[techtalk] Linux 6.1 Mouse Problems
I installed Redhat Linux 6.1 last night but am having a dickens of a time getting my mouse to work with X. I had been using a really, really old version of Linux so I reformatted the drive and started a clean install. I'm using a Microsoft Intellimouse (the optical version) connected to the PS/2 Mouse port. When I run startx, the mouse pointer sits in the top right corner of the screen and won't budge. Moving the mouse just causes it to pop up some menus. I edited the XF86Config file and changed it from PS/2 to Microsoft but now the mouse pointer sits in the top left corner. Any idea how to get this mouse working? ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Mouse Problems
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2000 8:55 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [techtalk] Mouse Problems > > > root wrote: > > > > A lot has changed from > > my 1995 version of Linux (command line only) so now I get to dip my toes > > into the new waters... Anybody have a life preserver I can borrow? :-) > > This whole list is a life preserver. :) And so it is, indeed. > Tip: don't do your work as root. Create a login, even if it's just you > on the machine, and do stuff as it. > > (You're sending mail to the list as 'root'. Thus, you're probably at > LEAST doing your basic mail as root. Too many permissions. Using a > non-root account is the most basic of the life preservers. ) Ahem... can I plead a momentary lapse of good judgement? That's what I get for trying to save 30 seconds while downloading and installing the latest patches. > Jenn V. > -- >"Do you ever wonder if there's a whole section of geek culture > you miss out on by being a geek?" - Dancer. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]Jenn Vesperman > http://www.simegen.com/~jenn/ > > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Installing Linux on a second hard drive.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Darren > Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2000 9:28 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [techtalk] Installing Linux on a second hard drive. > > > On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >The Cat In The Hat wrote: > >> > >> The CD-Rom is the secondary slave because of where it is on > the cable. You want your new hard drive to be the primary slave > in the system. You do not want to move you CD-Rom to the Primary > slave position. The position it is currently in is actually the > best for future upgrades and additions of hard drives. > > > > > >Actually, to my knowledge the location on the cable is irrelevent. The > >Cat is correct in saying it's a hardware issue, though. (it's not Linux, > >it's the way EISA PCs are built.) > > Location on the cable can be relevant, if the jumpers on one or both > drives is set to "cable select", so that you theoretically don't have to > worry about where on the chain the drive is located. It's a setting that > caused me big long headaches the first time I installed a second HD. > Ironically, I assume it's an option intended to make drive installation > easier. If what I understand is correct, the cable select option requires a special cable that has the master/slave pins removed as appropriate. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Mouse Problems
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 12:49 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [techtalk] Mouse Problems > > On a list with a mix of the very-new and the very-experienced, I prefer > not to assume that the person I'm speaking to necessarily knows stuff. > > It's easier to apologise to the experienced for wasting a moment or > two's time, than to apologise to a new person for not telling them > something that could have prevented them accidentally wiping their /bin > directory. :/ That's a good policy and could potentially save someone a lot of time and anguish. Besides, you never know who might be lurking that needs that information... or who knows it but needs to be politely reminded to be more careful. In other words, thanks for the polite reminder. Lothan ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Installing Linux on a second hard drive.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeramia Ory > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 12:58 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: FW: [techtalk] Installing Linux on a second hard drive. > > > > I must confess, I am a bit confused about why swap partitons on opposite > > drives would boost performance. > > Caveat: this is all how I understand it, and could be > completely bogus, > and would welcome someone correcting me on anything I have wrong. > > One cause of a performance hit is when you swap memory in and > out of the > partition. In a single drive system, even thought the swap is on > a separate > partition, it can't access two partitions on the same drive at the same > time, so you lose performance while the drive alternates the > memory swapping > process and the other disk i/o processes. With the swap on a separate > channel, the system can now do memory swapping concurrently with the other > processes, thereby speeding up i/o. I've found system "snappiness" > correlates well with how well the i/o is tuned. FMMV. > > > And I shouldn't have any LILO issues if they are each a master, correct? > > You shouldn't have LILO issues regardless of master/slave status, as > long as you install LILO into the mbr of the primary master. I see three potential areas this could improve: 1. I/O can be performed concurrently on each IDE bus -- assuming your IDE controller has dual FIFOs. Some "cheap" third-party IDE controllers implement a single FIFO and can not perform concurrent access to both ports. 2. Fragmentation is less likely to occur for dynamic Windows swap files. However, you may as well use a static (fixed size) swap file if the partition is dedicated to that use. 3. The biggest potential savings is likely in seek time. If the swap file is on the same physical drive, the heads have to seek a potentially substantial distance between memory swapping and regular disk I/O. Given the rates of most modern hard drives, this equates to roughly nine milliseconds for one-third stroke or as much as 30 to 40 milliseconds full-stroke. Compare this with .008 millisecond access time for typical PC100 memory and you'll quickly realize how "expensive" swap files can be. Lothan ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Partition table editting
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeramia Ory > Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 1:07 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [techtalk] Partition table editting > > > Anyone on the list have any experience fixing partition tables with > fdisk? I'm getting the impression from deja.com that it is doable, though > tricky. I installed the Mandrake 7.1beta (for those wondering - don't > bother yet, the Xservers are still 3.3.6, not 4.0 as advertised, very odd) > last night on my machine which already had Win2k on it, and now the > partition table is screwed up, Partition Magic won't touch it. Sigh. > Strange thing is I can mount and read both NTFS partitions in Linux, but > they won't boot, get an "error loading operating system." Any > pointers/howto's appreciated. Maybe it's a sign I should be working in > Linux more, as it boots fine... I don't think you'll have much success with fdisk if Partition Magic won't touch the partition table. I have Partition Magic but I rarely use it due to its inability to actually do anything really useful (like setting up non-DOS/Windows partitions or recovering damaged partition tables). Unfortunately, fdisk is even less capable of handling non-DOS partitions. My tool of choice is Norton's Disk Editor. While it's less than a perfect solution (it doesn't know the type bytes for Linux partitions, for example), it does let you fiddle with the partition table at the byte level. In fact, it's what I used to set up my Linux partitions. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] RE: [issues] Standards?? PHOOEY!!!
