One thing that I don't like for Fedora 12
FedoraForum.org - Fedora Support Forums and Community
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    43
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    One thing that I don't like for Fedora 12

    It changes the active partition after installation. For example, I had windows XP installed on sda1 and sda1 used to be the active partition. Then after I installed fedora on sda2, sda2 becomes the active partition. It didn't ask if you want to do that during the installation. I found this out because it cost me a lot of time to figure out the issue after a crashed install of fedora, after which my computer doesn't boot from HD any more.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,544
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hello qinhan,

    I understand your sentiment about that and even have to say that I don't care for it either because I use NTLoader as my main boot loader. That means I have to change it back after I install Fedora nowadays. It's no big deal really, once you become aware of it and get used to thinking about it as a possible factor in boot loader dilemmas. It wasn't always this way. It started with Fedora 11. Anyway, in this other thread here, JEO takes a reasonable stab at explaining a possible reason for this change...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    43
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    stoat,
    Thanks for your reply. The change may be reasonable. But I would suggest somewhat more robust implementation. What I experienced is that after I choose which partition to install fedora, the installation crashed and obviously the active partition had already been changed at that time. Then after rebooting, the computer was not going anywhere since now the active partition is pointing to one that doesn't have any boot loader on it. If the active partition should be changed, it should be changed after grub is installed. My 1c.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,544
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fair enough. You can always make your thoughts known to the developers...In the meantime, here's something you might be interested in...It's a handy free utility to have around for times like you described. It can boot the computer with a live Linux system and run gparted. With it you could have changed the active partition. I keep one around at all times.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    8,486
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stoat
    Fair enough. You can always make your thoughts known to the developers...In the meantime, here's something you might be interested in...It's a handy free utility to have around for times like you described. It can boot the computer with a live Linux system and run gparted. With it you could have changed the active partition. I keep one around at all times.
    I concur. the gparted livecd is an indispensable tool and I wouldn't be without it

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sebring, Florida, USA
    Posts
    272
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stoat
    Anyway, in this other thread here, JEO takes a reasonable stab at explaining a possible reason for this change...
    From JEO - Many BIOSes will not try to boot a drive even if it has grub in the MBR if they detect that no partitions on the drive are set active (parted boot flag on). This has bitten me many times on several systems. One partition on a bootable drive should be set active. For grub in the MBR, any one primary partiton set active will allow it to boot.
    Wouldn't it be much more sensible for the installer to determine if there's an active partition or not and leave things alone if there is one and set an active partition if there isn't one? You know ..... like everyone else does. I personally consider arbitrarily changing current settings that don't need changing to be intrusive and rude. You know ..... a windows sort of thing.
    Linux User #456254

    Fedora 14 desktop on:

    BioStar MCP6P-M2 Motherboard * NVIDIA GeForce 6150 / nForce 430 Video * AMD Sempron LE1100 1.9GHZ 256KB CPU * 1GB PC4200 DDR2 RAM * 160GB Serial ATA HD * 320 GB WD IDE HD * SATA2

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,868
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    I have heard of this problem before but haven't seen any bug reports filed. I would highly recommend doing so.
    Rahul
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RahulSundaram

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    48
    Posts
    4,164
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ginhan,
    I believed it ask you grub was going to be the boot loader. You must have notice that.

    What that changed, anyone?

    I used to dual boot years ago. I'm now a Fedora user on this rig, Windows 2000 Pro expired, hence, used the whole drive since for Fedora Core 6, the best!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    Good news, further evaluation of this issue has lead to the conclusion that
    the removal of the active flag from an existing partition indeed is unwanted
    behavior.

    So I've just changed this, and for F-13 we will no longer do that, see:
    http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=a...118ad9faf24cc9

    Regards,

    Hans

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    8,486
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank you Hans. I would think that setting the partition that Fedora is installed to as active would be wanted, but changing other existing partitions would be unwanted.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 4th May 2008, 10:16 PM
  2. 2 thing I am quite not satisfied with Fedora 8
    By James Lau in forum Using Fedora
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 13th November 2007, 11:22 AM
  3. And another thing...
    By schwim in forum Wibble
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 8th September 2007, 05:14 PM
  4. The first thing...
    By Wayne in forum Wibble
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 7th September 2006, 03:43 AM
  5. Possible to do a system restore type thing with fedora?
    By phantomcow2 in forum Using Fedora
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 25th April 2006, 10:54 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •