| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Irre
Guru
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Posts: 434
Location: Stockholm
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:32 am Post subject: Windows update KB2949927. I big warning for linux users |
 |
|
My windows 7 refused to install this update. I googled and found that one should temporary aktivate the windows boot partition. Foolish me thought I could do it from within windows. I could not. After that only windows could boot -- and all extended partition were gone!
Via an external usb-disk I could boot a linux system. I had a printout of the partition table and I could type in the table. It took me about five hours to restore the computer to the same status it had yesterday, I hope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
creaker
l33t
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 651
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:55 am Post subject: Re: Windows update KB2949927. I big warning for linux users |
|
|
updates are evil
beware updates
| Irre wrote: | | After that only windows could boot -- and all extended partition were gone! |
does it ruined a partitions table or rewrote it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 1:06 pm Post subject: Re: Windows update KB2949927. I big warning for linux users |
|
|
| Irre wrote: | | I googled and found that one should temporary aktivate the windows boot partition. |
google gave you answers, it doesn't gave you right answer.
I don't know why an update would wish that, and what anyone could mean by "aktivate the windows boot partition", but i know i should think twice before trusting a random answer found by google. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irre
Guru
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Posts: 434
Location: Stockholm
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now is the update applied. Windows destroyed partition table  , but not the contents of the partition. (maybe I misunderstood how it should be done)
This is how I should have done:
1) From Linux. Enable boot-flag where the windows mbr is. In my case /dev/sda1. (I normally boot grub via partition /dev/sda3)
2) Run windows update.
3) Boot rescue Linux via USB-disk or CD
4) Disable boot-flag where the windows mbr is
After that multibooting via grub in partion /dev/sda3 works as usual.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ct85711
Veteran
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 1791
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm glad I'm running UEFI for my system, so I don't need to worry about the boot partition. As long as the bios can find it; all I may have to do is tell my bios to use the linux loader once again, and all is fixed.  It also helps that I stopped doing a windows update about 10 years ago, (nearly 15 years since I've had a antivirus on my system). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
creaker
l33t
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 651
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Irre wrote: | | ... Windows destroyed partition table , but not the contents of the partition. (maybe I misunderstood how it should be done) |
My assumption is Windows just rewrote MBR, not a partition table. It's an usual Windows behaviour - to write Windows loader into mbr without testing whether any other bootloader already exists there or not. If partition table was rewritten, you couldn't restore it so easy as you decribed it above.
Since you have a Windows installed, it is a good idea to have your drives mbr copy saved somewhere.
| Code: | | dd if=/dev/sdX of=/some/safe/place/sdX.mbr bs=512 count=1 |
If Windows will rewrite mbr you can easily restore it with dd:
| Code: | | dd if=/where/saved/your/mbr/file of=/dev/sdX bs=512 count=1 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keet
Guru
Joined: 09 Sep 2008
Posts: 568
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've seen things like this, in which Windows disregards/overwrites any other operating systems, partitions, bootloaders, and so on. When I was testing Windows 7, it detected all my Linux partitions and asked something like, 'This partition is not formatted. Would you live to format it now?' Of course, they were formatted and full of data; Windows was just too stupid (poorly-designed) to detect this.
Windows is the only O.S. Windows has always been the only O.S. Windows will always be the only O.S. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
albright
Advocate
Joined: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 2588
Location: Near Toronto
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | My assumption is Windows just rewrote MBR, not a partition table |
that's what just happened to me going from win8 to 8.1; I foolishly
assumed that the upgrader would check for other operating systems 
scary for a while, but easy to fix in the end
_________________
.... there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth
doing as simply messing about with Linux ...
(apologies to Kenneth Graeme) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djdunn
l33t
Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 810
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| albright wrote: | | Quote: | | My assumption is Windows just rewrote MBR, not a partition table |
that's what just happened to me going from win8 to 8.1; I foolishly
assumed that the upgrader would check for other operating systems
scary for a while, but easy to fix in the end |
it probably does check, and makes sure to break them 
_________________
“Music is a moral law. It gives a soul to the Universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination, a charm to sadness, gaiety and life to everything. It is the essence of order, and leads to all that is good and just and beautiful.”
