Re: install-mbr vs lilo
Essentially, you can use just Lilo by itself, or you can use both.
If you could post contents of your /etc/lilo.conf, and a summary of
your partitions (fdisk -l), it might be easier to see what the
problem might be.
Anyway, here's a quick comparison of the two as I understand them:
Install-mbr only installs a master boot record, whose function is to:
1) Determine which partition to boot from (from user input or by
default)
2) Call the boot code located in the first sector of the chosen boot
partition, which then is responsible for actually booting the OS.
BIOS ==>> install-mbr in MBR ==>> partition boot code ==>> OS kernel
In the case of Linux, that boot code in the first sector of the
partition is usually Lilo, which is needed to boot the kernel.
Install-mbr itself can not boot the Linux kernel - Lilo is needed for
that. So if you use install-mbr, you also need Lilo installed in the
partition's boot sector. In the case of NT, Win2k etc., they have their
own specific boot code which they automatically install in the
partition's boot sector.
Lilo is much more versatile, and can install either a master boot record
(boot=/dev/hda), or a partition boot record (boot=/dev/hdxx).
If installed as a partition boot record, it needs something else in the
MBR to call it - like install-mbr, or the standard MS mbr code, or some
boot manager like System Commander. (could also be another copy of
Lilo).
BIOS ==>> something in mbr ==>> Lilo ==>> Lilo menu choice
Once you get to Lilo (whether in the MBR or in a partition boot sector),
there are two fundamental ways it can boot an OS from there.
1) directly boot a Linux kernel as specified in "image="
...Lilo ==>> Linux kernel
2) call a partition boot sector as specified in "other="
...Lilo ==>> partition boot code ==>> OS kernel
There are almost endless variations of how Lilo can be configured.
And actually, much of the Lilo boot code is contained in /boot/boot.b,
which is called from the small amount of code that will fit in the boot
sector. Install-mbr's code is completely contained in the MBR sector.
Both can also be installed in a floppy boot sector.
Hope some of this was useful for you....
Tom
Kent West wrote:
>
> Note: Please let me know if this comes through as HTML (and accept my
> apologies) - I'm on a new email client that I'm unfamiliar with.
>
> Can anyone explain to me the difference between install-mbr and lilo?
> I've never really understood the Linux bootstrap process, and although
> I've read the man pages for these two apps I'm still unclear.
>
> History of Problem I'm Trying to Solve
> ----------------------------
> I recently discovered install-mbr when I did a Potato install on a new
> computer; I was VERY pleased with the way it worked because it allowed
> me to have a dual-boot with NT and Linux in (what's supposed to be only)
> an NT student lab at school (it's okay; I'm the new lab admin, and I'm
> experimenting before I openly start trying to introduce Debian to the
> lab). install-mbr has a very low-profile presence, so no one knows
> Debian is on the box unless they know to watch for the 3-second long
> display of the cryptic MBR prompt. Both OSes are on one 4GB drive; NT is
> onthe first 2GB partition of /dev/hda1, and Debian is spread across 5 or
> 6 partitions (/, usr, home, var, tmp, swap) on the second 2GB.
>
> However, when I tried a similar thing on a friend's computer with his
> knowledge and blessing, things went horribly wrong. His W2K is on
> /dev/hda (one partition); most of his data files are on a SCSI drive;
> and we were installing Debian 2.2 on his third drive /dev/hdb (2nd IDE
> drive), with 5 or 6 partitions. When it came to installing a master boot
> record, the options offered during the install didn't seem to quite fit
> what we needed, so we basically guessed, and the follow up reboot
> resulted in a bunch of repeating 1's and 0's. Booting off the Debian
> floppy that was created during the install allowed us to get back into
> Debian, where we experimented over several tries with lilo and
> install-mbr. We also tried running W2K's repair option to set the boot
> record back to Windows'. However, nothing worked. Eventually something
> (I suspect W2K's "repair", but that's another story) totally hosed the
> W2K installation.
>
> So we reinstalled W2K. The MBR prompt still appears. It doesn't
> automatically boot into Windows, but by pressing A (Advanced), followed
> by 1 (first partition on the first drive?), W2K's boot handler appears
> and then W2K boots normally. Alternatively, at the MBR prompt, I can
> press A, followed by F to boot off the Debian floppy.
>
> So at this point, both OSes work properly, but I'm having to boot into
> Debian off of the floppy. I'm afraid to try lilo or install-mbr again
> without having a clearer understanding of the two apps.
>
> Any information beyond what's in the man pages would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
Reply to: