GRUB adds Windows but not other Linux distributions?

[actaea]

I have developed the hobby of testing out Linux distributions over the last month. The problem I have is with how GRUB is installed by Linux distros. My Microsoft Windows partition is always perfectly well recognized. It's on its own hard drive. (I have a Windows OS as a present from a college student who got it free from his university. I would never pay for it, but it's important to know what the enemy is up to.)

I have two other drives where I try to play with three Linux distributions. (One of the drives is a massive 500GB drive.) When GRUB is installed, the Linux distros rarely recognize each other. (Ubuntu is about the only exception that really worked, though OpenSuse at least made a good effort.) Can't we show the respect for each other that we show the evil empire?

I'm sorry if I'm ranting, but I do have a problem. I need to get back to my Debian install, but I'm getting a GRUB error 22 error and I'm not having much luck fixing it. I've been real successful with errors 15 and 17. Any suggestions for my error?

Really, my GRUB error is less important than getting Distros to include better installations of GRUB. What can we do to get this issue front and center? It seems to me that all I'm demanding is that we implement the free software philosophy, and that we think our Operating Systems are as worthy as Windows.

[devils casper]

i disagree with you. all Linux distros recognize other installed distros except Fedora Core. Ubuntu and SuSe recognize multiple kernel versions too.
you are getting these errors coz you are not installing GRUB in MBR of Linux Harddisk. there might be other reasons too.






Casper

[actaea]

i disagree with you. all Linux distros recognize other installed distros except Fedora Core. Ubuntu and SuSe recognize multiple kernel versions too.
you are getting these errors coz you are not installing GRUB in MBR of Linux Harddisk. there might be other reasons too.
Casper

I don't think you are right, but if even if you are right, the problem remains. I always pick the choices that seem to imply that I'm installing the GRUB in the MBR of the Linux hard drive. If--as you state--Linux distros do recognize each other, all except Ubuntu provide choices that make even good users not be able to install GRUB properly. Linux shouldn't be only for those who know the ultra-secret code, but for everyone.

[devils casper]

Ubuntu Desktop CD doesn't provide any option for Boot Loader type or Location and it installs GRUB in MBR of Primary Harddisk. all other Distro Installers give a lot of options for Boot Loader type and Location. Ubuntu worked for you coz it didn't ask anything.
are you sure that you didn't change any option in Boot Loader section during other distros installation?





Casper

[netstrider]

Always install to hda/sda... (Where windows is installed - usually)

[actaea]

I suppose I should be more clear about my complaint, as I think I was confusing issues last night. Several distribution will mention before installing GRUB that there are other Linux'es on the machine, but then turn around and don't put them in GRUB. Others don't bother detecting them. I have had issues like that with Debian, PCLOS, openSuse, and Arch. (Arch may be slightly forgiven since it did not detect the Windows installation either.)

On the other hand, Ubuntu--I installed Kubuntu--is excellent!! I installed it and all my GRUB errors went away. Windows was detected as well as the Debian install on which I had a large and unbacked up file. On the other hand, I find that openSuse has the best routine for partitioning disk. I urge distros--even the nerd-macho distros like Arch and Gentoo--to use Ubuntu's GRUB scheme. It just makes sense to be polite about other distros and even about Windows. Some people may need to be eased over gently.

[Juan Pablo]

I don't know what is happening to you, I have tried Debian, PCLinuxOS, openSuSE and Arch and all recognize other distros and even add multiple kernels for each one.
I think you are doing something wrong here.

Even the nerd-macho distros .... and Gentoo to use Ubuntu's GRUB scheme

This is pointless, Gentoo doesn't even have a working installer. You install and configure GRUB yourself

[oz]

I urge distros--even the nerd-macho distros like Arch and Gentoo--to use Ubuntu's GRUB scheme. It just makes sense to be polite about other distros and even about Windows. Some people may need to be eased over gently.

As an avid Arch user for the last two years, I wouldn't like that at all. Arch is meant to be for those users that enjoy using the command line interface and doing their tweaking manually. Adding lots of tools to the distro to do these things only complicates the distro.

From the first paragraph in the Arch "About" page:

We do not provide any configuration helper utilities (ie, you won't find linuxconf in here) so you will quickly become very proficient at configuring your system from the shell commandline.

That's way the huge majority of veteran Arch users like it. If someone wants a distro with "training wheels", there are already plenty of those distros to choose from.

Just my two cents...

oz

[actaea]

I don't know what is happening to you, I have tried Debian, PCLinuxOS, openSuSE and Arch and all recognize other distros and even add multiple kernels for each one.
I think you are doing something wrong here.

In order to do an install I need a distro with the JMicron drivers. I wonder if what is happening to me could be related to having SATA hard drives. I notice something very peculiar about Linuxes describe my SATA hard drives as SCSI hard drives. Juan Pablo, do you think the problem could just be my machine?

[actaea]

I didn't understand how hard core the Arch and Gentoo folks are, but I certainly meant no offence in my suggestion. I now understand that it was a bad suggestion.