Long ago, in a partition far, far away...

Long ago, in a partition far, far away...

Post by Bill Petr » Wed, 19 May 1999 04:00:00

Jedi knights,

Tomorrow I plan to partition and install Linux, then see Star Wars.
I've called Red Hat thrice, with unsatisfactory replies. I'm a bit
confused about partitioning on the Win98/Partition Magic side vs.
the logical partitioning inside Linux. I wish to preserve my
Win98 data, and want to be careful to keep my /boot partition
below the 1024 cyl/8GB threshold. I plan to take one of two paths,
depending on your advice. Here are the two scenarios, and then the

 Dell 450
 17GB disk
 128MB RAM
 Win98 uses ~4 GB (defragged)
 Partition Magic 4.0
 Redhat Linux 6.0

1) I'd rather optimize the free space on C by doing this:


        Win98 (4GB)             C drive
        free space (4<8GB)

        /boot partition (16MB)  invisible partition (extended?)
        /swap (128MB)           invisible partition (extended?)
        native Linux (~3GB)     invisible partition (extended?)

        Win98 (11GB<17GB)        D drive


2) ... Rather than doing this contiguous, sub 8GB approach:


        Win98 (4GB)             C drive
        /boot (16 MB)           invisible partition (extended?)
        /swap (128MB)           invisible partition (extended?)
        native Linux (~3GB)     invisible partition (extended?)

        Win98 (8GB<17GB)        D drive


        Linux (13GB<17GB)       Linux partition



1) Can I do scenario 1, or must I do scenario 2?
The PM partitions need not be contiguous, must they?

2) How many Linux partitions do I have to create on the Partition
Magic (Win98) side, two or three?
        a) If I go with scenario 1, I'll need at least two: one
           boot partition below the 8GB/1024 cyl barrier, and
           another above, but do I need to create one as well
           for swap?
        b) Do I, in general, have to create two PM partitions for
           Linux in either case:
           native (~3GB) and one swap (128MB), or just one,
           and let fdisk/DiskDruid slice things up INSIDE Linux?

2) For these two (or three) PM partitions, do I create any of them
as Primary, or are they Extended type partitions?

4) Is Darth Vader really Luke's father? Oops, sorry, wrong movie.

Bill Petro
Web:    http://www.billpetro.com


Long ago, in a partition far, far away...

Post by Eric Youse » Tue, 25 May 1999 04:00:00

> > > Hello;

> > > I'm currently running RH50 w/kernel -2.0.32.

> > > I recently configured PPP to connect to the Internet and read an article
> > > in Linux Journal stating that I would have to upgrade my kernel for
> > > security enhancements. (ie: prevent teardrop attack)

> > > I've down loaded the necessary rpms (I think) but I receive an error on
> > > the following when  upgrading.

> > > kernel source
> > > ########################################error -2 reading  header:
> > > Success  (what does this mean?)

> > Did you upgrade your rpm package before trying this?

> > See : http://www.veryComputer.com/

> > > I'm upgrading to kernel 2.0.36 and I've downloaded the following

> > > kernel-2.0.36-3.i386.rpm
> > > kernel-headers-2.0.36-3.i386.rpm
> > > kernel-ibcs-2.0.36-3.i386.rpm
> > > kernel-source-2.0.36-3.i386.rpm

> > > The how-to page also told me to download this
> > > kernel-pcmcia-cs-2.0.36-3.i386.rpm and I have this pcmcia-cs-2.9.12-2.

> > Do you use a laptop? Otherwise, you do not need these.

> > > When trying to upgrade this I get a screen full of errors.

> > Cheers,

> > --
> > Howard Mann
> > http://www.veryComputer.com/
> > (a LINUX website for newbies)
> > Smart Linuxers search at: http://www.veryComputer.com/

> When I tried to upgrade my rpm pack I get the following:
> failed dependencies:
>         patch < 2.5 conflicts with rpm-2.5.3-5.1

> When I use rpm -q rpm rpm-devel I get the following:
> rpm-2.4.10-1glibc
> rpm-devel-2.5.3-5.0

> So where do I go from here?

> Appreciate all the help.

> v/r
> ET1

There are several ways that you can do things, and both of the ways that
you have lined up should work.

One thing is that you really don't have to have a /boot partion.  You
can do it if you want, but it is not necessary.

If you are newbie the one of the easier ways to do things is to put it
all under / and have a /swap of course.  

The way that I set up my friends (both very big newbies) computers was
to make a 2 gig 95/98 partition for the primary partition (FAT16 or
FAT32).  Then I created an extended partition for the rest of drive.
Then I created / and /swap, in that order, on the first part of the
extended.  For you it would be 3gig of / and 128megs of /swap.  Then I
made the rest of their drives as 95/98.  

I used Partition Magic 4.0 to make a the /swap first.  I told it to make
a 125meg partition that BEGAN at the END of the free space.  Then I
created an extended 2 (ext2) partition to fill up the rest of the
space.  Both of their systems are bootable and running just fine.  

For my personal system I just used a seperate dedicated hard drive.  I
did it for entire system stability.  I also have 2 other OSes, 98 and NT
4.0.  Each of which have thier own hard drives.  I did this so that it
was harder for the system to get 'screwed' up down the road.  I do a lot
of experimention with OSes.  I have am currently running 98, NT 4.0
Worksatation, Red Hat 6.0.  I have also run 95, BeOS 4.0, RedHat 5.0 and
5.2 in the past.  I also have Solaris 7 for i386 on it's way, I just
need to go and pick it up from my campus housing office.  I plan to try
out one of the BSD variants here pretty soon too, like FreeBSD or
NetBSD.  I will probably get FreeBSD.  I like to play with them and
learn about them.

Hope this helps, and good luck.
Eric Yousey

ICQ: 6850552
AOL Instant Messenger: EYousey
Team Leader of The Demon * of Wright State University
Our attempt to win some money in the RC5 cracking effort
"Windows 98 is a buggy browser on top of a 32-bit extension and
a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating
system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a
2-bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition."


1. webhosting.com - stay away... far far away

i made a big mistake hosting with webhosting.com

they do not respond to support and don't know what they are doing. i've
tried everything with them. i havn't heard anything from them in over a
week (they claim 48 hour response). i've even escalated to the
president, three times, and still heard nothing. their 'live support'
feature is a fraud. it is NEVER staffed.

stay away from webhosting.com

i'd love to hear from others with similar experience. they've cost me a
lot of time and money and i intend to get it back.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

2. Flatfish wil go onto the Annals of Linux History!

3. Half-height Modems

4. Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away"

5. Dual Boot & 40 GB HD -- any problems?

6. ISSG down far, far more than BCSG

7. exit on funktion-key

8. Need a way to get around limits to boot a 'far away' partition

9. How far are we away from an all-ELF Slackware distribution ?

10. How far away is OpenBSD 2.9?

11. telnet server very far away in the univers...

12. IBM Far & Away card - was: Re: Red Hat's sick sense of humor (support)