xp + ubuntu

[-=N0N@ME420=-]

easy question, looking for easy answer?

2 disks
1 = xp
1 = ubuntu

atm I put in cd, click install, next, next, partitioning setup, I say, USE ENTIRE DISK, and use the hard drive that is empty, ok, good, done, reboot, reboot and choose to boot off disk ubuntu, what happen? BLACK SCREEN!? why

Is there, or can anyone, make a really simple step guide to get this to work ?

[HyRax1]

By telling Ubuntu to install on the second drive, it has gone and installed GRUB into the MBR of that drive. Since your PC is setup to boot from the first drive and not the second, Ubuntu will not boot at all (I'm guessing you didn't even see the GRUB menu when you tried to boot up after installation?).

Why do you want to use separate drives for the OS' anyway? Ubuntu only uses 2GB of actual disk space with a vanilla install. I generally recommend to people that they allocate 8GB as a minimum to allow for system updates and a handful of extra apps. Windows? Different story - start with 20GB as a minimum.

1. Install Windows first on its own partition, of say at least 20GB.
2. Reboot and install Ubuntu on its own 8GB partition on the same drive plus the swapfile in its own partition on that drive too. Ubuntu will take care of the dual-boot menu automatically.
3. Use the second disk to put Windows and Ubuntu's Home data exclusively. Divide the drive in two and give 50% of the drive to each OS. This way you have Windows sees C: and D: drives and in Ubuntu, the OS and swapfile sit on the first drive and /home sits on the second drive.

[-=N0N@ME420=-]

Originally Posted by HyRax1

By telling Ubuntu to install on the second drive, it has gone and installed GRUB into the MBR of that drive. Since your PC is setup to boot from the first drive and not the second, Ubuntu will not boot at all (I'm guessing you didn't even see the GRUB menu when you tried to boot up after installation?).

Why do you want to use separate drives for the OS' anyway? Ubuntu only uses 2GB of actual disk space with a vanilla install. I generally recommend to people that they allocate 8GB as a minimum to allow for system updates and a handful of extra apps. Windows? Different story - start with 20GB as a minimum.

1. Install Windows first on its own partition, of say at least 20GB.
2. Reboot and install Ubuntu on its own 8GB partition on the same drive plus the swapfile in its own partition on that drive too. Ubuntu will take care of the dual-boot menu automatically.
3. Use the second disk to put Windows and Ubuntu's Home data exclusively. Divide the drive in two and give 50% of the drive to each OS. This way you have Windows C: and D: drives and in Ubuntu, the OS and swapfile sit on the first drive and /home sits on the second drive.

i have 3 drives in pc, one is blank,1 is full and another 1 is also full, both full have windows and fraps and media files on them. thank you for your response at such a late time!

My issue goes a long way back that I hate partitions, particularaily small partitions, since I will get the error "disk full" frequently

i understand what you are saying and will do it

champion

[Outcast_Aussie]

I've done it exactly the same way as the op selecting the same options and let it write to the MBR of it's choice.

Never had an issue (until I buggered around with the boot order in BIOS once upon a long ago)

[HyRax1]

Originally Posted by -=N0N@ME420=-

i have 3 drives in pc, one is blank,1 is full and another 1 is also full, both full have windows and fraps and media files on them. thank you for your response at such a late time!

You need to separate the user-generated data from the OS. The OS will never change and carries no real importance (other than config files for special apps).

Originally Posted by -=N0N@ME420=-

My issue goes a long way back that I hate partitions, particularaily small partitions, since I will get the error "disk full" frequently

Case in point - short of installing a zillion apps, the OS partition will never fill up, hence the benefit of placing all user-generated data on its own dedicated drive. In your case, you could have one smaller drive dedicated to the OS' and apps (eg: an old 80GB HDD), the second drive dedicated to Windows data and the third drive dedicated to Linux data, both being much larger drives in the 1TB region or so.

Originally Posted by -=N0N@ME420=-

i understand what you are saying and will do it

champion

No worries. I really ought to go to bed too...!

[-=N0N@ME420=-]

Originally Posted by Outcast_Aussie

I've done it exactly the same way as the op selecting the same options and let it write to the MBR of it's choice.

Never had an issue (until I buggered around with the boot order in BIOS once upon a long ago)

I wondered why hyrax said one thing, and you said it worked.

Originally Posted by HyRax1

By telling Ubuntu to install on the second drive, it has gone and installed GRUB into the MBR of that drive.

it was the mbr! at the end of the ubuntu install it tried to install to hd0, which didn't exist, so I pointed it at sdc/the hard drive with ubuntu on it, and now it's working

I will eventually move over to the setup hyrax mentioned as it makes more sense.

[HyRax1]

Originally Posted by -=N0N@ME420=-

I wondered why hyrax said one thing, and you said it worked.

It means that the MBR was correctly updated on the first drive. If it were updated on the second drive, then there's nothing to tell the system to launch the GRUB bootloader, and hence Linux won't boot, unless you told the system to try and start off the second drive.

Originally Posted by -=N0N@ME420=-

it was the mbr! at the end of the ubuntu install it tried to install to hd0, which didn't exist, so I pointed it at sdc/the hard drive with ubuntu on it, and now it's working

Yay!