Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #51224 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-10-29 14:07 -0500 |
| Last post | 2013-10-30 05:45 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 100 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-29 14:07 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 15:13 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-29 15:06 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 16:22 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-29 16:35 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 18:11 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-29 17:35 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-10-30 17:00 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-30 17:09 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-10-30 17:29 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 17:36 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-10-30 19:54 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 20:04 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-10-30 20:10 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-30 19:05 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-10-30 20:12 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-30 22:05 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-10-30 19:58 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-30 22:18 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-10-30 19:56 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 13:11 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 00:02 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 18:26 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2013-10-29 19:10 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 19:27 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2013-10-29 17:48 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-29 19:32 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-29 18:59 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-29 20:23 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-29 20:30 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-29 19:38 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 21:03 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-30 19:31 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 09:09 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 09:21 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 17:12 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 13:03 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 00:05 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2013-10-30 14:32 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2013-10-30 12:11 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-29 18:57 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-30 19:11 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? "Ted L." <tedl719@yahoo.com> - 2013-10-30 07:54 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 09:15 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-10-31 00:31 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 15:19 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-10-30 19:50 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> - 2013-10-30 22:14 -0500
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-10-31 01:04 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2013-10-31 21:54 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 05:23 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-11-01 00:30 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-11-01 07:03 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2013-11-02 10:29 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-11-01 23:33 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 05:24 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 09:25 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-10-31 12:29 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2013-10-31 09:14 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 09:26 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-10-31 14:23 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2013-10-31 09:11 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2013-10-30 22:21 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-29 19:40 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 22:45 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-10-30 04:25 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-30 00:48 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-10-30 12:54 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-30 13:33 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? ggrandish@gmail.com - 2013-10-30 10:49 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-30 14:57 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-10-31 00:23 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 02:57 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-10-31 14:31 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 13:43 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? ggrandish@gmail.com - 2013-10-31 12:57 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 18:20 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 21:08 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 18:20 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-11-01 13:47 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 09:16 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-10-30 10:21 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2013-10-30 15:54 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-10-30 13:02 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2013-10-31 09:58 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 17:33 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-10-30 04:27 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 09:15 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2013-10-30 09:52 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Martin Τrautmann <t-usenet@gmx.net> - 2013-10-31 08:16 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-11-01 09:30 +1300
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-10-29 22:29 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? ggrandish@gmail.com - 2013-10-29 15:19 -0700
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-10-31 18:46 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2013-11-01 12:55 +0000
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 21:11 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-11-01 14:30 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-11-01 17:05 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-11-01 23:34 -0400
