Boot from MBR vs Root partition vs None?

Hi would just like to know what’s the difference (if any) between choosing to boot from the MBR, the root partition or enabling neither?

Referring to:
pic23-MBR switch.png - Windows Live

Would one be better for dual boots for example? (Using Vista too)


I’ll just explain what they mean and you can judge when each is appropriate.

Install in MBR means you are taking control of the boot first thing. So this GRUB can boot openSUSE, and other OSes. If you already have Windows, this overwrites the Windows MBR.

Install in root partition expects the first bootloader to chain to it. The first bootloader could be GRUB or Windows.

None means you have to arrange for some other bootloader to load openSUSE. For instance you already have GRUB from Ubuntu in the MBR and you just add an entry for openSUSE.

Not to mention that you can also install Grub in both locations.
For dual or multibooting, it usually makes sense to have Grub in MBR.

Thanks for your replies guys.

Cheek of it, using my images!lol!

I always use the MBR. But often by default if suse is left to install on a win machine - shrinking win partition etc… it will not place it on MBR, but boot from root with grub and active flag on the extended.

Will I be receiving a DMCA take-down notice soon? :stuck_out_tongue: Your sideshow guides have been immensely useful.

Everyone is welcome to use it/them however:)
No worries