Semi O.T.

I have not heard from my posts on some Linux forums.

Since some here dual boot to Windows and some Linux distro, I thought I would give it a shot.

I installed Linux Slacko to a new system that has Win 10.

When I tried to boot into Slacko 6.3.0 it said

Error 2 Bad file or directory type

Hope someone can help me.

Andy

Andy wrote:
I have not heard from my posts on some Linux forums.

Since some here dual boot to Windows and some Linux distro, I thought I would give it a shot.

I installed Linux Slacko to a new system that has Win 10.

When I tried to boot into Slacko 6.3.0 it said

Error 2 Bad file or directory type

Hope someone can help me.

Andy

Your error message is coming from Grub.
So it's a Grub problem, possibly caused by the
whizzy hardware in the new machine, not being
perfect for the version of Grub used.

No, don't follow the solutions in here. Just
consider the implications first.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1587165

As an old-timer, I'd be switching on CSM in the UEFI
BIOS of the computer. And only install with CSM enabled.
CSM is what makes a UEFI BIOS, behave more like
a legacy BIOS would.

The Win10 box could be UEFI with no CSM, or
it could be SecureBoot. There are a number of
developments on the OEM hardware side, that
will shoot a new customer in the foot.

If you were to ask me in advance, for a "Technician Platform",
it would not be a Dell or an Acer. It would be
a carefully constructed home-built machine, with
a motherboard and BIOS I could trust. Not some
locked-down crap in a Dell or Acer. Some of the
business class machines would be the worst, for
their locked-down build choices. You want
hardware that is still open-enough to use.

Paul

No sure it WAS a grub issue.

Once I deleted and reformatted, I hate zero problems installing Puppy Slacko.

Andy

While I had Win 10, it had noticeably faster download times than XP had.

Andy wrote:
I installed Linux Slacko to a new system that has Win 10.

Slacko is a Puppy. It is better to not install Puppy, but to use it as
it was designed, either live or as a 'frugal' install, which is not an
linux install in the conventional sense.

And for a Win10 system, installing Slacko would have additional install
issues/problems.

http://puppylinux.org/main/Download%...%20Release.htm *NEW* Slacko
Puppy 6.3 -

http://puppylinux.org/main/How%20NOT...ll%20Puppy.htm - How
NOT to install Puppy Linux - Puppy is easy to use and does not require a
hard disk, so the first trick that you must know is how NOT to install
it to hard disk !

It is better to boot the live puppy, configure it to your choosing, and
then when you are shutting it down, follow the guides for saving your
configuration. Then you would continue to boot using the USB (or CD)
with the configurational changes persistent.

The last choice on the above page discusses the frugal install to hdd.
However, that part was written back in XP days, not Win10.



--
Mike Easter

On Tuesday, June 28, 2016 at 11:42:20 AM UTC-5, Mike Easter wrote:
Andy wrote:
I installed Linux Slacko to a new system that has Win 10.

Slacko is a Puppy. It is better to not install Puppy, but to use it as
it was designed, either live or as a 'frugal' install, which is not an
linux install in the conventional sense.

And for a Win10 system, installing Slacko would have additional install
issues/problems.

http://puppylinux.org/main/Download%...%20Release.htm *NEW* Slacko
Puppy 6.3 -

http://puppylinux.org/main/How%20NOT...ll%20Puppy.htm - How
NOT to install Puppy Linux - Puppy is easy to use and does not require a
hard disk, so the first trick that you must know is how NOT to install
it to hard disk !

It is better to boot the live puppy, configure it to your choosing, and
then when you are shutting it down, follow the guides for saving your
configuration. Then you would continue to boot using the USB (or CD)
with the configurational changes persistent.

The last choice on the above page discusses the frugal install to hdd.
However, that part was written back in XP days, not Win10.



--
Mike Easter

Frugal installs take longer to boot up and power down due to the time
spent creating the save file.

I have used full installs for years on several laptops with no issues.

Andy

Andy wrote:
Mike Easter wrote:
Andy wrote:
I installed Linux Slacko to a new system that has Win 10.

Slacko is a Puppy. It is better to not install Puppy, but to use it
as it was designed, either live or as a 'frugal' install, which is
not an linux install in the conventional sense.

And for a Win10 system, installing Slacko would have additional install
issues/problems.

The last choice on the above page discusses the frugal install to hdd.
However, that part was written back in XP days, not Win10.

Frugal installs take longer to boot up and power down due to the time
spent creating the save file.

I can't argue with that; but it shouldn't be a big deal/difference.

I have used full installs for years on several laptops with no issues.

Now you have the additional entanglement with UEFI Secure Boot.

Here's what Puppy docs say about that http://puppylinux.org/wikka/UEFI
.... bypass secure boot but this only applies to "CLASS 3" UEFI systems
and is usually from "pre-built" or other wise "mass - produced" computer
vendors. ... How can you tell the difference between class 1,2 and 3?
.... Basically if you go into advanced settings and do not see any
"Firmware options" (CSM, Op-rom, etc) in that Tab, then you got a "Class
3" UEFI BIOS Implementation.


--
Mike Easter

On Thursday, June 30, 2016 at 7:26:26 PM UTC-5, Mike Easter wrote:
Andy wrote:
Mike Easter wrote:
Andy wrote:
I installed Linux Slacko to a new system that has Win 10.

Slacko is a Puppy. It is better to not install Puppy, but to use it
as it was designed, either live or as a 'frugal' install, which is
not an linux install in the conventional sense.

And for a Win10 system, installing Slacko would have additional install
issues/problems.

The last choice on the above page discusses the frugal install to hdd.
However, that part was written back in XP days, not Win10.

Frugal installs take longer to boot up and power down due to the time
spent creating the save file.

I can't argue with that; but it shouldn't be a big deal/difference.

I have used full installs for years on several laptops with no issues.

Now you have the additional entanglement with UEFI Secure Boot.

Here's what Puppy docs say about that http://puppylinux.org/wikka/UEFI
... bypass secure boot but this only applies to "CLASS 3" UEFI systems
and is usually from "pre-built" or other wise "mass - produced" computer
vendors. ... How can you tell the difference between class 1,2 and 3?
... Basically if you go into advanced settings and do not see any
"Firmware options" (CSM, Op-rom, etc) in that Tab, then you got a "Class
3" UEFI BIOS Implementation.


--
Mike Easter

Problem was Windows 10.

When it was deleted, all problems went away.

Using Ubuntu_Mate.

Way more stable than Windows and no sneaky stuff behind my back. :-)

Andy