this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
1538 points (96.1% liked)

linuxmemes

21198 readers
319 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    In fact old BIOS systems are more resilient. With a separate bootload on another disk, starting from that disk and then chainloading Windows (on another disk) or Linux works very stable as Windows is not trying to change the boot order of BIOS.

    But Windows likes to also meddle with UEFI. Even with separate disks each with their own ESP it likes to change you EFI settings to make windows the default again instead of the boot menu on another disk (everything on the same single ESP is even worse, because then Windows can access and delete everything now Windows and you have to restore the boot loader/menu).