Part 1 - yes. Install win first, disable secure boot in BIOS. When installed, use win's disk management tools to shrink win C: to create space for mint, leave the space unallocated. Disable fast boot in win, if you don't your ntfs partitions will be read-only to mint. When you install mint, either choose the 'install alongside' option or create your linux partition(s) in advance with gparted and install with the 'something else' option.
Part 2 - yes.
[SOLVED] Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Forum rules
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Thinkcentre M720Q - LM21.3 cinnamon, 4 x T430 - LM21.3 cinnamon, Homebrew desktop i5-8400+GTX1080 Cinnamon 19.0
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Thank you very much AndyMH. Your answers to those questions provide a great reference for me to refer to if I decide to go with that configuration when the new computer arrives.
And I am very glad to have that reference because (referring back to the title of this thread) if I did put the operating systems (OS) on separate SSDs, it appears that I may have to put one of the OS on a slower (non-NVME) drive.
I put in several hours of research to attempt to discover whether you could add a second M.2 NVME drive and alternately boot into either OS on separate NVME drives with the computer I purchased. I read about using an adapter, that could potentially be placed into a PCIe x4 slot, to enable a second NVME drive to be connected. But I also read that the graphics card will very likely block the use of such an adapter for the PCIe x4 slot in my computer.
I found quite a few opinions on the issue in various forums but they mostly seemed to contradict each other. One person quoted a Dell representative saying the computer only supported one NVME drive, but I believe someone else said they proved that to be false. And in another forum post, someone indicated you could add a second NVME drive, but could only use it for storage and wouldn't be able to boot from it. Funny how this reminds me of the BestBuy salesman who recently, after I explained why I didn't want to buy the computer model he was trying to sell me said: "you've been reading too much."
Although I can find some sparse data supplemented by "flowery" text about my specific Dell XPS 8940 special edition model on the Dell website and some more specifications for the general (but variable) line of XPS 8940 computers, Dell does not seem to make it easy to find certain types of model-specific details. The "flowery" text touts this computer's expandability for the future, but multiple posts I read seemed to regard that as a bit of a joke, apparently mainly due to the many propriety parts Dell uses that can't easily or economically be replaced or upgraded. Here is the model-specific description:
1) On this specific computer model, is there a way I could add a second NVME SSD, install LM and Windows on separate NVME SSDs and then alternately boot to either OS?
2) If I just add another 16GB stick of DDR4 RAM (to the factory-build's single 16GB stick of RAM), of the same or higher MHz, putting both in white slots -- if there are white slots, will I then automatically be running in dual channel memory mode (on my specific model of XPS 8940 SE)?
And I am very glad to have that reference because (referring back to the title of this thread) if I did put the operating systems (OS) on separate SSDs, it appears that I may have to put one of the OS on a slower (non-NVME) drive.
I put in several hours of research to attempt to discover whether you could add a second M.2 NVME drive and alternately boot into either OS on separate NVME drives with the computer I purchased. I read about using an adapter, that could potentially be placed into a PCIe x4 slot, to enable a second NVME drive to be connected. But I also read that the graphics card will very likely block the use of such an adapter for the PCIe x4 slot in my computer.
I found quite a few opinions on the issue in various forums but they mostly seemed to contradict each other. One person quoted a Dell representative saying the computer only supported one NVME drive, but I believe someone else said they proved that to be false. And in another forum post, someone indicated you could add a second NVME drive, but could only use it for storage and wouldn't be able to boot from it. Funny how this reminds me of the BestBuy salesman who recently, after I explained why I didn't want to buy the computer model he was trying to sell me said: "you've been reading too much."
Although I can find some sparse data supplemented by "flowery" text about my specific Dell XPS 8940 special edition model on the Dell website and some more specifications for the general (but variable) line of XPS 8940 computers, Dell does not seem to make it easy to find certain types of model-specific details. The "flowery" text touts this computer's expandability for the future, but multiple posts I read seemed to regard that as a bit of a joke, apparently mainly due to the many propriety parts Dell uses that can't easily or economically be replaced or upgraded. Here is the model-specific description:
- 11th Gen Intel® Core™ i7-11700 processor(8-Core, 16M Cache, 2.5GHz to 4.9GHz
- Windows 10 Home English
- NVIDIA® GeForce® RTX 2060 SUPER™ 8GB GDDR6
- 16GB, 16Gx1, DDR4, 2933MHz
- 512GB PCIe M.2 SSD +1TB SATA 7200 RPM HDD
1) On this specific computer model, is there a way I could add a second NVME SSD, install LM and Windows on separate NVME SSDs and then alternately boot to either OS?
2) If I just add another 16GB stick of DDR4 RAM (to the factory-build's single 16GB stick of RAM), of the same or higher MHz, putting both in white slots -- if there are white slots, will I then automatically be running in dual channel memory mode (on my specific model of XPS 8940 SE)?
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
My desktop started life with 2 x 240GB SSDs, one for win, one for linux. I then replaced them with a single 512GB pcie NVME drive (I had to test some software with nvme drives - their naming and naming of partitions is different to sata drives). In the real world I can't say I noticed the difference in performance.
Thinkcentre M720Q - LM21.3 cinnamon, 4 x T430 - LM21.3 cinnamon, Homebrew desktop i5-8400+GTX1080 Cinnamon 19.0
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
In case this might be helpful to other Linux Mint (LM) novices thinking about doing something similar, I will provide a brief update here - now that I have received the new computer and installed LM.
After receiving the new computer, I decided to go with my original plan of installing LM on a separate Solid State Drive (SSD) from Windows. To do that, I installed a used (had old Linux distros on it) 240 GB SATA SSD into one of the two 2.5" drive "slots" available. I want to also install a used Hard Disk Drive (HDD) in the second 2.5" slot but Dell only provides one plastic drive "caddy" (a plastic drive holder that slides into a metal compartment that can hold two 2.5" drives). And they only provided one free SATA data cable. I had read somewhere that often, a computer may only have one SATA connection capable of SATA III speeds and that it is usually blue. So I disconnected the 1TB HDD that came with the computer from the blue SATA port on the motherboard and instead connected my SSD drive to the blue port to hopefully, get full SATA III speed on my LM system drive. My understanding is that a HDD can't make use of SATA III speed anyhow.
As was suggested to me in this forum thread, before beginning the installation, I turned off Secure Boot. And I removed the M.2 PCIe NVME SSD, which had Windows 10 installed on it, from the M.2 slot on the motherboard. The the reason to do these things, as suggested by helpful LM forum members, was to minimize current and future interference with the LM installation and get the new bootloader script (at least that is what I think it might be called) correctly placed onto the LM operating system (OS) disk instead of erroneously (apparently due to a bug in Ubuntu) getting placed on the Windows OS disk. And ideally, that results in having LM as the default option to load when booting up and also allows you to choose to load Windows instead, if you want to. (Spoiler Alert: it worked/works, perfectly -- for now anyway. If I want to load Windows on this Dell computer, I just poke the F12 key a few times as it is booting up -- otherwise, it automatically boots to LM).
Following the LM Installation guide and tips from LM forum members, I first tried installing LM 20.2 Cinnamon but was not able to get into it until I chose compatibility mode. Given that I was mostly clueless what the implications of that were, I was concerned that there might be undesirable consequences down the road if I continued with this version. So as I contemplated possibly trying LM 20.1 Edge Cinnamon (I had read the Edge versions are likely to be more compatibility with newer computers), I went into the LM Chat Room and a friendly person in there suggested LM 20.2 Edge Cinnamon. Apparently, it had just popped up on the download list because I had not seen an Edge option for LM 20.2 Cinnamon when I started my attempt to install LM.
So I followed that suggestion and eventually got into LM 20.2 Edge Cinnamon in a Live session from a USB stick. Unfortunately, I ran into a problem when I attempted to install LM onto my used SSD from the live LM session. I plan to explain more about that in a future post.
After receiving the new computer, I decided to go with my original plan of installing LM on a separate Solid State Drive (SSD) from Windows. To do that, I installed a used (had old Linux distros on it) 240 GB SATA SSD into one of the two 2.5" drive "slots" available. I want to also install a used Hard Disk Drive (HDD) in the second 2.5" slot but Dell only provides one plastic drive "caddy" (a plastic drive holder that slides into a metal compartment that can hold two 2.5" drives). And they only provided one free SATA data cable. I had read somewhere that often, a computer may only have one SATA connection capable of SATA III speeds and that it is usually blue. So I disconnected the 1TB HDD that came with the computer from the blue SATA port on the motherboard and instead connected my SSD drive to the blue port to hopefully, get full SATA III speed on my LM system drive. My understanding is that a HDD can't make use of SATA III speed anyhow.
As was suggested to me in this forum thread, before beginning the installation, I turned off Secure Boot. And I removed the M.2 PCIe NVME SSD, which had Windows 10 installed on it, from the M.2 slot on the motherboard. The the reason to do these things, as suggested by helpful LM forum members, was to minimize current and future interference with the LM installation and get the new bootloader script (at least that is what I think it might be called) correctly placed onto the LM operating system (OS) disk instead of erroneously (apparently due to a bug in Ubuntu) getting placed on the Windows OS disk. And ideally, that results in having LM as the default option to load when booting up and also allows you to choose to load Windows instead, if you want to. (Spoiler Alert: it worked/works, perfectly -- for now anyway. If I want to load Windows on this Dell computer, I just poke the F12 key a few times as it is booting up -- otherwise, it automatically boots to LM).
