to do this, but always seem to run into a problem
that I can't figure out.

Today's problem:  After installing XOSL, WinXP no longer fully boots

So I take the first hard drive, partition it into three partitions.
#1: Windows 2000, #2: XOSL, and #3: WinXP.  I install Win2k, no
problems.  I install WinXP, no problems.  I install XOSL, and
suddenly, WinXP wants to boot, but when it gets to the point just
before the normal user logon, it stops.  Small XP logo, mouse works,
but doesn't boot any farther.  Win2k boots fine.  Any ideas?

-=Zzed=-

Hi,

I found some interesting previous discussions on the
subject "Win2000/XP on Slave Disk" and got the point with "SWAP
DISC". Genius trick! Now I finally can boot Win2K and WinXP on my
second disk. But nothing is perfect: although I can boot all 7
partitions on HDD0 and the 3 primary partitions on HDD1, but not the
logical partitions on HDD1. (Since this problem is more concerning
the subject "Win2000/XP on Slave Disk", I am posting the details of
my problems under this subject.)

Thanks for all the hints.

Best regards,
Julian

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "Orlando Dancourt" <scanray1@y...> wrote:
> Fritznlang:
>
> When you install the other HD like master and you install him the
XOSL, marks the option " SWAP DISC ". (The xosl assigns the HD slave
the hexadecimal 80H that it is what the Bios assigns to the HD
master.) Your HD slave becomes This way master. I have it this way
and it works very well.
>
>
Hi,

I am glad to find the postings about this subject because I have just
add a new disk to my PC. Thanks the hints, now I can boot my new disk
as HDD0 and using "SWAP DISC" to boot my old disk (with Win2K) as
HDD1. However, I encounter the following problems:

It is ok to boot independently all the 7 partitions on HDD0 and the 3
primary partitions on HDD1 by using "SWAP DISC". But when I try to
boot the 2 logical partitions on my HDD1 (using "SWAP DISC"), it
always ends up in an endless loops between the mask requesting for
pressing "Ctrl, Alt and Del" and the "log-in" window (for entering
pass words). Before setting this disk to "slave", I could boot all
primary and logical partitions on it – the only change I made is that
I have de-installed XOSL in the first partition and set the disk now
as slave.

My PC configuration:
- new HDD0: 3 primary partitions (Win98SE, Win2K and Win XP) and 4
logical partitions (W2Ks and Win XPs)
- new HDD1 (old HDD0):
Part 1 (primary):    Win98SE    (3004.3 MB)
Part 2 (primary):    Win2K      (5506.7 MB)
Part 3 (primary):    Win2K      (5506.7 MB)
Part 4 (logical):    Win2K      (5506.6 MB)
Part 5 (logical):    Win2K      (10001.4 MB)

Anyone have similar experiences or knows solutions for this problem?

Regards,
Julian

In my environment I have written a custom boot sector on a CD that
examines the partition table of the MBR on the first hard disk and
locates and loads the boot record of the active partition.  I have 2
primary partitions and am able to selectively boot the OS on either
partition.  The problem I have is booting an OS on a second physical
drive.

I can locate the boot record on the second drive and successfully
load and execute the correct boot record but beyond that the OS that
is on the corresponding partition of the first HDD loads instead.

I am utilizing several hidden sectors and using a boot manager is not
an option.  I joined this group on the recommendation of a guy from
Microsoft as a possible source to find out how XOSL does it.

So, the question is what do I have to change in order to boot an OS
on an active primary partition on the second hard drive?

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "evanrhicks" <evanrhicks@y...> wrote:
> In my environment I have written a custom boot sector on a CD that
> examines the partition table of the MBR on the first hard disk and
> locates and loads the boot record of the active partition.  I have
2
> primary partitions and am able to selectively boot the OS on either
> partition.  The problem I have is booting an OS on a second
physical
> drive.
>
> I can locate the boot record on the second drive and successfully
> load and execute the correct boot record but beyond that the OS
that
> is on the corresponding partition of the first HDD loads instead.
>
> I am utilizing several hidden sectors and using a boot manager is
not
> an option.  I joined this group on the recommendation of a guy from
> Microsoft as a possible source to find out how XOSL does it.
>
> So, the question is what do I have to change in order to boot an OS
> on an active primary partition on the second hard drive?

-------------------
Here is an update on this:
After changing the drive designator in the boot record at offset 40h
for Win32 (Win98ME) the initial splash screen appears and then error
messages indicating OS loader files could not be found.

The same problem occurred when I tried booting DOS7 on another
partition on the second hard drive.

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "jchliu001" <Julian.Liu@t...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I found some interesting previous discussions on the
> subject "Win2000/XP on Slave Disk" and got the point with "SWAP
> DISC". Genius trick! Now I finally can boot Win2K and WinXP on my
> second disk. But nothing is perfect: although I can boot all 7
> partitions on HDD0 and the 3 primary partitions on HDD1, but not
the
> logical partitions on HDD1. (Since this problem is more concerning
> the subject "Win2000/XP on Slave Disk", I am posting the details of
> my problems under this subject.)
>
> Thanks for all the hints.
>
> Best regards,
> Julian

hi,
both my hdds are ide and i reached to boot xp from logicals at hdd1
using that trick.
you must be careful in counting the exact position of the logical
partition where xp is in. eg, if you have three primaries and your xp
is in the fourth logical after them you should assign partition 7 in
boot.ini file, before booting, using a editor like edit.com (found in
w98 diskette instalation). all other parameters of boot.ini file
should be filled with zero.
for my situation it worked.

