Bug 15190 - Grub not able to boot windows from SATA disk
Summary: Grub not able to boot windows from SATA disk
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: Mageia
Classification: Unclassified
Component: RPM Packages (show other bugs)
Version: 4
Hardware: i586 Linux
Priority: Normal normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mageia Bug Squad
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-02-03 12:11 CET by Ole Reier Ulland
Modified: 2015-07-03 19:28 CEST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Source RPM: grub-0.97-39.mga4
CVE:
Status comment:


Attachments

Description Ole Reier Ulland 2015-02-03 12:11:37 CET
The computer in question is a Dell Dimension 8300, 32 bit, with a ATI RADEON 9200 PRO graphic card and 2 GB RAM. It has two HDDs, one HDD with Mageia 4.1, swap and data, and one HDD with Diagnostics partition, Windows XP and data.

SATA, Grub bootloader, sdb, hd0
Root, 0x83, ext4
Swap, 0x82, Linux swap
Data, 0x7, NTFS

IDE, Windows bootloader, sda, hd1
Dell Diagnostics, 0xde, Dell Utility
Windows, 0x7, NTFS
Data, 0x7, NTFS

I find it pleasant to have all Linux, Windows and Diagnostics in the Grub menu. As long as I had two IDE HDD that was no problem. As long as I had one IDE and one SATA HDD with grub on the IDE HDD that was no problem. But because the computer automatically only looks to the SATA disk for the bootloader, when it is present, I wanted to place grub there. Now grub is not able to boot Windows XP with the following:

root (hd1,1)
   Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0x7
makeactive
chainloader +1

Reproducible: 

Steps to Reproduce:
Comment 1 Filip Komar 2015-02-03 12:59:40 CET
This one also reminds me on bug 5076.

CC: (none) => filip.komar

Comment 2 Filip Komar 2015-02-03 14:51:41 CET
According to bug 15191 Comment 2 your IDE is _not_ _hd1_ so you need to change root (hd1,1) for Windows to boot.

Specific part in manual:
http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/legacy/grub.html#DOS_002fWindows
Comment 3 Ole Reier Ulland 2015-02-03 18:03:39 CET
bug 15191 Comment 2 is from the terminal and there hd0 and hd1 are switch in comparison to menu.lst. Even though I have tried to switch between hd0 and hd1 in menu.lst several times under different conditions, grub only starts as hd0 and never as hd1. But after Mageia is up and running it is running on hd1.
Comment 4 Frank Griffin 2015-02-03 18:30:13 CET
The difference between grub running as an application under Linux and grub running at boot time is that when running as an application grub relies on the running kernel for interpretation of hd0/hd1 and at boot time it has to do this itself.  The two don't produce the same result.

CC: (none) => ftg

Comment 5 Ole Reier Ulland 2015-02-03 18:41:53 CET
Clearly, but this has no influence on the problem.
Comment 6 Ole Reier Ulland 2015-02-05 10:42:35 CET
(In reply to Filip Komar from comment #2)
> Specific part in manual:
> http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/legacy/grub.html#DOS_002fWindows

This link gives the grub commands "map", "hide" and "unhide" I have tried useing them all now in many combinations in "menu.lst", but I am not able to make them produce any difference in the outcome.

It looks to me like bios will only look for bootloader on the SATA disk automatically and grub is not able to boot a non-Linux partition that is not on the same HDD as grub.
Comment 7 Filip Komar 2015-02-05 10:56:37 CET
Below there is a very informative quote about grub legacy from
http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Debian/2008-05/msg00998.html
Luckily grub 2 matured a lot since then. Maybe you can try it as Barry suggested in bug 15191 Comment 3.

Generally, GRUB uses some sort of *guessing* to assign the drive numbers, so
one always has to be careful.[1]

[1] This guessing can, of course, never be really consistent and leads to all
sorts of confusing situations, e.g. different device numbers depending on
whether GRUB is started from the BIOS of from within Debian or different
numbers after changing cables in the computer. It is one of the fundamental
logical flaws in the design of GRUB and one of the reasons GRUB 0.97 is not
developed further. (Development effort goes to GRUB 2, currently at version
1.9something, which has been in the works for years and is still not ready for
release and is not documented yet, so for most people is not a viable
alternative.)
Comment 8 Filip Komar 2015-06-23 15:35:39 CEST
(In reply to Ole Reier Ulland from comment #5)
> Clearly, but this has no influence on the problem.

Can you backup that with both (grub from terminal and grub directly in boot menu) outputs from your system?

Did you try grub 2?

Without more info there's not much we can do.

Keywords: (none) => NEEDINFO

Comment 9 Ole Reier Ulland 2015-07-03 18:49:21 CEST
Since grub clearly can not work in this case, I use grub2.
Comment 10 Filip Komar 2015-07-03 19:28:51 CEST
I guess we can close it then. Please reopen if need be.

Keywords: NEEDINFO => (none)
Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => WORKSFORME


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.