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Fan, Laurel > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 8:16 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [issues] Standards?? PHOOEY!!! > > There are no standards in the computing world. They're all agreements. > There is no authority saying "you can't do this. you must do this". > They're all agreements of the form "all devices/programs wishing to > interoperate can't do this, must do this". If your device/program does > not wish to interoperate, go right ahead, you just can't talk to anyone. The American National Starndards Insititute (ANSI) and the International Standards Organization (ISO) have several standards (and authority) on computer devices and languages (QIC tape hardware and protocols, and the C and C++ languages are examples of ANSI standards). The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) also has authority to set standards for Internet protocols (IPv4). Like it or not, Microsoft is the standards authority for Windows protocols (OLE, ActiveX controls). > The lack of agreements results in gratuitous incompatibility, creeping > featurism, and data loss. Standards arise when the participants in the > creation of the standard feel the need. Unfortunately there is no guarantee that standards won't prevent incompatibility, creeping featurism or data loss. Neither do standards guarantee acceptance by the community it intends to serve. > Take, for example, instant messaging. I have friends on both ICQ and > AIM. Both employ a different, closed, non-standard, protocol. > Therefore, to communicate with these people, I must either install and > maintain two different proprietary clients (not an option, since these > proprietary clients only run on a proprietary, non standard, operating > system), or use an open source client that has to keep up with two > obfuscated, moving-target protocols. If there was a standard (agreement?) > for instant messaging, I wouldn't have to do this. I'd write a client, > conforming to the open, standard, protocol, and it would communicate > perfectly with other standards-conforming clients and servers. I think > that makes my life a whole lot easier. AOL owns both instant messengers... Unfortunately I can't think of anything nice to say about AOHell so I'll keep quiet. > Standards make my life a whole lot easier. It's because of > _Standard_ C++, > and the _standard_ library, that I'm able to write code that compiles on > VMS, Digital Unix, and Linux. Unfortunately it can also make your life more miserable sometimes. I still have and use an old version of Borland C++ because (at least at the time of its release) it followed the ANSI C++ standard (for both the compiler and the library). Of course, at that time Microsoft C++ blatantly thumbed its nose at the ANSI standard. Needless to say, to this day that ancient copy of Borland C++ is by far more compatible with UNIX source code. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] SAMBA
Are there any good references or how-tos on the net for setting up samba? I have a Windows 2000 box (my primary development system) and a Redhat Linux 7 system connected via Ethernet cards (using DHCP) to a Linksys EtherFast Cable/DSL Router to an ADSL line. I completely wiped out my Redhat Linux 6.1 system to install Redhat Linux 7 from scratch and have "conveniently" forgotten how the heck I had it configured. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Linux - Windows System
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Patrick Ouellet > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 3:20 PM > To: Linux Chix > Subject: Re: [techtalk] Linux - Windows System > > And for your question Liese: > I diffenetly suggest a dual boot... > Wine and VMWare wont do any good for games. I haven't used wine so I can't comment on it. I have used VMWare, though. It's great if you want to run both Windows and Linux on the same machine... given the caveat that one or the other is going to be a lot slower than normal. > Another thing, I wouldn't suggest win2k... as it is new > and also full of good ol' M$ bugs... That's debatable. Windows 2000 with Service Pack 1 is far more reliable than any other version of Windows (provided you keep all the Norton and McAffee crap off it). I'm quite pleased to say that I reboot my Windows 2000 machine as often as I reboot my Rehat Linux 7.0 machine... that was about two months ago for each when I moved them across the room. It's not about one being better than the other. I like and use both about equally as much and have them installed on separate computers with a switchbox. > Have fun with Baldur's Gates... > ( also one of my favorites ) It's one of my favorites as well. Unfortunately it doesn't like my Matrox G400 video card and I can't live without my dual-head display. It works fine on the 3dfx Voodoo 3000 card, but I put that card in the Linux box. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Oops... I really did it this time
I always knew that Linux (and *nix) in general was rather finicky when it comes to the disk cache, but I never realized just how finicky it can be until last night. To make a long story short, I was attempting to plug in an audio cable into the back of one of the computers when my knee accidentally bumped the power switch on the Linux box. Oops! I got everything situated, powered on the Linux box and stared in disbelief at the disaster that struck... USB module not found... Sound Blaster PCI module not found... eth0 init failed. No biggie, I'll just dig out the appropriate modules and reinstall them from CD... /dev/cdrom has invalid major or minor number. Oops. I dig out the floppy... /dev/fd0 not found. Uh oh! ls -l /dev/f* shows no files. Grrr! ls -l /dev/e* shows no files. Grrr! ls -l /dev/* shows only the hdd and tty files... most of which have invalid major or minor numbers. Oh sh*t! On the up side, I now have a completely fresh install of Redhat Linux 7.0. One thing I found rather interesting is that the Redhat installer automatically reinstalled everything by itself without asking me beyond selecting which desktop I wanted. Looks like it just picked up the installed packages list from the hard drive. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Redhat Linux 7 Crashes
