10.10 isn't offering "auto" multiboot

[Dans564]

Usually when i am installing Ubuntu, including 10.10, the installer will recognize my windows partition and ask if I want to install side by side (not Wubi). When I try it now it only gives me the option to erase and use hole disk or advanced. Ubuntu installer usually does an awesome job of setting up dualboot all the way to adding windows to grub for me. Whats changed? And how to I change it back?????? Thanks in advanced :p

[Quackers]

The 10.10 installer has been changed. It is not normally a good idea to choose the "install alongside" option with this installer. It likes to over-write existing operating systems. The "assisted install" has now gone too.
From your comments I would ask whether you have any unallocated space for Ubuntu to install into?

[Dans564]

no i do not have any unallocated space, but I have a 1.5tb drive with only 53gb being used so i can easily spare some space. Should I shrink my windows 7 install as my next step?

[Quackers]

First thing is to check how many primary partitions Win 7 has used.
If you type into the Start search box dsik management msc then click on it above you will get a screen with the details of your partition layout. Primary partitions have a thick dark blue line at the top of the box. 3 or less primary partitions being used is ok, but 4 is not.
If you are unsure, post a screenshot of that screen here.

[Dans564]

i doing something i messed up my windows partition so i just installed Ubuntu to 100% of my hd. This is a better setup then having windows anyway lol. Thanks for the help though

[Quackers]

You're welcome :-) Enjoy!

[carusoswi]

The 10.10 installer has been changed. It is not normally a good idea to choose the "install alongside" option with this installer. It likes to over-write existing operating systems. The "assisted install" has now gone too.
From your comments I would ask whether you have any unallocated space for Ubuntu to install into?

So, I am downloading 10.10 now. Are you telling me it does not like to allow me to install so that I can dual boot XP and Ubuntu? I am not certain what you mean about that 'alongside' comment.

If I cannot maintain my dual boot and install this OS without destroying my XP installation, then, I am not going to install it.

Caruso

[Quackers]

What I mean is that the "install alongside" option is a badly formatted option and it can easily lead to an existing OS being over-written.
What I would suggest is to select the "specify manually" option and setup the Ubuntu partition(s) and swap space manually.
That way you can ensure that the existing OS is not over-written.

[carusoswi]

What I mean is that the "install alongside" option is a badly formatted option and it can easily lead to an existing OS being over-written.
What I would suggest is to select the "specify manually" option and setup the Ubuntu partition(s) and swap space manually.
That way you can ensure that the existing OS is not over-written.

I suppose the 'alongside' option is something new. I have always installed Ubuntu using the manual partitioning option so that I can see the partitions on my HD and avoid deleting or overwriting those that I wish to remain functional (and I must add that I learned to do it manually the hard way, by having overwritten my Windows installation several times (many moons ago)).

I am currently running Studio 10.04, and had avoided it altogether for probably most of its short installed life on my system (around May of 2010) because all internet browsers would freeze after four or five minutes of use. My daughter gave me a new wireless keyboard and mouse for Christmas, and, after installing them and removing their PS2 counterparts from my system, I find that browsing in Ubuntu seems to have settled down completely, so my problems must have stemmed from some sort of conflict that presented itself in 10.04 but not in earlier versions.

So, now, the question begs whether I need to upgrade altogether. I like Studio because I am into multi-media (the 10.10 I downloaded is not the Studio version).

Since it no longer seems 'broken' I will probably stick with .04.

Thanks for the reply.

Caruso

[dino99]

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=10161428&postcount=2