Re: Any Rosetta rumors? "Mr. Strat" <mrstrat@nospam.gmail.com> - 2013-10-30 05:45 -0700
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-29 18:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <l4pi22$ikg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #51263 |
On 10/29/13, 6:11 PM, David Empson wrote: > SheepShaver does more than just emulate a PowerPC: it runs a complete > copy of the older operating system as well. Not true -- *all* it does is emulate a PPC, with some glue to manage it. While people have packaged up directly installable versions of it that include OS 7.5.2 (I believe that's the version), the basic system is just an emulator -- you have to have a disk image of some appropriate classic O.S. (I'm using 9.0.4, for example) that you boot into it, just as if it were a real piece of hardware. You even have to manage to get a copy of the boot ROM (although that too tends to come packaged in distros.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-30 19:11 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <301020131911028277%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #51270 |
In article <l4pi22$ikg$1@dont-email.me>, Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> wrote: > On 10/29/13, 6:11 PM, David Empson wrote: > > SheepShaver does more than just emulate a PowerPC: it runs a complete > > copy of the older operating system as well. > > Not true -- *all* it does is emulate a PPC, with some glue to manage it. <snip> David meant the the SheepShaver application has it's own, separate, older version of the Mac OS running (the version you install on it) - in reality it's a pretend computer running inside your own computer. Rosetta, on the other hand, used the same existing Mac OS running on the real computer. As he said, you can achieve the same thing for an older version of Mac OS X (one with Rosetta) by running it under virtualisation with Fusion, Parallels or VirtualBox. Again, it would be a pretend computer with it's own version of the Mac OS, running inside your real computer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ted L." <tedl719@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-30 07:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <l4qvih$ms5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #51305 |
On 10/30/13, 1:11 AM, Your Name wrote: > David meant the the SheepShaver application has it's own, separate, > older version of the Mac OS running (the version you install on it) - > in reality it's a pretend computer running inside your own computer. > Rosetta, on the other hand, used the same existing Mac OS running on > the real computer. Not to beat a dead horse, but I repeat, SheepShaver itself does *not* contain any version of Mac OS nor provide a substitute for it -- using your terminology, all (!) it does is provide a pretend (aka, emulated) PPC with some set of (empty) memory and other devices (like a display, keyboard and mass storage contained in a Mac disk image). The boot ROM (firmware) isn't even technically part of SheepShaver, although some version of it seems to be packaged with most distributions of SheepShaver. The only connection to Mac OS is that selected folders in Mac's Unix look like disks to the Sheepshaver emulated Mac. -- Ted L. Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 09:15 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <311020130915541648%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #51334 |
In article <l4qvih$ms5$1@dont-email.me>, Ted L. <tedl719@yahoo.com> wrote: > On 10/30/13, 1:11 AM, Your Name wrote: > > > > David meant the the SheepShaver application has it's own, separate, > > older version of the Mac OS running (the version you install on it) - > > in reality it's a pretend computer running inside your own computer. > > Rosetta, on the other hand, used the same existing Mac OS running on > > the real computer. > > Not to beat a dead horse, but I repeat, SheepShaver itself does *not* > contain any version of Mac OS nor provide a substitute for it -- using > your terminology, all (!) it does is provide a pretend (aka, emulated) > PPC with some set of (empty) memory and other devices (like a display, > keyboard and mass storage contained in a Mac disk image). The boot ROM > (firmware) isn't even technically part of SheepShaver, although some > version of it seems to be packaged with most distributions of > SheepShaver. The only connection to Mac OS is that selected folders in > Mac's Unix look like disks to the Sheepshaver emulated Mac. Nobody said SheepShaver software itself contains a version of the OS. The point was that it uses a separate version of the OS on a pretend computer. You choose which version of the OS you want to install on the pretend computer. It is the same with Fusion, Pararllels and VirtualBox. Rosetta on the other hand uses the existing (now old) OS on the real computer. The only way to use Rosetta with a newer version of Mac OS is to run a separate older version of Mac OS on a pretend computer using Fusion, Pararllels and VirtualBox. (The exception which I haven't looked into could be to use Boot Camp so the old OS is running on the real computer, but then you're still not using Rosetta under the new Mac OS.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 00:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <l4s8cj$u77$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #51382 |
Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote: > (The exception which I haven't looked into could be to use Boot Camp > so the old OS is running on the real computer, but then you're still > not using Rosetta under the new Mac OS.) Boot Camp's only for Windows. It's possible to just make an ordinary partiton of a drive and install the old OS there. If the Mac originally supported Snow Leopard than it still will. -- K. Lang may your lum reek.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 15:19 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <311020131519450023%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #51426 |
In article <l4s8cj$u77$2@dont-email.me>, Király <me@home.spamsucks.ca> wrote: > Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote: > > (The exception which I haven't looked into could be to use Boot Camp > > so the old OS is running on the real computer, but then you're still > > not using Rosetta under the new Mac OS.) > > Boot Camp's only for Windows. It's possible to just make an ordinary > partiton of a drive and install the old OS there. If the Mac originally > supported Snow Leopard than it still will. Not quite true. You can use Boot Camp to install Linux (for example), but I really just meant setting the Mac up to be a multi-boot computer where you can choose which OS to boot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-30 19:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <vilain-510932.19505330102013@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #51426 |
