After booting Mepis AntiX M8.2 CD on an old computer I assembled from the residue in my basement ('97 BIOS / 233MHz cpu / 256MB RAM), and liking what I saw, I tried installing to the HD in hda2 (/root), hda3(swap) and hda4 (/home), it wouldn't boot to the HD. I fiddled with GRUB(1) for a couple of weeks without success (error 17 at GRUB stage 1.5) even after several edits/reinstalls/re-partitions/re-formats (ext3/ext2/reiserfs). Eventually, I upgraded the platform, expecting faster performance and hopefully a fixed boot problem. No dice.

I've noted several other distros of AntiX (which I will stay with, if possible), but do not know if the newer ones would still recognize my hardware or if there is a particular distro flavor that would be best (I see several flavors of AntiX: core, base, etc, but links to their descriptions are broken
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://antixlinux.com/downloads.html"
linktext was:"http://antixlinux.com/downloads.html"
====================================
). I eventually found the descriptions & opted for the 'full' distro of M8.5 and M11. Both M8.2 & 8.5 still gave the GRUB stage 1.5 error 17 (can't read the partition) on my upgraded system. M11 couldn't sort out the monitor setting and I an concentrating on M8.5, which I think will work for my purpose (see my Hello post for that) if I can boot it.

My system, presently, is:
MSi 6167, Athlon classic cpu (700MHz), 768MB RAM
HD is WD2500, master on IDE-1
DVD SATA via Startech PATA2SATA converter from IDE-2
LCD monitor on pci Diamond card
No floppy; no sound; nothing in USB slots (interfaces present)
ISA slots: Keithley Metrabyte DASCON-1 & DAS-16G1 cards (8-bit)
At this point there is no net connection - will add LAN later.
I intend to use the COMEDI software for the cards under either DOS (have some drivers) or C/C++/Python/? under Linux.

The install of M8.5, with no options, went with no reported problems till I tried to boot to the HD. I chose the GRUB install to the MBR, as recommended. I put boot on my sda2 (ext3) partition and with /home on the sda4 (ext3) partition. Partition sda4 is swap.

There seems to be some confusion in the ID of the HD: some places it is hda (BIOS) & some it is it is sda. I've installed to my hda1 / sda1. Is GRUB breaking up over this? GRUB (from CD/RAM) seems to need hd, as I get error 23 from: grub> root sd <t> and grub> root hd<t> gives"Possible discs are: hd0 and hd1". hd1 is a usb thumbdrive, part of my slippernet configuration to get various files to my desktop computer for contemplation.
Other differences: grub> root hd0,<t> reports that both partitions 1 & 3 (antix 2 & 4) are ext2, not ext3.

I can see 2 places in the installed /root/grub/menu.lst which can be changed from sd to hd, but thought to get the other things cleared up first.

All suggestions are welcome. I need guidance.

rich

The Linux system numbers drives as it finds them at boot up, so the designation of your drive may have changed. (UUID is probably the best way to go, but would be complicated to explain.)

HDA is the old naming convention of IDE drives, SDA is either SATA or USB drive designation.

You will need to look in your grub configuration file to see if it is attempting to boot the right drive.
If your /boot partition is not on the first drive that could be the problem.

Personally, I would install the OS onto your IDE drive, & also the swap, & put /home on your SATA drive. Doing that, your grub config should be booting from the first drive, HDA.
The advantage of doing it this way is that you can replace the OS whilst keeping your data.

Kernel changes I think determine hda vs sda. Older releases like 8.2 might use the hda . I gotta look see through some of my old posts I guess.


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://yatsite.blogspot.com/2009/07/install-antix-82-final-on-asus-eee-900.html"
linktext was:"http://yatsite.blogspot.com/2009/07/ins ... e-900.html"
====================================


No. 8.2 kernel uses sd instead of hd according to my old tutorial screenshots of gparted.

Yeah. Back in 2008 was hd used when I showed how to install Damn Small Linux 4.0. On a antique Compaq laptop.


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://yatsite.blogspot.com/2008/10/damn-small-linux-40-install-on-compaq.html"
linktext was:"http://yatsite.blogspot.com/2008/10/dam ... ompaq.html"
====================================

I'm back with success, finally. I got another HD (160GB / $10) partitioned it (sda1-20GB root; sda2-3GB swap; sda3-25GB home), formatted it ext3 and installed antix-8.5, and Grub to root. After disabling 'boot other' in the BIOS and adding a boot flag to sda1, it booted and I now have an antix installation.

I am convinced, at this point, that my problem was not sda/hda but something to do with the fact that BIOS, apparently can't see beyond 137GB (noticed this in BIOS report screen after my initial post; has to do with IDE & address bits) on any HD and my original install was on a 250GB HD with root at about 190GB. antix, however can see the whole drive and it isn't clear why Grub can't, also, see it. Installing grub to root instead of the MBR may have had an impact , though I've tried that before with no effect.

fatmac, my SATA drive is my CD/DVD drive, though Linux labels all the IDEs as sdx. I should be able to reinstall the OS in hda1 without impacting /home in sda3, shouldn't I? And I still have plenty of room above sda3 for more installs.

Anyhow, thanks for your help. It took about six weeks to get antix installed. I hope the rest of it is easier, or I won't live long enough to use it.

Rich

richES wrote:I'm back with success, finally.

fatmac, my SATA drive is my CD/DVD drive, though Linux labels all the IDEs as sdx. I should be able to reinstall the OS in hda1 without impacting /home in sda3, shouldn't I? And I still have plenty of room above sda3 for more installs.

Anyhow, thanks for your help. It took about six weeks to get antix installed. I hope the rest of it is easier, or I won't live long enough to use it.

Rich

Glad you're up & running.
Yes, if /home is on another partition, you can re-install most any Linux system.
It's only if /home is part of the / that problems can arise, but it is always better to back up your personal data before (re)installing
Your next install, if ever needed, will only take minutes. __{{emoticon}}__