1. You are viewing our forum as a guest. For full access please Register. WindowsBBS.com is completely free, paid for by advertisers and donations.

Advice sought on Dual/Triple Boot Win XP from PATA and SATA drives

Discussion in 'Windows XP' started by PeteC, 2005/12/06.

  1. 2005/12/06
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    I would appreciate some comments, advice and/or guidance for my next project on my main desktop….

    My current install of Win XP Pro has a few problems and far too many applets loaded and it’s time to start over with a fresh install.

    I have 4 hard drives "“ 2 x PATA and 2 x SATA (one just installed today) "“ Win XP Pro and Win XP Pro x64 are installed on a PATA drive as dual boot. I have recently deleted Vista, but will reinstall when Beta 2 is available.

    Because of time constraints due to family illness away from home I want to install Win XP Pro (new install CD) on the new SATA drive and install the software/tweaks at my leisure while using the existing install of XP Pro on the PATA drive "“ i.e. dual boot XP between PATA and SATA. When the SATA installation is complete I shall format the XP/XP x64 partitions on the PATA drive and reinstall x64 and Vista in separate partitions on the SATA.

    I am not sure if this is possible "“ it’s outside my experience "“ the SATA drives are both recognised by an XP install disk so the installation does not pose an apparent problem.

    Although I have everything backed up all ways round I cannot really afford to foul up here (on past experience it takes a solid week to reinstall all the software, remember which tweaks were applied and generally shake the computer down).

    Comments, guidance, advice, notice of likely pitfalls all gratefully received :)
     
  2. 2005/12/06
    skeet6961

    skeet6961 Inactive

    Joined:
    2005/09/03
    Messages:
    522
    Likes Received:
    0
    get a boot manager that can deal w/ two xp pro installs. boot magic by powerquest/symantec used to work nicely but there are many others that do same. they 'hide' partitions and allow selections that are not normally allowed via the hiding part ;) .... such as the dual xp install. system commander is another (i think?).

    u can also use brute force BIOS boot options to turn off bootability on most newer systems. not a good idea in my book as on/off drives may change drive lettering or just make this a painful experience in general.
     

  3. to hide this advert.

  4. 2005/12/06
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Surely not necessary? XP itself sets up it's own 'boot manager' through the boot.ini - even for two installs of XP on the same drive. That's what I use at present to dual boot XP Pro and XP Pro x64 and previously Vista too - each installed on a separate partition.
     
  5. 2005/12/06
    skeet6961

    skeet6961 Inactive

    Joined:
    2005/09/03
    Messages:
    522
    Likes Received:
    0

    u'r probably right. i've never installed two xps on anything ;)

    w/ 3 win os' i'd still opt a 3rd party boot manager tho
     
    Last edited: 2005/12/06
  6. 2005/12/06
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Another approach to this - probably less risky - would be to move the contents of the data partitions from the PATA drive on which XP is installed to the first SATA drive, disconnect the PATA drive with the current install of XP and load XP to the second SATA drive which would be able to access all my data as the software was loaded. In between times I would disconnect the second SATA drive and reconnect the PATA drive to continue using my current setup.

    What do you think?
     
  7. 2005/12/06
    McTavish

    McTavish Inactive

    Joined:
    2005/06/24
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    1
    There would be no problem Pete with installing XP directly to your SATA drive and using the ntloader as your bootmanager, as per your first post. However, if you later delete the XP installs on the PATA hard drive you will be deleting the ntloader, which resides inside the first installed XP on that drive. You can however repair things after you have reinstalled XP to the PATA drive, either with the recovery console or manually by editing the boot.ini file.

    Your second idea of removing the PATA drive and installing to the SATA drive would also work, but if as you say you want XP on the second SATA hard drive, you would have to make this drive the first boot device in the bios, as the ntloader will only run from the boot drive. Because you will have removed all other WinNT installs from the computer the new XP on the SATA drive will be the only WinNT, so it will have its own ntloader, hence it must be on the boot drive.
     
  8. 2005/12/07
    mattman

    mattman Inactive Alumni

    Joined:
    2002/06/10
    Messages:
    8,198
    Likes Received:
    63
    Hi Pete,
    I don't have SATA and the dual boots I have set up have been "static ", so no cause for changing them.