regards,
alberto

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "jchliu001" <Julian.Liu@t...> wrote:
> --- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "Orlando Dancourt" <scanray1@y...>
wrote:
> > Fritznlang:
> >
> > When you install the other HD like master and you install him the
> XOSL, marks the option " SWAP DISC ". (The xosl assigns the HD
slave
> the hexadecimal 80H that it is what the Bios assigns to the HD
> master.) Your HD slave becomes This way master. I have it this way
> and it works very well.
> >
> >
> Hi,
>
> I am glad to find the postings about this subject because I have
just
> add a new disk to my PC. Thanks the hints, now I can boot my new
disk
> as HDD0 and using "SWAP DISC" to boot my old disk (with Win2K) as
> HDD1. However, I encounter the following problems:
>
> It is ok to boot independently all the 7 partitions on HDD0 and the
3
> primary partitions on HDD1 by using "SWAP DISC". But when I try to
> boot the 2 logical partitions on my HDD1 (using "SWAP DISC"), it
> always ends up in an endless loops between the mask requesting for
> pressing "Ctrl, Alt and Del" and the "log-in" window (for entering
> pass words). Before setting this disk to "slave", I could boot all
> primary and logical partitions on it – the only change I made is
that
> I have de-installed XOSL in the first partition and set the disk
now
> as slave.
>
> My PC configuration:
> - new HDD0: 3 primary partitions (Win98SE, Win2K and Win XP) and 4
> logical partitions (W2Ks and Win XPs)
> - new HDD1 (old HDD0):
> Part 1 (primary):    Win98SE    (3004.3 MB)
> Part 2 (primary):    Win2K      (5506.7 MB)
> Part 3 (primary):    Win2K      (5506.7 MB)
> Part 4 (logical):    Win2K      (5506.6 MB)
> Part 5 (logical):    Win2K      (10001.4 MB)
>
> Anyone have similar experiences or knows solutions for this problem?
>
> Regards,
> Julian

How do you make this swap assignment without using the boot manager?
I am using the hidden sectors for other data and do not have room for
it.  I am in a fully automated system.  I have custom code that loads
the boot sector and would like to make the drive swap before
transferring control to the boot sector.

Thanks,
Evan

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "evanrhicks" <evanrhicks@y...> wrote:
>
> How do you make this swap assignment without using the boot
manager?
> I am using the hidden sectors for other data and do not have room
for
> it.  I am in a fully automated system.  I have custom code that
loads
> the boot sector and would like to make the drive swap before
> transferring control to the boot sector.
>
> Thanks,
> Evan

I hope that I have understood your question correctly. First, do you
mean HDD1 for the 2nd physical drive? (Usually the 1st physical drive
is HDD0 and the 2nd HDD1).

I use XOSL because it is powerful and easy in handling. Actually,
XOSL is the boot manager which is installed in partition 1 (Win98SE)
on my HDD0. The "swap drives" is one of the setup-options of XOSL.
For every individual partitions (on HDD0 and HDD1) to be booted, I
have defined correspondingly the partition-hidings and checked the
option "swap drives" for HDD1. Once this is set, I only have to
select the partitions desired for booting each time XOSL boots up
(after starting the PC), that's all. This way, I don't have to bother
about any details of the boot sectors or transferring controls, XOSL
takes care of it automatically (except the logical partitions – see
www.goodells.net/multiboot; see also postings between 3770 to 3780
concerning "Win2000/XP on Slave Disk")

However, the only problem I encounter on HDD1 is: although the 3
primaries boot ok, but the logicals not. Every time I boot theses two
logicals (with swap drives) it boots up the Win2K so far that I can
enter the password, but then it comes back to the mask again
requesting for pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del". If I do this and then
enter the password once more, it comes back to the same mask
requesting for pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del" again, and again – an
endless loop without going any further.

Regards,
Julian

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "novoasigma" <asigma@b...> wrote:
>
> hi,
> both my hdds are ide and i reached to boot xp from logicals at hdd1
> using that trick.
> you must be careful in counting the exact position of the logical
> partition where xp is in. eg, if you have three primaries and your
xp
> is in the fourth logical after them you should assign partition 7
in
> boot.ini file, before booting, using a editor like edit.com (found
in
> w98 diskette instalation). all other parameters of boot.ini file
> should be filled with zero.
> for my situation it worked.
>
> regards,
> alberto

Hi,

Both of my disks are also IDE and I have actually done the same way
as you described, though I used editbini.exe for changing the
partition numbers in the boot.ini files. My partitions and the
corresponding boot.ini files are set up as follows:

- HDD0:
    Part 1 (primary): Win98SE with XOSL installed (3004.3 MB)
    Part 2 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
    Part 3 (primary): WinXP (5506.7 MB)
    Part 4 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
    Part 5 (logical): WinXP (10001.4 MB)
    Part 6 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
    Part 7 (logical): WinXP (10001.4 MB)

- HDD1 (I boot all the partitions on this disk with "swap drives"):
    Part 1 (primary): Win98SE (3004.3 MB)
    Part 2 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
    Part 3 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
    Part 4 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
    Part 5 (logical): Win2K (10001.4 MB)

The HDD1 was used to be my old HDD0 (before the new HDD0 was
installed), and it worked perfectly before in booting all the
primaries and logicals on this disk. The only things I changed on
this disk is that I have de-installed XOSL, put the jumper as slave
and than adjusted the XOSL-setup correspondingly for "hide" and "swap
drives".

The problem I encounter on HDD1 now is: although the 3 primaries boot
ok, but the logicals not. Every time I boot theses two logicals (with
swap drives) it boot up the Win2K so far that I can enter the
password, but then it comes back to the mask again requesting for
pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del". If I do this and then enter the password
once more, it comes back to the same mask requesting for
pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del" again; and then the whole thing again –
an endless loop without going any further.

I don't know what is wrong, may be it is becuase of the size of the
partitions? Or may be I should not have de-installed XOSL on this
disk. Do you have kept XOSL installed on HDD1? How big are the
partitions on your HDD1?

