Very Computer

Quote:>Hi,

>I'm trying to install linux and windows 95 on a 1.2 Gig C drive.
>I install DOS, install the DM (disk manager from Quantum - which creates
>my partitions for me: 750 Meg for Dos and 500 for linux) and then install
>Windows. NO problem.
>Then, I got the 3.0 boot/root disks and booted up Linux.

>The problem:
>------------
>fdisk (in linux) does not see the partitions - in fact it doesn't even see
>the drive properly.

>So, I boot with: ramdisk hd=2428,16,64 (forget the exact numbers)
>and now it sees the while drive all right but it doesn't see the
>partitions.

Also, the smaller 200 mg hard drive. Make linux delete the paritions, re-boot
ans see if they are still there.

Mark
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Systems Specialist : Health Sciences Library at The Ohio State University
http://auto.med.ohio-state.edu/mark

: I'm trying to install linux and windows 95 on a 1.2 Gig C drive.
: I install DOS, install the DM (disk manager from Quantum - which creates
: my partitions for me: 750 Meg for Dos and 500 for linux) and then install
: Windows. NO problem.
: Then, I got the 3.0 boot/root disks and booted up Linux.

: The problem:
: ------------
: fdisk (in linux) does not see the partitions - in fact it doesn't even see
: the drive properly.

: So, I boot with: ramdisk hd=2428,16,64 (forget the exact numbers)
: and now it sees the while drive all right but it doesn't see the
: partitions.

: Another minor problem (relatively speaking) is that I have a 200 Meg D
: drive and linux doesn't see it properly at all - at one point it told me
: that there were 26 partitions on it or something stupid like that.
: I've tried booting with: ramdisk hd=....,...,.. hd=....,.,.
: but that doesn't work either.
: ----------

:Any ideas?
: Thanks,
: MArc

: (ps. my Internet Serv. Provider has been screwing up my mail for a few
: days now so if you can't email me - post to the newsgroup please or email

Okay kiddies, here's the problem. The disk manager you installed is software based,
That is it only takes effect after your machine reads the MBR (Master Boot Record)
of said hard drive. Linux doesn't like this. The optimal solution (which your
motherboard may or may not support) is to install the drive as an LBA (Large
Block Addressing) device. Most operating systems have a problem addressing more
than 1024 cylinders on a hard drive, which your 1.2GB drive has. The solution
that has been acquired is LBA support. LBA translates your drives actual      
characteristics at the hardware level so when your machine talks to a certain
sector on the drive the BIOS puts it in the actual right physical spot on the
hard drive even though your OS couldn't normally put it there. The drive manager
software performs this function however it does it on a software level which
Linux will completely ignore. I have yet to hear of a success story of Linux
and any kind of disk manager software (not to say it hasn't happened...I just
haven't seen it.). The trick to this is to see if your motherboard will take
the hard drives parameters as reported on the top of the drive. Then boot
a DOS disk (V. 5.0 or later) and type: 'fdisk /status'. It should say that the
drive is 1,200,000 total size (not this exact number but atleast the right amount
of 0's.) and has X amount available. If it works then you're in business, don't
use the drive manager software, fdisk your drive and install Win 95 before you
install Linux. Make sure you make a bootdisk of both OS's btw cuz I've heard
some boot record horror stories with this combination. If you can't get away
without using the drive manager software (ie 'fdisk /status' reports a drive
size of 524MB total) then I don't know what to tell you except look for a BIOS
upgrade for your motherboard. Most Pentium and newer 486 boards support LBA
though so it shouldn't be a problem.
If you're going to buy hardware to run Linux on and a large hard drive for it
ask your dealer if the BIOS supports LBA before you buy it...

                                J. Brandon.

You need either to use a Linux kernel that understands the proprietary
way that OnTrack Disk Manager 6.x partitions the drive (kernels since
version 1.3.14) or to upgrade to Disk Manager 7.x (a US$25 upgrade from
OnTrack), which has the option of partitioning the drive in "BIOS
compatible" mode.

If you don't need more than 504 MB for DOS/MS-Windows, you also have the
option of simply getting rid of Disk Manager entirely.  Linux will be
quite happy to access the entire disk without it.  (You do have to
arrange for the boot files to be located on the BIOS-accessible portion
of the disk.)

--

: I'm trying to install linux

Which kernel version?

: and windows 95 on a 1.2 Gig C drive.
: I install DOS, install the DM (disk manager from Quantum - which creates
: my partitions for me: 750 Meg for Dos and 500 for linux) and then install
: Windows. NO problem.

