On 07/02/2015 12:02 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:
Simply nulling bytes 510 and 511 of the first sector (getting rid
of the boot signature) should make the BIOS ignore the drive.
That signature applies to the entire MBR, including the partition
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:27 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>
>
> On 07/02/2015 12:02 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Rick Stevens
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Simply nulling bytes 510 and 511 of the first sector (getting rid
>>> of the boot signature) should make the BIOS ignore the drive.
On 07/02/2015 12:02 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:
Simply nulling bytes 510 and 511 of the first sector (getting rid
of the boot signature) should make the BIOS ignore the drive.
That signature applies to the entire MBR, including the partition
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:
> Simply nulling bytes 510 and 511 of the first sector (getting rid
> of the boot signature) should make the BIOS ignore the drive.
That signature applies to the entire MBR, including the partition
scheme. The signature is not a "boot me" sign
On 07/02/2015 10:56 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 07/01/2015 02:39 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 07/01/2015 03:14 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
On 2015-06-30 19:01, jd1008 wrote:
So, how can I proceed with a brand new drive,
dd /dev/zero into the first ... say 4K bytes, partition
it with fdisk, do not ma
On 07/01/2015 02:39 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 07/01/2015 03:14 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
On 2015-06-30 19:01, jd1008 wrote:
So, how can I proceed with a brand new drive,
dd /dev/zero into the first ... say 4K bytes, partition
it with fdisk, do not mark any partition bootable, so
that bios will sk
On 07/01/2015 05:36 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:37 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, let me ask a simple question.
Technically (I mean programatically), how difficult is it to
fix both BIOS and fdisk so that unless a partition is marked
as bootable, the partition table will not cont
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:37 PM, jd1008 wrote:
> So, let me ask a simple question.
> Technically (I mean programatically), how difficult is it to
> fix both BIOS and fdisk so that unless a partition is marked
> as bootable, the partition table will not contain the boot signature
> and BIOS will st
On 07/01/2015 04:32 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 3:39 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 07/01/2015 03:14 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
On 2015-06-30 19:01, jd1008 wrote:
So, how can I proceed with a brand new drive,
dd /dev/zero into the first ... say 4K bytes, partition
it with fdisk, d
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 3:39 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>
>
> On 07/01/2015 03:14 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>>
>> On 2015-06-30 19:01, jd1008 wrote:
>>>
>>> So, how can I proceed with a brand new drive,
>>> dd /dev/zero into the first ... say 4K bytes, partition
>>> it with fdisk, do not mark any partition
On 07/01/2015 03:14 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
On 2015-06-30 19:01, jd1008 wrote:
So, how can I proceed with a brand new drive,
dd /dev/zero into the first ... say 4K bytes, partition
it with fdisk, do not mark any partition bootable, so
that bios will skip over it ?
Don't know why no one's m
On 2015-06-30 19:01, jd1008 wrote:
> So, how can I proceed with a brand new drive,
> dd /dev/zero into the first ... say 4K bytes, partition
> it with fdisk, do not mark any partition bootable, so
> that bios will skip over it ?
Don't know why no one's mentioned this, but... you could always just
On 06/30/2015 06:04 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/30/2015 05:59 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Actually, another option is to put the legacy OS into a VM where it
can then inherit some of the features of Linux, including LVM support.
Then you can LVM this external drive instead of partitioning it, and
then
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Actually, another option is to put the legacy OS into a VM where it
> can then inherit some of the features of Linux, including LVM support.
> Then you can LVM this external drive instead of partitioning it, and
> then make an LV (or two or th
On 06/30/2015 05:59 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Actually, another option is to put the legacy OS into a VM where it
can then inherit some of the features of Linux, including LVM support.
Then you can LVM this external drive instead of partitioning it, and
then make an LV (or two or three or whateve
Actually, another option is to put the legacy OS into a VM where it
can then inherit some of the features of Linux, including LVM support.
Then you can LVM this external drive instead of partitioning it, and
then make an LV (or two or three or whatever) to use as backing for
the VM, and then those
On 06/30/2015 05:42 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:38 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/30/2015 05:33 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
So you could dd 512 bytes of /dev/zero to the drive, or use "wipefs -a
/dev/sdX", then use parted
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:43 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>> What OS are you booting that won't read GPT?
