Jump to content

Triple booting Windows NT 4, 98 and 2000.


Recommended Posts

Looking at the above info and some of the "general" regulations of Windows, here is what I was thinking:

 

1) My C:\ drive, approx. 1GB, formatted with FAT16, used to install Windows 98.

2) My D:\ drive, 1GB, formatted with FAT16, used to install Windows NT 4.0.

3) My E:\ drive, 2GB, formatted with FAT32, used to install Windows 2000.

4) My F:\ drive, approx. 10 GB, formatted with FAT32, used for storing files for Windows 98.

5) My G:\ drive, remaining 24GB, formatted with NTFS (but I will be certain to update Windows NT 4.0 with Service Pack 6 since using more than 7.8GB partitions on Windows NT 4.0 REQUIRES at least Service Pack 4, as well as Windows NT 4 and 2000 sharing a filesystem), used as storage space for Windows 2000 and Windows NT 4.0.

 

Would the following be doable? If not could you please explain?

Thank you.

 

Sure it is doable. :)

And it also seems like a good plan. :thumbup:

The only change I would make is the E:\ drive, which I would personally make a little bit larger, say 3 or 4 Gb and NTFS formatted[1]  (of course it depends on the amount of programs you plan to install on the 2K, by itself the windows 2000 takes around 650 Mb) or even "remove" it completely  :w00t: or moving it "past" the 10 Gb "exchange" volume.

 

Since you plan to have more than 4 volumes, at least one needs to be a logical volume inside extended, and the C:\ volume needs to be a primary, you can have (say) all primaries but the G:\ volume as primaries, whilst what i would personally do would be to have only the C:\ volume as a primary partition and make all the other logical volumes inside Extended, but if you don't plan to install another Operating System you can do anything "midway".

 

[1] Now let's talk of DEFAULT drive letter assignment in the various OS (assuming that you have only one connected hard disk in that system and that the CD/DVD drive letter at the most will "shift" some letter assignment:

C:\ will be C:\ under all OS's

D:\ will be D:\ under all OS's

E:\ will be E:\ under 98 and 2K but will NOT exist under NT 4

F:\ will be F:\ under 98 and 2K but will NOT exist under NT 4

G:\ will be G:\ under 2K, will NOT exist under 98 and will be E:\ under NT 4.00 (but you can change manually the drive letter assignment in the NT 4)

 

What about making the:

 

1) My C:\ drive, approx. 1GB, formatted with FAT16, used to install Windows 98.

2) My D:\ drive, 1GB, formatted with FAT16, used to install Windows NT 4.0.

3) My F:\ E:\ drive, approx. 10 GB, formatted with FAT32, used for storing files for Windows 98.

4) My E:\ F:\drive, 4GB, formatted with NTFS, used to install Windows 2000.

5) My G:\ drive, remaining 22GB, formatted with NTFS

 

C:\ will be C:\ under all OS's

D:\ will be D:\ under all OS's

E:\ will be E:\ under 98 and 2K but will NOT exist under NT 4

F:\ will be F:\ under 2K will NOT exist under 98 and will be E:\ under NT 4.00 (but you can change manually the drive letter assignment in the NT 4 to F:\ )

G:\ will be G:\ under 2K, will NOT exist under 98 and will be F:\ under NT 4.00 (but you can change manually the drive letter assignment in the NT 4 to G:\ )

 

Or even make only one volume out of the last two ad have Windows 2K installed on it.

 

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the late reply. I have been out of the house the last few days and had only the chance to really look at this today.

I downloaded and burned UBCD (very useful, thanks.) to a CD. I used RPM to make a 1GB,FAT16 volume to install Windows 98. As I thought, it worked well.

Then, I made a D: partition (having the C: drive used for installing Win98.). This partition is extended, and contains 4 individual partitions.

They are:

1) 1GB FAT16, used for installing NT4.

2)10GB FAT32, used for files for Win98.

3)4GB NTFS, used for installing Windows 2000.

4)ALL remaining space is used for files and programs for Windows NT 4 & 2000. (~23 GB).

All 4 are logical volumes.

However, when I started installing Windows NT 4.0, and got to the point of Setup where I would need to format my drive, this is what NT 4 recognized:

C: Unformatted or Damaged 972 MB

D: Unformatted or Damaged 970 MB

-- Windows 95 (FAT32) 9760 MB

Unpartitioned Space 26460 MB

The FAT16 drives are listed as "Unformatted or Damaged" while BOTH NTFS drives are combined together and are considered to be Unpartitioned space, according to Windows NT Setup.

