Has anyone dual booted Puppy + Ubuntu with GRUB2?

[DaveS]

Varmint, on my system, I loaded file manager as root, (sudo nautilus). Navigate to the grub.conf file and right click on it. Change the permissions to allow you rather than root to change it, and from then on, you can edit it directly in Ubuntu by just clicking on it and loading it into the text editor
Risky? Doubtful as only I use the PC.

[Varmint]

I just did some more fiddling with my Asus netbook, and used puppy to install grub. As I mentioned previously, Puppy is on the first partition, while Ubuntu is on the second partion. Here is the code from /boot/grub/menu.lst:

# linux bootable partition config begins
title Puppy Linux 5.01 (on /dev/sda1)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda1 ro vga=normal
# linux bootable partition config ends
# linux bootable partition config begins
title Ubuntu 10.4 (on /dev/sda2)
root (hd0,1)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-21-generic root=/dev/sda2 ro quiet splash
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32-21-generic
# linux bootable partition config ends


As it now stands, I'm seeing puppy boot normally, while ubuntu insists on running a disk check. While it says to "Hit C to cancel...." it continues on merrily and slowly with the disk test regardless of how many times you punch that key. Weird. Almost guarantees I won't bother with booting into ubuntu, as it takes about 15-30 minutes to run that silly test. I'll have to look at this to see what causes it, and find a workaround. I really resent any process running without my authorizations. But it DOES boot, and I'm not sure if it will do that test every time I boot into ubuntu or not. I'll update this post when I know.

Grace and peace

UPDATE: I just rebooted and find that ubuntu didn't need to run the disk check this time. Perhaps it was a one-time thing since I switched from using ubuntu's grub to using puppy's version of grub. My guess is that this changed warranted the test, and now my system boots normally. Sweet, indeed.

[DaveS]

Varmint......... I think Ubuntu runs diskcheck to a schedule. Default is every 30th boot as far as I can remember. Not such a bad thing really............

[Varmint]

DaveS wrote:
"....I think Ubuntu runs diskcheck to a schedule. Default is every 30th boot as far as I can remember."

My reply:
That's a very good thing, imho, and thank you for sharing that information here. I have an older Ubuntu (9.04) on a usb stick, but I've only used it a couple times, and keep it for demos for other interested parties. I notice it seems to do the complete disk check, and not just it's own partition. Is that correct? I've been getting aquainted with the vagaries of ubuntu the past few days. The fact that it had updated wifi support led me to install lucid puppy in place of the old acer remix2 I had with it. I've tried out the software manager and found it pretty nice to use, and the programs seem to be pretty responsive and easy to update. This should make either of these two fine distros a first-in-line choice for new Linux users, as far as I'm concerned. For the more serious user, I'd still recommend the Debian on which these are based, or Slackware (for the VERY serious), but these two will introduce ANYONE, regardless of their technical prowess (or lack thereof) to linux in great style, while maintaining good reliability and rock-solid stability. Now don't I sound like a "horn-blower"?

I still plan to put a 32gb ssd in my netbook soon, and then I'll have room for Backtrack 4 & Slackware 13.1, both of which I've tried on this machine with success. If only these devices were designed to handle about 4gb ram, how sweet it would be, but they do function great even now, and without a swap partition. Now then....at least I got to drop a couple toes on two ways of using grub, so others can duplicate my efforts with a minimum of effort.

I've no reason to think that Ubuntu, being Debian-based, will have trouble setting up other distros alongside it. I've used debian, and now ubuntu, with slackware, backtrack, helix, bsd, and a couple others I can't remember, so don't feel intimidated when making whatever installation you want....someone here has the info you need, or at least can point the way for you to find it!

Thanks again for your input, DaveS. I'm off to have some fun and surf the forums for a bit....

73

[DaveS]

ubuntu insists on running a disk check. While it says to "Hit C to cancel...." it continues on merrily and slowly with the disk test regardless of how many times you punch that key. Weird.