    Areas I would really plan well are the partitioning and the drivers. You are a bit concerned about things going pear-shaped later on. I would see unplanned problems with partitions being one area where a minor disaster could happen if you try to start changing drives/partitions and things get "confused" in the boot sectors/MBRs (antiviruses with power to change information in the boot sector could bring the whole system to it's knees). I would try to have a partitioning "plan" all laid out (and maybe uninstall the antivirus before changing a boot drive) and also use the HDD manufacturer's MBR backup program before changing HDDs around.

    Check for Win XP x64 drivers for your hardware. If you have a favourite printer for example, you may end up needing a new one (although I have heard of modifications to make XP drivers run in x64).

    Matt
     
  9. 2005/12/07
    Christer

    Christer Geek Member Staff

    Joined:
    2002/12/17
    Messages:
    6,585
    Likes Received:
    74
    Hi Pete!

    If I remember correctly, you are on an Asus motherboard. A friend of mine has an Asus P4P800 and two hard disks, one Seagate SATA with the OS (and a data partition) and one Seagate PATA for backups (and backwards compatibility) in a mobile rack. Whenever the computer has been run with the mobile rack powered off (SATA only running) and the mobile rack is powered back on, the computer "forgets" that the SATA is the boot drive and it tries to boot from the PATA. It doesn't even try the SATA and a detour into BIOS to change the boot order is necessary.

    I don't know if an improved BIOS version has been released but if you plan on using different hard disks for different operating systems (a mobile rack would be good for that) then I would use PATA's for the OS and the SATA's for data and backups. (You wouldn't notice any performance difference between an ATA100/133 and a SATA-150.)

    Christer
     
  10. 2005/12/07
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Thanks for the responses - I shall mull over the points you have made.

    I'm leaning towards installing XP on the SATA drive and leaving the install on the PATA drive for the time being and using the ntloader as boot manager. Thinking about it there's no real reason to remove the PATA install at all - I don't need the disk space and it may be handy to have a fall back system ready installed. I am familiar with editing the boot.ini file manually and did so to remove Vista.

    Matt - I think I've thought out the partitioning strategy :) - I rarely use x64 - it was originally installed to check out some software for one of Arie's associates and I may/may not reinstall it. As you say, drivers are a major problem at present.
     
  11. 2005/12/07
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Hi Christer

    Good memory :) I do indeed have an Asus board - A8V Deluxe with an Athlon 64 3500+.

    My four hard drives (1 x WD PATA, 1 x Maxtor PATA + 2 x Hitachi SATA) are permanently installed in the computer so the question of the bios forgetting the boot drive should not arise, but thanks for reminding me of your experience.

    See my post above for my current thoughts.
     
  12. 2005/12/07
    Christer

    Christer Geek Member Staff

    Joined:
    2002/12/17
    Messages:
    6,585
    Likes Received:
    74
    I was slooowly typing while you were posting ...... :p ...... but my input was based on what you wrote earlier:

    You're right that it's not a problem if all hard disks are always connected.

    It's also not certain that the BIOS bug in P4P800 is also present in the A8V.

    Christer
     
  13. 2005/12/07
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Success - eventually :)

    Now have a fresh install of XP Pro on the SATA drive just waiting to be tweaked and loaded with software. Ntloader functioning perfectly as boot manager.

    Had one problem though - the VGA controller had a conflict with the Via AGP controller. Eventually resolved it - not quite sure how, but all's well that ends well - maybe :)
     
  14. 2005/12/07
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    I use the asus A8V also.
    That's similar to what I found, but I found it's better to make a very small partition on the IDE0 master (I tried 4GB, but it can likely be much smaller) and that will contain the boot files and allow you to do anything you wish with the rest of that drive. That allows for the BIOS insisting that the IDE0 master should boot.

    With that partition, I believe that you can do anything you wish with whatever other drives you want to play with. I have IDE0 set up as a data drive, with all systems on the SATA0 80 GB drive.

    I found that recovery console and adjusting boot.ini are interesting but not very helpful between installations and a new install would save time if there's any problem.

    As always, I have installed the oldest OS first, except that I install linux last (why I call it multiboot) so grub runs first at boot, followed by the XP loader. I still use linux as my canary. :D
     
    Last edited: 2005/12/07
  15. 2005/12/07
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Let us suppose that I now want to delete the original copies of XP and XP x64 on the original PATA drive. How would I go about that - I must admit to being out of my depth a little on this and could use a some further advice.

    The problem that has arisen is that the Sata drive is now seen as D and all the other partitions have shifted down a letter when booted to the new install of XP, but are unchanged when the computer is booted to the PATA copy of XP on C when the SATA is then seen as S.