I am finding this very strange that NT 4.0 setup won't recognize preformatted FAT16 and NTFS partitions, when it will recognize fdisk-formatted partitions (it won't let you use them, but it lists them.)

Any suggestions? Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, anything beyond any of the two mentioned "limits" (roughly 4 Gb ad 8 Gb) are very likely to be mis-recognized or *whatever*.

Which SP do you have integrated in the NT 4.00?

You should try to integrate SP6a:

http://reboot.pro/topic/2383-windows-nt-service-pack-integration-slipstreaming-toolkit/

the mscab is still available through Wayback Machine:

https://web.archive.org/web/20071220062213/http://mateusz.free.fr/mscab/

 

What is queer is that the C:\ and D:\ (i.e. first primary and first volume inside extended) are as well problematic.

It is possible that *somehow* the "later" partitioning affects also the recognition of the first two, but it is "strange", particularly it is strange that the first primary (the C:\ drive) is considered Unformatted or damaged, it is likely that you fell :ph34r: into one of the little "traps" :w00t: we haven't mentioned:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/151414/en-us

 

Are you sure-sure that the partitioning and formatting was done correctly?

 

Check the Partition ID's.

The FAT volumes C:\ and D:\ should have a partition ID of 06 (and NOT of 0E)

And possibly the Extended Partition should have - at least temporarily - a partition ID of 05 (and NOT of 0F).

 

It is also possible that you will need to make a smaller Extended partition (in order to get the 05 ID) and later "expand" it to the final size. :unsure:

 

Can you run Partinfo (from the working 98) and post it's output?

 

jaclaz

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry once again for the late reply. I just finished my triple boot last night and MSFN was down this morning, at least on my web connection.

I had SP1 integrated in NT 4.0. I downloaded the files for integrating SP6a, although one of the files was identical in both downloads, so I became confused which file to use. I would've replied back, but I didn't want to bother you again.

So I tried taking matters into my own hands. I found some instructions for creating a slipstreamed CD I found a bit easier to understand: http://www.nu2.nu/bootcd/and followed them. Unfortunately, I was unable to build and burn the ISO using the CDRpack

utility, because I didn't install an ASPI manager, because the computer I used to make the ISO wasn't only mine. I then used MagicISO to make the ISO, and ImgBurn to burn it to a CD, not thinking that the software would make a difference. I found out that the CDRpack utility (or a close equivalent) was needed for a proper slipstream, as the CD still had SP1, but nevertheless, it installed correctly. I got Windows 2000 installed correctly as well, so now I have a working triple boot. And I thank you very much.

I am certain that the partitioning was done correctly for the triple boot. And also, partinfo.exe (from the working 98) gave the following output:

PARTINFO 1.14

COPYRIGHT © 1996-2008, 2013 TeraByte, Inc.

All rights reserved.

Run date: 12/28/2014 22:14

The window title was: "Finished - Partinfo".

I could be doing something wrong with the PartInfo application, but that's all I got. Thanks for everything and I hope that you aren't offended that I used different instructions to attempt the slipstream.

Edited by ironman14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for everything and I hope that you aren't offended that I used different instructions to attempt the slipstream.

 

Naah, why should I be offended? The only important thing is that you managed to get it working fine. :)

Still, if I suggest you to use this:

To know how is currently (or at any time) your system partitioned (including CHS data) you can get PartIn9x.zip (for 9x use) and PartInNT.zip (for NT/2K use) from Symantec they are "Partition INFO" tools, they are "safe" because they are "Read Only":

ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/english_us_canada/tools/pq/utilities/

not only providing a link to the tool, but also specifying how it was a Symantec utility (as a matter of fact it is a Powerquest one), and you manage to use a different Terabyte utility, command line only, instead:

http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/kb/article.php?id=288

you shouldn't be surprised by it's output:

 

I am certain that the partitioning was done correctly for the triple boot. And also, partinfo.exe (from the working 98) gave the following output:

PARTINFO 1.14

COPYRIGHT © 1996-2008, 2013 TeraByte, Inc.

All rights reserved.

Run date: 12/28/2014 22:14

The window title was: "Finished - Partinfo".

I could be doing something wrong with the PartInfo application, but that's all I got.

Though it is strange as Terabyte tooks are known to be excellent ones, so if you try again running it from a dos box as:

partinfo > partinfo.txt

it should produce a valid table.

Still, that is a different table from the one the Symantec Powerquest's tool will produce (this is a GUI tool and you need to save the report), now, be nice, get the tool I suggested (and not another one) and try running it, you will see how it produces more information anyway (please read as "there are reasons for suggesting specifically that one and not another one" ;)), including some info on the boot sectors of each volume :yes:.

 

jaclaz

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...