I’ve been roundly criticised for holding/saying that the windows 2000 and xp installation disks will refuse to install if there is not a windows compatible partition first up on the hard drive. That’s fine with me if I’m wrong so I seek your advice: Am I wrong or am I right?
Thanks
swerdna
If there is a primary partition marked Active/bootable and is not a Fat32 or NTFS then XP/2000 might not install, not sure due to not trying.
XP on most comps does not need to be at sda1 as long as there is any primary partition of fat32/ntfs that it’s boot files can be installed to. XP it self can be on a logical volume. Dueing install XP will make its partition with boot files active/bootable and write its boot code in the MBR.
With some comps-- (XP will not install if ‘grub’ is installed in the MBR for some reason. There is also some indications XP might have problems if there is any linux partition.)
So let me get this right. Are you saying that the requirement is that either ntfs or fat must be in a primary partition, not necessarily the first, is that it?
When I get enough free time on hand. I’m going to try some combinations of partitioning to see what exactly can or cannot be done.
I create a Virtual Box HD and partitioned it like this:
http://thumbnails17.imagebam.com/3999/10371039986129.gif](http://www.imagebam.com/image/10371039986129/)
hda1 = linux ext3 primary
hda2 = win ntfs primary
hda3 = extended
hda5 = win ntfs logical
On booting the XP disc I could format and install to either hda2 or hda5
I’m going to run an install proper and report back. See if it will actually boot.
I went back and changed the partitioning to leave windows with the only option of a logical partition - I removed the other ntfs primary. Windows could see the partition but didn’t like it, no go for install. Yet it would install to the logical partition in the picture I gave above with another ntfs primary in place.
This picture is showing Linux on the first primary
Then XP primary and swap
XP installed fine and then linux - and grub booting XP
http://thumbnails11.imagebam.com/4002/10cd7e40012286.gif](http://www.imagebam.com/image/10cd7e40012286/)
So now I went back to the original setup, well thereabouts:
http://thumbnails12.imagebam.com/4002/75661d40013417.gif](http://www.imagebam.com/image/75661d40013417/)
Having the primary ntfs fools XP. Because it lets you select and format the logical partition and start the install:
http://thumbnails16.imagebam.com/4002/9fe09840013858.gif](http://www.imagebam.com/image/9fe09840013858/) http://thumbnails19.imagebam.com/4002/5790ec40013860.gif](http://www.imagebam.com/image/5790ec40013860/) http://thumbnails7.imagebam.com/4002/5c8acf40013865.gif](http://www.imagebam.com/image/5c8acf40013865/)
ImageBam - Fast, Free Image Hosting and Photo Sharing
However. Once windows gets to the next step after loading the files, it reboots. And of course it can’t continue.
So to summarize:
Whilst I could do the above. It couldn’t really install in the logical.
It is however possible to install XP on a partition other than the FIRST primary, so long as it is installing to a Primary.
Does that make sense?
I found a similar problem with windows 7. It refused to install on a pure linux box with no fat or ntfs primary partition.
It needs this partition for ntldr.
To get around boot problems in the old days, we would make the first bootable partition on the drive a small primary dos parttion, enough to hold lilo and the dos root.
This overcame the problem of the bios not being able to see large drives.
Linux and lilo never had a problem booting to anywhere on a large drive.
Thanks very much for all of that Carl.
In my head it’s like this now:
Primary partitions: One can install to any primary partition. If there is no windows-compatible partition earlier on the drive,the boot files (boot.ini etc) will go into the installation partition. If there is a windows-compatible partition earlier on the drive, the boot files will go into that partition rather than the installation partition.
Extended partitions: You can install to an extended partition only if there exists a windows-compatible primary partition wher the windows installer can place the bootloader files.
Is that the way you see it?
@swerdna: there can be issues, but yes you can install XP without having a partition on the HDD. I’ve built numerous systems with new hdd’s and installed XP to them.
I did have troubles on used HDD’s. I then use the dd command to clear the MBR, remove the partition table, and off I go, on a clean disk.
AFAIK that could be the right description of can do / no can do 
If there is a windows-compatible partition earlier on the drive, the boot files will go into that partition rather than the installation partition.
I’m not sure I established that?
Extended partitions: You can install to an extended partition only if there exists a windows-compatible primary partition where the windows installer can place the bootloader files.
You mean a logical Partition which is contained within the Extended. But whilst I could get windows to format the partition and even start the install. It would not actually install because when XP reboots to start the install proper it failed in my trial. Yet there is a windows compatible partition earlier as you were describing.
I’ll have another fiddle soon. But it may be tonight.