Well, you just explained your problem: you installed a disk manager
that sets up some fake geometry to keep DOS happy.

: Then, I got the 3.0 boot/root disks and booted up Linux.

: The problem:
: ------------
: fdisk (in linux) does not see the partitions - in fact it doesn't even see
: the drive properly.

Which fdisk version?

: So, I boot with: ramdisk hd=2428,16,64 (forget the exact numbers)

ramdisk? This has nothing to do with ramdisk.
ramdisk and hd are completely independent options.

: and now it sees the while drive all right but it doesn't see the
: partitions.

You do not reveal the kernel version you are using, but only
kernel versions 1.3.14 and above know about the distortions
created by DM. Older kernel versions just see reality: one big
partition with type 54 or so.

Hi! Anyone knows of how Slackware 2.2 with kernel 1.2. I have set the type Linux native.

The configuarion is as follows.
             Boot  Begin Start  End     type
/dev/hda21     *      1     1    500     82  Linux Native
/dev/hda2             501 501    550     83 Linux Swap

Hope somebody can help as the setup program does not recognise them.

Thanks

Thanks,
Andy

Quote:> The problem:
> ------------
> fdisk (in linux) does not see the partitions - in fact it doesn't even see
> the drive properly.

> So, I boot with: ramdisk hd=2428,16,64 (forget the exact numbers)
> and now it sees the while drive all right but it doesn't see the
> partitions.

Quote:> Another minor problem (relatively speaking) is that I have a 200 Meg D
> drive and linux doesn't see it properly at all - at one point it told me
> that there were 26 partitions on it or something stupid like that.
> I've tried booting with: ramdisk hd=....,...,.. hd=....,.,.
> but that doesn't work either.

Quote:>system.  The purpose of the overlay is to use hard drives bigger than 528

Quote:>MB on older computers that don't support them.  Any boot manager such as

you can get these advantages even if you dont need Disk manager
7 to access all of a drive.

Quote:>LILO or OS/2 boot manager occupies the master boot record so it is extremely
>difficult to use both (I'd say impossible except I heard someone actually
>did it).

once DM is run from the physical  MBR , DM boots the (old) logical MBR
and hangs around in memory like a virus, and installs itself into
DOS if umb's are available (so it frees up low memory )
If you dont have dos umb services available, DM is just like BIOS.
(to go into the upper memory, it loads a dos  driver and releases itself. )

What this means is that while the first attempts to support DM in the linux
kernel may have confused lilo, there isnt any reason lilo wont work.
similarly OS/2 may have had trouble.

and using lilo  from a floppy without DM installed wont work
as lilo will have to assume DM is installed. (maybe it can test such
things these days ? there isnt any reason why it cant)

Quote:> If the overlay isn't loaded then none of the partitions can be
>seen.  Disk manager should give you the option of booting from a floppy
>after it loads - start the computer without a floppy in the drive, wait
>for the disk manager message to tell you to press a key or something to
>boot from floppy and stick the boot disk in.  I don't know if Linux is
>even compatible with this overlay,

Quote:> but if it is you could boot Linux from
>floppy each time you want to use it.
>I don't suggest this though; first, overlays are cheap software fixes for
>a hardware problem

in fact DM just replaces bios . bios is software, DM is software.
overlays are software fixes for software problems.
(an analogy. word processors are software fixes for a hardware problem.
go buy a electronic typewriter with  network access, laser /bubble /thermal/
dot matrix printing, fax capabilities,modem, 8 gig storage ,
etc etc)

ok, i think you are scared of the unknown. you dont know what DM
is doing, so you are saying avoid it. before linux supported DM,
we had to avoid it. at the same time  ontrack introduced  a DM
mode that was compatibile with linux, linux became compatible with
the standard DM mode .. so i use DM and linux together quite happily.

the reason DM hides the partitions  one big DM partition is so that
broken DOS wont scramble the  partitions IF you dont have DM loaded.

