Been gone all day. If you are recieving themach_kernel not found error it is only caused by one thing. The com.apple.boot.plist is aimed at the wrong partition. However, I know that is not the case here. So Im stumped.

partitioning schemes are information at the very beginning of your physical disk and are a way your computer knows at what sector do your partitions start and end. it's also a means of loading the boot information that loads the kernel of your system (and thus startup begins).

MBR stands for master boot record, this is the partitioning scheme that dos used to have, and it still lives on in windows, although windows 7 can (if i recall correctly) be installed on a GUID drive.

GUID is basically GPT, gnu partition table which i think linux (and maybe freebsd) uses. it has replaced the old Apple Partition Map, which was used to start up powerpc-based computers. now all intel-based macs use this scheme.

why is this important for us? because GUID has a little hidden partition (around 200mb) at the beginning ('efi' partition), enabling us to put our kernel extension (.kext) and other boot-time overrides there, this way making the system on our os x partition almost untouched. GUID is also more easily manageable. creating new partitions and resizing existing ones is easier and most of the time doesn't render your drive unbootable (on MBR this can happen often, and then you have to re-write the master boot record).

hope this clears out some confusion.

---

edit: 'vanilla' means that you're using the retail disk to install and then modify it according to your needs. this used to be the more complicated way in the past, that's why people made 'distros', which are already customised. vanilla is more clean, too, because it uses the efi partition for overrides (explained above). and you can brag about having an 'untouched' system. updates are easier, too, and are less likely to render your system unusable.
as you can see in these forums, vanilla install is currently more pain-free than using the distro, thanks to our beloved dalton.

GPT (GUID Partition Table) NOT GNU Partition Table! GPT is part of the EFI standard which is why you see the hidden EFI partition (also part of the standard) created when you format GPT. Also MBR is what any PC has used even ones with Linux OSes. Also more debatable I don't completely think what you wrote for Vanilla is accurate but many people think many different things about what makes installs vanilla.

I think we should try to bring the different methods/scenarios together and clarify what's the limitations of each. Checking around, it seems that MS XP and Vista (32 bit) still cannot understand GUID natively. Only the later versions of Vista (64, server) and now the Windows 7 start to understand GUID.

So if I want to keep using the XP that came with the MSI U-100, I better keep the MBR scheme.


Yes. The hidden EFI is created automatically when we repartition using the GUID. BUT: Are you sure that we cannot 'fake' it and create a small partition under MBR, call it EFI, and put all our customized stuff there, as someone (Mars478?) suggested? [same way as we could use a separate partition to put GRUB there]


I tried to look at the Boot Camp solution, but it seems that it is not a good solution for the long run. It takes advantage of the GUID/MBR Partition scheme hybrid, but is limited to only 4 'real' partitions (ie: Primary) (GUID/MBR hybrid cannot handle Extended partition and its Logical sub-partitions). Any future manipulation of the partitions such as moving, growing/shrinking, or adding partition will destroy the MBR-GUID synchronization.

So it seems that Boot Camp is not really a good solution in the long run.

Which bring me back to the need for the 'old' MBR scheme if we want to use the XP, until Windows 7 gains approval (remember Windows ME?)

What you'all think?

Isn't the same part written twice? ...

I figured it out. Thanks for the jump start!!


brax


(posting from it now)