tri-boot xp, vista, ubuntu

Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
557
how would i go abut tri-booting these three operating systems?
i heard that a specific one had to be installed first and that the harddrive must be partitioned a certain way. any help appreciated. thanks
 
The rules for dual-booting have never really changed. Older OSes first, Windows before Linux. Assuming you only have one physical drive, I'd cut it into three separate, primary partitions. XP goes on first, Vista second, and Ubuntu last.
 
The rules for dual-booting have never really changed. Older OSes first, Windows before Linux. Assuming you only have one physical drive, I'd cut it into three separate, primary partitions. XP goes on first, Vista second, and Ubuntu last.

i thought i heard that vista would wipe out the bootloader therefore it needs to go first? anyone confirm?
 
It wipes out XP's bootloader, but you are given the option to boot to either OS. Ubuntu will wipe out the Vista bootloader, and install GRUB.
 
It wipes out XP's bootloader, but you are given the option to boot to either OS. Ubuntu will wipe out the Vista bootloader, and install GRUB.

therefore basically i can just use gparted to get my 250gb sata partitioned into 5 sections
partition1 - vista 80gb
partition2 - xp 80gb
partition3 - linux 20gb
partition4 - linux-swap 2gb
partition5 - leftover space in ntfs format

found a link here
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=220452&highlight=tri+boot+vista
but it says to install xp, then vista, then ubuntu
 
but it says to install xp, then vista, then ubuntu

That's the order I suggested. I'd make Partition1 XP, then Partition2 as Vista, and all the remaining free space will be used by Ubuntu. I would use each OSes insatller to create it's own partition...don't create them ahead of time.
 
That's the order I suggested. I'd make Partition1 XP, then Partition2 as Vista, and all the remaining free space will be used by Ubuntu. I would use each OSes insatller to create it's own partition...don't create them ahead of time.

so when i install xp i install that on c drive? then install vista on d drive?
so for example when i install xp and then the installation complete. i reboot the comp and boot with the vista cd to install vista. when i'm installing vista i install vista on d drive? what would happen to the xp bootloader? that's the question.

does each install of os kill the bootloader of the old os?
 
does each install of os kill the bootloader of the old os?

Yes.

And djnes is right, I had this exact configuration for a while, and if you don't install in that order, you will not be able to select which os you want to boot into at startup.
 
does each install of os kill the bootloader of the old os?

Yes, that's why the order is important. Let's say you have a 60 GB drive. During the XP install, create a 20 GB partition, and finish XPs install. Then boot from your Vista disc, and during the Vista install, make another 20 GB partition, and install it there. Once Vista is done, boot from Ubuntu, and install it to the remaining part of the drive.

I'm assuming you've never done a multi-boot system before, but it's really not as difficult as you're making it seem.
 
Yes, that's why the order is important. Let's say you have a 60 GB drive. During the XP install, create a 20 GB partition, and finish XPs install. Then boot from your Vista disc, and during the Vista install, make another 20 GB partition, and install it there. Once Vista is done, boot from Ubuntu, and install it to the remaining part of the drive.

I'm assuming you've never done a multi-boot system before, but it's really not as difficult as you're making it seem.

i've done dual booting with xp and ubuntu, but i have never tried with vista. since i heard vista does some crazy stuff when u install the os i want to get it right before i do the actual setup

so would you consider this howto a bad idea?
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=220452&highlight=tri+boot+vista
 
It doesn't do anything different than previous versions of Windows. The problem has been people either not paying attention to what they were doing, or not udnerstanding how to partition the drives. Too many people also seem to want to set up the partitions first, rather than just let each individual installer handle that particular partition. It's simple enough that many of us have been surprised at how many people have trouble doing it.
 
It doesn't do anything different than previous versions of Windows. The problem has been people either not paying attention to what they were doing, or not udnerstanding how to partition the drives. Too many people also seem to want to set up the partitions first, rather than just let each individual installer handle that particular partition. It's simple enough that many of us have been surprised at how many people have trouble doing it.

thanks for the heads up. the new vista system will be built tonight and i'll use this thread for sure to get me started on tri boot
 
My mb allows me to boot to any bootable device by pressing F11 during boot up so I installed XP and Vista to sepreate HDD's so the mbr for each OS doesn't get messed up by the other OS. Now I just press F11 on my keyboard when booting up and can select the Vista HDD to boot to, default I have it set to boot to XP but I could change that too if I want. I have three HDD's and could put Linux on one of them and boot all three OS's without having to use a boot loader. Each OS is kept intact this way and is *much* better way to do it in case I have to reinstall one of the OS's. Only thing you have to do is disconnect your other HDD's before installing an OS to a HDD so it doesn't see the other OS and install a boot loader to the mbr. Just have to make sure all mb's I buy in the future have this feature as it is really handy to have.
 
It's simple enough that many of us have been surprised at how many people have trouble doing it.

I would like to remind you that not everyone is an uber geek and spends 24/7 in front of their computer.
 
I would like to remind you that not everyone is an uber geek and spends 24/7 in front of their computer.

Dude, the OP is talking about triple-booting XP, Vista, and Linux. I think your argument kinda goes out the window in this thread.
 