Following the LM Installation guide and tips from LM forum members, I first tried installing LM 20.2 Cinnamon but was not able to get into it until I chose compatibility mode. Given that I was mostly clueless what the implications of that were, I was concerned that there might be undesirable consequences down the road if I continued with this version. So as I contemplated possibly trying LM 20.1 Edge Cinnamon (I had read the Edge versions are likely to be more compatibility with newer computers), I went into the LM Chat Room and a friendly person in there suggested LM 20.2 Edge Cinnamon. Apparently, it had just popped up on the download list because I had not seen an Edge option for LM 20.2 Cinnamon when I started my attempt to install LM.
So I followed that suggestion and eventually got into LM 20.2 Edge Cinnamon in a Live session from a USB stick. Unfortunately, I ran into a problem when I attempted to install LM onto my used SSD from the live LM session. I plan to explain more about that in a future post.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
I will now try to give an overview of the following:
The warning indicated that I needed to add an EFI partition. But there was no mention of me needing to do that in the installation guide. So I wondered: How do I add an EFi partition? Where does it go? How big should I make it? And what is is an EFI partition? And I think it might need a boot flag and some other flag but there is no ability to add or manage flags visible in the "Something Else" interface. I am assuming that the EFI partition is where that thing I referred to above as the bootloader script gets written to so it can communicate with the UEFI (new style of BIOS?) to start up the correct operating system. [Maybe a forum member can clear this up for me or point to an existing post on the topic that is understandable for novices. *? There are so many of these terms and concepts that are a mystery to some of us novices that I imagine confused posts like mine must be a constant source of either frustration, or maybe even entertainment for the experts.]
Needless to say, I was a bit concerned at this point. But I looked at all the options I could find and eventually found a drop down menu that had "EFI partition" or something like that written as an option. I had just read that I probably needed to format the EFI partition in FAT32? (I think that was it) format, but there were no options to choose the format. So I hoped the installer would do that automatically. I figured it should probably go as the first partition, so I deleted the partitions I had set up previously, started over, and put the EFI partition first. I saw little consistency in recommendations I saw (elsewhere) for EFI partitions size, so I went large and made it 1GB.(Currently, only a small fraction of that is being used - after installation). I assume that is way more than is needed, but I could not find any definitive guidance on recommended or required size -- only vague or conflicting opinions.
I would appreciate it if someone could clarify or make an educated guess as to why I had to manually create an EFI partition, so I can avoid that issue in the future.[*?] My wild guess is it may have something to do with the fact that the SSD had been used before (two different Linux distros on it) and I selected "new partition table" in the "Something Else" interface during installation so I could set up a fresh set of partitions specifically for the current installation. But I am only guessing -- and I still don't know what size it should be or where it should be placed.
I'll also mention that I found posts indicating that, despite what may be written in guides, it is no longer necessary or best to explicitly/manually set up a swap partition as that will be handled automatically (and better) if you don't set one up manually. So I did not manually set up a swap partition in the end. I did, however, set up a Home partition (separate from the "/" partition) to allow Timeshift backups of "/" to be written to the Home partition so, if necessary, I could revert to an earlier system configuration (in "/") by restoring Timeshift backups -- without wiping out files located at "Home". I assume this configuration will also allow me to use some kind of backup program to back up files from "Home" separately from the "/" partition -- which I assume will save a lot of space on such backups.
So after creating EFI, "/" and Home partitions, I hit install, and as far as I can remember, everything went very well after that. I was able to boot into LM 20.2 Cinnamon Edge just fine. The more interesting test, I figured, was to see what would happen after I put the drive with the Windows operating system back in the computer. So after doing just that, and booting up the computer, to my delight, it still booted up directly into LM.
Now for the final test: could I also still get into Windows? So I re-started and tapped the F12 key a few times which brought up, among other things, some boot options (I wonder if this is the bootloader interface?). The first option in the list was "Ubuntu" (to boot LM)". Below that was an option to boot up Windows ("Windows Boot Manager"). I selected that option, hit enter and . . . sure enough, I was on the way to logging into Windows.
So, in summary, by following suggestions in this thread and loosely following the Linux Installation guide: except for the surprise requirement to install an EFI partition, the installation and use of LM and Windows on separate drives seems to have turned out very well -- at least so far.
Now that I have made it this far, can anyone tell me if there is any disadvantage to staying with an "Edge" version long term? For example, will it also be supported until April 2025 -- just like the non-Edge version of LM 20.2 Cinnamon?
- What went wrong when I tried to install LM 20.2 Cinnamon Edge from a live session based off of a USB stick.
- How I seem to have finally succeeded in getting LM installed as desired to work smoothly on a separate drive from Windows.
- How I was able to get the computer to boot into LM by default and still be able to alternately choose to have it boot into Windows when desired.
The warning indicated that I needed to add an EFI partition. But there was no mention of me needing to do that in the installation guide. So I wondered: How do I add an EFi partition? Where does it go? How big should I make it? And what is is an EFI partition? And I think it might need a boot flag and some other flag but there is no ability to add or manage flags visible in the "Something Else" interface. I am assuming that the EFI partition is where that thing I referred to above as the bootloader script gets written to so it can communicate with the UEFI (new style of BIOS?) to start up the correct operating system. [Maybe a forum member can clear this up for me or point to an existing post on the topic that is understandable for novices. *? There are so many of these terms and concepts that are a mystery to some of us novices that I imagine confused posts like mine must be a constant source of either frustration, or maybe even entertainment for the experts.]
Needless to say, I was a bit concerned at this point. But I looked at all the options I could find and eventually found a drop down menu that had "EFI partition" or something like that written as an option. I had just read that I probably needed to format the EFI partition in FAT32? (I think that was it) format, but there were no options to choose the format. So I hoped the installer would do that automatically. I figured it should probably go as the first partition, so I deleted the partitions I had set up previously, started over, and put the EFI partition first. I saw little consistency in recommendations I saw (elsewhere) for EFI partitions size, so I went large and made it 1GB.(Currently, only a small fraction of that is being used - after installation). I assume that is way more than is needed, but I could not find any definitive guidance on recommended or required size -- only vague or conflicting opinions.
I would appreciate it if someone could clarify or make an educated guess as to why I had to manually create an EFI partition, so I can avoid that issue in the future.[*?] My wild guess is it may have something to do with the fact that the SSD had been used before (two different Linux distros on it) and I selected "new partition table" in the "Something Else" interface during installation so I could set up a fresh set of partitions specifically for the current installation. But I am only guessing -- and I still don't know what size it should be or where it should be placed.
I'll also mention that I found posts indicating that, despite what may be written in guides, it is no longer necessary or best to explicitly/manually set up a swap partition as that will be handled automatically (and better) if you don't set one up manually. So I did not manually set up a swap partition in the end. I did, however, set up a Home partition (separate from the "/" partition) to allow Timeshift backups of "/" to be written to the Home partition so, if necessary, I could revert to an earlier system configuration (in "/") by restoring Timeshift backups -- without wiping out files located at "Home". I assume this configuration will also allow me to use some kind of backup program to back up files from "Home" separately from the "/" partition -- which I assume will save a lot of space on such backups.
So after creating EFI, "/" and Home partitions, I hit install, and as far as I can remember, everything went very well after that. I was able to boot into LM 20.2 Cinnamon Edge just fine. The more interesting test, I figured, was to see what would happen after I put the drive with the Windows operating system back in the computer. So after doing just that, and booting up the computer, to my delight, it still booted up directly into LM.
Now for the final test: could I also still get into Windows? So I re-started and tapped the F12 key a few times which brought up, among other things, some boot options (I wonder if this is the bootloader interface?). The first option in the list was "Ubuntu" (to boot LM)". Below that was an option to boot up Windows ("Windows Boot Manager"). I selected that option, hit enter and . . . sure enough, I was on the way to logging into Windows.
So, in summary, by following suggestions in this thread and loosely following the Linux Installation guide: except for the surprise requirement to install an EFI partition, the installation and use of LM and Windows on separate drives seems to have turned out very well -- at least so far.
Now that I have made it this far, can anyone tell me if there is any disadvantage to staying with an "Edge" version long term? For example, will it also be supported until April 2025 -- just like the non-Edge version of LM 20.2 Cinnamon?
Last edited by frank84 on Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Here's an excellent way to set up the hardware, whatever you end up with... Below is my explanation of the process:
"So, my notebook is running Ubuntu on the ssd, and the notebook had a cd drive as well. I had another ssd drive sitting unused, so I removed the cd drive, picked up a drive caddy for the ssd that was made for this task, and installed it in the cd recess under the keyboard.
I disconnected the Ubuntu ssd, and connected the other ssd to the old cd sata connectors. Plugged in the Win 10 iso boot usb drive and started the notebook after setting the usb as the boot drive. Then I went to the dark side…I still feel as if I did a bad thing, but it was necessary since the manufacturer did not offer a linux version.
After installing Windows 10, it took over the boot process, so I had to disconnect Windows ssd, and reconnect the Ubuntu ssd. I then started Ubuntu one time, quit and powered down in order to re-connect the Win 10 ssd.
The next boot went to the Ubuntu ssd, booting Ubuntu, and I went to the terminal and ran “sudo update-grub.” The grub updater then saw the Windows 10 boot info, and put it into the grub start menu in the inferior third position. Perfect!
I found this method here: https://linuxbsdos.com/2015/10/31/how-t ... rd-drives/ "
This way you can choose which op system to use in the grub boot menu.
Worked out very well.
"So, my notebook is running Ubuntu on the ssd, and the notebook had a cd drive as well. I had another ssd drive sitting unused, so I removed the cd drive, picked up a drive caddy for the ssd that was made for this task, and installed it in the cd recess under the keyboard.
I disconnected the Ubuntu ssd, and connected the other ssd to the old cd sata connectors. Plugged in the Win 10 iso boot usb drive and started the notebook after setting the usb as the boot drive. Then I went to the dark side…I still feel as if I did a bad thing, but it was necessary since the manufacturer did not offer a linux version.
After installing Windows 10, it took over the boot process, so I had to disconnect Windows ssd, and reconnect the Ubuntu ssd. I then started Ubuntu one time, quit and powered down in order to re-connect the Win 10 ssd.
The next boot went to the Ubuntu ssd, booting Ubuntu, and I went to the terminal and ran “sudo update-grub.” The grub updater then saw the Windows 10 boot info, and put it into the grub start menu in the inferior third position. Perfect!
I found this method here: https://linuxbsdos.com/2015/10/31/how-t ... rd-drives/ "
This way you can choose which op system to use in the grub boot menu.
Worked out very well.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Just to reiterate some of your questions:
I don't even know if I have a EFI or UEFI. I guess not on this machine. Disks says sda1 is one big 512 GB partition with "Partitioning: Master Boot Record".
It bugs me too that I can buy a brand new SSD and try to install LM and it doesn't go. I think all I had to do was format the whole thing as EXT4 and then it went, so it was not bad. But I would expect a one-step process to work with a brand new, empty drive.
I'm 62 yo and I think it is a safe bet that the computer startup / partitioning process will not be greatly simplified within my lifetime.
I haven't a clue. I know so little about this. I really should research it, but given what you said that would be a long process.I would appreciate it if someone could clarify or make an educated guess as to why I had to manually create an EFI partition
I don't even know if I have a EFI or UEFI. I guess not on this machine. Disks says sda1 is one big 512 GB partition with "Partitioning: Master Boot Record".
Me either. I guess 10 MB size would have been OK, but who knows. I think I did hear that the EFI partition can go anywhere, but first is a good option.I still don't know what size it should be or where it should be placed.
If it works I would stay with it. Upgrade options will come along when they are needed. I'm really glad to hear it went fairly well for you.Now that I have made it this far, can anyone tell me if there is any disadvantage to staying with an "Edge" version long term?
It bugs me too that I can buy a brand new SSD and try to install LM and it doesn't go. I think all I had to do was format the whole thing as EXT4 and then it went, so it was not bad. But I would expect a one-step process to work with a brand new, empty drive.
I'm 62 yo and I think it is a safe bet that the computer startup / partitioning process will not be greatly simplified within my lifetime.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
mikeflan: thanks for your comments. It's good to see your post because it tells me that someone is actually reading the details of my post. And I appreciate it because it makes me feel it was worth the time I spent attempting to clearly explain what I did and what happened. I'm sorry you had trouble with an install on a new SSD. I agree that it would be nice if the installation would go smoothly with such a simple, common starting point as a brand new SSD. Do you have any advice as to what I should look for as far as the right time to upgrade or switch over from an "Edge" version of Linux Mint? Do I wait for Mint 21.0 or ?
WHAT TURNED OUT REALLY WELL WITH THE INSTALLATION PROCEURE
I am quite happy that the steps I took for this installation turned out perfectly in the end -- exactly as I had intended. Despite the "moment" of concern when I was unexpectedly warned that I needed to add an EFI partition, several things I was uncertain about turned out great. Immediately after completing the Linux Mint (LM) installation, LM was already set to automatically boot up by default every time I started or re-started the computer. And even the first time I hit the f12 key during bootup, to be able to choose between the two operating systems, I saw confirmation that Ubuntu (i.e., LM) was already automatically placed at the top of the boot list. There was no need to disconnect the LM SSD or do anything like an update of grub.
So, as I intended, the computer normally just boots up directly into LM. But if I ever want to use Windows for something like a Windows-only game (I'm not actually a gamer - yet), I just tap the f12 key.
UEFI AND EFI
Regarding your comment: "I don't even know if I have a EFI or UEFI" -- In case it might be helpful, I will share what I found after doing some research. I hope I got it straight -- I'm just a beginner.
I believe UEFI is a newer, "improved" kind of "BIOS" (the older BIOS is now sometimes referred to as legacy BIOS) and EFI is a file type (and from my experience, can also be a name for a type of partition; I'm guessing it probably contains .efi files).
Regarding your comment; "sda1 is one big 512 GB partition with "Partitioning: Master Boot Record". I believe a MBR (master boot record) partition table format usually implies you have a legacy BIOS. UEFI instead uses a GPT(guid partition table) format instead of MBR.
Although I am a LM novice, here is a quote to share with you -- that I hope you find helpful:
"A file with the EFI file extension is an Extensible Firmware Interface file. They are boot loader executables, exist on UEFI (Unified Extensible Firmware Interface) based computer systems, and contain data on how the boot process should proceed."
Here is more from the same webpage: "the boot manager that exists as part of the motherboard UEFI firmware will have an EFI file location stored in the BootOrder variable. This . . . is usually just the EFI boot loader for your operating system. Most of the time, this file is stored on a special EFI system partition." [They were speaking of Windows here but maybe it would be the same or equivalent for LM or a situation like mine where the computer came with Windows on it and I added LM].They do, however, give an example of the boot loader location for Ubuntu: \EFI\ubuntu\elilo.efi . (Maybe my guess that .efi files probably hang out on EFI partitions was OK.)
Another website explains: "the UEFI works during the booting of a computer to load the files that are stored on the ESP. This would ensure that the installed systems will work properly." "ESP" means EFI system partition.
I think this just might be starting to make some sense now.
I also found a reference to "EFI" in the LM Installation Guide..
PARTITION SIZES
In this discussion, someone indicates "it is recommended [elsewhere] to have the size of EFI partition somewhere around 100~250 MB" and another person says that he has EFI partition sizes ranging from 97MB to 180MB.
The image below shows my 1GB-sized /boot/efi partition (formatted in fat32) at the beginning of my SSD. So far, the efi partition is only using 9.73 MB (1%) of the size I allotted in the partition -- looks like I made it large enough
.
And since I thought I might be installing a lot of applications to test and review for my volunteer work, I made the "/" partition about as large as the /Home partition. I really don't know how much capacity I will ultimately need on either of these two partitions.
I left quite a bit of space unallocated because I might use that space to make another partition for placing content like music, videos and old photos there that do not need to be backed up constantly. This is because I assume I will be able to find a backup app that will allow me to just make regular backups for the Home partition and skip backing up those non-changing media files constantly.
Regarding "why I had to manually create an EFI partition", another wild guess is maybe my formerly-used SSD (that was used to install LM on an ancient laptop) had a MBR (master boot record) partition table format and my current new computer, that uses UEFI (new form of BIOS) needed a GPT(guid partition table). And maybe that is part of what led to the need for me to manually add an EFI partition even though I did not see such a need mentioned in the installation guide.
WHAT TURNED OUT REALLY WELL WITH THE INSTALLATION PROCEURE
I am quite happy that the steps I took for this installation turned out perfectly in the end -- exactly as I had intended. Despite the "moment" of concern when I was unexpectedly warned that I needed to add an EFI partition, several things I was uncertain about turned out great. Immediately after completing the Linux Mint (LM) installation, LM was already set to automatically boot up by default every time I started or re-started the computer. And even the first time I hit the f12 key during bootup, to be able to choose between the two operating systems, I saw confirmation that Ubuntu (i.e., LM) was already automatically placed at the top of the boot list. There was no need to disconnect the LM SSD or do anything like an update of grub.
So, as I intended, the computer normally just boots up directly into LM. But if I ever want to use Windows for something like a Windows-only game (I'm not actually a gamer - yet), I just tap the f12 key.
UEFI AND EFI
Regarding your comment: "I don't even know if I have a EFI or UEFI" -- In case it might be helpful, I will share what I found after doing some research. I hope I got it straight -- I'm just a beginner.
I believe UEFI is a newer, "improved" kind of "BIOS" (the older BIOS is now sometimes referred to as legacy BIOS) and EFI is a file type (and from my experience, can also be a name for a type of partition; I'm guessing it probably contains .efi files).
Regarding your comment; "sda1 is one big 512 GB partition with "Partitioning: Master Boot Record". I believe a MBR (master boot record) partition table format usually implies you have a legacy BIOS. UEFI instead uses a GPT(guid partition table) format instead of MBR.
Although I am a LM novice, here is a quote to share with you -- that I hope you find helpful:
"A file with the EFI file extension is an Extensible Firmware Interface file. They are boot loader executables, exist on UEFI (Unified Extensible Firmware Interface) based computer systems, and contain data on how the boot process should proceed."
Here is more from the same webpage: "the boot manager that exists as part of the motherboard UEFI firmware will have an EFI file location stored in the BootOrder variable. This . . . is usually just the EFI boot loader for your operating system. Most of the time, this file is stored on a special EFI system partition." [They were speaking of Windows here but maybe it would be the same or equivalent for LM or a situation like mine where the computer came with Windows on it and I added LM].They do, however, give an example of the boot loader location for Ubuntu: \EFI\ubuntu\elilo.efi . (Maybe my guess that .efi files probably hang out on EFI partitions was OK.)