I did some experimenting with this and....... the command is wrong! Dont hit 'C', press the 'Esc' key to abort.

[Varmint]

DaveS wrote, in part:

I did some experimenting with this and....... the command is wrong! Dont hit 'C', press the 'Esc' key to abort.


My reply:
Sounds like a "bug report" to me! You found it, so perhaps you should report it. Strange to not notice something like that in development, though. I wonder if it worked on their systems?

Thanks for a nice tip!
73

[jockjunior]

Hi all,

this is working for me

#!/bin/sh
exec tail -n +3 $0
# This file provides an easy way to add custom menu entries. Simply type the
# menu entries you want to add after this comment. Be careful not to change
# the 'exec tail' line above.
menuentry "Puppy510"{
set root=(hd0,1)
linux /puppy510/vmlinuz pmedia=idehd psubdir=puppy510
initrd /puppy510/initrd.gz
}
EOF

the above saved as 11_puppy
This is using xubuntu 10.4 with puppy510 directory in /puppy510

Hope that helps someone

Jock

[stu90]

While in Lubuntu just editing the 40_custom file and updating grub works but when in puppy i have to edit the grub.cfg as well as 40_custom when making a new frugal install.

[DaveS]

The changes you make to 40_custom are written to grub.conf automatically BY Ubuntu, but running Puppy, this does not happen of course, so you have to edit both. You can edit ONLY grub.conf if you use only Puppy, as the non-existent entry in 40_custom will not overwrite your edit of grub.conf.

[Thauriswulfa]

i just installed ubuntu10.10 and its grub2 didn't detect my puppy510 as i have very little knowledge of linux and grub.
and don't have much time these days to study grub manual so please help me to
add custom menuentry to the file 40_custom

other entries in my grub.cfg file is

Code:
menuentry 'Ubuntu, with Linux 2.6.35-24-generic' --class ubuntu --class gnu-linux --class gnu --class os {
recordfail
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='(hd0,msdos4)'
search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set 3e9bc03c-8e94-4759-af71-7e6ac4973155
linux /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-24-generic root=UUID=3e9bc03c-8e94-4759-af71-7e6ac4973155 ro vga=792 splash quiet splash
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-24-generic


i tried many times editing it and using command
Code:
sudo update-grub
but no success.

my frugal install is on sda3 , ext4 files system in directory puppy510 and uuid is
ab4b85ab-02a0-46f0-b4aa-f5e3af480087
please help me in adding this custom menu entry....................[/code]

[nooby]

Thauriswulfa what DaveS wite above your post and which I quote here below should be of help. You have to manually edit both these files.

Use puppy to find the referred files to change them

The changes you make to 40_custom are written to grub.conf automatically BY Ubuntu, but running Puppy, this does not happen of course, so you have to edit both. You can edit ONLY grub.conf if you use only Puppy, as the non-existent entry in 40_custom will not overwrite your edit of grub.conf.

[stu90]

Thauriswulfa.

Here is a tutorial i made today about manual frugal install when running puppy but it also deals with editing grub2 and adding puppy to boot menu if you already have a buntu installed.
http://my.opera.com/stu90/blog/2011/01/ ... al-install
Hope it helps.

cheers.

[_Mark_]

Have already asked this on the buntu forums, but seeing if anyone here as come across this problem before

I have added a manual entry for puppy to /etc/grub.d/40_custom and ran update-grub and the entry is added to /boot/grub/grub.cfg OK

But when booting the entry is not appearing
the post is here with more info
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1666170

Any help appreciated
Thanks

[Varmint]

Thauriswulfa wrote, in part:
i just installed ubuntu10.10 and its grub2 didn't detect my puppy510 as i have very little knowledge of linux and grub.


My reply:

Actually, if you go up to my previous posts, you'll see how I did this. Ubuntu recognized my puppy install, but I didn't care for the way in which it handles it. I booted back into my puppy live cd and used that to install GRUB2. Then, while still using the live cd I edited the menu.lst file to say what I wanted (from puppy). The difference between my install and yours is that, for reasons I can't fathom, you installed FRUGAL, whereas I always install FULL on any hard disk. I found it much easier to edit my menu.lst files from puppy than from other distros, including unix.

