Multi boot, boot loaders on each own partition, cons and pros [Solved]

[Buck Fankers]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~ question ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is anything wrong, at multi Linux setup on the same drive, to put boot from first one into EFI partition as usual, then all other Linux installs get their boot installed onto their own partition? (PBR install).

Any downside of doing it this way? Any potential problems?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I used to had installed next to MX also Manjaro or Mint or some other linux flavor installed. Sometimes Manjaro then took over boot loader, after it's system update. One way, to avoid this is, to install second Linux's boot (say Manjaro's) into it's own partition (PBR). Then after install, restart computer and run

Code: Select all

sudo update-grub

and you will have all operating systems available.

Now a days, I only have MX installed, but I have several instances of MX installed. And I still like, that I have one main MX, that is always in charge of the boot. So I'm placing all other boot loaders (or whatever they are called) into their own partitions.

Somewhere I have read, that this may not be best, preferable way of doing it. For this reason I'm asking here, general question, not related to my specific computer, is it better, to always install latest Linux boot loader into EFI partition (and every new install takes over boot sequence) or is it OK the way I'm doing it now, first install of boot loader goes to EFI partition and all after other boots after first one go to their own partitions (PBR). Is anything wrong doing it this way anything I should be aware of it? Oh, only Linux installs, no windows ever in case it matters.

Obviously there is really no reason for QSI this time

[MXRobo]

Buck, I often say that I could be wrong, but I really might be wrong this time, and I generally shy away from this complicated subject – all of the variables, uefi, mbr, efi, legacy, bios, boot, efi-boot manager, grub, etc. in addition to confusing terms (bios legacy?) and I'd wait for other advice.

I think you were referring to the last distro installed, always controlled the bootloader or grub (I don't know my terms), assuming that sudo update-grub was ran afterwards, but I think I saw a method to avoid this usurping of grub control on this forum, and it was something like to do a regular install (install grub) with the one that you wanted to control the grub, and then to simply NOT install grub on the other distros. I found the idea amazingly simple, although I haven't used it.
Obviously, you have to run sudo update-grub after all of the distros are installed, but I think this does work.
I'm fairly sure of my methodology, but I may have the terminology screwed – so good luck.

Might be able to find it in the forum, but that can often be a little difficult.

[Buck Fankers]

A-ha so there are two options. I have working multi system (4 times MX) installed the way I described, their grubs are installed on their partitions (PBR install), first install of course on EFI and all works great so far. Then there is the way you wrote, not to install grubs (or whatever terminology is) at all. Thank you!

Now we need to find out, from someone experienced, which one is preferable

[davidy]

"So I'm placing all other boot loaders (or whatever they are called) into their own partitions."

You haven't said what the results, if any, there are in doing so but sounds like you have a method that may work.
In any case, I have always dreamed of having a single pc that has multiple mobos powered by a single switch or button. A switch would be cool.. Throw in your modems, routers, switches, etc. into the same box to keep it cleaner and have a couple monitors and then be able to switch back and forth without shutting anything down at all. A custom case would be necessary of course but the idea is sound. Everybody has multiple pc's and devices they work with. It would be cool to shrink it all to fit a single space and be able to have less cabling and cooling confusion. Way off topic but with the same goals really. I think they could put 2 mobo's in a laptop if they wanted. Why not?

For the most part, sata drives were susceptible to failure which is why I've always shied away from partitioning, unless required. Now everything is digital, but I still dislike having to shut one off to run the other so I ended up just buying more & smaller pc's.

[Buck Fankers]

You haven't said what the results, if any, there are in doing so.

It is in first post. To avoid one grub takes over another during new install or after some system updates. Plus, you always know, which Linux install is always in charge of a boot loader. Just makes everything simpler. Question is, if it is OK to have this kind of setup, or are there any potential problems in the future.

[davidy]

Right. 2 parts with separate grubs for each part. The last installed is the leader but only after the cmd line: sudo update-grub. At least that's what it sounds like. Your post is rather confusing honestly. First you said, "I used to", and then you say, "nowadays" but you repeat yourself so I was a little lost there for a moment. Great tips btw. Thanks

[CharlesV]

I have a client machine that I have multiple partitions on, uses multiple OS's ( windows, MX and BSD ) all with their own drive, partitions and boot loaders.

The decision to use one or the other is set using F9 at boot up, or actually removing drives. This all works very well - as long as your there to make the change to the boot selection! The primary boot drive is MX, select-able in bios.

I have had this setup for a very long time, and have changed out the Linux several times... changed out BSD several times too, as well as changed out hard drives a few times... but really kept the windows 10 alone. The gent that drives this uses BSD quite often, now MX almost exclusively and Windows on very rare occasions.

We set this up this way as he continued to have issues with multi-boot grub getting all tangled up and he lost the machine more than once on updates to one system or the other. (He kept them updated fairly good - baring issues.) Once we went to this setup, no more issues with update causing problems for booting the others.

[Buck Fankers]

First you said, "I used to", and then you say, "nowadays" but you repeat yourself so I was a little lost there for a moment.

I explained in OP:

"I used to" have differnet Linux systems installed (MX, Manjaro, Mint)
"nowadays" I only have several MX install.

I'm repeating myself, when responding to you... It is all in OP.

See:

I used to had installed next to MX also Manjaro or Mint or some other linux flavor installed.

Now a days, I only have MX installed, but I have several instances of MX installed.

[Buck Fankers]

I have a client machine that I have multiple partitions on, uses multiple OS's ( windows, MX and BSD ) all with their own drive, partitions and boot loaders.

Yes I have the same thing on one computer. Two drives, two installs each on it's own drive. Works great.

[Buck Fankers]

edit: moved condensed question into start of OP