Another website explains: "the UEFI works during the booting of a computer to load the files that are stored on the ESP. This would ensure that the installed systems will work properly." "ESP" means EFI system partition.
I think this just might be starting to make some sense now.
I also found a reference to "EFI" in the LM Installation Guide..
PARTITION SIZES
In this discussion, someone indicates "it is recommended [elsewhere] to have the size of EFI partition somewhere around 100~250 MB" and another person says that he has EFI partition sizes ranging from 97MB to 180MB.
The image below shows my 1GB-sized /boot/efi partition (formatted in fat32) at the beginning of my SSD. So far, the efi partition is only using 9.73 MB (1%) of the size I allotted in the partition -- looks like I made it large enough
.And since I thought I might be installing a lot of applications to test and review for my volunteer work, I made the "/" partition about as large as the /Home partition. I really don't know how much capacity I will ultimately need on either of these two partitions.
I left quite a bit of space unallocated because I might use that space to make another partition for placing content like music, videos and old photos there that do not need to be backed up constantly. This is because I assume I will be able to find a backup app that will allow me to just make regular backups for the Home partition and skip backing up those non-changing media files constantly.
Regarding "why I had to manually create an EFI partition", another wild guess is maybe my formerly-used SSD (that was used to install LM on an ancient laptop) had a MBR (master boot record) partition table format and my current new computer, that uses UEFI (new form of BIOS) needed a GPT(guid partition table). And maybe that is part of what led to the need for me to manually add an EFI partition even though I did not see such a need mentioned in the installation guide.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
backintime.This is because I assume I will be able to find a backup app that will allow me to just make regular backups for the Home partition
If you try and install in UEFI mode on a drive with a legacy partition table it will complain about the absence of an EFI partition, conversely if you try and install in legacy mode on a drive with a GPT partition table it will complain about the lack of a bios_grub partition.
Before you start adding lots of stuff, I would resize your / partition. Unless you install lots of snaps or flatpaks you are not going to use that space.
My system drive booting legacy, so no EFI partition:
Thinkcentre M720Q - LM21.3 cinnamon, 4 x T430 - LM21.3 cinnamon, Homebrew desktop i5-8400+GTX1080 Cinnamon 19.0
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
I learned today that you are right. If you do this in a terminal:I believe a MBR (master boot record) partition table format usually implies you have a legacy BIOS.
Code: Select all
efibootmgrEFI variables are not supported on this system.Then you are legacy (which I am). Anything else and you are booting UEFI.
More on UEFI vs Legacy:
viewtopic.php?p=2031992#p2031992
Thanks for all the details. Maybe some of it will stick
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
frank84
As long as that particular PC's motherboard is working as it should and the ram is dual channel ( which chances are unless you buy some sort of server grade ram or ram meant to compliment the AMD EPYC cpu lineup...it will be dual channel), when you install at least two sticks of ram or more it will run that dual channel ram in dual channel mode plug n play.I cannot clearly confirm that mine will be dual channel
Mint 21.2 Cinnamon 5.8.4
asrock x570 taichi ...bios p5.00
ryzen 5900x
128GB Kingston Fury @ 3600mhz
Corsair mp600 pro xt NVME ssd 4TB
three 4TB ssds
dual 1TB ssds
Two 16TB Toshiba hdd's
24GB amd 7900xtx vid card
Viewsonic Elite UHD 32" 144hz monitor
asrock x570 taichi ...bios p5.00
ryzen 5900x
128GB Kingston Fury @ 3600mhz
Corsair mp600 pro xt NVME ssd 4TB
three 4TB ssds
dual 1TB ssds
Two 16TB Toshiba hdd's
24GB amd 7900xtx vid card
Viewsonic Elite UHD 32" 144hz monitor
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
AndyMH, Thank you for the backintime tip.
And thanks so much for the clarification on UEFI vs BIOS Legacy mode. And I want to thank you for previously explaining things about UEFI, etc., also. Although I couldn't remember all the places I had picked up bits of knowledge on the topic while I was writing about it in my last post, I now realize that you had provided a helpful explanation earlier in this thread.
And I appreciate you showing me what your partitions look like. I would like to explain a bit more about why I currently have a large "/" partition and then see what you think about it. I am continuing to do research and explore new ideas to improve my guidance documents for my volunteer project: Personal Computers for Under-served Communities. A major part of the project involves using Linux and selected software to rejuvenate donated, used computers to improve the communities' educational and occupational opportunities. But the first communities I assisted with my guidance did not have Internet access. So while developing the guidance, I have continued to make sure it will be useful for the many under-served communities around the world that may not have easily accessible or affordable Internet service.
To explain why I am concerned that I may need a somewhat large partition for "/", I will mention a couple of the larger installs that I will be reviewing on this computer, to help under-served communities:
First you install Kiwix which allows you to set up offline access to things you normally would only access online. Then, you can install other useful things of value to the remote community. One example is Project Gutenberg, which currently includes over 65,000 books and other documents. Another good example is -- the entire contents of Wikipedia
. Apparently, in a compressed file, the current size for Wikipedia alone is about 82 GB.
Another example that I am recommending and intend to review on my computer is the universe of Kolibri - "an adaptable set of open solutions specially developed to support learning for the half of the world without Internet access". My guess is there is practically no limit on the size of content you could end up installing for use via Kolibri -- except the size of your disks.
So I am wondering if you have any idea if most of the content for items like Wikipedia, Project Gutenberg and Kolibri would end up on the "/" partition or the Home partition by default as I currently have it configured? I assume that if the content size becomes too large, I will need to figure out a way to put some of the content on a separate disk(s). I hope, eventually, I can learn how to control where such content goes in LM -- if there is a way to do that.
Thanks
And thanks so much for the clarification on UEFI vs BIOS Legacy mode. And I want to thank you for previously explaining things about UEFI, etc., also. Although I couldn't remember all the places I had picked up bits of knowledge on the topic while I was writing about it in my last post, I now realize that you had provided a helpful explanation earlier in this thread.
And I appreciate you showing me what your partitions look like. I would like to explain a bit more about why I currently have a large "/" partition and then see what you think about it. I am continuing to do research and explore new ideas to improve my guidance documents for my volunteer project: Personal Computers for Under-served Communities. A major part of the project involves using Linux and selected software to rejuvenate donated, used computers to improve the communities' educational and occupational opportunities. But the first communities I assisted with my guidance did not have Internet access. So while developing the guidance, I have continued to make sure it will be useful for the many under-served communities around the world that may not have easily accessible or affordable Internet service.
To explain why I am concerned that I may need a somewhat large partition for "/", I will mention a couple of the larger installs that I will be reviewing on this computer, to help under-served communities:
First you install Kiwix which allows you to set up offline access to things you normally would only access online. Then, you can install other useful things of value to the remote community. One example is Project Gutenberg, which currently includes over 65,000 books and other documents. Another good example is -- the entire contents of Wikipedia
. Apparently, in a compressed file, the current size for Wikipedia alone is about 82 GB. Another example that I am recommending and intend to review on my computer is the universe of Kolibri - "an adaptable set of open solutions specially developed to support learning for the half of the world without Internet access". My guess is there is practically no limit on the size of content you could end up installing for use via Kolibri -- except the size of your disks.
So I am wondering if you have any idea if most of the content for items like Wikipedia, Project Gutenberg and Kolibri would end up on the "/" partition or the Home partition by default as I currently have it configured? I assume that if the content size becomes too large, I will need to figure out a way to put some of the content on a separate disk(s). I hope, eventually, I can learn how to control where such content goes in LM -- if there is a way to do that.
Thanks
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Generally linux programs have a much smaller footprint that windows programs. Exceptions are snap packages and flatpaks (I don't use them). Programs get installed (usually) in
Suggest you install what you want and find out what it does to your disk space. You can always shrink and move stuff around later, just takes longer as there will be more stuff to move.
/ and their config files live in /home.Suggest you install what you want and find out what it does to your disk space. You can always shrink and move stuff around later, just takes longer as there will be more stuff to move.
Thinkcentre M720Q - LM21.3 cinnamon, 4 x T430 - LM21.3 cinnamon, Homebrew desktop i5-8400+GTX1080 Cinnamon 19.0
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Thanks for your input mikeflan.
Yes, as I was reading AndyMH's last post, after I had attempted to write something coherently about UEFI, it dawned on me that he had provided some very nice details on UEFI vs Legacy that I learned from -- earlier in this thread.
So I am definitely learning from this thread -- although a bit slowly. Now, if I could only figure out exactly what GRUB is and does, maybe I could put most of the pieces of the install and boot-up concepts puzzle together.
The Grand Unified Bootloader is apparently both a bootloader and a boot manager. Interestingly, it seems that I am technically not using GRUB, but instead, GRUB2: "GRUB 2 is the default boot loader and manager for Ubuntu since version 9.10". However, I think it is common practice to omit the "2" .
I looked a long time for a very simple description of what GRUB does to give me a starting point. I kind of like this one: "Its function is to take over from BIOS at boot time, load itself, load the Linux kernel into memory, and then turn over execution to the kernel." And "The function of the GRUB menu is to allow the user to select one of the installed kernels to boot in the case where the default kernel is not the desired one." OK, everybody else reading this probably already knew all of that, but I just wanted to make sure I was clear about what GRUB does at the most basic level.