DM7  has an option to use 'bios compatible format' which means
that the partitions are not hidden. There is only one MBR which is for
DM  in this format. but lilo doesnt need to go on the mbr !

this bios compatible format means that old versions of linux ,etc will
 be able to access the partitions ok. but  if you boot dos from a floppy
without DM , you can scramble data on all partitions and scramble the
partition table... DOS is broken !

but it means that you can put lilo on a floppy
( or on  a partition (but not the MBR when using bios compatible mode !!!! ) )
and lilo will work whether DM is loaded or not.
(so lilo could be fixed for this too. dont know whether it yet. )

Quote:>, second, multiple operating systems (especially Linux)
>and the overlay are a bad mix.  Go buy a new EIDE controller with an
>on-board BIOS so you don't need disk manager.  You might have to repartition
>after you remove disk manager (meaning backing up and restoring EVERYTHING),
>but I don't think so.

so you use the remove option then install the drivers for the vesa eide
controllers. (or fiddle with bios options or jumpers on the card or whatever)
(DM supports mode 3,4 for some vlb controllers, so you wouldnt even
have to drop DM or use the card's drivers or bios... these drivers and bios's
can be silly (and broken) software fixes (or breakages) for  hardware (or software)
problems. and as such should be avoided.)

Quote:>By the way, if you only wanted to use Linux you wouldn't need either the
>drive overlay or a new controller -

Quote:> entering the boot paramater overrides
>any settings in your computer's BIOS, which is what limits you to 528 MB.

use a newer kernel which identifies the drive from
a. bios
and
b. cmos
and
c. the drive identify command. (so the drive tells linux what it is.)

the drive identify results are used if they look ok.
except fdisk and lilo ask for the bios geometry ..
(so linux can only guess about the drive  geometry of drives supported by
dos drivers)

leon

My kernel is 1.2.13 and have no problem in using 1.2G.  It's just
LILO can't boot befond the  1024 cyl. limit.

 Andy Walton

: >>> Hi,
: >>>
: >>> I'm trying to install linux and windows 95 on a 1.2 Gig C drive.
: >>> I install DOS, install the DM (disk manager from Quantum - which creates
: >>> my partitions for me: 750 Meg for Dos and 500 for linux) and then install
: >>> Windows. NO problem.
: >>> Then, I got the 3.0 boot/root disks and booted up Linux.

: Hi - I've come in a bit late on this, but what version of Linux will
: support drives this big?  I have a >1GB disk that my bios support s
: fine for win95, but Linux 1.09 doesn't seem to like it.  Any ideas?

: Thanks,
: Andy

--

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://wwwcsif.cs.ucdavis.edu/~ngs            - My official no-fun page
http://www.engr.ucdavis.edu/~syng              - My intended-to-be fun page
http://www.engr.ucdavis.edu/~syng/anime.html - My anime page
http://www.engr.ucdavis.edu/~syng/smoon.html - My SailorMoon page
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

>compatibility came in about version 1.3.30 or something
>use loadlin from dos to get to linux if you dont want to mess with lilo.

I don't know why there's all this backward compatibility to old code!
Like, how about some new firmware in these machines?  500 meg
disks are small these days!  Having to mess with this stuff is so
primitive!  Like, you should send and receive packets from a disk
that's a black box, not mess with cylinders and heads and sectors
and all that trash!  It's like using 2 sticks to get fire!  Sheesh!

Quote:

> >LILO or OS/2 boot manager occupies the master boot record so it is extremely
> >difficult to use both (I'd say impossible except I heard someone actually
> >did it).

> DM occupies the physical MBR.
> DM creates a partition which holds a  complete virtual
> hard drive. MBR, partition table etc all in place ..

> once DM is run from the physical  MBR , DM boots the (old) logical MBR
> and hangs around in memory like a virus, and installs itself into
> DOS if umb's are available (so it frees up low memory )
> If you dont have dos umb services available, DM is just like BIOS.
> (to go into the upper memory, it loads a dos  driver and releases itself. )

Quote:> What this means is that while the first attempts to support DM in the linux
> kernel may have confused lilo, there isnt any reason lilo wont work.
> similarly OS/2 may have had trouble.

> and using lilo  from a floppy without DM installed wont work
> as lilo will have to assume DM is installed. (maybe it can test such
> things these days ? there isnt any reason why it cant)

> > If the overlay isn't loaded then none of the partitions can be
> >seen.  Disk manager should give you the option of booting from a floppy

> >after it loads - start the computer without a floppy in the drive, wait
> >for the disk manager message to tell you to press a key or something to
> >boot from floppy and stick the boot disk in.  I don't know if Linux is
> >even compatible with this overlay,

> compatibility came in about version 1.3.30 or something
> use loadlin from dos to get to linux if you dont want to mess with lilo.

> > but if it is you could boot Linux from
> >floppy each time you want to use it.
> >I don't suggest this though; first, overlays are cheap software fixes for
> >a hardware problem

> WAAH ! its a software problem ! the bios is software , and the bios
> is broke ! DM just fixes it.