― Plato |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irre
Guru
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Posts: 434
Location: Stockholm
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| creaker wrote: | | My assumption is Windows just rewrote MBR, not a partition table. |
No, I had a good backup of this part. It didn't help to restore mbr and partition table. All partitions in the extended area were gone, even ntfs-formatted partitions.
I had to redefine extended part by hand from a printout of the table. This information must be stored somewhere outside the first 512 bytes of the harddisk (perhaps in sda4?). I have this layout:
sda1 (win, boot,bootflag inactive)
sda2(win)
sda3(freebsd+grub mbr,bootflag active)
sda4(extended partion)
My Linux systems are all in extended partition, and unfortunately also grub config. So, when all partitions (sda5, sda6, .. sda12) were gone, I could only boot windows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roman_Gruber
Advocate
Joined: 03 Oct 2006
Posts: 3846
Location: Austro Bavaria
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Windows belong in a box, put it in a box and htats it.
Nothing surprises me because it aims for beeing idiot friendly so why should they care for partition or anything else as long their OS runs. Talking about 5 years ago and I doubt it changed now ... Juding also from screenshots of the annoucements on how the tiles work on windows 8 and so on...
Whenever I ever have the urge to use Windows I will install it in a virtual environment preventing me from any harm
If I were you i would have made DD and DD back everything so windows will have been in a bad luck at all. I am pretty sure this method still works in these days. But I have seen recently on a netbook with windows 7 starter that there is still the update behaviour even on battery without asking for permissions and when the update seems to be done, it starts again with updating after reboot. They are unable to update a box with one reboot only. Talking about windows 7 starter. (i just saw it because a girl next to me used that netbook close to me) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
creaker
l33t
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 651
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
yup, Windows like a mad dog that destroys all around
Don't let him out if you have no first-aid kit on hand  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fitzcarraldo
Advocate
Joined: 30 Aug 2008
Posts: 2034
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is why I prefer to keep the Windows Boot Manager as-is and use EasyBCD to configure it to chainload GRUB 2 on a different partition.
_________________
Clevo W230SS: amd64, VIDEO_CARDS="intel modesetting nvidia".
Compal NBLB2: ~amd64, xf86-video-ati. Dual boot Win 7 Pro 64-bit.
OpenRC udev elogind & KDE on both.
Fitzcarraldo's blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jaglover
Watchman
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 8291
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
creaker
l33t
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 651
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jaglover wrote: | | In actuality, the subject of this thread is incorrect. Since we are on Linux forums, the subject should be "... big warning for Windows users". |
A lot of windows users even don't know what "partitions table" is. Their competence does not extend beyond the visible desktop.
They fall into a stupor when you ask: "How many partitions you have at your hard drive?" It's useless to warn them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jaglover
Watchman
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 8291
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djdunn
l33t
Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 810
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I personally found that windows 7 UEFI install cooperates fine with any other UEFI install, it put itself in /boot/efi/windows. even while it was installed as not the first partition, actually it was 3rd, and gentoo was installed before it.
_________________
“Music is a moral law. It gives a soul to the Universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination, a charm to sadness, gaiety and life to everything. It is the essence of order, and leads to all that is good and just and beautiful.”
― Plato |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ct85711
Veteran
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 1791
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya, I have to admit, I do like the UEFI, makes it really nice in that I don't ever have to worry about the MBR, and where the boot loader is anymore. Too bad, I still have a couple older computers that don't support UEFI. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roman_Gruber
Advocate
Joined: 03 Oct 2006
Posts: 3846
Location: Austro Bavaria
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just move it to off the wall.
