I have Suse 12.1 education installed properly, but I just don’t like some install defaults.
Is it possible on installation to define that the bootloader should be installed in the same partition as Suse is installed, in this case sda7, instead of the MBR
I didn’t see an option during install.
I have all my 6 OSes that way, just not Suse !!!
Thanks
Kanjart
Sure just tell the installer where it should go. It is after you specify the partition layout. You will be shown what will be done if you don’t like it just change it.
The pictures are from 11.4, but it hasn’t changed.
Re: Bootloader question
Click on Booting in the Installations Settings Open the Boot Loader Installation tab in the Boot Loader Settings Check Boot from Root Partition but NOT Boot from Master Boot Record (unlike on the next picture) ... unless you want to install Grub stage1 in MBR as well. Click on Boot Loader Options Uncheck Write generic Boot Code to MBR
The pictures are from 11.4, but it hasn't changed.
Thanks a lot for the answer.
I will have a look this afternoon when I install Suse edu on my 2nd computer.
I started the install 3 times as I knew there had to be an option like this, as most other distros have it.
But, I could’t not find it…getting too old for this 
Also, installed the other Suse 12.1 ( not edu ) but missed it there too.
However, copy/paste from menu.lst to the first installed distro solved my problem.
Thanks a stack
Tony
And thanks a lot for the pics. 
On 2012-01-15 04:56, Kanjart wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the answer.
> I will have a look this afternoon when I install Suse edu on my 2nd
> computer.
On one of the first few screens, the default is easy install or quick
install or something like that. In that case a lot of options assume
sensible values, or may not be changed.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
<<
please_try_again/Flux Capacitor Penguin
Re: Bootloader question
Click on Booting in the Installations Settings
Open the Boot Loader Installation tab in the Boot Loader Settings
Check Boot from Root Partition but NOT Boot from Master Boot Record (unlike on the next picture) … unless you want to install Grub stage1 in MBR as well.
Click on Boot Loader Options
Uncheck Write generic Boot Code to MBR
>>
<<
Tony/Puzzled Penguin
Re: Bootloader question
I started the install 3 times as I knew there had to be an option like this, as most other distros have it.
But, I could’t not find it…getting too old for this 
Also, installed the other Suse 12.1 ( not edu ) but missed it there too.
However, copy/paste from menu.lst to the first installed distro solved my problem.
Tony
>>
I second Puzzled Penguin/Tony. I remain angry that installing 12.1 overwrote my MBR (= good multi-boot system) despite me asking for the boot loader to be on the ‘/’ partition. The more detailed explanation given by please_try_again/Flux Capacitor Penguin I found out for myself after installation = too late. The silliness - great danger - is that ensuring that ‘Boot from Master Boot Record’ is UNchecked’ in the Boot Loader Settings tab does not mean what it says. You have to also go to the Boot Loader Options tab and UNcheck ‘Write generic Boot Code to MBR’. I did not find this during installation.
I have installed loads of Linux’s, and am sick of them all destroying the MBR despite all efforts to stop them doing so. I have a backup of the previous one, but for some reason I cannot get it back in place: the Suse one persists. More by luck than judgement, it enables me to get back to where I was; but I am not amused.
Lewis Smith
On 2012-01-19 18:46, lewyssmith wrote:
> The silliness - great danger - is that
> ensuring that ‘Boot from Master Boot Record’ is UNchecked’ in the Boot
> Loader Settings tab does not mean what it says. You have to also go
> to the Boot Loader Options tab and UNcheck ‘Write generic Boot Code to
> MBR’. I did not find this during installation.
Yes, they are different things, booting from the MBR, and writing there
generic MBR code or not. You have to look at all the options carefully. I
have no problems getting it to do what I want.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
First off, I agree with you and if you read my other posts, you’ll see how often I have been trying to convince people here that openSUSE’s typical default to overwrite the MBR with a generic boot code is an absurd, dangerous and MS like behaviour. However you’ll also meet Windows lovers who think that this is a great feature, because a generic boot code in MBR is what Windows expects to find here.
