On 06/30/2015 05:13 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 17:11 -0600, jd1008 wrote:
So, it begs the question:
(that's not what "begs the question" means)
For my case it does cause me to ask : The conundrum of my situation
does indeed lead me to ask that question.
If you think it does not mean that - then please enlighten everyone
as to what it means :) :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
poc
:)
My use of it was aimed against BIOS and not against the respondent :)
If BIOS will not skip over unbootable drives, and it supposedly is written
to skip over non-bootable drives - yet it does not in the situation I
present,
then that exposes the fallacy of bios skipping over non bootable drives.
Then it is made apparent by the respondents that I cannot create
non-bootable
partitions in a drive using fdisk or even parted - and have bios skip over
such drives within a boot sequence.
So in effect the partitioning scheme may be at fault to encode a boot
signature where no boot code is present, nor any partition marked as
bootable.
LVM was mentioned as a possible way to avoid this.
But the other OS cannot use LVM.
I wonder if BIOS manufacturer's are reading this list and taking note :) :)
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