If you're not sure how what to put in your menu.lst file for ubuntu, simply mount the partition from puppy and take a peek. You can copy and paste from there directly into puppy's menu.lst file as I did. There is no linux or unix distro that will properly name another distro for you....you will have to edit that entry manually or live with the generic "linux on xxx" or "unknown distribution on xxx", where "xxx" equals the partition of said distro.

[_Mark_]

Well I fixed it

For info what I did removed my entry in 40_custom ran update-grub to remove entry from grub.cfg, added my entry back into 40_custom and grub.cfg and didn't run update-grub.

rebooted and voila the entry was there after a tweak or 2 it booted into puppy fine, just to test booted back to buntu and ran update-grub and the entry still there and booting fine

Possibly a bug in update-grub? who knows

[Jim1911]

in part:
Actually, if you go up to my previous posts, you'll see how I did this. Ubuntu recognized my puppy install, but I didn't care for the way in which it handles it. I booted back into my puppy live cd and used that to install GRUB2. Then, while still using the live cd I edited the menu.lst file to say what I wanted (from puppy). The difference between my install and yours is that, for reasons I can't fathom, you installed FRUGAL, whereas I always install FULL on any hard disk. I found it much easier to edit my menu.lst files from puppy than from other distros, including unix.

Your posts do not reflect a successful installation using GRUB2. Since GRUB2 does not have a menu.lst, I believe that you installed the legacy GRUB.097, or possibly Grub4Dos. I agree the legacy Grubs are easier to use than GRUB2 and are also much faster. You are correct that GRUB2 presently does recognize full installations, but not frugal installations.

For interested parties, there are a number of posts above that do reflect successful installations using GRUB2 along with hints on how to do it.

[vanchutr]

Installed GRUB2 on USB-Flash (2Gi)
(USB-Flash is formated with ext3, set boot flag)
I'd wrote "grub.cfg" and put it in boot/grub (on USB-Flash)

Code: Select all

set timeout=10
set default=0

menuentry "LUCI-526" {
 linux /lupu526rc/vmlinuz --
 initrd /lupu526rc/initrd.gz
}

menuentry "SQUE" {
 linux /sque/vmlinuz --
 initrd /sque/initrd.gz
}

These work! Is it simple (I did'nt to edit anything existed in installation of grub2

[nooby]

You are correct that GRUB2 presently does recognize full installations, but not frugal installations.

Jim that can explain why I failed to see some of my frugal installs then.

I did not know that feature of grub2. So typical for "real" linux to discriminate against frugal installs.

If any of you wonder what "SQUE" refers to it is a music server for special hardware so not a regular linux os on Linux DistroWatch

[rcrsn51]

You are correct that GRUB2 presently does recognize full installations, but not frugal installations.

Jim that can explain why I failed to see some of my frugal installs then.

@nooby: You know that the above statement is false, Your GRUB2 flash drive setup uses frugal installs and it works fine.

[nooby]

rcrsn51 I guess there is some misunderstanding due to my poor command of English grammar or lack of logic consistence in my text.

I assert that either I went outside the constraints that Lance set up in that grub.cfg because very often it refused to show OS that I added while it did show others and them booted fine too.

So both me and you are right. I trust that you having more knowledge than me you did keep within the restraints while me being adventures something tried wild things that is not supposed to work and them did not show up at all. They are there in the grub.cfg but not in the one that boots so one never see them and can not chose them. So the program seems to do some check of compatibility or something and refuses to accept entries that not live up to the constraints set up.

So if it is very important we can try to sort it out. But I trust very few others than me have those needs to get so many distros going.

Most people just try out Ubuntu and varieties of ubuntu and Linux Mint and Peppermint and such and very few would test odd linux distros that them never even heard of.