But reinstalling either Legacy Grub or Grub2 in the MBR, if that’s what you had before and what you are missing now, is not a problem. Just reinstall Legay Grub from the Grub shell (the method is explained in many posts here) or Grub2 with the grub2-install command followed by the disk device, usually /dev/sda. In your case, you might also have to set the bootflag back on a primary partition - if you were actually not booting from the MBR but from another Grub installed in a primary partition. If it’s the case, it is still there. You can use findgrub to see which Grub is installed where and looks for its stage2 in which partition.
On 2012-01-19 22:56, please try again wrote:
> However you’ll also meet
> Windows lovers who think that this is a great feature, because a generic
> boot code in MBR is what Windows expects to find here.
Yes, I want generic code in the MBR if I double boot, but I do not want
YaST to create it. I want the original one from MS.
That doesn’t make me a Windows Lover
What it makes me is very careful of what YaST says it will do, and check
thrice.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
Then Windows users and non Windows users will agree that writing a generic boot code by default is inappropriate for a Linux setup. The first ones want to keep their original generic boot code and the others don’t want their bootmanager (like Grub2 installed by another distro) to be destroyed.
If you say so.
On 2012-01-20 02:56, please try again wrote:
>
> robin_listas;2432176 Wrote:
> Then Windows users and non Windows users will agree that writing a
> generic boot code by default is inappropriate for a Linux setup. The
> first ones want to keep their original generic boot code and the others
> don’t want their bootmanager (like Grub2 installed by another distro) to
> be destroyed.
Absolutely.
>> That doesn’t make me a Windows Lover
>>
>
> If you say so.
Believe me, I am not. Even if I get a job installing, mantaining or simply
using it, I’m not a Windows Lover. Not everybody gets a lovable job.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
robin_listas
<<they are different things, booting from the MBR, and writing there
generic MBR code or not. You have to look at all the options carefully. I
have no problems getting it to do what I want.>>
I find this rather blase. Any intent to overwrite the MBR should be double-confirmed. In Opensuse’s case (& everyone else’s) it is done on the sly.
As a generality, cannot one propose:
Now to put the cat among the pigeons… The multi-boot loader I use because it is the easiest by far is the Windows NT one. I in fact have no working Windows on my system, but needed 2000 Server/NT for development work in the past. Why is it so easy?
Here’s how I do it:
If you update a Linux in-situ, sometimes it boots straight away with no change; sometimes you have to re-copy its partiton boot sector to the FAT partition.
If anyone can say how to install the NT boot loader without NT itself, please tell us!
Lewis Smith
On 01/21/2012 10:06 AM, lewyssmith wrote:
> If anyone can say how to install the NT boot loader without NT itself,
> please tell us!
why not ask that in your own thread, in a forum known to be populated
with NT Gurus…i’d start looking for those here: http://www.microsoft.com
–
DD http://tinyurl.com/DD-Caveat http://tinyurl.com/DD-Hardware
http://tinyurl.com/DD-Software
openSUSE®, the “German Engineered Automobiles” of operating systems!
I agree. I do what I want too. I’m sure I could install openSUSE without YaST. “I do what I want” is not an answer to anyone’s boot problem. Let us talk about the default that hits 99% of the users, whether newbies or advanced Linux users. The worst is not even that YaST overwrites the MBR - although it is unacceptable - but it doesn’t even seem to check - nor care - what’s in there. Thus it is able to replace something that works and boot with something that is non capable of booting on its own. Without a bootflag set on a partition, a generic MBR is worse nothing. You’re not multi-booting if you use a generic MBR, you’re just switching OSes. You could also leave your case open and plug or unplug hard disks. lol!
Yes. More generally speaking, overwriting a generic MBR with a generic MBR is useless, and overwriting a boot manager with a generic MBR is stupid. I can understand that an operating system wants to take the boot control - logically speaking it has to - but in the case of Linux, it should overwrite Grub with Grub an leave the system in a state that is able to boot at least one OS. In my experience, openSUSE is the only release based Linux which is able to leave a computer absolutely unbootable. I’ve already explained how to achieve that.