Windows never worked really for myself
and deleting a partition table happened on winshit 95 and maybe later too.
last time i handled was vista and that was years ago as i realized the windows installer does not even know or is able to handle partition. windows discs never ship a tool to make your own partition layout. therefore no surprise that the devs just wipe anything onthe drive.
as most win... users do not even use anything else they few who does have to life with that. so they sell
winshit starter
winshit pro
winshit home
winshit professional
and wahtever they call it. I just asked someone if the windows 7 or 8 install disc can handle paritions and hte answer was no.
End of my rant, but serious move it to off the wall or dustbin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
c00l.wave
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Aug 2003
Posts: 264
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First, thanks for the warning - I'm glad my dual-boot Windows didn't install its updates the past 2 times I ran it last week. I guess it wouldn't have installed on my computer without manual intervention as well: I always had trouble installing such Windows updates in the past as they tend to hang indefinitely during installation until you hard-reset your PC. Also, it's just ridiculous how the Windows installer always hangs just because you have GRUB on any of your hard drives. Not sure what it does, it just sits there for 10 minutes apparently doing nothing. Then it suddenly springs back to life and goes on as usual. I'm also unable to configure the Windows bootloader while having GRUB installed on the MBR. Might also have to do something with Windows being installed to a secondary HDD and GRUB being on the primary one, chainloading the second drive.
Regarding UEFI: I still have to figure that thing out, tried several times and couldn't. No clue whatsoever where bootloaders are being installed to - it all appears to go to some "hidden" internal EFI flash drive, handled as something crazy like manually mapped direct MTD just like on embedded devices? I know there's also a FAT partition on HDD and there can also be a directory on (any?) partition on disk but whatever I did, those partitions/directorys always appeared just empty and the systems never picked anything up that I put there. What determines what's used? I guess that the internal flash memory overrides everything else but why do I need "large" partitions on my disk then? How do you (un)install anything at the EFI flash memory? Is there a way to configure anything? Why does that crappy integrated EFI console run at 80x25 characters and print 10 pages of fast-scrolling text when asking for "help" without any option to let the user scroll or even pause printing? No idea. Don't really want to care. Whenever I had to fiddle with EFI I just wanted my system to boot, so no time for extensive exploration of the unknown deeps of EFI. => installed all EFI systems in legacy mode as there are no benefits, anyway (except for Windows which - artificially - cannot boot off GPT partitions without hybrid MBR or UEFI)
My guess is that the EFI boot loaders can peacefully exist beside each other only because boot priority and bootloader locations on EFI are a complete mess.
| creaker wrote: | | yup, Windows like a mad dog that destroys all around |
Nope, that sounds more like Ubuntu in multi-boot setups. Over the years, I totally lost count of all the (less tech-savvy) people telling me they lost all their files due to that half-automated, "user-friendly" GUI installer Ubuntu has. Worst thing about that? Not only does it erase partition tables and boot records but it writes over your previous partitions without proper warning. And since "Ubuntu is Linux", those people usually try to avoid Linux from that onward.
With Windows you usually only have to restore your boot loader upon (re-)installation and very rarely after updates (usually only after service packs). This is the first time I hear that it actually rewrites the partition table as a whole.
_________________
nohup nice -n -20 cp /dev/urandom /dev/null & |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roman_Gruber
Advocate
Joined: 03 Oct 2006
Posts: 3846
Location: Austro Bavaria
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I'm also unable to configure the Windows bootloader while having GRUB installed on the MBR. |
The keyword is chainloading. Chainloading is a feature to load another bootloader from grub and therefore the other bootloader does not see grub at all. Grub => grub entry chainloading windows bootloader => windows bootlaoder => windows
| Quote: | | Nope, that sounds more like Ubuntu in multi-boot setups. Over the years, I totally lost count of all the (less tech-savvy) people telling me they lost all their files due to that half-automated, "user-friendly" GUI installer Ubuntu has. Worst thing about that? Not only does it erase partition tables and boot records but it writes over your previous partitions without proper warning. And since "Ubuntu is Linux", those people usually try to avoid Linux from that onward. |
Yes crappy implementation. I screwed up several mint / ubuntu / whatever-buntu because the update process screwed up or the installer did. But you can say this about Suse and others too. The audience for those are call them Noobs / People who never care for anything but just want a desctop fast installed without the technical details / I do not care much as long as my desctop works ... It is basically teh windows audience who is than unable to burn a single disc or do anythingon their own even with those fancy big icons or anything because tehy never learnt the basics / showed interestes.
for 99 percent of those poeple who just want to use their facebook or whatever they just put in the disc and hope it installs fine and thats the audience for that.