>
> It is an OS that existed before GPT I still use it
> because it has purchased SW that is too expensive to replace
> with versions for more modern OS.
> `nough said :) :)
>
Full circle. N
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:38 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>
>
> On 06/30/2015 05:33 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Gordon Messmer
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So you could dd 512 bytes of /dev/zero to the drive, or use "wipefs -a
>>> /dev/sdX", then use parted to "mktable gpt" and set up
On 06/30/2015 05:38 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/30/2015 04:11 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Since my internal drive is dual boot, I do need to boot an OS that
does not
recognize GPT :(
What OS are you booting that won't read GPT?
It is an OS that existed before GPT I still use it
because it h
On 06/30/2015 04:33 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
That will not work. Parted replaces the PMBR in such a case. So does gdisk.
Today I learned too many things. Thanks, Chris. :)
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproj
On 06/30/2015 05:33 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
So you could dd 512 bytes of /dev/zero to the drive, or use "wipefs -a
/dev/sdX", then use parted to "mktable gpt" and set up partitions.
That will not work. Parted replaces the PMBR in such a
On 06/30/2015 04:11 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Since my internal drive is dual boot, I do need to boot an OS that
does not
recognize GPT :(
What OS are you booting that won't read GPT?
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedor
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:28 PM, jd1008 wrote:
> I wonder if BIOS manufacturer's are reading this list and taking note :) :)
They have and they say to upgrade to UEFI.
This is a very long thread just to arrive at the conclusion that BIOS
behavior isn't ideal for your use case. The expectation i
On 06/30/2015 04:10 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
However, also based on testing, it seems that if you used GPT for your
>partitions, then BIOS would skip over the drive during the boot process.
No because every GPT creator also creates a PMBR which includes the
MBR boot signature that you're telling
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> So you could dd 512 bytes of /dev/zero to the drive, or use "wipefs -a
> /dev/sdX", then use parted to "mktable gpt" and set up partitions.
That will not work. Parted replaces the PMBR in such a case. So does gdisk.
wipefs -a after parted
On 06/30/2015 03:41 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, it begs the question:
No it doesn't, it asks the question. Begging the question means
something entirely different
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question) and the fact that
many people misuse it that way doesn't change the meaning.
--
On 06/30/2015 04:13 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 17:11 -0600, jd1008 wrote:
So, it begs the question:
(that's not what "begs the question" means)
For my case it does cause me to ask : The conundrum of my situation
does indeed lead me to ask that question.
If you think i
On 06/30/2015 05:13 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 17:11 -0600, jd1008 wrote:
So, it begs the question:
(that's not what "begs the question" means)
For my case it does cause me to ask : The conundrum of my situation
does indeed lead me to ask that question.
If you think
On 06/30/2015 04:01 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, how can I proceed with a brand new drive,
dd /dev/zero into the first ... say 4K bytes, partition
it with fdisk, do not mark any partition bootable, so
that bios will skip over it ?
Based on testing, it looks like any use of MBR will cause your BIOS to
UEFI spec 2.4.0 suggests the PMBR is optional.
5.2.3
"A Protective MBR may be located at LBA 0 (i.e. the first logical
block) of the disk if it is using the GPT disk layout. The Protective
MBR precedes the GUID Partition Table Header to maintain compatibility
with existing tools that do not unders
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:13 PM, jd1008 wrote:
> OMG!!!
> LVM!!!
> The other OS will most certainly NOT be able to make use
> of that drive :) :)
OK so you have two options.
-Change the BIOS boot order.
- Use GPT and after making all changes either zero out LBA 0 or
otherwise invalidate the MB
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 03:18 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> 2. The most likely explanation for the problem, as someone else
>> alluded to, is the USB drive has stale bootloader code on it that
>> points to no where and hangs.
>
>
> One of jd's earlier
On 06/30/2015 03:18 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
2. The most likely explanation for the problem, as someone else
alluded to, is the USB drive has stale bootloader code on it that
points to no where and hangs.
One of jd's earlier messages included the boot sector. It was mostly
nul bytes.
The so
On 06/30/2015 05:10 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
On 06/30/2015 03:41 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, it begs the question:
(that's not what "begs the question" means)
Yes. It's an accusation.
Can I create a disk with msdos partitioning scheme,
non
On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 17:11 -0600, jd1008 wrote:
> >> So, it begs the question:
> >
> > (that's not what "begs the question" means)
> For my case it does cause me to ask : The conundrum of my situation
> does indeed lead me to ask that question.