Regards,
Julian

>
> Hi,
>
> Both of my disks are also IDE and I have actually done the same way
> as you described, though I used editbini.exe for changing the
> partition numbers in the boot.ini files. My partitions and the
> corresponding boot.ini files are set up as follows:
>
> - HDD0:
>    Part 1 (primary): Win98SE with XOSL installed (3004.3 MB)
>    Part 2 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
>    Part 3 (primary): WinXP (5506.7 MB)
>    Part 4 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
>    Part 5 (logical): WinXP (10001.4 MB)
>    Part 6 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
>    Part 7 (logical): WinXP (10001.4 MB)
>
> - HDD1 (I boot all the partitions on this disk with "swap drives"):
>    Part 1 (primary): Win98SE (3004.3 MB)
>    Part 2 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
>    Part 3 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
>    Part 4 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
>    Part 5 (logical): Win2K (10001.4 MB)
>
> The HDD1 was used to be my old HDD0 (before the new HDD0 was
> installed), and it worked perfectly before in booting all the
> primaries and logicals on this disk. The only things I changed on
> this disk is that I have de-installed XOSL, put the jumper as slave
> and than adjusted the XOSL-setup correspondingly for "hide"
and "swap
> drives".
>
> The problem I encounter on HDD1 now is: although the 3 primaries
boot
> ok, but the logicals not. Every time I boot theses two logicals
(with
> swap drives) it boot up the Win2K so far that I can enter the
> password, but then it comes back to the mask again requesting for
> pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del". If I do this and then enter the
password
> once more, it comes back to the same mask requesting for
> pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del" again; and then the whole thing again –
> an endless loop without going any further.
>
> I don't know what is wrong, may be it is becuase of the size of the
> partitions? Or may be I should not have de-installed XOSL on this
> disk. Do you have kept XOSL installed on HDD1? How big are the
> partitions on your HDD1?
>
> Regards,
> Julian


hi,
obbeying the safe mode i allways apply on those situations i learnt
that is more interesting and secure to install xosl partition in hdd1
instead do that in hdd0, though mbr is in hdd0.
recently i changed hdd0 by another one i had bought but the xosl
partition was placed in hdd1 and the things ran fine.
i dont know about w2k but referenced to xp have you unhidden
the "master" extendend partition ? (the one that comes before the
logical partitions in xosl setup).

that is it for while i can pass for you.

regards
alberto

novoasigma wrote:

>>Hi,
>>
>>Both of my disks are also IDE and I have actually done the same way
>>as you described, though I used editbini.exe for changing the
>>partition numbers in the boot.ini files. My partitions and the
>>corresponding boot.ini files are set up as follows:
>>
>>- HDD0:
>>   Part 1 (primary): Win98SE with XOSL installed (3004.3 MB)
>>   Part 2 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
>>   Part 3 (primary): WinXP (5506.7 MB)
>>   Part 4 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
>>   Part 5 (logical): WinXP (10001.4 MB)
>>   Part 6 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
>>   Part 7 (logical): WinXP (10001.4 MB)
>>
>>- HDD1 (I boot all the partitions on this disk with "swap drives"):
>>   Part 1 (primary): Win98SE (3004.3 MB)
>>   Part 2 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
>>   Part 3 (primary): Win2K (5506.7 MB)
>>   Part 4 (logical): Win2K (5506.6 MB)
>>   Part 5 (logical): Win2K (10001.4 MB)
>>
>>The HDD1 was used to be my old HDD0 (before the new HDD0 was
>>installed), and it worked perfectly before in booting all the
>>primaries and logicals on this disk. The only things I changed on
>>this disk is that I have de-installed XOSL, put the jumper as slave
>>and than adjusted the XOSL-setup correspondingly for "hide"
>>
>>
>and "swap
>
>
>>drives".
>>
>>The problem I encounter on HDD1 now is: although the 3 primaries
>>
>>
>boot
>
>
>>ok, but the logicals not. Every time I boot theses two logicals
>>
>>
>(with
>
>
>>swap drives) it boot up the Win2K so far that I can enter the
>>password, but then it comes back to the mask again requesting for
>>pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del". If I do this and then enter the
>>
>>
>password
>
>
>>once more, it comes back to the same mask requesting for
>>pushing "Ctrl, Alt and Del" again; and then the whole thing again –
>>an endless loop without going any further.
>>
>>I don't know what is wrong, may be it is becuase of the size of the
>>partitions? Or may be I should not have de-installed XOSL on this
>>disk. Do you have kept XOSL installed on HDD1? How big are the
>>partitions on your HDD1?
>>
>>Regards,
>>Julian
>>
>>hi,
>>obbeying the safe mode i allways apply on those situations i learnt
>>that is more interesting and secure to install xosl partition in hdd1
>>instead do that in hdd0, though mbr is in hdd0.
>>recently i changed hdd0 by another one i had bought but the xosl
>>partition was placed in hdd1 and the things ran fine.
>>i dont know about w2k but referenced to xp have you unhidden
>>the "master" extendend partition ? (the one that comes before the
>>logical partitions in xosl setup).
>>
>>that is it for while i can pass for you.
>>
>>regards
>>alberto
>>
>>

Hi,

When are you guys going to use correct terminology!

There's no such thing as a "MASTER EXTENDED PARTITION"
Each physical hard-disk can have a maximum of four PRIMARY partitions,
one of which on each disk can be an EXTENDED PARTITION! The EXTENDED
PARTITION is a *PRIMARY* PARTITION. Any partitions within it [them] is a
LOGICAL PARTITION!

You can have as many *logical* partitions as you want on each hard-disk
*inside* its extended partition, not limited to the letters of the
alphabet, although under Windows systems you can have problems depending
on how many other non-Windows-recognised partitions there are and what
their positioning in the extended partition is, relative to
Windows-recognised partitions. You can't allocate less than one cylinder
to each partition in the extended partition, same as you can't for a
primary partition, and they don't all have to be allocated a drive
letter simultaneously!

With post-NT versions of Windows you can use the system Disk Management
Tools to selectively allocate drive-letters to volumes[drives]. In other
word you can have many "inactive" partitions.

What I can't figure is WHY you many of you, particularly recently, want
to have multiple editions of the same set of windows OSes on multiple disks?
I can understand you having separate setups of the same OS for e.g.
Gaming/Business-oriented etc., but not the excessive number of different
editions of each - is that just because of the number of "please
re-install the OS" messages that get thrown at you by the Blue Screens,
in response to Windows screw-ups?

Why not learn *how* to partition the disks *properly* and keep the
OS/Applications/DATA all on separate partitions - none of you seem to
have any idea about using common Application partitions/DATA partitions
that can be used for *any* of the installed OSes.
with windows you are effectively limited to booting from a C: drive.

I have some [non-Windows/non-Linux-standalone-booting] disks that don't
have a C: drive at all - they might be booting directly from a Logical
K: drive as K:, and on which I can read-write every other bootable
partition or run programs from/network-share from the currently booted
partition on the LAN.

HTH

--
Regards,
Mike

Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
[ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments]
[Please use zipped versions of above]

--- Mike O'Connor <mikeoc@d...> wrote:
> When are you guys going to use correct terminology!
>
> There's no such thing as a "MASTER EXTENDED PARTITION"
>
> ... (snipped)...
>
> Why not learn *how* to partition the disks *properly*
> and keep the OS/Applications/DATA all on separate
> partitions - none of you seem to have any idea about
> using common Application partitions/DATA partitions
> that can be used for *any* of the installed OSes.

Not sure, but I don't think English is the first language of
everyone in this newsgroup.  And I had no trouble understanding what
Alberto was referring to by <quote>"master" extended
partition</quote>, and note he did put "master" inside quotation
marks.  While there may factually be only one extended partition,
many utilities - including the ubiquitous PartitionMagic - will show
several "extended partition" entries, one in each extended partition
table.  Add to this the fact that a lot of common folk regard
logical volumes in the (one and only) extended partition
as "extended partitions", and it seemed clear to me that Alberto was
trying to circumvent any confusion.

Your point about using separate data partitions is well taken,
though.  I don't see any data partitions in Julian's disk layout.
Maybe he didn't show everything, or maybe he has a reason for not
using them, but we won't know unless we ask him.  Which nobody has
done yet.

All,

I would like to run XOSL (Version 1.15) on my new Toshiba Tecra S1 (latest
BIOS revision 2.30) in order to boot WinXP, Debian Linux and Solaris 9 x86.

Unfortunately, I have found the keyboard to be completely dead from within
XOSL, although it generally works fine outside of XOSL. Also, XOSL itself
used to run fine on my previous Dell Latitude Notebook (using the same HDD
partition config).

I have also tried the two laptop workarounds available at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/files/other_binaries/, but without any
luck (they seem to address different types of problems, anyway).

So my question now is: Are there any known issues with accessing the
keyboard from othernotebooks as well?
From looking at the source code, to me (I'm no assembler freak at all), it
seems that XOSL is only using fairly standard calls to INT 16H (see
XOSL\Keyboard\key.asm).

Are there any known issues about Toshiba/Tecra S1 BIOSes? Is it possible
that there is any special init sequence/keyboard reset needed on the S1
before accessing the keyboard using INT 16H will work?

Unfortunately, I have found Toshiba support in Germany to be quite
uncooperative and unwilling to resolve my problem (general answer is:
"Sorry, but you are using unsupported software"), although my problem is
probably about the BIOS and not about XOSL itself, but would still care a
great deal to get my issue resolved.

Many thanks in advance & best regards from Germany,

Andreas

--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "Dan Goodell" <dg1261@c...> wrote:
> --- Mike O'Connor <mikeoc@d...> wrote:
>
> > > to install xosl partition in hdd1 instead do that in hdd0,
> > > though mbr is in hdd0.
> > >          ........................
> >
> > Why not learn *how* to partition the disks *properly*
> > and keep the OS/Applications/DATA all on separate
> > partitions - none of you seem to have any idea about
> > using common Application partitions/DATA partitions
> > that can be used for *any* of the installed OSes.
>
>
> Your point about using separate data partitions is well taken,
> though.  I don't see any data partitions in Julian's disk layout.
> Maybe he didn't show everything, or maybe he has a reason for not
> using them, but we won't know unless we ask him.  Which nobody has
> done yet.

Dan is right, I didn't mention my data partitions because they are
not the trouble makers in my case. As a matter of fact, I do
use "common Application data partition" since the Win95 days. At the
first place, it is my "D" and all of my OSs "share" this single "data
base" (of course, I have also other special data partitions).

Ok, Mike, you certainly wonder why someone would need so many OSs.
Well, at the first place, I am a person who tries and uses many
different applications. It always bothers me that after certain
installations (programs, driver updates, etc) or after a period of
applications the OSs start to get "fussy" or to get "lazy". I always
have one "clean" partition for each OS and I try to test those
installations only in designated "test-partitions". Only when I'm
sure that there is no problem, they would first come into my "clean"
partitions, from which I create the back-up images generations (with
Drive Image). To prevent the OSs to be overloaded with too many
applications, I "distribute" these installations in different OS test-
partitions. Besides, I also handle with video editing, and in order
to have the videos run "spotlessly" and "fluently", I have special
large OS partitions without any hardware and software ballast, but
mainly the video editors. Ok, of course, as we all know that there
are also the problems that certain applications run only in certain
OSs – this increases the number of partitions additionally. It might
be peculiar, but it is just for my special personal needs. Well, I
generally handle 7 hard disks (totally 670GB, incl. externals) and I
am pretty sure that all my partitions are proper.

Thanks, Alberto, for the hint. I will also take a trial to install
XOSL on HDD1, may be that is what is missing in my system.

Regards,
Julian

jchliu001 wrote:

>--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "Dan Goodell" <dg1261@c...> wrote:
>
>
>>--- Mike O'Connor <mikeoc@d...> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>to install xosl partition in hdd1 instead do that in hdd0,
>>>>though mbr is in hdd0.
>>>>         ........................
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Why not learn *how* to partition the disks *properly*
>>>and keep the OS/Applications/DATA all on separate
>>>partitions - none of you seem to have any idea about
>>>using common Application partitions/DATA partitions
>>>that can be used for *any* of the installed OSes.
>>>
>>>
>>Your point about using separate data partitions is well taken,
>>though.  I don't see any data partitions in Julian's disk layout.
>>Maybe he didn't show everything, or maybe he has a reason for not
>>using them, but we won't know unless we ask him.  Which nobody has
>>done yet.
>>
>>
>Dan is right, I didn't mention my data partitions because they are
>not the trouble makers in my case. As a matter of fact, I do
>use "common Application data partition" since the Win95 days. At the
>first place, it is my "D" and all of my OSs "share" this single "data
>base" (of course, I have also other special data partitions).
>
>Ok, Mike, you certainly wonder why someone would need so many OSs.
>Well, at the first place, I am a person who tries and uses many
>different applications. It always bothers me that after certain
>installations (programs, driver updates, etc) or after a period of
>applications the OSs start to get "fussy" or to get "lazy". I always
>have one "clean" partition for each OS and I try to test those
>installations only in designated "test-partitions". Only when I'm
>sure that there is no problem, they would first come into my "clean"
>partitions, from which I create the back-up images generations (with
>Drive Image). To prevent the OSs to be overloaded with too many
>applications, I "distribute" these installations in different OS test-
>partitions. Besides, I also handle with video editing, and in order
>to have the videos run "spotlessly" and "fluently", I have special
>large OS partitions without any hardware and software ballast, but
>mainly the video editors. Ok, of course, as we all know that there
>are also the problems that certain applications run only in certain
>OSs – this increases the number of partitions additionally. It might
>be peculiar, but it is just for my special personal needs. Well, I
>generally handle 7 hard disks (totally 670GB, incl. externals) and I
>am pretty sure that all my partitions are proper.
>
>Thanks, Alberto, for the hint. I will also take a trial to install
>XOSL on HDD1, may be that is what is missing in my system.
>
>Regards,
>Julian
>
>

Hi Julian [& Dan],
I much appreciate the explanation of the need -- I don't ever get that
problem of partitions getting /fuzzy/lazy/having to be reinstalled/
because my appications don't get embedded into the registry [except in
Windows (2000/98), which is only used about 1% of the time here, for
apps. only available with Windows drivers].

Sorry I didn't get back to Dan sooner because I had a small disaster on
my 80Gb drive [physically damaged previously from major [mains] power
failure] -- it's 80% of my entire disk storage, other drives are all
multi-boot-multi-OS, but small by current standards, and I'm in the
middle of resurrecting the third of three boot-partitions that got
affected by a hard-lock-up which necessiated a hard-power-down.

Must be nice to have that much storage available -- it's a bit hard on
Old Age Social Security Pension though!

All the best.

--
Regards,
Mike

Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
[ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments]
[Please use zipped versions of above]

>From: Mike O'Connor
>When are you guys going to use correct terminology! There's no such thing
>as a "MASTER EXTENDED PARTITION".

Doc Chiron butting in:
Agreed Mike! I can also see how the confusion can arise from usage of RPM.
Seeing that the Ranish 'Sector Usage List' (my term) displays the 2nd entry
in each EBR (Extended Partition Record) following each LOGICAL drive entry
may cause folks to refer to them as 'lessor' extended partitions, when all
they are, are pointers (aka links) to the next EBR within the Extended
Partition.

Mike>
Each physical hard-disk can have a maximum of four PRIMARY partitions, one
of which on each disk can be an EXTENDED PARTITION! The EXTENDED PARTITION
is a *PRIMARY* PARTITION.

Doc:
    The use of incorrect terms is partly a byproduct of IBM/Microsoft's
possible failure to define the terms early on, plus the fact that some users
pick up terminology with only a partial understanding of their relationship
to the system as a whole. Although even I am guilty of misusing terminology
on occasion, I do endeavor to avoid it whenever possible. There are many
references to partitions being PRIMARY, but in truth it is only the
partition table entries themselves that are PRIMARY. I believe some of this
confusion might dissipate somewhat if we begin calling the MBR's partition
table the PRIMARY partition table. Then it is easier to associate the
entries therein as PRIMARY. Does that seem fair? The logical extension of
that idea is that Extended Partition Records (EBRs) contain Extended
entries, consisting of an entry for a LOGICAL partition and maybe an entry
that is a link to the next EBR. BTW: If a LOGICAL partition is deleted, its
entry in the EBR is change to type 0x00. The partition's cylinder space is
not reclaimed, reused or overwritten until repurposed by tools such as FDISK
or PartitionMagic.

Mike, I'm guessing you mis-spoke, otherwise you are forgetting the way RPM's
'TEXT80x25' boot manager uses the non-standard approach to managing up to
about 30 Primary partitions by way of allowing most of them to be OFF-LINE
(inaccessible) during any one particular OS session, due to their failure to
be included in any linked partition table for that session.
    It *IS* correct to say that the PRIMARY (i.e. MBR) partition table is
limited to four entries, ALL of which are deemed PRIMARY solely by the fact
they are there. Also, since a fair number of group members ar into LINUX in
some form, it is prudent to recall that there is also the LINUX Extended
partition type (0x85) that can exist side-by-side in the PRIMARY partition
table with a DOS Extended partition (types 0x05 & 0x0F).

Mike>
You can't allocate less than one cylinder to each partition in the extended
partition, same as you can't for a primary partition, and they don't all
have to be allocated a drive letter simultaneously!