In article <l4s8cj$u77$2@dont-email.me>, me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) wrote: > Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote: > > (The exception which I haven't looked into could be to use Boot Camp > > so the old OS is running on the real computer, but then you're still > > not using Rosetta under the new Mac OS.) > > Boot Camp's only for Windows. It's possible to just make an ordinary > partiton of a drive and install the old OS there. If the Mac originally > supported Snow Leopard than it still will. As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no such thing, so I don't think you can do that. -- DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee... [I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-30 22:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <l4shu8$9cn$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #51434 |
On 10/30/13, 9:50 PM, Michael Vilain wrote: > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To > boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions > on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no > such thing, so I don't think you can do that. Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. Ted
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 01:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <vilain-56596A.01045531102013@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #51441 |
In article <l4shu8$9cn$2@dont-email.me>, Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> wrote: > On 10/30/13, 9:50 PM, Michael Vilain wrote: > > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To > > boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions > > on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no > > such thing, so I don't think you can do that. > > Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even > OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the > startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or > have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration > on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot > into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. > > Ted Classic and MacOS X are the exception. I'm saying you can't boot MacOS 10.8 and 10.9 from the same disk if they're loaded from different partitions. Or has Apple changed that? -- DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee... [I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 21:54 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1lbmk0c.rpeezi1rguqnsN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> |
| In reply to | #51461 |
Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > In article <l4shu8$9cn$2@dont-email.me>, Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> wrote: > > > On 10/30/13, 9:50 PM, Michael Vilain wrote: > > > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To > > > boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions > > > on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no > > > such thing, so I don't think you can do that. > > > > Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even > > OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the > > startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or > > have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration > > on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot > > into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. > > Classic and MacOS X are the exception. I'm saying you can't boot MacOS > 10.8 and 10.9 from the same disk if they're loaded from different > partitions. Or has Apple changed that? That has always been possible. I have an external hard drive with bootable 10.4 and 10.5 partitions for a PowerPC Mac (using Apple Partition Map), and another with bootable 10.5 and 10.6 partitions for an Intel Mac (using GUID Partition Table). In the past, I've done the same with even older OS X versions, probably also mixing 10.7 with one of the earlier ones, and I'm aware of other people with bootable 10.6 and 10.8 partitions on the same drive. I wouldn't expect that 10.9 changes anything on that front. For that matter, 10.7 and later normally has two bootable partitions per disk: the recovery partition and the main one. The Mac's firmware allows booting from any partition containing a supported OS. You can use Startup Disk to choose which one, or hold down the Option key at startup and pick the boot volume. On PowerPC Macs, it is also possible to have bootable Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X systems on the same partition. Going back further, Mac OS 9 and earlier can have multiple bootable systems on the same partition (with differently named or located system folders, each one containing valid System and Finder files). -- David Empson dempson@actrix.gen.nz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 05:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <311020130523591204%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #51467 |
In article <1lbmk0c.rpeezi1rguqnsN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>, David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote: > Going back further, Mac OS 9 and earlier can have multiple bootable > systems on the same partition (with differently named or located system > folders, each one containing valid System and Finder files). that was *really* useful.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-11-01 00:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <vilain-53E843.00300401112013@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #51467 |
