PDA

View Full Version : [ubuntu] [SOLVED] Grub Doesn't Show Vista



N00bB00b
September 29th, 2008, 03:59 PM
Um, Ok, so I have 8.04 on my box. I haven't had any need to go into Vista until this morning, so I didn't even notice until this morning that...Grub doesn't have an entry for Vista. The partitions are still there (in fact, there are annoyingly sitting right on my desktop), but no boot option.

I can boot into the recovery console that was included, but not into Vista.

What do I do to diagnose this?

TIA.

caljohnsmith
September 29th, 2008, 04:17 PM
How about posting the following first:

sudo fdisk -lu
cat /boot/grub/menu.lst

N00bB00b
September 30th, 2008, 03:35 PM
The meat & potatoes of fdisk:
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 63 16370234 8185086 12 Compaq diagnostics
/dev/sda2 * 16370235 86654609 35142187+ 6 FAT16
/dev/sda3 86654610 150159554 31752472+ 83 Linux
/dev/sda4 150159555 156296384 3068415 82 Linux swap / Solaris


The meat & potatoes of the grub menu:
title Ubuntu 8.04.1, kernel 2.6.24-19-386
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-19-386 root=UUID=5ff7cc40-e0e4-4a2a-b204-bf40dd52d904 ro quiet splash
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.24-19-386

title Ubuntu 8.04.1, kernel 2.6.24-19-386 (recovery mode)
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-19-386 root=UUID=5ff7cc40-e0e4-4a2a-b204-bf40dd52d904 ro single
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.24-19-386

title Ubuntu 8.04.1, kernel 2.6.15-52-386
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.15-52-386 root=UUID=5ff7cc40-e0e4-4a2a-b204-bf40dd52d904 ro quiet splash
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.15-52-386

title Ubuntu 8.04.1, kernel 2.6.15-52-386 (recovery mode)
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.15-52-386 root=UUID=5ff7cc40-e0e4-4a2a-b204-bf40dd52d904 ro single
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.15-52-386

title Ubuntu 8.04.1, memtest86+
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/memtest86+.bin

### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST

# This is a divider, added to separate the menu items below from the Debian
# ones.
title Other operating systems:
root


# This entry automatically added by the Debian installer for a non-linux OS
# on /dev/sda1
title Windows NT/2000/XP
root (hd0,0)
savedefault
makeactive
chainloader +1

caljohnsmith
September 30th, 2008, 03:47 PM
The only partition on your HDD that could possibly have Vista in it is sda2, but it has a FAT16 file system; did you install Vista yourself or did it come with your computer? I would just be really surprised if your computer came with Vista installed to a FAT16 partition; Vista should be using NTFS, and in fact I'm not even sure Vista would run with a FAT16 file system. Can you give some ideas of how this may have happened?

Anyway, you can try to boot the sda2 partition and see what happens; while you are in Ubuntu, just do:

gksudo gedit /boot/grub/menu.lst
And at the bottom where it has your Windows entry, change it to:

title Windows Vista (maybe)
root (hd0,1)
savedefault
chainloader +1
Let me know what happens when you try to boot with the above entry.

Mark Phelps
September 30th, 2008, 04:14 PM
Your machine shows no sign of having Vista on it -- anymore!

FAT-16 formatted partitions predate even Windows XP, which defaulted to FAT-32 format. Vista defaults to NTFS format and, when you install it, will either reformat an existing partition to NTFS, or will create a new partition -- even then, using NTFS. XP installation provided the option of choosing FAT-32 or NTFS; Vista does not provide that option.

Without further info, my guess is that you overwrote and reformatted your Vista partition when you installed Ubuntu. That would explain the total absence of an NTFS partition.

N00bB00b
September 30th, 2008, 04:19 PM
sda2 does indeed appear to be the partition that contains Windoze, based on the various things I've found in the folders (I didn't use Vista for long before installing HH. The main plan for this box was to turn it into a testbed for HH, but I wanted to make sure I had a fallback plan in case I didn't appreciate the experience).

Anyway, the last entry in grub boots a recovery mode for Vista (sda1 is the vendor-installed recovery partition). So, before I do this, should I instead just add another entry to grub instead?

N00bB00b
September 30th, 2008, 04:26 PM
FYI, it should be noted that when I do the boot on sda1, it fires up XP and then the recovery tool.

I suppose option 2 would be that sda1 is the boot into the recovery console and sda2 contains the factory-installed backup image of Vista, but in sda2's Users directory appears to be the username that I created when I fired up Vista.

Anyway, back to the current question - should I instead add a new entry to grub, and what should that entry contain?

caljohnsmith
September 30th, 2008, 04:51 PM
How about we look at what is in the sda2 partition before you go further; from Ubuntu do the following:

sudu umount /dev/sda2
Don't worry about a device not mounted error, this is just to make sure. Continue with:

sudo mount /dev/sda2 /mnt
ls -l /mnt
Please post the output of the above commands.