Dude, the OP is talking about triple-booting XP, Vista, and Linux. I think your argument kinda goes out the window in this thread.
Exactly. First off, this is an enthusiast's website, not an AOL Help Forum. Secondly, my AOL-using in-laws aren't exactly pondering a triple boot system on their 5 year old Gateway.
 
Just a little thing that has saved me alot with my setup (dual-boot XP and Gentoo). My mobo has one of those "protect MBR from being written to, just incase its a virus" things.

Turns out XP won't/cant write to the MBR if that is enabled HOWEVER GRUB can
Since my XP seems to go pete-tong every 2-3 months (while my Gentoo install is rock solid) the fact that during XP-install it doesn't over-write my MRB with ntldr-pointer means that my GRUB menu is the first thing I see after I have finish the DOS-like copy-stage of XP
 
I have Xp on my Sata Raid array. I decided to install vista too. I had problems installing vista rc1 before where it changed my xp mbr and xp couldn't boot until I did an xp repair. I was hoping to avoid this problem by putting xp on it's own ata100 driver dedicated to IDE2. I installed vista on that dedicated line thinking that it couldn't possilbe change my sata raid on the sata connections. After using vista for 2 days I can't load the xp on the raid anymore. I don't believe that I changed anything on the raid and intentionally avoided messing with it through the vista installation. My Raid now shows as healthy 466g on bios but shows up split equal drives in everything else now. In Stallar Phoenix program one drive shows as Fat16 and the other as Fat 32. Did I mess something up or does vista installation just search for all drives on the board (even if on separate inputs) and change the mbr on those drives too?

Also strange is that my XP being on the Raid 0 for a while was no longer and option available on startup after I installed vista. Only thing I had was vista on Sata Raid0, after vista install using vista to install itself on the IDE drive my only selection from startup was Vista, UNLESS I went into bios and then changed the boot order back to the Sata Raid as being first.
 
I have Xp on my Sata Raid array. I decided to install vista too. I had problems installing vista before where it changed my xp mbr and xp couldn't boot until I did an xp repair. I was hoping to avoid this problem by putting xp on it's own ata100 driver dedicated to IDE2. I installed vista on that dedicated line thinking that it couldn't possilbe change my sata raid on the sata connections. After using vista for 2 days I can't load the xp on the raid anymore. I don't believe that I changed anything on the raid and intentionally avoided messing with it through the vista installation. My Raid now shows as healthy 466g on bios but shows up split equal drives in everything else now. In Stallar Phoenix program one drive shows as Fat16 and the other as Fat 32. Did I mess something up or does vista installation just search for all drives on the board (even if on separate inputs) and change the mbr on those drives too?

sounds like your "RAID-Controller" is a Software RAID and thus without actual RAID drivers the drives which are part of the Array will appear separate.
Likewise unless Vista know's/has the drivers for your software RAID at install-time (or you provided it to Vista via floppy/USB) then it will write the MBR to a single drive and not to the array (as it knows no different)
 
I had to edit my post. Not sure if you read that. I don't use a controller, just using F6 raid floppy driver install for my motherboards nvida controller. I couldn't use those raid drivers on vista at all. Don't know if that provides any better info.
 
In a way, I'd have to agree with this as well. I'd run VIsta and Ubuntu, and if XP is needed, just use Virtual PC. It's free.

Exactly. Or if you don't like Vista, just use XP and Ubuntu. Whether you want KDE or Gnome is your choice.
 
I had to edit my post. Not sure if you read that. I don't use a controller, just using F6 raid floppy driver install for my motherboards nvida controller. I couldn't use those raid drivers on vista at all. Don't know if that provides any better info.

Thats the problem then. IF Vista isn't given the mechanism to identify and communicate to a software RAID (ie pretty much everything done in the driver) then the drives that are part of your ARRAY will appear induvidually to Vista
 
Well those drives are showing up in a fresh f6 floppy raid driver XP install as Disk 1 but as 2 x 233g drives now. One is a Primary and other is logical. When it worked correctly they just showed as the one 466g drive. I realize I know much less about raid and partitioning than I previously thought and am embarrased to ask for help so I am going to ask a stupid question. Would deleting that logical drive restore the 2 drives as one or actually break the array from that point?
I was able to see some of the files in Stellar Phoenix but It seems to have only found 1 or 2 of the 6 partions.
 
Exactly. First off, this is an enthusiast's website, not an AOL Help Forum. Secondly, my AOL-using in-laws aren't exactly pondering a triple boot system on their 5 year old Gateway.

Yea, yea, lots of geeks here but not everyone is. Some here are geeks in training, just as you were at one time.
 
so far so good. i got dual boot going for xp and vista. i wil install ubuntu either tonight or tomorrow. also have to overclock my new system before i do actually proceed with the installing of other software and or os
 
so far so good. i got dual boot going for xp and vista. i wil install ubuntu either tonight or tomorrow. also have to overclock my new system before i do actually proceed with the installing of other software and or os

just make sure your oc is stable, and I mean stable, if things start corrupting, infact I would suggest you install on stock speeds and then overclock......if you think you can overclock tonight and tomorrow find your max oc speeds and memtest and prime to check how stable your overclock is. Sorry but if you tell me your cpu can hit 5GHz it aint worth a damn to me if I cant even play or surf the web without kernel panics/bsods.

Also I agree with the above posters, boot vista and ubuntu, and if you need xp run via virtual machine in either ubuntu or vista.....
 
Back
Top