In article <1lbmk0c.rpeezi1rguqnsN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>, dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote: > Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > > > In article <l4shu8$9cn$2@dont-email.me>, Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> wrote: > > > > > On 10/30/13, 9:50 PM, Michael Vilain wrote: > > > > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To > > > > boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions > > > > on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no > > > > such thing, so I don't think you can do that. > > > > > > Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even > > > OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the > > > startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or > > > have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration > > > on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot > > > into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. > > > > Classic and MacOS X are the exception. I'm saying you can't boot MacOS > > 10.8 and 10.9 from the same disk if they're loaded from different > > partitions. Or has Apple changed that? > > That has always been possible. I have an external hard drive with > bootable 10.4 and 10.5 partitions for a PowerPC Mac (using Apple > Partition Map), and another with bootable 10.5 and 10.6 partitions for > an Intel Mac (using GUID Partition Table). > > In the past, I've done the same with even older OS X versions, probably > also mixing 10.7 with one of the earlier ones, and I'm aware of other > people with bootable 10.6 and 10.8 partitions on the same drive. > > I wouldn't expect that 10.9 changes anything on that front. > > For that matter, 10.7 and later normally has two bootable partitions per > disk: the recovery partition and the main one. > > The Mac's firmware allows booting from any partition containing a > supported OS. You can use Startup Disk to choose which one, or hold down > the Option key at startup and pick the boot volume. > > On PowerPC Macs, it is also possible to have bootable Mac OS 9 and Mac > OS X systems on the same partition. > > Going back further, Mac OS 9 and earlier can have multiple bootable > systems on the same partition (with differently named or located system > folders, each one containing valid System and Finder files). How does that work? I thought the "drivers" for booting a partition were installed on the drive's boot sector, not on a partition by partition basis. When you partition a disk, you can specify GUID (Intel), Apple Partition Map (PPC), or Master Boot Record (Windows). If you have a disk that has 10.4 and 10.6, how can you partition that to boot either of those versions of the OS. I can see setting it up to boot 10.7 and 10.9 or 10.8 and 10.9 because you have to use GUID. How does the Boot Prom know to boot a Windows partition or MacOS 10.8? Or can MacOS boot using MBR? -- DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee... [I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-11-01 07:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <011120130703044735%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #51575 |
In article <vilain-53E843.00300401112013@news.individual.net>, Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > > The Mac's firmware allows booting from any partition containing a > > supported OS. You can use Startup Disk to choose which one, or hold down > > the Option key at startup and pick the boot volume. > > > > On PowerPC Macs, it is also possible to have bootable Mac OS 9 and Mac > > OS X systems on the same partition. > > > > Going back further, Mac OS 9 and earlier can have multiple bootable > > systems on the same partition (with differently named or located system > > folders, each one containing valid System and Finder files). > > How does that work? I thought the "drivers" for booting a partition > were installed on the drive's boot sector, not on a partition by > partition basis. When you partition a disk, you can specify GUID > (Intel), Apple Partition Map (PPC), or Master Boot Record (Windows). guid/apm/mbr is for the whole drive not individual partitions. > If you have a disk that has 10.4 and 10.6, how can you partition that to > boot either of those versions of the OS. make two partitions, one with 10.4 and one with 10.6. 10.4 came in two versions, powerpc and intel. i can't think of any reason why you'd want a powerpc 10.4 and an intel 10.6 on the same drive because it would need to be used for two different macs. that situation is better served by two different drives. nevertheless, you could do it if you wanted. intel macs can boot from apm partitions (at least ones that run 10.6), so partition the drive as apm and install 10.4 on one partition then clone 10.6 to the other partition (the installer will complain if you try to install to apm). if you want the intel 10.4 version, you partition the drive guid and install 10.4 on one and 10.6 on the other. hold down the option key at boot to choose which one, or use startup disk preference panel. > I can see setting it up to > boot 10.7 and 10.9 or 10.8 and 10.9 because you have to use GUID. How > does the Boot Prom know to boot a Windows partition or MacOS 10.8? Or > can MacOS boot using MBR? boot camp carves out its own partition if you choose to use it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-11-02 10:29 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1lbpcm2.1av9wh7w5pz9cN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> |
| In reply to | #51575 |
Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > In article <1lbmk0c.rpeezi1rguqnsN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>, > dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote: > > > Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > > > > > In article <l4shu8$9cn$2@dont-email.me>, Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On 10/30/13, 9:50 PM, Michael Vilain wrote: > > > > > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per > > > > > system. To boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on > > > > > multiple partitions on the same disk would require a boot loader > > > > > like Grub. There is no such thing, so I don't think you can do > > > > > that. > > > > > > > > Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even > > > > OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the > > > > startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or > > > > have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration > > > > on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot > > > > into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. > > > > > > Classic and MacOS X are the exception. I'm saying you can't boot MacOS > > > 10.8 and 10.9 from the same disk if they're loaded from different > > > partitions. Or has Apple changed that? > > > > That has always been possible. I have an external hard drive with > > bootable 10.4 and 10.5 partitions for a PowerPC Mac (using Apple > > Partition Map), and another with bootable 10.5 and 10.6 partitions for > > an Intel Mac (using GUID Partition Table). > > > > In the past, I've done the same with even older OS X versions, probably > > also mixing 