N00bB00b
September 30th, 2008, 05:14 PM
How about we look at what is in the sda2 partition before you go further; from Ubuntu do the following:

sudu umount /dev/sda2
Don't worry about a device not mounted error, this is just to make sure.
No error, fyi. Out of curiosity, how to I keep these partitions from mounting at boot time? I really don't need or want access to sda1 and sda2, ever. All I'm going to do is F*** them up.




Continue with:

sudo mount /dev/sda2 /mnt
ls -l /mnt
Please post the output of the above commands.


total 1563332
-rwxrwxrwx 2 root root 8013 2007-04-10 15:55 -20070410.log
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-08-22 15:39 Acer
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 166 2007-04-10 12:45 Arcade.log
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 2006-09-18 17:43 autoexec.bat
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2007-04-10 11:56 Book
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4096 2007-04-10 11:58 Boot
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 438840 2006-11-02 04:53 bootmgr
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8192 2007-04-10 11:58 BOOTSECT.BAK
-rwxrwxrwx 2 root root 10 2006-09-18 17:43 config.sys
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2006-11-02 07:59 Documents and Settings
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4096 2007-04-10 11:56 DRV
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 526569472 2008-08-22 15:55 hiberfil.sys
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2007-04-10 12:36 Intel
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 1073741824 2008-08-22 15:55 pagefile.sys
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4096 2008-08-22 15:37 ProgramData
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8192 2008-08-22 15:36 Program Files
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-08-22 15:39 $RECYCLE.BIN
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 284 2007-04-10 12:30 RHDSetup.log
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 178 2007-04-10 12:50 setup.log
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4096 2008-08-22 15:37 System Volume Information
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4096 2008-08-22 15:36 Users
drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 32768 2008-08-22 15:38 Windows

caljohnsmith
September 30th, 2008, 05:34 PM
Well it's hard for me to believe, but it does look like Vista is indeed installed in sda2. Just add the Vista entry in your menu.lst that I gave in post #4, reboot, choose it from the Grub menu, and let us know what happens.

N00bB00b
September 30th, 2008, 05:52 PM
As an interesting (and annoying) sidenote, gedit doesn't support workspaces. I'll reboot in a moment.

Mark Phelps
September 30th, 2008, 05:58 PM
OK ... I stand corrected ... Those are definitely Vista files, not XP.

As caljohnsmith has said, it will be interesting to see what happens when you are able to boot from that partition.

N00bB00b
September 30th, 2008, 06:01 PM
Yep, that did it. Vista booted just fine.
1) It's running Vista Home Basic. I don't know if that makes the filesystem matter.
2) This box (an Acer Aspire 3680) was really, really REALLY cheap when we bought it, even though it was brand new. The clerk's crack at the time was "What do you want that for? All you're going to be able to do is run Linux on it". Well, I have to say, it runs Linux quite nicely, thank you.

Thanks to folks who helped. Thank-you's will be going out shortly. I'll leave this thread open a little longer before closing it.

caljohnsmith
September 30th, 2008, 06:11 PM
Yep, that did it. Vista booted just fine.
1) It's running Vista Home Basic. I don't know if that makes the filesystem matter.
2) This box (an Acer Aspire 3680) was really, really REALLY cheap when we bought it, even though it was brand new. The clerk's crack at the time was "What do you want that for? All you're going to be able to do is run Linux on it". Well, I have to say, it runs Linux quite nicely, thank you.

Thanks to folks who helped. Thank-you's will be going out shortly. I'll leave this thread open a little longer before closing it.
I'm glad that worked, but I'm still incredulous that some tech actually installed Vista to a FAT16 partition; I was thinking like Mark that it probably wasn't even possible, but I guess we've all been proven wrong. :biggrin:

Mark Phelps
September 30th, 2008, 09:56 PM
Gollly .... learn something every day. Maybe that's whey they call it Vista Home "basic"!!

meierfra.
October 1st, 2008, 12:45 AM
Just a guess, but I think it is just a mistake in the partition table, and the filesystem is actually NTFS and not FAT16.

To test my theory, I used "cfdisk" to change all my partition to type FAT16. I was still still able to mount all partitions.
XP and Vista did not mind at all: They booted up just fine
But I wasn't able to boot Ubuntu anymore.

Mark Phelps
October 3rd, 2008, 10:37 PM
caljohnsmith:

Since you apparently CAN boot directly into the Windows partitions using GRUB, thought I would try your suggestions to try and fix my problem.

No success...

Please look at the following post:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=5901822#post5901822