Quote:

> in fact DM just replaces bios . bios is software, DM is software.
> overlays are software fixes for software problems.
> (an analogy. word processors are software fixes for a hardware problem.
> go buy a electronic typewriter with  network access, laser /bubble /thermal/
> dot matrix printing, fax capabilities,modem, 8 gig storage ,
> etc etc)

Quote:> ok, i think you are scared of the unknown. you dont know what DM
> is doing, so you are saying avoid it. before linux supported DM,
> we had to avoid it. at the same time  ontrack introduced  a DM
> mode that was compatibile with linux, linux became compatible with
> the standard DM mode .. so i use DM and linux together quite happily.

Quote:

> the reason DM hides the partitions  one big DM partition is so that
> broken DOS wont scramble the  partitions IF you dont have DM loaded.

Quote:

> DM7  has an option to use 'bios compatible format' which means
> that the partitions are not hidden. There is only one MBR which is for
> DM  in this format. but lilo doesnt need to go on the mbr !

Quote:> this bios compatible format means that old versions of linux ,etc will
>  be able to access the partitions ok. but  if you boot dos from a floppy
> without DM , you can scramble data on all partitions and scramble the
> partition table... DOS is broken !

Quote:> but it means that you can put lilo on a floppy
> ( or on  a partition (but not the MBR when using bios compatible mode !!!! ) )
> and lilo will work whether DM is loaded or not.
> (so lilo could be fixed for this too. dont know whether it yet. )

> >, second, multiple operating systems (especially Linux)
> >and the overlay are a bad mix.  Go buy a new EIDE controller with an
> >on-board BIOS so you don't need disk manager.  You might have to repartition
> >after you remove disk manager (meaning backing up and restoring EVERYTHING),
> >but I don't think so.

> DM  will cooperate with the interface's bios ..
> that means that you just plug the drives onto the new controller and
> DM will still boot and install ok.

Quote:> DM has a non-reversable remove option.

> so you use the remove option then install the drivers for the vesa eide
> controllers. (or fiddle with bios options or jumpers on the card or whatever)
> (DM supports mode 3,4 for some vlb controllers, so you wouldnt even
> have to drop DM or use the card's drivers or bios... these drivers and bios's
> can be silly (and broken) software fixes (or breakages) for  hardware (or software)
> problems. and as such should be avoided.)

> >By the way, if you only wanted to use Linux you wouldn't need either the
> >drive overlay or a new controller -

> true.  linux cant use the dm services.
> linux can do for itself anything dm does.

> > entering the boot paramater overrides
> >any settings in your computer's BIOS, which is what limits you to 528 MB.

> but new kernels dont need  boot parameter overrides.

> use a newer kernel which identifies the drive from
> a. bios
> and
> b. cmos
> and
> c. the drive identify command. (so the drive tells linux what it is.)

> the drive identify results are used if they look ok.
> except fdisk and lilo ask for the bios geometry ..
> (so linux can only guess about the drive  geometry of drives supported by
> dos drivers)

> leon

Quote:>My kernel is 1.2.13 and have no problem in using 1.2G.  It's just
>LILO can't boot befond the  1024 cyl. limit.

I could install the slackware 3.0 distribution with
Disk Manager on my drive, but I found I couldn't
boot from the HD.  I rebuilt the kernel and 1.3.20
boots fine off the hard drive.  I tried a later kernel
for another problem and I was back to the same
HD boot kernel panic, so I put 1.3.20 back on.

Anyone know exactly what the issue is with this
2.1 gig threshold?  I'm curious.

:
: >My kernel is 1.2.13 and have no problem in using 1.2G.  It's just
: >LILO can't boot befond the  1024 cyl. limit.
:
: PMJI, but I think there's another issue if the drive
: is larger than 2.1 gig.  I don't know the nitty gritty
: but when I opened the box on my Western Digital
: Caviar 2.5 gig drive it had a note saying you may
: have to use a Disk Manager type program to use
: the drive.
:
: I could install the slackware 3.0 distribution with
: Disk Manager on my drive, but I found I couldn't
: boot from the HD.  I rebuilt the kernel and 1.3.20
: boots fine off the hard drive.  I tried a later kernel
: for another problem and I was back to the same
: HD boot kernel panic, so I put 1.3.20 back on.
:
: Anyone know exactly what the issue is with this
: 2.1 gig threshold?  I'm curious.