10.7 with one of the earlier ones, and I'm aware of other > > people with bootable 10.6 and 10.8 partitions on the same drive. > > > > I wouldn't expect that 10.9 changes anything on that front. > > > > For that matter, 10.7 and later normally has two bootable partitions per > > disk: the recovery partition and the main one. > > > > The Mac's firmware allows booting from any partition containing a > > supported OS. You can use Startup Disk to choose which one, or hold down > > the Option key at startup and pick the boot volume. > > > > On PowerPC Macs, it is also possible to have bootable Mac OS 9 and Mac > > OS X systems on the same partition. > > > > Going back further, Mac OS 9 and earlier can have multiple bootable > > systems on the same partition (with differently named or located system > > folders, each one containing valid System and Finder files). > > How does that work? I thought the "drivers" for booting a partition > were installed on the drive's boot sector, not on a partition by > partition basis. What "drivers"? Back in the early Mac OS SCSI era (using the Apple Partition Map scheme), Apple had a mechanism where a driver was installed in a special partition that could be used to boot any other partition into Mac OS. If different drivers were needed for different computers, it was possible to have multiple drivers in different driver partitions, and the system would pick the appropriate one. None of that applies with Mac OS X. The firmware supplies the drivers needed to access the hard drive and recognise enough of it to bootstrap the operating system. The partition table tells the firmware where the partitions live on the disk. The firmware has parameters saved in NVRAM to select which partition to boot by default. The partition has information typically stored in a boot sector which indicates the file used to bootstrap load the OS. > When you partition a disk, you can specify GUID (Intel), Apple Partition > Map (PPC), or Master Boot Record (Windows). > > If you have a disk that has 10.4 and 10.6, how can you partition that to > boot either of those versions of the OS. 1. Choose a partition map scheme which is compatible with the firmware on the computer: APM for PowerPC Macs, GUID for Intel Macs. Intel Macs released up to at least mid 2011 (and I'm not aware of any later ones losing this ability) can can boot from APM, but with limitations: they won't let you install the OS onto a drive which is using APM, and if booted from APM they can't install firmware updates. Because of these limitations I don't bother using APM drives to boot Intel Macs, I just keep a separate APM-partitioned drive for PowerPC Macs and a GUID-partitioned drive for Intel Macs. 10.5 can boot both PowerPC and Intel Macs if installed on an APM drive. Other Intel OS versions can boot from APM if cloned to that drive rather than being installed directly. 2. Boot from the install disc for the first OS you want to install. (If you want to install an older OS like 10.4 for Intel, you will need to do it using a Mac which can boot that OS version. You can do the following installation steps from multiple Macs if you need a wider span of OS versions than are supported by any one Mac you have.) 3. Use Disk Utility to partition the drive, selecting the appropriate partition map scheme and as many partitions as you need: at least one per bootable OS X version. 4. Install the OS you are booted from in one partition. Set it up as normal. 5. Boot from the install disc for the next OS you want to install. 6. Install that into one of the other partitions. Set it up as normal. 7. Repeat steps 5 and 6 for as many other OS versions as you want on the same drive. In theory, this could be as many as six versions so far for an Intel Mac (each of 10.4 through 10.9), or six for a PowerPC Mac (each of 10.0 through 10.5). Note that each of 10.7 and later will repartition the drive slightly, adding a recovery partition (less than 1 GB) for that OS version immediately after the partition on which the OS is installed. The partition for the OS is reduced in size accordingly and later partitions are not affected. 8. To start up from the desired OS, use System Preferences > Startup Disk, or hold down the Option key at startup. > I can see setting it up to boot 10.7 and 10.9 or 10.8 and 10.9 because you > have to use GUID. 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7, 10.8 and 10.9 on an Intel Mac can all boot from GUID, since that partition scheme was introduced with Intel Macs back in 2006. (I expect all of them can also boot from APM, but I haven't tested that with 10.6 or later.) > How does the Boot Prom know to boot a Windows partition or MacOS 10.8? > Or can MacOS boot using MBR? The firmware uses information saved in the parameter RAM (which is set by the Startup Disk preference pane) to select which drive and partition to boot by default. If you hold down the Option key, the firmware presents the startup manager user interface which shows all bootable volumes it can find and lets you pick one. I'd have to re-read the HFS+ technical note to refresh my memory on how the boot OS is located, but I think that information is stored in a fixed location early in the partition (e.g. a boot sector), referring to the file to be loaded, which is typically /mach_kernel on an installed OS volume. (The firmware directly supports the HFS+ file system.) I'm less familiar with Windows booting mechanisms, but my understanding is that when you use Boot Camp, it sets up a fake MBR (on a GUID-partitioned drive) which is needed by Windows, but I don't know offhand if the Mac firmware actually needs it to boot - it probably goes directly to the partition containing Windows and loads the boot sector, which contains code to load whichever file Windows uses to boot. -- David Empson dempson@actrix.gen.nz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-11-01 23:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <l51rq4$qn5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #51600 |
On 11-01-2013, 17:29, David Empson (and others) wrote:
>> >How does that work? I thought the "drivers" for booting a partition
>> >were installed on the drive's boot sector, not on a partition by
>> >partition basis.
> What "drivers"? Back in the early Mac OS SCSI era (using the Apple
> Partition Map scheme), Apple had a mechanism where a driver was
> installed in a special partition that could be used to boot any other
> partition into Mac OS. If different drivers were needed for different
> computers, it was possible to have multiple drivers in different driver
> partitions, and the system would pick the appropriate one.