And here is an answer to the question that kept bugging me: "The GRUB 2 bootloader is included on all currently-supported versions of the Ubuntu family. GRUB 2 can accommodate traditional computer firmware such as BIOS as well as the newer EFI/UEFI standards. It is compatible with MBR, GPT and other partitioning tables." It took me a long time to find a statement that confirmed the GRUB can operate compatibly with all these configurations. Apparently everyone else already knew the answer.
Thanks very much for your comment motoryzen.
I saw many people on the Dell Community forum reporting things like the new 16GB RAM stick they bought to pair up with the single stick that came in the Dell computer didn't work at all, no less fail to work in dual channel mode. I believe some of them said they couldn't even get their computer to boot up with the new, second stick installed. A Dell representative indicated they didn't have any RAM available to sell that would pair with my single stick. I got the impression it could easily be two months or more before a matching stick was available. And the prices for similar RAM sticks at Dell were ridiculously high.
I couldn't find all the details I thought I needed like voltage, timing, etc. from Dell and the label on the RAM stick I had wasn't much help either. So I downloaded cpu-z and got the voltage and timing (in addition to capacity and nominal speed) using that. In the end, I could not match things exactly, not even the same manufacturer. I ended up buying the second 16GB RAM stick from Crucial; I purchased one that had specifications as close to the original as I could find.The price was way less than Dell would have charged me.
In the end, as you predicted, it turned out quite well. I now have 32GB of RAM working in dual channel mode. And unlike what some other unfortunate Dell computer owners reported, the second, non-identical RAM stick did not substantially reduce the RAM speed of both sticks in the computer. I was able to maintain the same speed as when I only had the original stick in.
Yes, as I was reading AndyMH's last post, after I had attempted to write something coherently about UEFI, it dawned on me that he had provided some very nice details on UEFI vs Legacy that I learned from -- earlier in this thread.
So I am definitely learning from this thread -- although a bit slowly. Now, if I could only figure out exactly what GRUB is and does, maybe I could put most of the pieces of the install and boot-up concepts puzzle together.
The Grand Unified Bootloader is apparently both a bootloader and a boot manager. Interestingly, it seems that I am technically not using GRUB, but instead, GRUB2: "GRUB 2 is the default boot loader and manager for Ubuntu since version 9.10". However, I think it is common practice to omit the "2"
.I looked a long time for a very simple description of what GRUB does to give me a starting point. I kind of like this one: "Its function is to take over from BIOS at boot time, load itself, load the Linux kernel into memory, and then turn over execution to the kernel." And "The function of the GRUB menu is to allow the user to select one of the installed kernels to boot in the case where the default kernel is not the desired one." OK, everybody else reading this probably already knew all of that, but I just wanted to make sure I was clear about what GRUB does at the most basic level.
And here is an answer to the question that kept bugging me: "The GRUB 2 bootloader is included on all currently-supported versions of the Ubuntu family. GRUB 2 can accommodate traditional computer firmware such as BIOS as well as the newer EFI/UEFI standards. It is compatible with MBR, GPT and other partitioning tables." It took me a long time to find a statement that confirmed the GRUB can operate compatibly with all these configurations. Apparently everyone else already knew the answer.
Thanks very much for your comment motoryzen.
I saw many people on the Dell Community forum reporting things like the new 16GB RAM stick they bought to pair up with the single stick that came in the Dell computer didn't work at all, no less fail to work in dual channel mode. I believe some of them said they couldn't even get their computer to boot up with the new, second stick installed. A Dell representative indicated they didn't have any RAM available to sell that would pair with my single stick. I got the impression it could easily be two months or more before a matching stick was available. And the prices for similar RAM sticks at Dell were ridiculously high.
I couldn't find all the details I thought I needed like voltage, timing, etc. from Dell and the label on the RAM stick I had wasn't much help either. So I downloaded cpu-z and got the voltage and timing (in addition to capacity and nominal speed) using that. In the end, I could not match things exactly, not even the same manufacturer. I ended up buying the second 16GB RAM stick from Crucial; I purchased one that had specifications as close to the original as I could find.The price was way less than Dell would have charged me.
In the end, as you predicted, it turned out quite well. I now have 32GB of RAM working in dual channel mode. And unlike what some other unfortunate Dell computer owners reported, the second, non-identical RAM stick did not substantially reduce the RAM speed of both sticks in the computer. I was able to maintain the same speed as when I only had the original stick in.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Bit more on grub, although I'm hazy on some details of UEFI.
When you boot legacy, BIOS looks at the first sector of your boot drive and it runs the code it finds in the first 446 bytes on the drive. That is not a lot of space, so with grub that code points to the second stage bootloader. This hides in the gap between the end of the partition table (which is the first sector, 512 bytes) and start of the first partition (which is normally at 1MB, 2048 sectors). The second stage bootloader then looks for your boot partition and /boot inside that (where your kernel(s) live). How does it know where /boot is? When grub is installed it knows the UUID of your / partition and the partition also has the flag boot set.
Advantages - it is simple, downsides - there is only room for one bootloader, so the last OS installed will overwrite whatever bootloader was previously installed. Okay with linux as grub knows about different OSes, bad with win because it only understands win. This is why, if you are dual booting, we always say install win first, cos if you do it after installing linux it will overwrite grub.
UEFI - the more modern standard, the PC's firmware, or BIOS in old speak, is more intelligent. It looks for a drive(s) with an EFI partition and reads the contents. It knows it is an EFI partition because it has the flags esp & boot set on it and is formatted fat32. Inside the EFI partition are folders for each OS with their bootloader files. Beyond that, boot process is similar - grub looks for your boot partition and hands off control to the kernel.
Advantages - you can have multiple bootloaders installed without them overwriting each other, it supports a rudimentary 'bash type' shell that can be used to try and fix some problems - bit like the grub rescue prompt. Disadvantages - more complex.
When you set up your boot list in BIOS, in legacy boot you select the drive to boot - it then reads the first sector of that drive. In UEFI you select the bootloader - with titles like 'windows bootloader' or 'ubuntu' - because BIOS has read the EFI partition and worked out what is in there.
A lot of the problems reported on the forum with dual boot are a result of one OS being installed in legacy mode and the other in UEFI. This is not helped by bugs in the installer:
When you boot legacy, BIOS looks at the first sector of your boot drive and it runs the code it finds in the first 446 bytes on the drive. That is not a lot of space, so with grub that code points to the second stage bootloader. This hides in the gap between the end of the partition table (which is the first sector, 512 bytes) and start of the first partition (which is normally at 1MB, 2048 sectors). The second stage bootloader then looks for your boot partition and /boot inside that (where your kernel(s) live). How does it know where /boot is? When grub is installed it knows the UUID of your / partition and the partition also has the flag boot set.
Advantages - it is simple, downsides - there is only room for one bootloader, so the last OS installed will overwrite whatever bootloader was previously installed. Okay with linux as grub knows about different OSes, bad with win because it only understands win. This is why, if you are dual booting, we always say install win first, cos if you do it after installing linux it will overwrite grub.
UEFI - the more modern standard, the PC's firmware, or BIOS in old speak, is more intelligent. It looks for a drive(s) with an EFI partition and reads the contents. It knows it is an EFI partition because it has the flags esp & boot set on it and is formatted fat32. Inside the EFI partition are folders for each OS with their bootloader files. Beyond that, boot process is similar - grub looks for your boot partition and hands off control to the kernel.
Advantages - you can have multiple bootloaders installed without them overwriting each other, it supports a rudimentary 'bash type' shell that can be used to try and fix some problems - bit like the grub rescue prompt. Disadvantages - more complex.
When you set up your boot list in BIOS, in legacy boot you select the drive to boot - it then reads the first sector of that drive. In UEFI you select the bootloader - with titles like 'windows bootloader' or 'ubuntu' - because BIOS has read the EFI partition and worked out what is in there.
A lot of the problems reported on the forum with dual boot are a result of one OS being installed in legacy mode and the other in UEFI. This is not helped by bugs in the installer:
- legacy boot, LM20, 'erase and install' and 'install alongside' will create a useless EFI partition. Not good because it can be confusing trying to spot a legacy/UEFI boot problem, also not good because on legacy/msdos format drives you are limited to four primary partitions and this is using up one of them. Not an issue with LM19.
- UEFI boot on separate drives - the installer will put grub in the first EFI partition it finds, not what you tell it. With separate drives you would want them to be capable of booting independently. Not what you get. Don't know if this bug exists with LM19, not checked.
Thinkcentre M720Q - LM21.3 cinnamon, 4 x T430 - LM21.3 cinnamon, Homebrew desktop i5-8400+GTX1080 Cinnamon 19.0
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Thanks AndyMH.
I'm sure glad that I eventually got past the UEFI/Legacy BIOS, MBR/GPT Partition Table format and GRUB/GRUB2 issues to get Linux Mint (LM) installed OK. It sounds like you would need a Ph.D. in this subject to fully understand it. I wonder if anyone is considering including some tips or brief guidance on this set of topics inside of (or as a Preface to) the Installation Guide or fixing that Ubuntu installer bug. Above in this thread, I believe Mikeflan, was saying he even had a lot of trouble trying to do a Linux Mint install on "a brand new SSD".
TIME TO BACK UP
In case any other novices (like me) are reading this thread and are on a similar journey to get everything set up for their computer, here is how I am currently addressing backups -- and some hurdles I had to get over as an uninformed novice. As commonly recommended, I set up Timeshift, with no problems, to automatically, regularly back up the system, "'/", but not the "/Home" partition. I believe the default backup location for Timeshift is "/Home". Later, if my system partition, "/" , grows larger and I get a backup disk installed internally for LM, I will probably change the Timeshift backup location to that backup disk (mentioned below). This is because I would be following a recommendation that I believe I read from AndyMH to avoid backups overwhelming the space availability on your primary Linux Mint drive.
