I have a Duron 1G with 256 MB RAM, 60G hard disk. I have Partition Magic and I'm running System Commander for dual booting stuff. I'm trying to run DOS 6.22, Windows 98 SE, Windows NT Workstation 4.0 SP 6, and RedHat Linux 7.0 on the same hard drive and I'm a little confused about all the "1024 cylinder (8 GB) boundary" requirements. From what I've gathered, 98 doesn't care where it boots from but NT and Linux need to be on partitions entirely before 8 GB (please correct me if I'm wrong). So this is what I'm planning on setting my partitions up like: Primary - 1 GB DOS (FAT16) Primary - 4 GB Linux Extended: Logical - 3 GB WinNT (NTFS) --8 GB Boundary-- Logical - 40 GB Various other partitions (no OS's) Primary - 12 GB Win98 (FAT32) I already have DOS and WindowsNT installed as they are - NT on a logical partition - and I don't want to change them. So is all my information right or are there any problems with all this? Can the NT partition be larger or somewhere else on the hard drive, especially considering I have System Commander? Does 98 need to be somewhere else? Thanks in advance for any help or advice.

SP6a should take care of the 8Gb limit for NT and Red hat is going to need 3 partitions, one about 1meg for temp install, 2Gb for the os, and 2Gb for the apps. and as a swap partition so other os's can see it. As for the NT partition I believe it can be anywhere.

'98 will not boot if in a primary partition that starts beyond the 8Gig barrier; this is its boot-code limit/boundary. You must have '98 before that barrier if in a Primary partition - and I think this applies even if using an add-in boot-manager util. I would put '98 into a logical-drive after the NT logical-drive. You already have the core condition for a dual/multi-boot involving NT - i.e. fat16 C: active Primary partition. The 'drive' for '98 can be whatever size you wish (within reason). Post 3279 on this NT forum was posted some time back by a chap... It details a '98/NT dual-boot and is worth a read. I think you will see how it can be modified to your needs (you already have it part way there) and then add in Linux? Put Linux after '98/NT. Also your data areas; remember that NT cannot see fat32, and '98 cannot see ntfs (or fat16 areas over 2Gig.). So it's wise to have common/shared data areas (as fat16 - 2Gig limits)) if wishing to share data? Or use the sysinternals utils that accomodate this limitation. Useful rule of thumb: put all fat32 areas at end of drive (M$/gurus advice) - at the least after NT. I have'nt played with Linux so I can't advise with much detail on installing it; but there is good guide on integrating Linux with NT/W2K at the John Savill's NT faq's at: http://www.windows2000faq.com - installation section. Can't post a link to it for you as the site is not up just now. If the site still isn't up when you go there, then a search via google.com for: dual-boot Linux and NT4 (similarly for W2K and Linux) will bring up various other guides. All about partition and boot-code issues for some OS at: http://www.pcbodega.com.ph/troll3.html ('Troll' also seems to involve Linux in his scheme of things...) http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types-2.html Also another one to be aware of: John Savill link for NT and larger drives: http://www.windows2000faq.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=13894 You need SP4 or later; and ideally the updated ATAPI.exe during installation. Overall you 'could' set this whole scene up without using an add-in boot-manger util? Before you start out - make the ERD for NT. Update it at each step of the way; keep current at all times.

First of all, thanks for the help from both of you, especially "trvlr," it was really helpful. I checked out all of the links and learned a lot. I spent some time and couldn't find anywhere saying Windows 98 can be installed on a logical partition, and several sources saying it can only be on a primary partition. So I'm assuming what I found to be true unless someone explains otherwise? I also found that it does not matter where Linux is installed, at least not RH 7.0 which is what I have. So my new partition plan follows: Primary - 1 GB DOS - FAT16 Primary - 3 GB Win98 - FAT32 Logical - 4 GB WinNT - NTFS -- 8 GB Boundary -- Logical - 4-5 GB Linux partitions Logical - 4-5 GB NTFS Files Logical - 26 GB FAT16 Shared Files Logical - 17 GB FAT32 Files Anything wrong with this? I'd appreciate a response even if it's fine. Thanks again and if anyone else has anything to add, it'd be great too. Another concern I have is Windows 98 OEM versions wiping out the hard drive without warning? I've heard that some versions do this but does anyone have an idea of how likely this is? I suppose this is more of a Windows 9x forum question and i'll ask there too, but I'd like to have an idea whether this is going to happen and if there is any way to prevent it.