Doc:
Stated explicitly, although RPM will allow you to create partitions starting
and stopping on almost any sector you want, you will quickly find out that
partitions NOT created in a multiple of whole cylinders will incur the wrath
of some OS or utility program such that you either conform or suffer the
consequences.

Mike>
What I can't figure is WHY you many of you, particularly recently, want to
have multiple editions of the same set of windows OSes on multiple disks?

Doc:
From reading many postings to this forum, I have to say that the reasons are
manifold.
Some wish to set up separate partitions for different users of the computer,
keeping them isolated from one another.
Some wish to have multiple platforms for the purpose of software
development, where the have different combinations of software other than
the software being developed, for the purpose of looking for
incompatibilities.
Some for the reasons you stated, such as gaming, software development,
financial programs, or just  internet surfing (while limiting their system's
exposure to malware).

Mike>
Why not learn *how* to partition the disks *properly* and keep the
OS/Applications/DATA all on separate partitions - none of you seem to have
any idea about using common Application partitions/DATA partitions that can
be used for *any* of the installed OSes. with windows you are effectively
limited to booting from a C: drive.

Doc:
I've listend to that argument for separate partitions for OS/OS/OS/OS/Ommon
Apps/Common Data, on the grounds that if the OS or Apps partition is
corrupted that the other partitions will be okay (ie easily restored).
Part of the difficulty with that is various programs customizations don't
always save their changes to .INI or .CFG files in the program's directory
or subdirectories. Often they are saved in the REGISTRY (in the case of
Windows OSes). Since each partition has its own REGISTRY, keeping track of
the customizations for each partition could become a nightmare! Plus, how do
you choose which partition you will install the Apps from? That's right, you
have to install them from within each booted OS in order to create the
required REGISTRY entries while overwriting the previously installed files
from the previously booted OS. Sure you save space, but at what price?
Surely the cost of HDD capacity has dropped to the point where you don't
need to share a common Apps directory.

Doc Chiron out.

_________________________________________________________________
Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and
more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx

All,

after some further investigations, I have SOLVED this issue (at least for my
Toshiba Tecra S1 BIOS)!

Also, it is quite likely that the solution that I found will also work for
other keyboard-related problems, e.g. keyboard not responding from the DOS
command line after having left XOSL.

The root cause for the problem is infamous the "A20 gate" used for access to
"extended memory" which used to be switched on and off using calls to the
keyboard controller, some kind of horrible PC legacy from the early days. (I
have never written PC assembler code myself before, but found a truly
interesting compilation of several "A20" issues can be found at
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/kbd/A20.html.)

It looks like the code to handle the A20 gate included with XOSL 1.15
xosl\misc\a20line.asm (marked to be "taken from Ranish Partition Manager
2.38 Beta 1.9") does not work any more for recent BIOS versions, in
particular notebook BIOSes.

I have moved to using new BIOS INT15h AX=240x calls for implementing A20
switching, as can be seen from the attached modified a20line.asm, and using
this new version in fact fixes all keyboard issues for me! :-)))

Besides the changed source file, I've also attached a ZIP file which
contains the compiled Xoslimg*.xxf files, so in the binary install of plain
XOSL 1.15, simply replace the old versions by the new versions from the ZIP
file.

Please be aware that in order for the modified version to work, the BIOS
must implement the "new" BIOS INT 15h AX=240x calls for implementing A20
switching (should be the case for most recent BIOSes, anyway), as I have not
included any error handling in case the BIOS does not support the new calls.

Best regards from Germany,

Andreas

----- Original Message -----
From: Andreas Loew
To: xosl@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: [xosl] Toshiba Tecra S1: Keyboard dead within XOSL GUI


All,

I would like to run XOSL (Version 1.15) on my new Toshiba Tecra S1 (latest
BIOS revision 2.30) in order to boot WinXP, Debian Linux and Solaris 9 x86.

Unfortunately, I have found the keyboard to be completely dead from within
XOSL, although it generally works fine outside of XOSL. Also, XOSL itself
used to run fine on my previous Dell Latitude Notebook (using the same HDD
partition config).

I have also tried the two laptop workarounds available at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/files/other_binaries/, but without any
luck (they seem to address different types of problems, anyway).

So my question now is: Are there any known issues with accessing the
keyboard from othernotebooks as well?
>From looking at the source code, to me (I'm no assembler freak at all), it
seems that XOSL is only using fairly standard calls to INT 16H (see
XOSL\Keyboard\key.asm).

Are there any known issues about Toshiba/Tecra S1 BIOSes? Is it possible
that there is any special init sequence/keyboard reset needed on the S1
before accessing the keyboard using INT 16H will work?

Unfortunately, I have found Toshiba support in Germany to be quite
uncooperative and unwilling to resolve my problem (general answer is:
"Sorry, but you are using unsupported software"), although my problem is
probably about the BIOS and not about XOSL itself, but would still care a
great deal to get my issue resolved.

Many thanks in advance & best regards from Germany,

Andreas



To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or
use the web interface at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT






Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

All,

after some further investigations, I have SOLVED this issue (at least for my
Toshiba Tecra S1 BIOS)!

Also, it is quite likely that the solution that I found will also work for
other keyboard-related problems, e.g. keyboard not responding from the DOS
command line after having left XOSL.

The root cause for the problem is infamous the "A20 gate" used for access to
"extended memory" which used to be switched on and off using calls to the
keyboard controller, some kind of horrible PC legacy from the early days. (I
have never written PC assembler code myself before, but found a truly
interesting compilation of several "A20" issues can be found at
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/kbd/A20.html.)

It looks like the code to handle the A20 gate included with XOSL 1.15
xosl\misc\a20line.asm (marked to be "taken from Ranish Partition Manager
2.38 Beta 1.9") does not work any more for recent BIOS versions, in
particular notebook BIOSes.