It is popular because the mayority does not care much and they do the proper advertising and I assume most are still windows users and for them, they are used to overwrite the hole disc always. As windows overwrites the hole disc since windows 95 when you do not pay attention, do not know it, have bad luck, forgot the right choice, never got offered the right choice whatever.
See it as personal opinion. Ubuntu may be the right choice for a lot but not for all.
| Code: | | With Windows you usually only have to restore your boot loader upon (re-)installation and very rarely after updates (usually only after service packs). This is the first time I hear that it actually rewrites the partition table as a whole. |
happens since windows 95. A screwed up box because blue screen of death in the boot process / unbootable box / crashes / slowdown or whatever
the only choice they give you is to reinstall and therefore hope that you had the data on another drive => D:
C: was always to be a destroyed drive after a while.
I have no glue these days as i do not use windows for over 6 years but is it still teh same that you reinstall windows every 6 months? is it still that you need lots of RAM for nothing? updates without beeing asked to update? buggy updates?
sorry for beeing off topic.
i checked out new msi-72 notebook or what it is called with 970m gpu. i saw 512 mb for a gpu driver and i just thought wow omg, why so much for just one gpu driver. i checked the other components and saw the days of 10mb drivers are long gone on windows.
Anyway thanks for sharing your windows expierence, so I may got a current impression of win... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
creaker
l33t
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 651
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| c00l.wave wrote: |
| creaker wrote: | | yup, Windows like a mad dog that destroys all around |
Nope, that sounds more like Ubuntu in multi-boot setups. Over the years, I totally lost count of all the (less tech-savvy) people telling me they lost all their files due to that half-automated, "user-friendly" GUI installer Ubuntu has. Worst thing about that? Not only does it erase partition tables and boot records but it writes over your previous partitions without proper warning. And since "Ubuntu is Linux", those people usually try to avoid Linux from that onward. |
They have one passport for two. Ubuntu==GNU-Windows.
Fortunately I never trusted "user friendly" linux installer. User friendly Linux - it's something fishy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
c00l.wave
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Aug 2003
Posts: 264
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tw04l124 wrote: | | The keyword is chainloading. Chainloading is a feature to load another bootloader from grub and therefore the other bootloader does not see grub at all. |
I am chainloading Windows via GRUB but of course Windows still sees GRUB on the MBR but expects its own NT bootloader there. When I try to update the NT bootloader it always fails unless I first restore the MBR for Windows.
| Quote: | | for 99 percent of those poeple who just want to use their facebook or whatever they just put in the disc and hope it installs fine and thats the audience for that. |
Actually, 99 percent of those people don't want to get rid of Windows but want to install a dual-boot setup to have the option to return to their usual environment at any time. The Ubuntu installer, however, doesn't warn those users that it deletes Windows straight away. Since Ubuntu is supposed to be made for that scenario, I don't get why they still don't show a proper warning. AFAIR the Windows installer (to get back to topic in some way) does have a warning, inherited way back from MS-DOS times. So Windows can actually be considered less destructive than Ubuntu in this respect, a MBR is far easier to restore than data from a half-overwritten hard disk.
_________________
nohup nice -n -20 cp /dev/urandom /dev/null & |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irre
Guru
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Posts: 434
Location: Stockholm
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I never replaced the mbr in partition 1. I KNOW that Windows owns this part. So I installed grub mbr in another partition and had that partition active (boot-flag moved from partition 1). This works fine. The only problem was this update. The update forced me to make partition 1 temporary active. I should have done that from Linux not Windows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