> If you think it does not mean that - then please en
Yet another possibility is to GPT partition the disk and then zero LBA
0 (the PMBR). Now to any MBR only utility, it will appear to be a
blank drive and hence dangerously unprotected. But, being lazy I won't
go look for this, I don't think the UEFI spec requires a PMBR on GPT
disks, it can just hav
On 06/30/2015 05:02 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/30/2015 03:41 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, it begs the question:
(that's not what "begs the question" means)
For my case it does cause me to ask : The conundrum of my situation
does indeed lead me to ask that question.
If you think it does not me
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 03:41 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>>
>> So, it begs the question:
>
>
> (that's not what "begs the question" means)
Yes. It's an accusation.
>
>> Can I create a disk with msdos partitioning scheme,
>> none of the partitions marked as b
On 06/30/2015 03:41 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, it begs the question:
(that's not what "begs the question" means)
Can I create a disk with msdos partitioning scheme,
none of the partitions marked as bootable, and have bios
quickly skip over it to the next device in the boot sequence?
So far it l
On 06/30/2015 04:56 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/30/2015 03:32 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, with this kind of change, it destroys the partition table.
So it does. :(
Well, that's disappointing. Educational, but disappointing.
I missed that in testing because the bootable media I was using wro
On 06/30/2015 04:54 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
I just set Vbox boot order to HD > CD/DVD. And added a new blank VDI
for the HD, and a Fedora 22 Live CD ISO for the CD. And it boots from
the CD. So the HD is clearly skipped.
If I partition the HD with fdisk with a single partition and no boot
flag
On 06/30/2015 03:32 PM, jd1008 wrote:
So, with this kind of change, it destroys the partition table.
So it does. :(
Well, that's disappointing. Educational, but disappointing.
I missed that in testing because the bootable media I was using wrote
both an MBR and GPT labels to the USB drive.
I just set Vbox boot order to HD > CD/DVD. And added a new blank VDI
for the HD, and a Fedora 22 Live CD ISO for the CD. And it boots from
the CD. So the HD is clearly skipped.
If I partition the HD with fdisk with a single partition and no boot
flag, I get the same result. So clearly this BIOS is
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 03:17 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>>
>> The link you refer to
>> talks about the 2 bytes past byte 255, they they are
>> bytes 256 and 257.
>
>
> No, they're the two byte block at the 255th block of two bytes.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.or
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:41 PM, jd1008 wrote:
> So, it begs the question:
> Can I create a disk with msdos partitioning scheme,
> none of the partitions marked as bootable, and have bios
> quickly skip over it to the next device in the boot sequence?
If you partition the disk you want skipped w
On 06/30/2015 03:17 PM, jd1008 wrote:
The link you refer to
talks about the 2 bytes past byte 255, they they are
bytes 256 and 257.
No, they're the two byte block at the 255th block of two bytes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record
Again, bytes 0-446 are boot code. Bytes 256 and
On 06/30/2015 04:36 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:32 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Here is what happened after the 2 bytes at offset 511 and 512 were null'ed:
fdisk /dev/sdb
Welcome to fdisk (util-linux 2.24.2).
Changes will remain in memory only, until you decide to write them.
Be
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:32 PM, jd1008 wrote:
> Here is what happened after the 2 bytes at offset 511 and 512 were null'ed:
>
> fdisk /dev/sdb
>
> Welcome to fdisk (util-linux 2.24.2).
> Changes will remain in memory only, until you decide to write them.
> Be careful before using the write comman
On 06/30/2015 04:32 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/30/2015 03:04 PM, jd1008 wrote:
dd if=/dev/sdb bs=2 count=1 skip=255 2>/dev/null | od -x
000 aa55
If these are the bytes that indicate a boot signature,
can they be "null'ed" safely??
Doing so worked for me, when testing under SeaBIOS.
Here is what happened after the 2 bytes at offset 511 and 512 were null'ed:
fdisk /dev/sdb
Welcome to fdisk (util-linux 2.24.2).
Changes will remain in memory only, until you decide to write them.
Be careful before using the write command.
Device does not contain a recognized partition table.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:04 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>
> Hi Rick,
> Re: my /dev/sdb:
>
>
> dd if=/dev/sdb bs=2 count=1 skip=255 2>/dev/null | od -x
> 000 aa55
> 002
>
> If these are the bytes that indicate a boot signature,
> can they be "null'ed" safely??