'98 (or '95-OSR2b/c) can go into a logical-drive as long as the active primary is either fat16/fat32. During setup the '98 boot/start-up files will go into the active primary, the actual system files (the OS itself) will go where you put it. If installing 95a then the active primary has to be fat16 ('95a, like NT3x/4x, cannnot see fat32). (M$ KB details the M$ approach to a multi-boot involving all of the M$ OS'; each is in its own logical-drive - including '95/'98...) E.g. I have a triple-boot NTWs/Svr/'98 system with '98 in a logical-drive; with C: fat16 active primary; this a 6Gig drive. Another system (C: active primary = fat16) is a quad-boot - NTWS/Svr/'98/W2K; '98 was installed first (as fat16 on this ocasion) into the first logical-drive. It's really a 'quin-boot', as DOS 6.22 is also around on this one - in the C: primary. '98 is there just as a safety OS in case something won't run under W2K)... All OS are in separate logical-drives; a common accessed data area as fat16; some data areas as fat32; some intended as ntfs5 (NT has reqired SP to handle ntfs5). This system is a 40Gig drive. So again I would put '98 into a logical-drive (after NT) as suggested earlier? I don't see the need for a second primary as you are already part way to the standard/multi-boot. A separate primary for '98 will probably require the add-in boot-util? Why install things you probably don't need? Using PM etc. you could create/establish the logical-drive for '98 (as fat16 or fat32), without loss of current installation (data etc.) - after NT; afterwhich PM is redundant? Nonetheless I'd save/secure/backup data first - just to sure. Not aware of a '98 OEM CD wiping out a current installation or hard-drive? 'Usually' the only way you can wipe out a drive is to Fdisk or (re)format it? As you suggest put that one on the '9x forum as well; and perhaps post findings here too?

So what I'm getting out of this is 98 is like NT in the sense that it puts boot files on the first partition but the rest of it can be on another? The M$KB article seemed somewhat confusing but I got the point you were trying to make about the logical partitions. I'm assuming when you, and MS, mention logical-drives, you are referring to partitions, not separate hard disks? I always thought of a drive as a separate physical component. On your "quin-boot" system, where do you have NT? Is it before or after the 8GB boundary? Although this doesn't matter that much for me, as I'll most likely keep NT before 8GB anyway. Of course, I have everything backed up, it's just sort of a hassle to reinstall everything. So now what I'll do with my partitions is DOS, then NT, then ~12G for 98, then the rest. What the 9x forum people told me was that OEM discs don't wipe out the hard drive, however recovery discs, which restore everything back to how it came from the factory - partitions, OS's, bundled programs - are designed to do this. My question now is, as I asked there also, how do I tell if an OEM disk is really a recovery disc? Will it be labeled as such?

A drive is usually referring to a physical item - i.e. the actual hardware item; a logical-drive is a subdivision within the Extended partition - which itself is separate partition after any Primary partition(s) presnt. DOS/'9x(ME) can only create/handle/see a single primary; but NT/W2K/XP can create/handle/see upto four. A drive can be configured to have upto four primary partitions, or three and an Extended partition; this providing the OS involved is capable of creating multiple primaries... All M$ OS will install their boot/startup files into the active primary; the actual system files (the OS itself) can go into a logical-drive...; or the system files can also be in the active primary (as would the case in a conventional single OS installation). You can have a dual/multi-boot with one OS in the active primary, the other(s) being in logical-drive(s) - or occupying the extended partition along with data - if not subdivided into two or more logical-drives; and you can have all/each OS installed in separate logical-drives. My 'quin-boot system' is as follows: Primary: c: = iGig = fat16 = DOS6.22 (with CDROM drivers) + all installed M$ OS boot-files. (It also has '98/NT setup folders (from their CD's) copied there...) Extended: d: = 2Gig = fat16 = '98; e: = 2Gig = fat16 = ntws; f: = 2Gig = fat16 = ntsvr; g: = 5Gig = fat32 = W2KPro; h: = 5Gig = fat32 = ??? i: = balance of drive - as yet unconfigured/formatted... d is fat16 and could be fat32; but if fat32 then drive letters move aroundfor subsequnet OS's that cannot see fat32...; and I only have '98 installed as fall-back OS for items that won't run under W2K (and perhaps NT)... NT 'logical-drives' could be larger; could be ntfs even; but I don't need larger size or ntfs for them at present. Your current proposed arrangement should be OK. How to distinguish between an OEM and recovery disk? I'm not sure - never having had to use one of the latter... I seem to recall comments elsewhere that a true 'recovery disk' has no setup.exe? Current OEM CD's come 'fixed' (bios-locked) to disallow installation on other than the sytem with which it came; although there are ways to defeat this in some cases... The following link includes an article about recovery CD's: http://csociety.ecn.purdue.edu/pipermail/slashdot-mailer/2000-June/000509.html You could ask the folks who sold you system and disks; also contact M$ for any input re differences?