Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!jkh From: jkh@violet.berkeley.edu (Jordan K. Hubbard) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Info needed Date: 7 Jan 1996 23:48:21 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 20 Message-ID: <4cpm45$kgo@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <4cplfe$bpk@news.halcyon.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.berkeley.edu In article <4cplfe$bpk@news.halcyon.com>, <javaman@halcyon.com> wrote: >1) During the first install, I had booteasy installed on MBR of HD 1, > after a smooth install, I tried to boot linux using booteasy. I think this has a lot to do with how you've installed Linux & LILO (e.g. "cooperatively" or "non-cooperatively"). If you install LILO in the Linux partition itself (I believe that's one of LILO's options), booteasy will chain to it just fine and you'll be able to go on into Linux. However, if you install LILO as an MBR boot manager (which booteasy also is) then naturally booteasy is going to spam it when you choose the "install booteasy" option. I believe that Linux is left more or less "headless" in this case since it doesn't have any boot blocks installed for booteasy to jump to. I'm not absolutely sure of this, but that's what the empirical evidence seems to point to. Since FreeBSD *always* has boot blocks installed in its partition (regardless of the choice of boot manager) it works fine with LILO or pretty much any other boot manager. Jordan