News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on NetBSD Code Study. Parent comment

Re:NetBSD Code Study by elwes5 on Tuesday June 16, 2020 @09:52AM (#23539113)
They sorta did then sorta skipped everyone else. The real requirement was that their bootloader was in the first partition. You can install windows to a different drive/folder. It would probably mess with a lot of programs out there though. The later versions (past 2000 I think, maybe xp its been awhile) did not really give you the option to put it somewhere else.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/de...

The problem is they only really made it work correctly with OS2, WindowsNT, Win9x, and DOS. Even then it was kind of a pain to make it work correctly.

Have not messed with the UEFI bits they added in recent versions so it may be different now. But I doubt it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
[dead]
Re:NetBSD Code Study by elwes5 on Tuesday June 16, 2020 @11:52AM (#23540613)
Did not realize I had to do full on research before posting on everything? My point if you had read it would be boot.ini allows multi boot in particular cases. I am not sure on the UEFI bits as I do not really multi boot anymore. I am sure it is great or miserable. I just personally have little need to do it anymore as VM's tend to solve the particular issues I ran into. Did your browbeating me bring much to the discussion? Why did you bother to comment other than to mock me? Am I understanding YOU correctly?
[ Parent | on HN ]