It won’t work. I tried with Win7 installing to an extended partition with the same results. Win7 won’t boot.
Windows needs a primary bootable dos or ntfs partition to place ntldr and the ini files.
Linux has the advantage that it can write to most file systems, whereas windows only sees/writes to fat16/32 or ntfs partitions.
If you have a large drive and think you may want to install windows some time, create a small 500 meg or so primary fat partition as the first partition and then install everything else in whatever order you want.
You only get a problem with windows when you have only linux and want to install windows to an extended partition.
I have dual boot on my laptop, XP with Linux.
From my experience:
I cleaned up everything long time ago, a clean HDD. Installed Linux 1st on it, and then tried to install XP with no ntfs,Fat32 partition. Then i create a ntfs partition in Linux, it was sda3. And then tried to install XP, but with no luck.
Then i give up, and one day i cleaned the HDD again and install XP this time. and leave space for Linux extensions. And this time Xp was installed on sda1(Primary partition). And it worked.
Later i install Linux on sda5, and everything went so smoothly, with no issue.
Conclusion:
Install XP 1st, then Linux. Other wise hard to install XP after Linux. Also primary partition matters in XP.
If there is a windows-compatible partition earlier on the drive, the boot files will go into that partition rather than the installation partition.
If you have a hdd with
hda1–linux
hda2-- extended
hda3–Fat23 Win 98
hda4-- TO be XP install
hda5 –
If prior to installing XP the hda4 partition is made active/bootable , then XP should install all files on hda4 and boot as drive C:.
If on the other hand hda3 is active/bootable, then XP will install the boot files on hda3 and will be installed onto drive D:.
What I’m not sure of if hda1 is active/bootable, I think XP will not install.
If there is no active partition, then XP will make one but do not think XP will change the active partition.
If one wants to install a copy on hda5 then XP will use hda3/4 for its boot files, it will only depend on which partition is active, and should see itself on drive E:. (Not 100% sure on drive letter)
If one copy/clone XP from hda4 to hda5 and hides hda3 and hda4, then XP will still boot but can not do a repair install, due to its need of a primary partition for installing.
I have made a hdd with no primary partition and using XOSL as boot manager, 98/XP had no problems booting, only hdd in system.
On a real HDD I’ve just now managed
sda1= primary & Linux root
sda2= primary & swap
sda3 = primary and xp
Installation went with no problems as expected from caf4926’s reports. I had to reinstall Grub because windows installation overwrote it in the MBR – quick & easy to fix.
Now I’ll try logical partitions in the extended partition but from caf4926’s work I expect it to fail.
OK this time I installed xp on a logical partition in the extended partition. I used Gparted on Ubuntu live CD to set up the partitions on a test hard drive. They ran:
primary partition sda1: empty ext3 Linux
primary partition sda2: NTFS empty partition
extended partition sda3: container for the logical partitions
logical partition sda5: swap partition
logical partition sda6: NTFS partiiton.
First I installed Ubuntu to sda1 and sda5.
Then I installed xp to sda6 – it went like a charm – the boot files boot.ini and so on were put into sda2 by the install program.
@carl: I don’t know why it didn’t work for you – maybe this: try it with NO boot flag in the primary partitions to confuse the issue when the installer reboots half way through the xp install – that could be your problem.
Conclusion for Extended partitions: You can install to an extended partition if there exists a windows-compatible primary partition where the windows installer can place the bootloader files.
I’ll have a look at it John. I know exactly what you mean anyway.
I always suspect VBox does not behave quite like the real thing, but we’ll see.
Nice work there too;)
John. I had another look and what I found was a peculiar little trait I have come across before. The primary partition was created with Parted Magic (well all the partitions were). I knew the windows boot code had been placed on the ntfs primary but it wasn’t working (it stalled after reboot at the “Press any key to boot form cd” message)
I couldn’t format the ntfs primary from the main installer, so I went in to the DOS repair and did a format on the primary.
Ran the windows installer again and reboot went fine this time. Installed no problem.
I have had this before with windows only liking partitions formatted by it’s own installer.
Whilst XP is a pain. A note of interest for VISTA users. If you end up repairing a borked Vista install and use a utility like Parted Magic to wipe the disc and format to ntfs. Whatever you do, Vista will not do anything with it, it just won’t accept the partition as valid. BUT, throw an XP disc in and it will see the partition and allow you to format it. At the reboot just throw the Vista disc back in and away you go.
I have learned quite a lot here John. Hopefully you can use some of this info to update your suse pages. All good fun too.
I thought I had this correct a year ago when I did about a week’s solid work experimenting with it – but I was wrong – there’s always some new aspect to learn – and the tutorial pages will be changed today