I wanted to follow AndyMH's recommendation to use Backintime (downloaded from the software manager) to back up appropriate files from the /Home partition. But when I tried it, I received a large number of error messages. I thought about using other backup apps I read about in this forum but I was discouraged by notes or review comments I saw like "no longer supported". So I resorted to trying the "Backup Tool" -- already included in LM. It ran the backup just fine. However, unlike the more advanced file-snycing backup apps like Backintime, it was just a manual, one-time backup. I would have to remember to back it up each time and it would be copying the entirety of every single file (full backup) each time I ran a backup. This is opposed to just updating any changes you have made, automatically, on an automated schedule by using the "fancier" file-syncing apps.
I searched a lot but could not find an obvious explanation or solution to the error messages I got from Backintime. Finally, since I was already second-guessing my decision to format my (currently) external 320GB hard disk drive (HDD) entirely in exfat (so it would be compatible for file storage and sharing among LM, Windows and Android), I decided to check if the exfat disk file format was causing the problem. I think it may be pickier about file name lengths and what characters you can use than some other modern formats.
FAT, EXFAT, NTFS, EXT4 OR . . . WHAT FILE SYSTEM FORMAT WILL FIT YOUR "SECONDARY" DISK NEEDS?
I did a fair amount of reading on the above topic, but I seemed to find many more questions than answers. And it appears that most of the answers or suggestions were either out-of-date, short-sighted or just wrong.
So I opened gparted and attempted to shrink the exfat partition and add an Ext4 partition to put the backup files in. But gparted would not comply (I assume due to the Windows proprietary nature of exfat). I eventually gave up trying to find updated versions of gparted that I could install -- that would be more useful. So I resorted to using "Disks", an app that is included with LM, because I remembered that is how I "finally" got exfat on the disk in the first place. It seems very basic compared to gparted to me and I practically needed a magnifying glass to read the text on the partition representations. Unfortunately, "Disks" would not let me shrink the exfat partition either.
STARTING OVER
So, as a last resort, using "Disks", I deleted the exfat partition (that covered the entire drive) which of course deleted all my backups and other files on the disk. Then I was finally able to add an Ext4 partition and a smaller exfat partition.
Next I re-downloaded and installed Backintime. And when I ran it this time . . . it seemed to work perfectly . . . by backing up to the EXT4 partition on that drive. It appears that Backintime does not like backing up to an exfat partition. The only problem I am having with Backintime is it wont forget (or allow me to delete) the "Main" profile and its settings that I had set up before I deleted Backintime. I made another profile with new settings but that "Main" profile is always the one that is presented on the interface unless I remember to change over by using a drop-down box.
The backup drive I am speaking of is an old, used internal HDD sitting inside an external adapter case (located outside of the computer) and connected to the computer via a USB3 connection. I was surprised how fast the 16GB backups went -- even on a HDD.
THE "JOY" OF BUYING A MODERN PRE-BUILT COMPUTER
The reason I have not installed the second LM drive internally yet is that Dell did not provide a second 2.5" disk "caddy" or a second free SATA cable -- even though there were two empty 2.5" disk bays open (and super easy-upgrading heralded by Dell's marketing department) when I bought the computer. As far as I can tell, if I want a caddy (plastic holder that grabs onto the disk and keeps it steady inside the bay) that will fit, I will have to buy the proprietary caddy from Dell and pay them to ship it to me.
Eventually I plan to get that HDD installed internally but then also periodically, and also very temporarily, connect a larger external USB HDD to do occasional backups. Since the plan is to only have that larger, external HDD attached briefly, during the backups, I am hoping that will provide some protection against ransomware attacks, catastrophic damage inside the computer, etc.
With my computer, Dell also provided an apparently proprietary CPU heatsink/cooler that connects to the motherboard in a way that eliminates the installation of almost all other coolers. Many online computer experts are warning that this CPU cooler is absolutely terrible and must be replaced immediately if you want your CPU to run above half speed (they say the unabated CPU heat immediately causes the CPU speed to throttle down to 2.5 GHz instead of the max near 5 GHz) or survive the heat any length of time. And they said that since the desktop, that comes with high-end Nvidia graphics cards, has no air input fan and only one very tiny output fan, they are all buying two or more new fans to install in their computers. So I am still at least working on research and decision-making to address installing the HDD and getting an upgraded CPU cooler.
I'm sure glad that I eventually got past the UEFI/Legacy BIOS, MBR/GPT Partition Table format and GRUB/GRUB2 issues to get Linux Mint (LM) installed OK. It sounds like you would need a Ph.D. in this subject to fully understand it. I wonder if anyone is considering including some tips or brief guidance on this set of topics inside of (or as a Preface to) the Installation Guide or fixing that Ubuntu installer bug. Above in this thread, I believe Mikeflan, was saying he even had a lot of trouble trying to do a Linux Mint install on "a brand new SSD".
TIME TO BACK UP
In case any other novices (like me) are reading this thread and are on a similar journey to get everything set up for their computer, here is how I am currently addressing backups -- and some hurdles I had to get over as an uninformed novice. As commonly recommended, I set up Timeshift, with no problems, to automatically, regularly back up the system, "'/", but not the "/Home" partition. I believe the default backup location for Timeshift is "/Home". Later, if my system partition, "/" , grows larger and I get a backup disk installed internally for LM, I will probably change the Timeshift backup location to that backup disk (mentioned below). This is because I would be following a recommendation that I believe I read from AndyMH to avoid backups overwhelming the space availability on your primary Linux Mint drive.
I wanted to follow AndyMH's recommendation to use Backintime (downloaded from the software manager) to back up appropriate files from the /Home partition. But when I tried it, I received a large number of error messages. I thought about using other backup apps I read about in this forum but I was discouraged by notes or review comments I saw like "no longer supported". So I resorted to trying the "Backup Tool" -- already included in LM. It ran the backup just fine. However, unlike the more advanced file-snycing backup apps like Backintime, it was just a manual, one-time backup. I would have to remember to back it up each time and it would be copying the entirety of every single file (full backup) each time I ran a backup. This is opposed to just updating any changes you have made, automatically, on an automated schedule by using the "fancier" file-syncing apps.
I searched a lot but could not find an obvious explanation or solution to the error messages I got from Backintime. Finally, since I was already second-guessing my decision to format my (currently) external 320GB hard disk drive (HDD) entirely in exfat (so it would be compatible for file storage and sharing among LM, Windows and Android), I decided to check if the exfat disk file format was causing the problem. I think it may be pickier about file name lengths and what characters you can use than some other modern formats.
FAT, EXFAT, NTFS, EXT4 OR . . . WHAT FILE SYSTEM FORMAT WILL FIT YOUR "SECONDARY" DISK NEEDS?
I did a fair amount of reading on the above topic, but I seemed to find many more questions than answers. And it appears that most of the answers or suggestions were either out-of-date, short-sighted or just wrong.
So I opened gparted and attempted to shrink the exfat partition and add an Ext4 partition to put the backup files in. But gparted would not comply (I assume due to the Windows proprietary nature of exfat). I eventually gave up trying to find updated versions of gparted that I could install -- that would be more useful. So I resorted to using "Disks", an app that is included with LM, because I remembered that is how I "finally" got exfat on the disk in the first place. It seems very basic compared to gparted to me and I practically needed a magnifying glass to read the text on the partition representations. Unfortunately, "Disks" would not let me shrink the exfat partition either.
STARTING OVER
So, as a last resort, using "Disks", I deleted the exfat partition (that covered the entire drive) which of course deleted all my backups and other files on the disk. Then I was finally able to add an Ext4 partition and a smaller exfat partition.
Next I re-downloaded and installed Backintime. And when I ran it this time . . . it seemed to work perfectly . . . by backing up to the EXT4 partition on that drive. It appears that Backintime does not like backing up to an exfat partition. The only problem I am having with Backintime is it wont forget (or allow me to delete) the "Main" profile and its settings that I had set up before I deleted Backintime. I made another profile with new settings but that "Main" profile is always the one that is presented on the interface unless I remember to change over by using a drop-down box.
The backup drive I am speaking of is an old, used internal HDD sitting inside an external adapter case (located outside of the computer) and connected to the computer via a USB3 connection. I was surprised how fast the 16GB backups went -- even on a HDD.
THE "JOY" OF BUYING A MODERN PRE-BUILT COMPUTER
The reason I have not installed the second LM drive internally yet is that Dell did not provide a second 2.5" disk "caddy" or a second free SATA cable -- even though there were two empty 2.5" disk bays open (and super easy-upgrading heralded by Dell's marketing department) when I bought the computer. As far as I can tell, if I want a caddy (plastic holder that grabs onto the disk and keeps it steady inside the bay) that will fit, I will have to buy the proprietary caddy from Dell and pay them to ship it to me.
Eventually I plan to get that HDD installed internally but then also periodically, and also very temporarily, connect a larger external USB HDD to do occasional backups. Since the plan is to only have that larger, external HDD attached briefly, during the backups, I am hoping that will provide some protection against ransomware attacks, catastrophic damage inside the computer, etc.