How do you define safely? It means the
On 06/30/2015 03:04 PM, jd1008 wrote:
dd if=/dev/sdb bs=2 count=1 skip=255 2>/dev/null | od -x
000 aa55
If these are the bytes that indicate a boot signature,
can they be "null'ed" safely??
Doing so worked for me, when testing under SeaBIOS.
dd if=/dev/zero bs=2 count=1 seek=255 of=/dev/s
On 06/30/2015 03:19 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/30/2015 03:17 PM, jd1008 wrote:
The link you refer to
talks about the 2 bytes past byte 255, they they are
bytes 256 and 257.
No, you set the block size to 2, so you are seeking (2 * 255) or 512
bytes into the disk.
Grrr! 2 * 255 = 510 bytes
On 06/30/2015 03:17 PM, jd1008 wrote:
The link you refer to
talks about the 2 bytes past byte 255, they they are
bytes 256 and 257.
No, you set the block size to 2, so you are seeking (2 * 255) or 512
bytes into the disk.
But I already indicated the 466 bytes are null... in another usb drive
observations:
1. GRUB's boot.img, the 440 bytes of code in the MBR/LBA 0, does not
use the partition active bit (the boot flag). So boot flag is
irrelevant in a GRUB context. The GRUB boot.img code contains the
specific LBA to jump to where core.img is found, which on MBR disks is
in the MBR gap.
The link you refer to
talks about the 2 bytes past byte 255, they they are
bytes 256 and 257.
But I already indicated the 466 bytes are null... in another usb drive I
tested,
thus no boot signature - and yet, bios hung forever because that disk
was 2nd
in boot order after cd/dvd drive, and befo
Hi Rick,
Re: my /dev/sdb:
dd if=/dev/sdb bs=2 count=1 skip=255 2>/dev/null | od -x
000 aa55
002
If these are the bytes that indicate a boot signature,
can they be "null'ed" safely??
Thanx.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription opt
On 06/30/2015 02:28 PM, jd1008 wrote:
I already explained to you
1. The disk is partitioned using fdisk.
2. I cleared the 446 bytes to nulls.
3. None of the partitions have a boot signature.
The boot signature is at bytes 511 and 512, and you indicated that it is
present:
https://lists.fedora
I already explained to you
1. The disk is partitioned using fdisk.
2. I cleared the 446 bytes to nulls.
3. None of the partitions have a boot signature.
You comment "bug" is not a word for "something I don't understand" or
"something I don't like."
is so totally irrelevant to what I have alrea
On 06/26/2015 07:35 PM, jd1008 wrote:
I have been googling and read wikis.
None of them really explain clearly
If
1. a drive has no bootable partitions and
2. the boot code in the 1st 446 bytes does not exist (all nulls)
then
how does bios decide it is not bootable, move on to the nex
perhaps the drive firmware presents the drive as bootable when first
awakened .. to load driver like software .. or perhaps malware ...
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:35 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>
>
> On 06/26/2015 06:09 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
>
>> On 06/26/2015 04:42 PM, jd1008 wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06
On 06/26/2015 06:09 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:42 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/26/2015 05:29 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:05 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the
On 06/26/2015 04:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the first sector which
you thought might be boot code that is confusing BIOS
to think that my usb drive is bootable.
The bytes you already saw are obviously not boot code.
W
On 06/26/2015 04:42 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/26/2015 05:29 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:05 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the first sector which
you thought might be boot co
On 06/26/2015 04:29 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:05 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the first sector which
you thought might be boot code that is confusing BIOS
to think that m
On 06/26/2015 05:29 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:05 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the first sector which
you thought might be boot code that is confusing BIOS
to think that
On 06/26/2015 04:05 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/26/2015 04:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the first sector which
you thought might be boot code that is confusing BIOS
to think that my usb drive is bootable.
The bytes you alread
On 06/26/2015 04:05 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Where do device (or partition) labels reside? In the partitions?
In MBR, partitions don't have labels. Filesystems do regardless of what
container they're in. In GPT, partitions have 72 bytes for a label/name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_
On 06/26/2015 04:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the first sector which
you thought might be boot code that is confusing BIOS
to think that my usb drive is bootable.
