Grub options

Dick Georgeson · External Since: Aug 09, 2004 Posts: 28

Does anyone have experience of the grub 'uppermem' statement which it says
can be used to lie to OSs - specifically whether it will successfully lie
to Windows? Reason I'm suspicious is that grub says it 'chain loads'
Windows.

I was naively expecting on the new machine to run a couple of Win apps
under Wine - but neither plays ball. Bunging Windows on it might be the
strategic retreat option but Windows complains there is not enough memory unless
I remove half of it[1]. It will also involve completely repartioning the
HD and it would be nice to have some assurance that it's worth it.

[1] integer overflow I guess, though it's a strange size integer.

--
Dick Georgeson
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time
to reform. -- Mark Twain

Geoffrey Clements · External Since: Apr 09, 2004 Posts: 76

Dick Georgeson wrote:

> Does anyone have experience of the grub 'uppermem' statement which it says
> can be used to lie to OSs - specifically whether it will successfully lie
> to Windows? Reason I'm suspicious is that grub says it 'chain loads'
> Windows.
>
> I was naively expecting on the new machine to run a couple of Win apps
> under Wine - but neither plays ball. Bunging Windows on it might be the
> strategic retreat option but Windows complains there is not enough memory
> unless I remove half of it[1].

What, there's not enough memory unless you take half away? Odd.

> It will also involve completely
> repartioning the HD and it would be nice to have some assurance that it's
> worth it.
>
> [1] integer overflow I guess, though it's a strange size integer.
>

I've found that XP can be installed on partitions that are not the first but
it was difficult to do this. Pre XP Windows always wanted to be on the
first partition. So if you've already put linux on the first partition it
will be easier if you move things around a bit.

To be honest, if you want to run just a couple of Windows apps I'd use qemu,
in fact that's exactly what I do.

--
Geoff Registered Linux user 196308
Replace bitbucket with geoff to mail me.

Dick Georgeson · External Since: Aug 09, 2004 Posts: 28

We have evidence that on Sat, 09 Jun 2007 16:44:18 +0100, Geoffrey
Clements wrote:

> Dick Georgeson wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have experience of the grub 'uppermem' statement which it
>> says can be used to lie to OSs - specifically whether it will
>> successfully lie to Windows? Reason I'm suspicious is that grub says it
>> 'chain loads' Windows.
>>
>> I was naively expecting on the new machine to run a couple of Win apps
>> under Wine - but neither plays ball. Bunging Windows on it might be the
>> strategic retreat option but Windows complains there is not enough
>> memory unless I remove half of it[1].
>
> What, there's not enough memory unless you take half away? Odd.

As I say, probably integer overflow so it thinks that the size is
negative.

> I've found that XP can be installed on partitions that are not the first
> but it was difficult to do this. Pre XP Windows always wanted to be on
> the first partition. So if you've already put linux on the first
> partition it will be easier if you move things around a bit.
>
> To be honest, if you want to run just a couple of Windows apps I'd use
> qemu, in fact that's exactly what I do.
>
Sounds good except that I looked up qemu and it says there could be
problems with running 32 bit apps (which these are) on a 64 bit host
(which this is).

--
Dick Georgeson
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time
to reform. -- Mark Twain

Geoffrey Clements · External Since: Apr 06, 2004 Posts: 226

"Dick Georgeson" <rmg RemoveThis @nospam.zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.06.10.12.53.26.488959.518@nospam.zetnet.co.uk...
> We have evidence that on Sat, 09 Jun 2007 16:44:18 +0100, Geoffrey
> Clements wrote:
>
>> Dick Georgeson wrote:
>>
>>> Does anyone have experience of the grub 'uppermem' statement which it
>>> says can be used to lie to OSs - specifically whether it will
>>> successfully lie to Windows? Reason I'm suspicious is that grub says it
>>> 'chain loads' Windows.
>>>
>>> I was naively expecting on the new machine to run a couple of Win apps
>>> under Wine - but neither plays ball. Bunging Windows on it might be the
>>> strategic retreat option but Windows complains there is not enough
>>> memory unless I remove half of it[1].
>>
>> What, there's not enough memory unless you take half away? Odd.
>
> As I say, probably integer overflow so it thinks that the size is
> negative.
>

What version of Windows is it? The last version of Windows that had
problems with too much memory was Win95, at least that's what I remember.
Sorry - this isn't exactly answering your question.

>> I've found that XP can be installed on partitions that are not the first
>> but it was difficult to do this. Pre XP Windows always wanted to be on
>> the first partition. So if you've already put linux on the first
>> partition it will be easier if you move things around a bit.
>>
>> To be honest, if you want to run just a couple of Windows apps I'd use
>> qemu, in fact that's exactly what I do.
>>
> Sounds good except that I looked up qemu and it says there could be
> problems with running 32 bit apps (which these are) on a 64 bit host
> (which this is).
>

ahh - there are other virtualisation systems out there but I haven't tried
any of them so I can't make a recommendation. I suppose you could always
give qemu a try, you haven't lost anything if it doesn't work - I'm assuming
the apps you want to run don't require DirectX.

--
Geoff