Hummm … I used this method 15 years ago. I’m not sure it would still work on modern computer in AHCI mode. I do have a FAT 16 partition for historical reasons, but to boot DOS on most computers, I have to swich SATA to legacy. Then Linux won’t boot. So I’m not sure how the NT bootloader would see the disk geometry in this situation. Actually I could try but …
Humm … You’re entering (proprietary) bootloader hacking territory with your question. It’s easy if you know how to rewrite a bootloader in assembler. Then you can just copy NTLDR and NTDECT.COM - if I remember the names correctly - on any FAT16 partition. I don’t think they need to be at the top of the FAT - unlike MSDOS and PCDOS system files - but not Novell DOS. If they do, you would just have to edit the FAT with a disk editor. … then you do what you want- as Carlos would say.
But maybe you could do that with ReactOS … couldn’t you? It must have a NT like bootloader. I never tried.
IMO, your method will continue to work until your computer dies. That’s not much you will be able to do with the NT bootloader on your next computer (unless you find some old machine in the dumpster - it’s always possible).
On 2012-01-21 12:06, please try again wrote:
>
> lewyssmith;2432502 Wrote:
> I agree. I do what I want too. I’m sure I could install openSUSE
> without YaST. “I do what I want” is not an answer to anyone’s boot
> problem. Let us talk about the default that hits 99% of the users,
> whether newbies or advanced Linux users.
But I’ve never used the default proposal. Never, since I started to use it
in 1998. I don’t ever look at it… and I was a newbi once. I can not
comment on what the initial proposal does, because I always discard it…
it is always wrong for one or another reason and I have to remake it
manually, item by tedious item. I do what I want means that in fact you can
tweak the proposals to do anything in the end.
> The worst is not even that
> YaST overwrites the MBR - although it is unacceptable - but it doesn’t
> even seem to check - nor care - what’s in there. Thus it is able to
> replace something that works and boot with something that is non capable
> of booting on its own.
Which you can report in Bugzilla… saying it here you know will get
nothing from the devs.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On 2012-01-21 10:06, lewyssmith wrote:
>
> robin_listas
> <<they are different things, booting from the MBR, and writing there
> generic MBR code or not. You have to look at all the options
> carefully. I
> have no problems getting it to do what I want.>>
> I find this rather blase. Any intent to overwrite the MBR should be
> double-confirmed. In Opensuse’s case (& everyone else’s) it is done on
> the sly.
I would prefer that you used standard quoting. It makes more difficult to
find what we said and what you said.
You can report those problems as bugs in Bugzilla, specially if you can
show proof.
> In the past it was normal - & convenient -
> to offer to create a bootable floppy disc for the Linux, and not touch
> the MBR.
Grub can not do it, AFAIK. And lilo was dropped, or at least, not
maintained in YaST.
> Now to put the cat among the pigeons… The multi-boot loader I use
> because it is the easiest by far is the Windows NT one.
No, I would not do it, except on machines where NT is the main operating
system. I have used that boot method, then replaced it with grub.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
You miss the difference between a bug and a decision, and a chapter of Microsoft/Novell Honeymoon.
Writing a generic bootcode to the MBR is not a bug. It has been a political decision.
There is nothing to report in Bugzilla.
On 2012-01-21 17:26, please try again wrote:
> You miss the difference between a bug and a decision, and a chapter of
> Microsoft/Novell Honeymoon.
> Writing a generic bootcode to the MBR is not a bug. It has been a
> political decision.
> There is nothing to report in Bugzilla.
Oh, my… here we go again. :-/
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
Thanks for warning me. I only have IDE & was unaware of these looming problems. I actually like ‘legacy’ GRUB also, because that has/had just 1 config file which could be edited as per NT’s boot.ini without having to re-generate things all the time. GRUB2 intimidates me.
Yes, another user said I should not have raised this issue here. Point taken.
Following detailed investigation of my OpenSuse-revised boot system, I feel the need to open a different thread to unravel things.
Lewis Smith