Vendors seem to say that the 2gig threshold/per disk is a built-in
limitation in the Pentium motherboards (of the day).
Per disk does not mean per drive, and a 2.5 Gig should work fully if
partitioned in 2 or more.
Vice versa I use 5 disks totalling over 3 gig (some compressed), out of
2 devices plugged on only one socket. It all works fine....
Just careful with those Fdisk....

Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.linux.hardware: 30-Jul-96

Quote:>: I could install the slackware 3.0 distribution with
>: Disk Manager on my drive, but I found I couldn't
>: boot from the HD.  I rebuilt the kernel and 1.3.20
>: boots fine off the hard drive.  I tried a later kernel
>: for another problem and I was back to the same
>: HD boot kernel panic, so I put 1.3.20 back on.
>:
>: Anyone know exactly what the issue is with this
>: 2.1 gig threshold?  I'm curious.

(take following with grain of salt.  From memory after wandering through
 FAQs and drive docs -- I do *not* work at a drive factory... hence, it
 is possibly and probably not terribly accurate.)

Summary re: booting

        This is mostly a DOS-limitation vs. a Linux limitation, as DOS,
        without TSR utilities or BIOS extensions, cannot properly deal with
        drives with more than 1024 cylinders.  As there are normally 512
        bytes per sector, 63 sectors/track, and 16 heads maximum, this
        would lead to a maximum of 504MB (software).  This bit is a BIOS
        limitation of the older BIOSes.

        Newer BIOSes, however, employ "translation" schemes.  They present
        a "faked" geometry (C/H/S counts) that works by fudging the head,
        and sometimes the sector/track, count(s) to higher values, while
        lowering the effective cylinder count so that C*H*S still returns
        the same product, but the BIOS reports something with <= 1024
        cylinders.

        Example:  a drive with 2400 cylinders, 16 heads, and
        63 sectors/track may report instead 800 cylinders, 48 heads,
        and 63 sectors/track; or it may use some different scheme.
        I've not seen a spec that dictates the exact methods used,
        but the general idea is to reduce the C count < 1025 cylinders.

        However, the BIOS may not be able to send a head count >= 63.
        For instance, my BIOS detects and fully translates the Quantum
        LPS540, and detects but fails to translate the WDC32550, probably
        because it exceeds the size of the apparent maximum, 1024/63/63
        or about 2.03GB.  Therefore, it returns untranslated values to
        DOS; this may be done not because it is unfeasible, but instead
        in view of a previously agreed spec for communication between the
        BIOS and DOS and other OSes.  As DOS has no way of querying the
        user for the *real* disk geometry, without, say, a disk manager,
        it gets confused and returns a value < capacity of the drive
        (in my case, the 504MB maximum for a non-translated drive.)

        Linux, OTOH, only uses the BIOS to boot, and *can* accept the drive    
        geometry specs from the user; hence, it can access the full drive
        fine.  Newer kernels may coexist with Disk Manager; I wouldn't know,
        as I'm using 1.2.13 and didn't use DM as I had intended to give the
        bulk of the drive to Linux, anyway, which didn't need DM.

        Incidentally, from my own experience, tech support (in my case,
        from Western Digital and Dell) tends not to be especially aware
        of this limitation, although the WDC _manual_ did come pretty
        close to this issue...

Quote:>Vendors seem to say that the 2gig threshold/per disk is a built-in
>limitation in the Pentium motherboards (of the day).
>Per disk does not mean per drive, and a 2.5 Gig should work fully if
>partitioned in 2 or more.
>Vice versa I use 5 disks totalling over 3 gig (some compressed), out of
>2 devices plugged on only one socket. It all works fine....
>Just careful with those Fdisk....

 >>: Anyone know exactly what the issue is with this
 >>: 2.1 gig threshold?  I'm curious.

There are no less than two distinct 2GB issues:-

 1. The DOS/Win (V)FAT filesystem has a hard coded limit of 2GB.
    Except the WinNT implementation which goes up to 4GB.

    This gives a 2GB PARTITION limit with this filesystem. Linux,
    with e.g. the ext2 filesystem, has no such limit.

 2. There are buggy BIOSes which *on drives with more than
    4096 ("physical") cylinders.

    This gives a 2GB HARDDISK limit with these BIOSes.

 >For detailed info, see the "Yet Another EIDE/ATA FAQ" or something
 >of that sort, don't recall URLs etc offhand, but I think I found a
 >copy through the Seagate web site (http://www.veryComputer.com/)

The current version is on http://www.veryComputer.com/~pieterh/storage.html

 - Peter

--