I have moved to using new BIOS INT15h AX=240x calls for implementing A20
switching, as can be seen from the attached modified a20line.asm, and using
this new version in fact fixes all keyboard issues for me! :-)))

Besides the changed source file, I've also attached a ZIP file which
contains the compiled Xoslimg*.xxf files, so in the binary install of plain
XOSL 1.15, simply replace the old versions by the new versions from the ZIP
file.

Please be aware that in order for the modified version to work, the BIOS
must implement the "new" BIOS INT 15h AX=240x calls for implementing A20
switching (should be the case for most recent BIOSes, anyway), as I have not
included any error handling in case the BIOS does not support the new calls.

Best regards from Germany,

Andreas

----- Original Message -----
From: Andreas Loew
To: xosl@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: [xosl] Toshiba Tecra S1: Keyboard dead within XOSL GUI


All,

I would like to run XOSL (Version 1.15) on my new Toshiba Tecra S1 (latest
BIOS revision 2.30) in order to boot WinXP, Debian Linux and Solaris 9 x86.

Unfortunately, I have found the keyboard to be completely dead from within
XOSL, although it generally works fine outside of XOSL. Also, XOSL itself
used to run fine on my previous Dell Latitude Notebook (using the same HDD
partition config).

I have also tried the two laptop workarounds available at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/files/other_binaries/, but without any
luck (they seem to address different types of problems, anyway).

So my question now is: Are there any known issues with accessing the
keyboard from othernotebooks as well?
>From looking at the source code, to me (I'm no assembler freak at all), it
seems that XOSL is only using fairly standard calls to INT 16H (see
XOSL\Keyboard\key.asm).

Are there any known issues about Toshiba/Tecra S1 BIOSes? Is it possible
that there is any special init sequence/keyboard reset needed on the S1
before accessing the keyboard using INT 16H will work?

Unfortunately, I have found Toshiba support in Germany to be quite
uncooperative and unwilling to resolve my problem (general answer is:
"Sorry, but you are using unsupported software"), although my problem is
probably about the BIOS and not about XOSL itself, but would still care a
great deal to get my issue resolved.

Many thanks in advance & best regards from Germany,

Andreas



To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or
use the web interface at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT






Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or use the web interface at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl




> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/octet-stream name=a20line.asm


> ATTACHMENT part 3 application/x-zip-compressed name=XOSLIMG.ZIP

----- Original Message -----

From: Douglas Fulcher

To: xosl@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 1:05 AM

Subject: Re: [xosl] SOLVED: Keyboard issues within XOSL GUI (BIOS/A20 problem)

Andreas,

 

Hey man, I'm good, but I'm not that good.  I've tried using the other fixes for the laptop keyboard problem and none of them are working.  I think your solution may work, but I have no idea how to implement it.  Is there somewhere I can go to get the new installation files that will implement the changes to be made, or is it something I will have to do manually?  I appreciate any help you can give. 

 

Doug

Andreas Loew <aloew@...> wrote:

All,

after some further investigations, I have SOLVED this issue (at least for my
Toshiba Tecra S1 BIOS)!

Also, it is quite likely that the solution that I found will also work for
other keyboard-related problems, e.g. keyboard not responding from the DOS
command line after having left XOSL.

The root cause for the problem is infamous the "A20 gate" used for access to
"extended memory" which used to be switched on and off using calls to the
keyboard controller, some kind of horrible PC legacy from the early days. (I
have never written PC assembler code myself before, but found a truly
interesting compilation of several "A20" issues can be found at
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/kbd/A20.html.)

It looks like the code to handle the A20 gate included with XOSL 1.15
xosl\misc\a20line.asm (marked to be "taken from Ranish Partition Manager
2.38 Beta 1.9") does not work any more for recent BIOS versions, in
particular notebook BIOSes.

I have moved to using new BIOS INT15h AX=240x calls for implementing A20
switching, as can be seen from the attached modified a20line.asm, and using
this new version in fact fixes all keyboard issues for me! :-)))

Besides the changed source file, I've also attached a ZIP file which
contains the compiled Xoslimg*.xxf files, so in the binary install of plain
XOSL 1.15, simply replace the old versions by the new versions from the ZIP
file.

Please be aware that in order for the modified version to work, the BIOS
must implement the "new" BIOS INT 15h AX=240x calls for implementing A20
switching (should be the case for most recent BIOSes, anyway), as I have not
included any error handling in case the BIOS does not support the new calls.

Best regards from Germany,

Andreas

----- Original Message -----
From: Andreas Loew
To: xosl@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: [xosl] Toshiba Tecra S1: Keyboard dead within XOSL GUI


All,

I would like to run XOSL (Version 1.15) on my new Toshiba Tecra S1 (latest
BIOS revision 2.30) in order to boot WinXP, Debian Linux and Solaris 9 x86.

Unfortunately, I have found the keyboard to be completely dead from within
XOSL, although it generally works fine outside of XOSL. Also, XOSL itself
used to run fine on my previous Dell Latitude Notebook (using the same HDD
partition config).

I have also tried the two laptop workarounds available at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/files/other_binaries/, but without any
luck (they seem to address different types of problems, anyway).

So my question now is: Are there any known issues with accessing the
keyboard from othernotebooks as well?
>From looking at the source code, to me (I'm no assembler freak at all), it
seems that XOSL is only using fairly standard calls to INT 16H (see
XOSL\Keyboard\key.asm).

Are there any known issues about Toshiba/Tecra S1 BIOSes? Is it possible
that there is any special init sequence/keyboard reset needed on the S1
before accessing the keyboard using INT 16H will work?

Unfortunately, I have found Toshiba support in Germany to be quite
uncooperative and unwilling to resolve my problem (general answer is:
"Sorry, but you are using unsupported software"), although my problem is
probably about the BIOS and not about XOSL itself, but would still care a
great deal to get my issue resolved.