With my computer, Dell also provided an apparently proprietary CPU heatsink/cooler that connects to the motherboard in a way that eliminates the installation of almost all other coolers. Many online computer experts are warning that this CPU cooler is absolutely terrible and must be replaced immediately if you want your CPU to run above half speed (they say the unabated CPU heat immediately causes the CPU speed to throttle down to 2.5 GHz instead of the max near 5 GHz) or survive the heat any length of time. And they said that since the desktop, that comes with high-end Nvidia graphics cards, has no air input fan and only one very tiny output fan, they are all buying two or more new fans to install in their computers. So I am still at least working on research and decision-making to address installing the HDD and getting an upgraded CPU cooler.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Not used exfat, so knowledge limited. I think support in linux is spotty. Best to use ntfs for sharing between win and linux.
Now you have an ext4 partition on the external drive, use it for timeshift as well - you just point timeshift at the partition in settings > location. When you have done this you can delete the contents of /timeshift - that is the default location for saving snapshots.
Timeshift must use a linux filesystem as the destination, backintime is better with a linux filesystem. The reason is that they use hardlinks - each snapshot is complete, but if a file has not changed then the snapshot contains a hardlink to the original backup of the file = no wasted space or duplicates. Win filesystems do not support hardlinks. If your backup drive is permanently connected you can automate timeshift and backintime. I have both running daily automatically. If you thought they were quick you will find subsequent snapshots even quicker - they only copy what has changed.
Both timeshift and backintime work at the file level. As a backstop you should also consider an image backup of the whole drive. There are several utilities available, but I recommend foxclone (biased, I developed it). You download the iso, burn it to a usb stick and boot from it. I run backintime/timeshift daily. I take a foxclone backup maybe every couple of months. If I have a drive failure or screw up, foxclone gets me a working system and backintime/timeshift get me back to yesterday.
Note - I also think gparted is better than disks, but one issue - create an ext4 partition with it and it is owned by root, so read-only to you. Disks, as you have found out, doesn't have this problem. Also, whenever you create a partition, add a label (in gparted right click on the partition). By default mint will mount the partition at
If you create ext4 partitions with gparted, to fix ownership, with the partition mounted, in a terminal:
This changes ownership to you. USER is an environment variable containing your username,
Now you have an ext4 partition on the external drive, use it for timeshift as well - you just point timeshift at the partition in settings > location. When you have done this you can delete the contents of /timeshift - that is the default location for saving snapshots.
Timeshift must use a linux filesystem as the destination, backintime is better with a linux filesystem. The reason is that they use hardlinks - each snapshot is complete, but if a file has not changed then the snapshot contains a hardlink to the original backup of the file = no wasted space or duplicates. Win filesystems do not support hardlinks. If your backup drive is permanently connected you can automate timeshift and backintime. I have both running daily automatically. If you thought they were quick you will find subsequent snapshots even quicker - they only copy what has changed.
Both timeshift and backintime work at the file level. As a backstop you should also consider an image backup of the whole drive. There are several utilities available, but I recommend foxclone (biased, I developed it). You download the iso, burn it to a usb stick and boot from it. I run backintime/timeshift daily. I take a foxclone backup maybe every couple of months. If I have a drive failure or screw up, foxclone gets me a working system and backintime/timeshift get me back to yesterday.
Note - I also think gparted is better than disks, but one issue - create an ext4 partition with it and it is owned by root, so read-only to you. Disks, as you have found out, doesn't have this problem. Also, whenever you create a partition, add a label (in gparted right click on the partition). By default mint will mount the partition at
/media/you/mylabel, if you don't use a label it uses the UUID, a long number not user friendly.If you create ext4 partitions with gparted, to fix ownership, with the partition mounted, in a terminal:
Code: Select all
sudo chown -R $USER:$USER /media/you/mylabel$ means 'the contents of', -R is recursive = apply to all contents. Change the mount point as appropriate.Thinkcentre M720Q - LM21.3 cinnamon, 4 x T430 - LM21.3 cinnamon, Homebrew desktop i5-8400+GTX1080 Cinnamon 19.0
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Thanks AndyMH.AndyMH wrote: ⤴Wed Aug 04, 2021 6:11 am Not used exfat, so knowledge limited. I think support in linux is spotty. Best to use ntfs for sharing between win and linux.
Now you have an ext4 partition on the external drive, use it for timeshift as well - you just point timeshift at the partition in settings > location. When you have done this you can delete the contents of /timeshift - that is the default location for saving snapshots . . .
I followed your advice and inside the Timeshift app, clicked on the Settings button/icon and then the Location tab. I saw that a radio button for my sda3 (/home) partition was selected. So I clicked on the radio button for sdc1, which is the Ext4 partition on my backup drive, and that successfully changed the destination for Timeshift backup files. I immediately did an on-demand backup and everything seemed to go well.
I ran into a bit of a surprise when I browsed through the filesystem to the old Timeshift Backup files in /home and attempted to delete that obsolete directory. It just wasn't happening -- I couldn't do it. So I tried opening the Timeshift app and tried to get to those old files from inside there. And when I did, I was indeed able to delete the entire obsolete Timeshift directory from inside the Timeshift app.
If there are any other Linux Mint beginners (besides me) reading this, I wonder if you are finding yourself confused about some of the same issues as I am.
Home SWEET hOME
As a novice, at this early point, I have found it to be a bit confusing that the partition /home and the directory (?) Home seem to pretty much have the same name -- but are indeed different entities.
When I first clicked on the "Home" icon on the desktop, I assumed I would be opening up the /home partition -- and seeing the directories at the first level below it. But that is not what I got. I saw the contents of "MyUserName" directory -- but the title at the top of the directory window does not match "MyUserName"; the title is "Home". No actual complaint here because it's nice to have a handy desktop shortcut that takes me directly to my personal "Documents", "Pictures", etc.
But when instead, I started by clicking the "Computer" icon on the desktop and then "filesystem" and next "home", I don't see my personal files like Documents and Pictures. Instead, I see a directory with my "MyUserName". And when I open that, the title of the directory window is "Home"! At this point, I was starting to wonder just how many "homes" there were in this neighborhood.
But this was actually the same view I get when I just click on the "Home" icon on the desktop.I assume "Home" is just being used here, and with the linked icon (shortcut) on the desktop, as a nickname for the "MyUserName" directory. So the Home icon apparently points to, or is linked to the "MyUserName" directory. But I do wonder why it was decided to make the names of these two different items so similar ("home" and "Home") instead of making more of a distinction to help newcomers like me from getting confused.
Please be sure to let me know if I got this all wrong or if there is a clear and satisfying explanation for the preponderance of homes in this Minty neighborhood. If anyone else was confused about home/Home, etc., I hope I helped and didn't make it worse.
- The above image shows a slice of one directory window overlapping another.
- Attachments
-
- In this photo, I assume "home" is where I came from and "Home" is a nickname for the "MyUserName" directory where I am now located.
- home Username Home.png (9.58 KiB) Viewed 628 times
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Well done Frank84 for figuring all that out!!!
I was doing a similar thing on a machine with UEFI BIOS.
I was reorganising, moving Linux, Windows and my data library between 3 drives - an NVME-SSD and 2 HDDs. I also prefer each OS to have its own disk, with the dual boot option on the Linux disk.
It was tricky and what I ended up doing did include reformatting and reinstalling. Clonezilla is great for moving disks and partitions around. It even coped with system partitions. An external HDD which you can back up everything onto is recommended.
I came across some of the same questions and problems which are NOT WELL DOCUMENTED in the Mint installation instructions. It would be nice to have some examples of formatting and partitions for different setups.
- Legacy or MBR compatability boot should be turned off in the BIOS if you don't need it. Otherwise the OS might install in the old mode and then things get tricky.
- Disks should be formatted with a GPT partition table, not an old MBR one.
- When you format a disk a tip is to set aside some space at the beginning that can be used as a boot partition in the future eg. 100 - 500 MB.
- A boot partition should be formatted as FAT32 with boot and esp flags.
- Windows will put the boot wherever it feels like it. Again it gets tricky when you have the bootloader on the wrong disk.
- Linux Mint will also put the boot in the wrong place.
- When you install Mint you can force the installer to use the boot partition on the right disk by unplugging the other ones. The nicer way is to use Gparted so that only the partition you want has the esp and boot flags when you install. You will not see the flags on the Mint installer but Gparted is included on the live USB.
The moral of the story is GPARTED is your friend.
I was doing a similar thing on a machine with UEFI BIOS.
I was reorganising, moving Linux, Windows and my data library between 3 drives - an NVME-SSD and 2 HDDs. I also prefer each OS to have its own disk, with the dual boot option on the Linux disk.
It was tricky and what I ended up doing did include reformatting and reinstalling. Clonezilla is great for moving disks and partitions around. It even coped with system partitions. An external HDD which you can back up everything onto is recommended.
I came across some of the same questions and problems which are NOT WELL DOCUMENTED in the Mint installation instructions. It would be nice to have some examples of formatting and partitions for different setups.
- Legacy or MBR compatability boot should be turned off in the BIOS if you don't need it. Otherwise the OS might install in the old mode and then things get tricky.
- Disks should be formatted with a GPT partition table, not an old MBR one.
- When you format a disk a tip is to set aside some space at the beginning that can be used as a boot partition in the future eg. 100 - 500 MB.
- A boot partition should be formatted as FAT32 with boot and esp flags.
- Windows will put the boot wherever it feels like it. Again it gets tricky when you have the bootloader on the wrong disk.
- Linux Mint will also put the boot in the wrong place.