>
> None of that applies with Mac OS X. The firmware supplies the drivers
> needed to access the hard drive and recognise enough of it to bootstrap
> the operating system. The partition table tells the firmware where the
Maybe he was thinking of the time when disk utility would announce that
it was installing OS9 drivers.
--
Wes Groleau
He that complies against his will is of the same opinion still.
— Samuel Butler, 1612-1680
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 05:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <311020130524001264%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #51461 |
In article <vilain-56596A.01045531102013@news.individual.net>, Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > > > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To > > > boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions > > > on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no > > > such thing, so I don't think you can do that. > > > > Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even > > OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the > > startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or > > have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration > > on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot > > into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. > > > Classic and MacOS X are the exception. I'm saying you can't boot MacOS > 10.8 and 10.9 from the same disk if they're loaded from different > partitions. Or has Apple changed that? 1 os x per partition on as many partitions as will fit on a hard drive. no need for anything else. it's always worked that way. probably always will.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 09:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <l4tlnc$fdk$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #51472 |
On 10-31-2013, 05:24, nospam wrote:
> 1 os x per partition on as many partitions as will fit on a hard drive.
> no need for anything else. it's always worked that way. probably always
And with a little work, you can probably make any partition a VM for the
others.
--
Wes Groleau
After the christening of his baby brother in church, Jason sobbed
all the way home in the back seat of the car. His father asked him
three times what was wrong. Finally, the boy replied, “That preacher
said he wanted us brought up in a Christian home, and I wanted to
stay with you guys."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 12:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnl74j8s.20cu.g.kreme@mbp55.local> |
| In reply to | #51461 |
In message <vilain-56596A.01045531102013@news.individual.net> Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > In article <l4shu8$9cn$2@dont-email.me>, Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> wrote: >> On 10/30/13, 9:50 PM, Michael Vilain wrote: >> > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To >> > boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions >> > on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no >> > such thing, so I don't think you can do that. >> >> Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even >> OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the >> startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or >> have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration >> on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot >> into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. >> >> Ted > Classic and MacOS X are the exception. I'm saying you can't boot MacOS > 10.8 and 10.9 from the same disk if they're loaded from different > partitions. That's not true. > Or has Apple changed that? Nope, no change. That has *never* been the case with any version of OS X (or Mac OS). -- Commander: "Seems odd you'd name your ship after a battle you were on the wrong side of." Mal: "May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 09:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dfritzin-4FFD98.09141431102013@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #51461 |
In article <vilain-56596A.01045531102013@news.individual.net>, Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > In article <l4shu8$9cn$2@dont-email.me>, Ted Lee <tmplee@mr.net> wrote: > > > On 10/30/13, 9:50 PM, Michael Vilain wrote: > > > As far as I know, the boot process is setup for one disk per system. To > > > boot multiple OS' (or Windows, Linux, and MacOS) on multiple partitions > > > on the same disk would require a boot loader like Grub. There is no > > > such thing, so I don't think you can do that. > > > > Huh? If I have bootable copies of more than one version of OS X (even > > OS 9 if the machine is of the right age to run it too) and go to the > > startup disk pref pane I can select any one of them to boot into. Or > > have I misread something here (quite possible.) I had one configuration > > on my old, now retired, PowerMac where I seem to remember I could boot > > into OS 9 *and* three different versions of OS X. > > > > Ted > > Classic and MacOS X are the exception. I'm saying you can't boot MacOS > 10.8 and 10.9 from the same disk if they're loaded from different > partitions. Or has Apple changed that? I've been booting two different systems from the same disk since Lion came out and didn't support PPC apps. So, Apple has supported this since SL at least.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-10-31 09:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <l4tlqq$fdk$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #51480 |
On 10-31-2013, 09:14, David Fritzinger wrote:
> I've been booting two different systems from the same disk since Lion
> came out and didn't support PPC apps. So, Apple has supported this since
> SL at least.
My first iMac had OS 9.1 on one partition and 10.0.4 on another.
As soon as they were available, I made it 9.2.2 and 10.1
--
Wes Groleau
After the christening of his baby brother in church, Jason sobbed
all the way home in the back seat of the car. His father asked him
three times what was wrong. Finally, the boy replied, “That preacher
said he wanted us brought up in a Christian home, and I wanted to
stay with you guys."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web