Many thanks in advance & best regards from Germany,

Andreas



To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or
use the web interface at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT






Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or use the web interface at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl




> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/octet-stream name=a20line.asm


> ATTACHMENT part 3 application/x-zip-compressed name=XOSLIMG.ZIP

To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or use the web interface at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl

hi there,

andreas provided some new workaround for the hanging/freezing
keyboard on notebook/laptop computers, etc.:

please see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/files/other_binaries/
and report any results.

  best, philipp0000

> andreas provided some new workaround for the hanging/freezing
> keyboard on notebook/laptop computers, etc.:
>
> please see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/files/other_binaries/
> and report any results.

I'm able to access LaptopKeyboardFix_AndreasL directory and see ascii
files but I'm not able to download the zip file. I have tested others
directories and it works properly.

Boris

Nearly a month on since my original post I have finally found some time to a) deal with my XP boot issue and b) respond to your post!

My apologies for not responding any sooner. Any help offered is appreciated , regardless of whether it solves the reported problem or not, and I did not want to give the impression that I know where/who to write to when I've got a problem but then ungratefully run off with any solutions kindly offered by good people who are willing to spend some of their precious spare time solving strangers' problems.

Also thanks to Bob Coleman.

The problem I had wasn't getting XOSL to work again (the restore function took care of that effortlessly) but getting Windows XP to boot again. Changing the GRUB config didn't solve the issue nor did 'fixmbr' and 'fixboot' from the Recovery console or the Repair option in the Windows installation. Even a reinstall without formatting the XP partition did not let me boot XP again.

I ended up reformatting the partition prior to reinstalling XP and going through the hassle of reinstalling every single bloody application. The upside of it is though that I've now got a squeaky clean XP devoid of all the crappy codecs, drivers and other unnecessary stuff.

I have now installed all the basic applications I expect to have on a freshly installed XP and will  be using Ghost soon to create an image that will make life a lot easier when either XP decides to go tits up again (as it does from time to time; I don't know anyone who hasn't had XP running for more than a year without going going through at least one reinstall a year) or I screw things up again by not reading perfectly clear installation screens :-)

Thanks again for your attempts to help me.

eMiLe

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 23:24:52 +0100, John McCabe wrote:
>> At 2004-09-03 13:12, you wrote:
>>> Hmm, er, well, you see I've got the following problem:
>>>
>>> I recently installed Mandrakelinux with grub and installed the
>>> way you describe below. Then I decided to play around with SuSE
>>> Linux instead, which I installed over Mandraklinux, again with
>>> grub.
>>>
>>> However I absentmindedly managed to not properly read the
>>> location proposed by SuSE Linux and installed grub at the disk
>>> root instead of the SuSE partition root and as a result I can
>>> now no longer boot XP.
>>>
>>> Is there a way to restore this, without having to reinstall XP
>>> (not really a problem) and all the bloody applications, codecs
>>> etc. etc. (the REAL problem!!)?
>>
>>
>> I've never worked with Linux, but I'd think you would only have
>> to re-install or restore XOSL.
>>
>
> If you do that in its simplest form you will lose SuSE. You need to
> boot into SuSE and use the boot configuration tool to change where
> GRUB is installed from the root of the drive to one of the linux
> partitions. Once you have done this (I think it's quite easy to do,
> at least it was with LILO so GRUB should be even easier), you
> should then be able to restore XOSL.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Best Regards
> John McCabe <john@...>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
> ~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/EGnolB/TM -----------
> ---------------------------------------------------------~->
>
> To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:xosl-
> unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> or use the web interface at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xosl/
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: xosl-
> unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I understand that macintoshes Open Firmware is a very different
animal than PC BIOS, but I wish the website confirmed that XOSL is
unsuitable for macs.
  Perhaps x86 OpenDarwin can be booted on a HFS partition with XOSL,
but could xosl ever be made to multiboot a mac? Yaboot is the only
tool which multiboots current macs I beleive.

Hi Roger, could you send me the files XPART00... via email?

Address: jgugan@... (or jgugan@...)

Thanks in advance:
jozsef



--- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "rboomdoggy" <rboomdoggy@y...> wrote:
> Hi Alberto,
> I would be happy to send you the files but your e-mail address is
not
> shown completely and I can't seem to figure out how to attach a
file
> to this group message. Sorry. Roger
>
> --- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "novoasigma" <asigma@b...> wrote:
> > --- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "rboomdoggy" <rboomdoggy@y...> wrote:
> > > --- In xosl@yahoogroups.com, "robitailleh"
> <hubert.robitaille@f...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Is there a way to replace the version of RPM (2.38) which is
> > > > integrated in XOSL by the last version ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your comment.
> > > >
> > > >    Hubert
> > >
> > > Hi, I have also wanted to upgrade the RPM in XOSL. After
editing
> > > part.exe ver 2.44 to add a few bytes I split it with hjsplit
and
> > > renamed the resulting files XRPART00.XXF and XRPART01.XXF. Then
I
> > > replaced these files on my XOSL diskette. Upon reinstalling
XOSL
> > ctrl-
> > > P now launches RPM 2.44. I've played around with some free
space
> I
> > > have on my hard drive and it seems to work fine although I make
> no
> > > guarantees. There are other ways to boot RPM 2.44 from XOSL.
You
> > can
> > > set up an RPM boot manager partition and make it a boot item in
> > XOSL.
> > > Or if you had RPM's Boot Manager in your MBR before installing
> XOSL
> > > you can make Original MBR a boot item in XOSL. If you want the
> > > XRPART00.XXF and XRPART01.XXF files I'll email them to you.
> > >
> > >     Roger
> >
> > hi, Roger
> > if you might i would be pleased you sent me the XRPART00.XXF and
> > XRPART01.XXF files.
> > tks
> >
> > alberto
> > asigma@b...