- When you install Mint you can force the installer to use the boot partition on the right disk by unplugging the other ones. The nicer way is to use Gparted so that only the partition you want has the esp and boot flags when you install. You will not see the flags on the Mint installer but Gparted is included on the live USB.
The moral of the story is GPARTED is your friend.
Re: Computer for Installing LM & Win on Separate SSDs?
Thank you Lonehorse.
I appreciate your input. I don't expect to figure out everything about LM but, as you saw, there were a few things I felt a need to understand better and I thought it might be useful to share what I thought I learned.
I agree with you that some things that non-LM-experts really need guidance on seem to be completely missing from the installation guidance. I assume it may be because experts may not realize that non-experts, like me, may have absolutely no clue how to deal with such things without some expert guidance on the topic -- especially when something a little bit unusual happens during an install.
Since experts may not even need an installation guide, wouldn't it be great to have a LM installation guide specifically developed for beginners and non-experts that don't yet know all the insider jargon and aren't experts on disk formatting?
And if they got some improved guidance on when and how to use the correct disk partition manager for their circumstance (e.g., which allows you to create, own and use an EFI partition vs. which allows you to create an exFAT partition), how to figure out if they have a UEFI vs a legacy BIOS and how they may need to adapt because of that, I think it would greatly increase their chances of having a successful install. This would be great because after non-experts try numerous unsuccessful installs, they might just give up. So I would imagine LM could become much more popular if there was an installation guide targeted at non-experts.
Part of why I am trying to learn a little more as opposed to just moving on as soon as I get LM running is that I have been working on a volunteer project which includes a plan and guide related to LM. I created a website and documents for people who would like to help under-served communities by installing LM on old retired (e.g., donated) computers to give to communities who could really use computers but cannot afford them.
I am definitely not a computer expert so my approach was to try to supplement and complement guides that are already provided online by experts. I try to fill in some of the gaps a non-expert like me would need to know or figure out to get LM and some key additional software installed. I try to explain and suggest things in less technical terms and put extra effort into defining terms that non-computer-experts don't know but would need to know to understand the online guides written by experts.
Most aspects of my effort to have LM & Windows running on separate drives in the same computer are still going smoothly after several weeks now. I'm not sure why I seemed to get so much encouragement to put both operating systems on the same drive. I am still glad I put the two OS on separate drives. However, I completely understand that other people with different goals and in different situations might prefer something different.
When I want to boot up in LM, I just wait till the LM screen shows up (very quickly) and login. If I want to be in Windows, I just restart or boot up and hit the f12 key when I see the Dell logo and immediately see the option to boot into Windows. I tap the down arrow to select that option, hit enter and I am immediately at the Windows login screen. Since I use LM nearly all the time, its not a bother to just take a few seconds to change over to the Windows drive once in a rare time when desired. Later, some day, I might try some games in Windows and spend a little more time there. But if so, I wouldn't want to be running it inside LM or vice versa; I want to be able to run either OS at full tilt to get the most out of the computer.
One thing I didn't mention earlier regarding the use of this Dell XPS 8940 computer in LM is that I ran into the "scratchy sound while using Firefox" problem and found that the temporary fix recommended by BashBasher located here took care of the issue.
I am still working on a couple of issues though. I've noticed multiple times that when I boot into Windows, my clock and calendar seem to get reset to a Western European time zone even though I am in the Midwest USA. Sometimes I think it is a temporary thing caused during some Dell updates at startup but other times the incorrect time and date sticks until I manually correct it again. I've tried both automatic and manual time settings but neither has prevented the issue in the future.
The most bothersome issue however, is the intermittent appearance of a very irritating thin oscillating horizontal line along the bottom of my HDTV display in both LM and Windows. It's hard to troubleshoot because it only appears when it feels like it. When calling Dell for assistance with my new computer I got nothing but dodging the issue and the the run-around for weeks on this issue. It appears that I was just getting very low level tech support reading me their scripted list of mostly obviously useless stuff for me to do to seemingly wear me down and try to get Dell off the hook. Maybe it was designed to get my computer past Dell's return date policy -- I don't know but it was a very frustrating circus of support - that was like a very not-funny joke. Surprisingly, they eventually sent a replacement gpu; but it did not help.
It seems strange how Dell went from telling me I need to replace the HDMI cable (that works perfectly with another computer) to I need to re-install Windows (on a brand new Windows installation) to them replacing the gpu without ever once even considering that a simple adjustment on the NVIDIA control panel for the GPU or tweaking some easily accessible controls on the TV might solve the problem.
I may be wrong but It seems they just didn't want to make anyone with actual video expertise available for support. In fact, I have figured out at least 3 different such adjustments that at least solve the problem temporarily (and possibly permanently) in Linux. But since the controls to make those adjustments are not available in Windows, I am still in need of a video display solution from Dell for Windows. I am a little more optimistic now since at least they were willing to try replacing my GPU (with a bent-up refurbished GPU) and have said they will contact me again now that I explained it did not help.
I appreciate your input. I don't expect to figure out everything about LM but, as you saw, there were a few things I felt a need to understand better and I thought it might be useful to share what I thought I learned.
I agree with you that some things that non-LM-experts really need guidance on seem to be completely missing from the installation guidance. I assume it may be because experts may not realize that non-experts, like me, may have absolutely no clue how to deal with such things without some expert guidance on the topic -- especially when something a little bit unusual happens during an install.
Since experts may not even need an installation guide, wouldn't it be great to have a LM installation guide specifically developed for beginners and non-experts that don't yet know all the insider jargon and aren't experts on disk formatting?
And if they got some improved guidance on when and how to use the correct disk partition manager for their circumstance (e.g., which allows you to create, own and use an EFI partition vs. which allows you to create an exFAT partition), how to figure out if they have a UEFI vs a legacy BIOS and how they may need to adapt because of that, I think it would greatly increase their chances of having a successful install. This would be great because after non-experts try numerous unsuccessful installs, they might just give up. So I would imagine LM could become much more popular if there was an installation guide targeted at non-experts.
Part of why I am trying to learn a little more as opposed to just moving on as soon as I get LM running is that I have been working on a volunteer project which includes a plan and guide related to LM. I created a website and documents for people who would like to help under-served communities by installing LM on old retired (e.g., donated) computers to give to communities who could really use computers but cannot afford them.
I am definitely not a computer expert so my approach was to try to supplement and complement guides that are already provided online by experts. I try to fill in some of the gaps a non-expert like me would need to know or figure out to get LM and some key additional software installed. I try to explain and suggest things in less technical terms and put extra effort into defining terms that non-computer-experts don't know but would need to know to understand the online guides written by experts.
Most aspects of my effort to have LM & Windows running on separate drives in the same computer are still going smoothly after several weeks now. I'm not sure why I seemed to get so much encouragement to put both operating systems on the same drive. I am still glad I put the two OS on separate drives. However, I completely understand that other people with different goals and in different situations might prefer something different.
When I want to boot up in LM, I just wait till the LM screen shows up (very quickly) and login. If I want to be in Windows, I just restart or boot up and hit the f12 key when I see the Dell logo and immediately see the option to boot into Windows. I tap the down arrow to select that option, hit enter and I am immediately at the Windows login screen. Since I use LM nearly all the time, its not a bother to just take a few seconds to change over to the Windows drive once in a rare time when desired. Later, some day, I might try some games in Windows and spend a little more time there. But if so, I wouldn't want to be running it inside LM or vice versa; I want to be able to run either OS at full tilt to get the most out of the computer.
One thing I didn't mention earlier regarding the use of this Dell XPS 8940 computer in LM is that I ran into the "scratchy sound while using Firefox" problem and found that the temporary fix recommended by BashBasher located here took care of the issue.
I am still working on a couple of issues though. I've noticed multiple times that when I boot into Windows, my clock and calendar seem to get reset to a Western European time zone even though I am in the Midwest USA. Sometimes I think it is a temporary thing caused during some Dell updates at startup but other times the incorrect time and date sticks until I manually correct it again. I've tried both automatic and manual time settings but neither has prevented the issue in the future.
The most bothersome issue however, is the intermittent appearance of a very irritating thin oscillating horizontal line along the bottom of my HDTV display in both LM and Windows. It's hard to troubleshoot because it only appears when it feels like it. When calling Dell for assistance with my new computer I got nothing but dodging the issue and the the run-around for weeks on this issue. It appears that I was just getting very low level tech support reading me their scripted list of mostly obviously useless stuff for me to do to seemingly wear me down and try to get Dell off the hook. Maybe it was designed to get my computer past Dell's return date policy -- I don't know but it was a very frustrating circus of support - that was like a very not-funny joke. Surprisingly, they eventually sent a replacement gpu; but it did not help.
It seems strange how Dell went from telling me I need to replace the HDMI cable (that works perfectly with another computer) to I need to re-install Windows (on a brand new Windows installation) to them replacing the gpu without ever once even considering that a simple adjustment on the NVIDIA control panel for the GPU or tweaking some easily accessible controls on the TV might solve the problem.
I may be wrong but It seems they just didn't want to make anyone with actual video expertise available for support. In fact, I have figured out at least 3 different such adjustments that at least solve the problem temporarily (and possibly permanently) in Linux. But since the controls to make those adjustments are not available in Windows, I am still in need of a video display solution from Dell for Windows. I am a little more optimistic now since at least they were willing to try replacing my GPU (with a bent-up refurbished GPU) and have said they will contact me again now that I explained it did not help.