[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: LILO on second drive?



No idea about installing an MBR on a slave drive, but why not put the
additional configuration in your lilo.conf and boot from your master
drive? That way you can control the boot process from the lilo prompt with
out having to go into the BIOS.

Ernest Johanson
Web Systems Administrator
Fuller Theological Seminary


On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, EVCom Support wrote:

> Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 17:45:25 -0400
> From: EVCom Support <todds@evcom.net>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: LILO on second drive?
> 
> Greetings all,
> 
> Having read various docs, etc on Lilo, and having never used it before (Always
> had Linux on it's own primary drive, etc) I would like to use lilo to make 
> a slave
> drive bootable (kinda tired of using boot floppies).   Now, my BIOS 
> supports booting
> from any drive letter, so even tho I have OS's installed on /dev/hda I can 
> tell the bios
> to boot drive , /hdb1 and basically ignore the existance of /dev/hda 
> alltogether.
> 
> The problem is that lilo refuses to install a master boot record, etc, 
> because it
> correctly detects that it is being asked to do so on a secondary 
> drive.  Basically
> I would like to be able to force lilo to do what I want, and make the secondary
> drive completely bootable so I can just switch my bios between booting drive 0
> and drive 1 at will.
> 
> When I boot drive D at this time, I get a lilo prompt that looks similar to 
> this:
> 
> F1:  linux
> F2:  ????
> F3:  linux
> 
> F3 default.
> 
> The machine then locks up.
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> Todd
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> Todd Suess
> Technical Support Night Manager
> Evolution Communications, Inc.
> 800.496.4736/561.624.7570
> Email- support@evcom.net
> Support Hours-
> Monday through Friday 6am to Midnight
> Saturday and Sunday 8:30 to Midnight
> 
> Be sure to visit EvCom.net at Booth 1388 for 'Everything Internet' at
> Internet World '99 in New York City, October 4-8, 1999.
> 


Reply to: