BT4-PreFinal Manual Install -Dual Boot

[adri_ht_]

So you guys think that i should have a single /boot partition for all three Linux distributions (Ubuntu, Fedora, and Backtrack)?

Wouldn't there be issues with overwriting of files between distributions, thus cause boot issues..?

Thanks for the help!

If you name each distribution's vmlinuz and initrd differently, I don't see a reason why there will be a conflict. When booting a particular distribution, make sure you point to the write set of files.

title BT4
root(hd0,2) (This is the boot partition, not the root!)
kernel /vmlinuz-bt4 root=/dev/sdaX
initrd /initrd-bt4

title Ubuntu
root(hd0,2) (This is the boot partition, not the root!)
kernel /vmlinuz-ubuntu root=/dev/sdaX
initrd /initrd-ubuntu

This are just generic entries to explain myself. You will have to modify the above to match your settings.

[Killians31]

Wont the other files that normally reside within the /boot partition (i.e. grub folder, stage 1,ect.) get over written though? or are these files universal among all linux distributions..

well guys, i FINALLY got it all working!

here is my current set-up:

Partitions:
sda1 | Windows Vista
--------sda2-----------
sda5 | /boot Ubuntu
sda6 | /Ubuntu
sda7 | /boot Fedora
sda8 | /Fedora
sda9 | /Backtrack
-------------------------
sda3 | Shared Drive
sda4 | Swap

Grub Entry:
title Windows Vista
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
savedefault
makeactive
chainloader +1

title Ubuntu 9.04
uuid f26de4bd-f377-479b-a7cd-0efd0b30d045
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.28-11-generic root=UUID=8208ef00-54c9-4558-9164-1d8d53cb0377 ro quiet splash
initrd /initrd.img-2.6.28-11-generic
quiet

title Fedora Leonidas
root (hd0,6)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586 ro root=UUID=219254c2-13c0-4c27-a141-2e763f749e05 rhgb quiet
initrd /initrd-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586.img
savedefault
boot

title Backtrack Four
root (hd0,8)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.29.4 root=/dev/sda9 rw vga=0x317
initrd /initrd.img-2.6.29.4


Thanks again for ALL the help!

[imported_athacks]

Cheers then, i think thread could be closed :P

[fnord0]

thanks for the HOWTO adri_ht_, this has become my favorite way to install BT4prefinal on a hard drive. I like this much more then ubiquity!

much respect

[lkzwieder]

If you want enter to grub don't forget use sudo. if you not type "sudo grub" you can't be able to find stage1. "grub" alone can be very painful...

Sorry, I not speak english

[GileraGFR]

I just need a little help here peeps if possible please.

I've followed the instructions in this thread to update my dual boot WinXP (dev/sda1) and BT3 (dev/sda4) to BT4, my boot partiton is /dev/sda2 and swap is /dev/sda3
hxxp://forums.remote-exploit.org/backtrack-4-howto/24435-bt4-prefinal-manual-install-dual-boot.html

Everything went ok except a made a mistake in my /boot/grub/menu.lst and need to edit the command line it if i want to boot either OS so I went to edit the menu.lst file but found my /boot/ folder empty.

I've checked and my boot partition /dev/sda2/ is mounted to /mnt/bt4/boot so i'm not sure what has happened or how my system still finds the entries i created in menu.lst originally.

I've ran locate menu.lst to try and find it to no avail and googled a lot but i'm not 100% sure what grub i'm running and therefore what to google.

EDIT:
If i run locate grub the top result is /boot/grub but I can't browse to it in the file manager or in a terminal, i'm using Grub 0.97 but i still can't find anything google to help.

Any help would be appreciated.

[adri_ht_]

I just need a little help here peeps if possible please.

I've followed the instructions in this thread to update my dual boot WinXP (dev/sda1) and BT3 (dev/sda4) to BT4, my boot partiton is /dev/sda2 and swap is /dev/sda3
hxxp://forums.remote-exploit.org/backtrack-4-howto/24435-bt4-prefinal-manual-install-dual-boot.html

Everything went ok except a made a mistake in my /boot/grub/menu.lst and need to edit the command line it if i want to boot either OS so I went to edit the menu.lst file but found my /boot/ folder empty.

I've checked and my boot partition /dev/sda2/ is mounted to /mnt/bt4/boot so i'm not sure what has happened or how my system still finds the entries i created in menu.lst originally.

I've ran locate menu.lst to try and find it to no avail and googled a lot but i'm not 100% sure what grub i'm running and therefore what to google.

EDIT:
If i run locate grub the top result is /boot/grub but I can't browse to it in the file manager or in a terminal, i'm using Grub 0.97 but i still can't find anything google to help.

Any help would be appreciated.

If you are sure that /dev/sda2 is empty, simply copy again the boot files from the live cd to the boot partition /dev/sda2. Modify menu.lst accordingly and install GRUB again. When you install GRUB, it makes a copy of the important file to the MBR. That's why even thought your files are missing it is still able to load the system.

If you are able to load BackTrack, that means that the boot folder still contains vmlinuz and initrd.gz. Try to umount and mount the partition before doing anything to make sure that it is really missing the files.

Good Luck!

[zade7]

What's up with that GUI installer that we have now? I don't know about you, but I'm not a fan of it. I haven't even tried it yet! The manual install as always stills the same,

would it not be more advisable to do the manual install
as with the install.sh you go through the ubuntu install process
setting up a user account and would have to sudo everything ?
I could be mistaken but i believe that after installing this way you would not be able to su to root even if you wanted to
and considering most everything you need to do, you need to be root
this would be annoying to say the least

... am I wrong with this thinking ?

:: Bootsplash Support

root@bt:~# cd /media/cdrom0/boot
root@bt:~# cp --preserve -R {bootsplash,vmlinuz,initrd.gz} /mnt/bt4/boot/

root@bt:~# chroot /mnt/bt4/ /bin/bash

For those attempting to manually install from a bootable usb drive this line(above) is still the same your USB will be mounted to /media/cdrom0/ and all the files you will need to copy can be found there

[adri_ht_]

would it not be more advisable to do the manual install
as with the install.sh you go through the ubuntu install process
setting up a user account and would have to sudo everything ?
I could be mistaken but i believe that after installing this way you would not be able to su to root even if you wanted to
and considering most everything you need to do, you need to be root
this would be annoying to say the least

... am I wrong with this thinking ?

Hmm, the manual install simply makes a copy of the Live CD install into a real/virtual HDD. Because the Live CD always runs as root, the manual install does as well. There is no need for su/sudo unless you explicitly set it that way afterwards.

[zade7]

Because the Live CD always runs as root, the manual install does as well. There is no need for su/sudo unless you explicitly set it that way afterwards.

and since this distro is originally intended to be run off the live CD this method
of installation is the best way

I understand the purpose for using ubuntu/debian as the base
I was just trying to understand the purpose behind not having a root user,
which you would get by using the install.sh

The only thing I can imagine is for those who would be using it as a normal
machine

instead of a security/pentest platform

I was basically asking "what am I missing from the picture", when I asked "am I wrong with this thinking"