    Guessing here, but if I disconnected the PATA drive and ran fixmbr and bootcfg from the Recovery Console on the new SATA installation would I come out smelling of roses or be deeply in the s***t? I rather suspect the latter :)
     
  16. 2005/12/07
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd just delete the partitions containg those OS. However, you'll lose the boot info on C:\ and the simplest correction for this is a reinstall of XP on the SATA. If the PATA will remain connected, XP will probably wish to put the boot files on it, so make a very small partition on the front of it as in my prev. post and then you should be able to do what you wish. As I said above, restore console (fixboot=deleting and making a new boot.ini) wasn't any help to me in this same situation.
    Shouldn't happen after removing XP from C:.
    Would only do that if you never intend to use the PATA on this PC.
     
    Last edited: 2005/12/07
  17. 2005/12/07
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Reread your first post in this thread, and I believe you can do what you mentioned there; again suggest you reserve the small partition on c: (IDE0) for the few loader files and boot ini. Found that the last install corrects the boot configuration, bringing it up to date, so a plan ahead is probably worthwhile. I'm not too good at that, though. :D
     
  18. 2005/12/07
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Thanks, Sparrow. I'm too tired now to think clearly, but I think I get the jist of what you are saying.
     
  19. 2005/12/07
    McTavish

    McTavish Inactive

    Joined:
    2005/06/24
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    1
    Once XP has assigned its own drive letter – D: in your case Pete – it’s not possible to change it. Microsoft say it is not possible, except to restore it back to the original in certain circumstances. It is a problem I have tried to crack and even though I have had limited success I can’t guarantee it and wouldn’t consider suggesting it. As Sparrow says, the only way to do it is to reinstall XP and get it to assign the letter you want during setup. Not straightforward and not always possible to make it the C: drive if the ntloader is on an other partition.

    Perhaps it would be best for me to try and explain why yours came out as D: If you look in Disk Management you will see the partition that holds the ntloader listed as (Boot) and the XP partition you are booted into as (System). I know intuitively and against convention boot and system seem back to front, but this is just another quirk of MS and the ntloader. Because the (Boot) partition with the ntloader and XP on it is already a C: drive and this partition can not be hidden from or unmounted in the (System) partition, then another install of WinNT will always be given another letter, not necessarily D.

    The other thing you should know is that the ntloader will always be installed to the Active primary partition on the boot drive. The ‘Active’ part being the important thing to remember. If the Active primary on the boot drive is FAT or NTFS then the ntloader will go there (or the one already there will be used, or replaced). It does not matter if this partition has a Windows OS on it or its just a data partition or completely empty. So as Sparrow says you can delete the current XPs on your boot drive and create a small primary partition, format it and make it the Active one on the disk, then reinstall to the SATA drive. However, and this part I can’t swear to, you might still end up with the new install as the D: drive.

    During early install setup of XP from the CD all the partitions will show as already assigned drive letters. While some of these will change once booted into Windows, the one assigned to the partition you are going to put the install on won’t change. What letter the setup has assigned to it will carry through the install and be the final drive letter of the new Windows. Which means you can see what drive letter you are going to get before you even start.

    I’ve got to get to bed now Pete but I’ll be back about midday. If you want all your Windows installs to see themselves as the C: drive then you need a third party bootmanager so that every install can have its own ntloader.
     
    Last edited: 2005/12/07
  20. 2005/12/08
    mattman

    mattman Inactive Alumni

    Joined:
    2002/06/10
    Messages:
    8,198
    Likes Received:
    63
    Your C: drive is the key. Put the Boot.ini file there (even if the C: has a version of DOS :) ). The dual boot loaders (ntloader I take it), then say the OS boot information is on the "X" drive... in your case it sounds like the OS boot information is on the S: drive.

    My simplistic (working backwards) view :) .

    Matt
     
  21. 2005/12/08
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Thank you all sincerely for your input, knowledge and guidance on this rather iffy project - it didn't work out the way I planned, but at least I now have a much greater understanding of these matters :) With hindsight and a clearer mind I would almost certainly have taken a different approach!

    Last night - when I should have been in bed, I took Sparrow's advice and deleted the two OS partitions on the PATA drive and reinstalled XP on the SATA drive. Have the basic OS updated and running with no software except av and firewall installed - plain sailing from now on even though the drive letters across the remaining 15 or so partitions are all over the place. That is not a problem as the data is all mirrored on an external USB drive and I can rethink and rearrange the partitions at my leisure. At a later stage I shall add XP x64 and Vista as a triple boot setup.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.