The bytes you already saw are obviously not boot code.
W
On 06/26/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Just wondering about the bytes in the first sector which
you thought might be boot code that is confusing BIOS
to think that my usb drive is bootable.
The bytes you already saw are obviously not boot code.
What is obvious to you is not obvious to the CPU,
On 06/25/2015 03:32 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/25/2015 11:33 AM, jd1008 wrote:
I bought the usb drive brand new and had not installed anything
on it. Just partitioned it and used it.
So, how could it contain any boot code?
Is this what manufacturers do by default? I had not encountered
th
On 06/25/2015 03:55 PM, jd1008 wrote:
OK, but since this drive is my only backup drive, I feel
I cannot run dd to clobber those 466 bytes :(
Too risky, even if I feel nothing can go wrong, but ...
murphy's law
Re: sda1: here is the output:
dd if=/dev/sda bs=2 count=1 skip=255 2>/dev/null |
On 06/25/2015 04:26 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/25/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Is the; \0 305 033 the cause of the problem for BIOS?
Possibly? Though, I should have also suggested that you check bytes
at 0x1FE and 0x1FF:
# dd if=/dev/sda bs=2 count=1 skip=255 2>/dev/null |
On 06/25/2015 02:51 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Is the; \0 305 033 the cause of the problem for BIOS?
Possibly? Though, I should have also suggested that you check bytes at
0x1FE and 0x1FF:
# dd if=/dev/sda bs=2 count=1 skip=255 2>/dev/null | od -x
000 aa55
002
Those bytes are a sig
On 06/25/2015 03:32 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/25/2015 11:33 AM, jd1008 wrote:
I bought the usb drive brand new and had not installed anything
on it. Just partitioned it and used it.
So, how could it contain any boot code?
Is this what manufacturers do by default? I had not encountered
th
On 06/25/2015 11:33 AM, jd1008 wrote:
I bought the usb drive brand new and had not installed anything
on it. Just partitioned it and used it.
So, how could it contain any boot code?
Is this what manufacturers do by default? I had not encountered
this issue you raise before.
Have a look at it:
On 06/25/2015 11:22 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:47 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Well, that is strange!!! It really says that BIOS is busted
and does not have the good sense to realize the drive is not
bootable - just as in the case of having an audio CD in the
CD drive, and it ignores the
On 06/24/2015 05:47 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Well, that is strange!!! It really says that BIOS is busted
and does not have the good sense to realize the drive is not
bootable - just as in the case of having an audio CD in the
CD drive, and it ignores the presenc of the audio CD and
moves on to the next
On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 18:36 -0600, jd1008 wrote:
> OK, so how long before bios times out and move on
> to the internal HD? The usb drive, which is
> NOT bootable, has no booter installed, and
> neither one of it's partitions are bootable:
Some BIOSs will not do that.
I have one PC that cannot be
On 06/24/2015 07:13 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:47 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:40 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:36 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:25 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:07 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens w
On 06/24/2015 05:47 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:40 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:36 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:25 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:07 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
L
On 06/24/2015 06:40 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:36 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:25 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:07 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 wi
On 06/24/2015 05:36 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:25 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:07 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 with all updates
Grub installed on sda.
Power u
On 06/24/2015 06:25 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:07 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 with all updates
Grub installed on sda.
Power up ,and after bios's internal works, I d
On 06/24/2015 06:24 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 06/25/2015 02:07 AM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 with all updates
Grub installed on sda.
Power up ,and after bios's internal works, I
On 06/25/2015 02:07 AM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 with all updates
Grub installed on sda.
Power up ,and after bios's internal works, I do not get the grub menu.
All I get is an empty
On 06/24/2015 05:07 PM, jd1008 wrote:
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 with all updates
Grub installed on sda.
Power up ,and after bios's internal works, I do not get the grub menu.
All I get is an empty
On 06/24/2015 05:57 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 with all updates
Grub installed on sda.
Power up ,and after bios's internal works, I do not get the grub menu.
All I get is an empty screen with the underscore cursor blink
On 06/24/2015 04:25 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Laptop: Dell Latitude E6510.
OS: F20 with all updates
Grub installed on sda.
Power up ,and after bios's internal works, I do not get the grub menu.
All I get is an empty screen with the underscore cursor blinking at
upper left corner.
Reboot.
Press F12 t
90 matches
Mail list logo
