How very odd.. I wrote/posted another contribution here this am and it doth not seem to be here now??? Must have hit the wrong button.... Regardless… You appear to have a single Primary and an Extended partition – which latter correctly appears as logical-drive. XP is ntfs; and ME cannot address an ntfs partition during a boot-up; but can do so afterwards with a suitable add-in util. Recalling my earlier post re’ requirements for a dual/multi-boo; that active Primary “must” be a format that all installed M$ OS can access – at boot-time (I omitted to make that clear). The common format across all M$ OS = fat16 – max partition size = 2Gig; this even though NT/W2K/XP can also handle fat16 to a max of 4Gig. If only ‘9x/ME present with XP/W2K then that Primary can also be fat32. (If NT with a dos-based OS present then it “must” be fat16 – 2Gig max) Your Primary is ntfs – and clearly it doesn’t fulfil the first requirement; nor the second fat32 (option) either. Also the active Primary “must” contain the bootsect.dos for the dos-based OS. Usually this is created by the NT family (NT/W2K/XP) when they are installed (or the installation routine is started) and they find the bootsector is currently dos based… If one adds in a dos-based OS after either of those OS have been installed, the bootsector will be rewritten to that for dos; and NT/W2K (and XP) will not boot. The standard NT/W2K repair routine will restore boot to/for NT etc, and will also create the bootsect.dos – and complete boot.ini/boot-menu etc. and thus the dual/multi-boot. Traditionally XP has not done this last bit; its repair routines will not create the bootsect.dos. Either one manually creates it (Doug Knox details one approach – amongst others); or one starts a temp installation of XP; allows it go to first reboot – or all the way. Whichever way you choose both approaches will create a bootsect.dos and complete the dual/multi-boot. After-which one deletes all traces of the temp XP installation… That the bootsect.dos can also be created via the Recovery Console is a new one for me; haven’t seen any references in M$-land to this effect either… But if it works (and a link below does seem to bear out TopFarmer’s info) then it’s another way to know about? M$ do comment in this same reference that the XP repair routine will not (usually) produce a bootsect.dos; and my limited experience is the same. Why does one need the bootsect.dos…? Very briefly - when (via the NT etc. boot-menu) one opts for dos/’9x/ME a lot goes on behind the scenes… There is hidden soft reboot; the (NT style) bootsector info is replaced by the info for dos etc. (using data in the bootsect.dos file in the active primary partition); then the system reboots boots to dos level (only); and then boots up ‘9x/ME accordingly… When you close out… and/or reboot, the boot sector is again set for NT etc. Assorted ways to create bootsect.dos: http://www.thpc.info/dual/bootsectd... And a more detailed discussion on the whole NT/W2K/XP boot sequence… http://tweakhomepc.virtualave.net/d... Even though you managed to create a boot-menu showing ME as part of it all, the ME boot-files aren’t where they orta be; and wont’ eva be – cos XP (active Primary) = ntfs…; and likewise even if you manage to create a bootsect.dos file one way or t’other… you will still not get ME to boot… Unless you use an add-in util; or rejig the drive significantly… and that’s a path you don’t really want to go down… In your present situation you have a couple of options; and the following is possibly the easiest/simplest overall? (1) Using an add-in boot-manger util: First (via XP or the util) delete the Extended partition and create a second Primary partition in its place (format it as fat32); this will be second physical partition on the drive.. Transfer the cloned ME to it; and use the boot-manger util to select which OS you wish to boot up. Many will suggest PM8x; I don’t… There have been enough instances of folks having problems with and XP…;not everyone has had problems – but enough to discourage me… Acronis gets good reports; and BootIT likewise from those who have used it; and neither appears to have any issues with XP… The util is installed via XP; and allows (usually) one to hide the other Primary if not if not requiring access to it (and OS booted up can “see” it”). Remember that while XP can access fat32… ME cannot access ntfs (without a suitable add-in). In this scenario XP Primary remains the active partition… Whichever util you decide to use – first read the idiot’s manual that comes with it. Each util has its own foibles and ways of doing things… Less simple etc. but viable (and not my first choice at all…)- rejig the drive partitioning… Rejigging the drive partitioning means using a partition-manager (Acronis etc…?) and shunting the XP Primary down the drive; and then creating a new Primary ahead of it – for ME – and this is formatted as fat32. Load ME into this new Primary – which will now be the active Primary. (You will have to delete the present ME extended partition entirely so as to free up space on the drive…). Once ME installed and booting OK… do a temp installation of XP – into the c:\temp folder in the ME (Primary) partition. Allow it go all the way, or cancel at first reboot. When you reboot you will have a working dual-boot ME/XP. Delete all traces of XP from the c:\temp location in ME, and clean up the boot.ini to remove evidence of the temp installation…. In both the above scenarios, both OS will boot as c: . XP will re-assign a drive letter other than c: to the ME partition when XP is booted up. Whereas ME will not see XP at all – unless you us an add-in boot-util; and then it too will assign a drive letter other than c: to the XP area… This will produce no problems for either OS… and all paths will remain valid… I’d go the first option as it it’s the simples/easiest and least messy? One other point re' OS installations - especially dos-based... Dos itself has to be in the first physical partition on the drive - and thus that will the active Primary.. Also the boot/start-up files for '9x/ME can go into that active Primary while their system files (the actual OS files) can go elsewhere on the drive (extended-partition\logical-drive(s) - usually). Also '9x/Me can go into an additional Primary that is not physically first on the drive - when using a boot-manger util...; within certain limits...

0

TRVIR Your response is so expansive and comprehensive it leaves me breathless - and somewhat OVERawed. I don't know if the following option is implied in the above : It would not be too onerous for me to partition a 'new' HDD, and clone my WinMe into the first partition. That would ensure Fat32 is where it is needed. Then I clone my WinXP into the second partition. I would lose the multiboot structure on the current HDD, but it seems that could now (or earlier) be created the 'regular' way and result in a FUNCTIONAL multiboot. None of this would require me to venture into unchartered territory and might therefore be preferable ? Is this a goer ? Basty

0

TopFarmer The HDDs are 40Gb, so the limit is no issue. I've looked at the blurb with GAG, and it seems I could apply it to my concocted system. It may be worth trying first, so I won't have to REDO partitioning, formatting, cloning..... The reference for XOSL is not working for me, but that should be unnecessary if GAG can do what it seems to offer. Thanks for your concise help. Basty

0

mmm... A new HD, partitioned so as to have ME in the Primary and XP (also cloned) in an extended-partition\logical-drive: and balance of drive used for data - yes... A solution that is relatively easy to achieve. Likewise same new HD with "2" primary partitions; first for ME, second for XP; and an extended area for data - a viable option. To make this approach dual-boot - either use an add-in boot-manger (Acronis etc...) or the temp XP installation routine as described in earlier post above... I'd be somewhat inclined to go with the dual-primary partitions approach; allows you to achieve the dual-option in either of the two ways suggested. An add-in util might well be the easier for you; although the temp XP installation is equally easy...

0

Unless they have update GAG it will not boot an extended partition. If you have Partition Magic (likely other programs),may be on the Hiren's Boot Disc, I would have it change ME's partition to a primary one ,it should do it with no loss of ME . Then use XP dual boot option or GAG. If you use XP's dual boot option (see #1). Useing GAG would have no problem with ME install if done correctly. I did have your hdd setup but with 98 in place of ME and had no problem using XP's dual boot option. (see #1) #1 But the draw back it is not the normal way and one can not do any repair or clean install of 98(ME). #2 Use of any third party boot manager, if you reinstall any MS OS you will have to reinstall the boot manager. trvlr's suggestion with 2 primary partitions with ME first and XP 2nd would provide the best if help was needed later. But you would have to use a third party boot manager. When you work with XP the ME partition would have to be hid, otherwise due to the cloning of XP, its registry would point to the C: ME drive.

0

mmm.... XP reads/consults the registry during its bootup sequence (likewise with NT and W2K).; and this is where the actual drive letter assignment is determined once the OS is installed - unlike with dos-based OS. Thus regardless of where (which partition\logical-drive as appropriate) the system-files (the actual OS file) are located... XP will still boot and show itself as c: - in your situation - (or whatever drive letter/partition it was using at time of cloning...). ME and the whole dos-based OS family do not read the registry etc; and thus will always, when they boot up, assign the letter of the partition where they are on that current drive. So if you used XP dual/multi-boot facility to run the show (not an add-in util), and you had cloned ME when in c: and it's now on say d: , then it will boot (if you're lucky) and appear as d : - and give you a real headache in terms of path statements (all the cloned registry etc. entries will still refer to c: ). A nightmare you do not want to visit - unless into exercises of the mind; as the issue can be resolved - with time/effort - and/or a util or three... I get the feeling that you are (and with good reason) wary of getting into water that may be too deep for your comfort... And with this in mind... I strongly advocate you use the dual-primary approach and an add-in boot-util (with the caveat re' PM8x and XP very much in mind...). Even with that approach you can also use XP as the dual-boot manager rather than an add-in util; but the add-in util may overall be much easier or you - and quicker? re' the drive letter assignments issue again. If XP boots it will assign a "new" letter to the ME partition (if it sees it); but this letter "only" exists in and for XP boot.. Likewise if ME sees the XP partition (one way or other) it too will assign a "new" drive letter to it (XP); and again this is unique to ME and has no effects etc. on XP... If you prefer to partition the intended drive afresh with a genuine fat32 at the start (physically)... you have a mix of option available... But so much time/effort to achieve something quite simple at this stage - KISS principle would be best advice here? Also ME is likely to be the OS you may well dump at some stage anyway; and if it's second physically on the drive (or even later in...) then that space is ideally situated for other use - as in data storage...? If it's first on the drive - it "space" can still be used data etc - or another OS - but not the norm if data? You have working XP drive - and want to add ME to it... So retain the current drive; and go the dual primary route with XP where it is now; transfer cloned image of ME to second primary; install boot-util via XP (read its idiot's manual first - saves a lot grief and gnashing of toofs if reads them first in all situations) - and job's dun...! Again if using "any" add-in util - first read it's idiot's manual... - before you start to do anything at all...! One does not "have" to use an add-in/third-party util to control a dual/multi-primary OS dual/multi boot...; one can use the XP built-in "version". But to use that XP the boot-manger to control/complete the dual-boot option requires just a wee bit more of your time/effort etc... but it's not hard to do... Your choice obviously... Incidentally I generally do not encourage the use of add-in boot-utils (as I'm sure Wanderer and a few others here will concur...). I generally regard anything not essential as best left out. But there are times/places when they seem quite/most appropriate/suitable - and this is clearly one... You might feel to peruse again some of the lengthier info I sent you earlier (not the least the links) as it may/will help you understand what/why/how etc. of it all...? Dual/multi-boot etc. is no black magic; just requires one to understand the differences between the dos-based OSs and the NT/W2K/XP family... A "little" study resource or three...: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/51978 http://www.storagereview.com/guide2... http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file...

0

As a short reply to a great deal of offered help, I want to say that I feel I have a grasp of the fact that WinXP can handle FAT32, but WinMe can NOT handle NTFS - and that has implications for what is possible and advisable. As it is now 3.20am here, I'll leave it at that for now. Basty

0