I'm at my wits end trying to figure out a bizarre problem with Redhat 7 and hope someone can offer some guidance. I originally installed Redhat 7 from scratch (reformatting the entire drive with pure Linux partitions) and it ran for about three months pretty much continuously without any problems. I don't shutdown or reboot very often. One night I couldn't connect to the net so I shutdown the computer from the Gnome menus. During the shutdown process I noticed a message something along the lines of "hdb is busy" but it continued to shutdown. Upon reboot most of the /dev directory was fairly well trashed. What's so strange to me is that this has happened four times and it doesn't matter if I leave it running continuously or shutdown every night. Seemingly at random I'll get "hdb is busy" during shutdown and the drive will be trashed upon reboot. At first I thought it might be the NIC since one symptom is that I always loose connection to the net when it happens. Unfortunately replacing the NIC hasn't helped. I also swapped hard drives with another computer and installed a new video card. That rules out everything except the motherboard. Even more puzzling is that it has been running Windows 2000 for the past three weeks without any problems. The only other possibility I can think of is that I boot directly to X/Gnome with Redhat 7 whereas I was booting to console with Redhat 6. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
FW: [techtalk] Redhat Linux 7 Crashes
I didn't see anything in the system log that might help trace the problem. The first hiccup was a complaint that the file system was not unmounted cleanly (which seems appropriate considering the file system was reported 'busy' during shutdown) followed by a long list of errors from fsck complaining about dead inodes, invalid timestamps, etc. This was followed by a list of missing devices, drivers and modules. Based on the symptoms I've seen, my gut reaction was a hardware problem and I initially replaced the NIC since the symptoms were always preceded by a loss of all network connections. It happens every two to three weeks, but I could never duplicate it with Redhat Linux 6.1 or Windows 2000. I'm beginning to suspect it may be something in Redhat Linux 7.0 because we just lost the email server with a similar crash after updating it a few weeks ago. I just finished installing Progeny Debian Linux at home so we'll see if it holds together any better. > Are you getting any messages in the system log (/var/adm/messages) when > this occurs? This will help all of us provide a better answer. > > -Melissa > > -- > /* > /* Melissa Plunkett > /* System/Network Administrator > /* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > /* College of Education > /* University of Missouri - Columbia > /* 111 London Hall > /* Columbia, MO 65211 > /* Phone: (573) 884-6835 > /* Fax: (573) 884-5158 > */ ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] RE: [grrltalk] webads
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of James A. Sutherland > > >Blocking advertisements on web pages is no different than > changing channels > >on the TV when the ads come on. I have not been paid nor > contracted to watch > >the blasted things so I exercise my right to block any and all > advertising. > >I also exercise my right to block cookies from any site I deem > fit. In other > >words, I block all cookies that are used for anything other than direct > >shopping requirements. > > The original post was mine - I wouldn't really describe the character > as a "friend", though. We are both part of the Campaign for Unmetered > Telecommunications here in the UK, campaigning for flat-rate (i.e. not > charged per minute) Internet access and local calls, which is how we > "met" - we often argue about whether or not filtering ads etc is OK. > > My POV is that for the most part, we are free to do WTF we want with > an HTTP connection, within reason (no DoS attacks etc). If I want to > run a Perl script to e-mail me the front page of here> every morning, that's OK - no need for me to download any of the > images, advertising or otherwise. I completely agree. There's nothing saying you must use a web browser or that you must download any or all graphics, scripts, cookies, etc. from a site. I admit I am somewhat amused at the number of sites that throw javascript errors (typically 'document.x.y is null or not an object') after I started blocking all ads. On a complete different tangent, I never did understand how folks in the UK could tolerate metered service for local calls. It just seems so... uncivilized. Of course, I was born and bred in the USA so I come from a completely different background and point of view. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Re; biscuit jack
I just wanna know which marketeer came up with the nondescript term "biscuit jack" for a simple surface-mount phone jack. It doesn't look anything like a biscuit to me. Sounds rather similar to those "neoprene high energy impact devices" the US military purchased for a grand each instead of going to the local hardware store and purchasing a garden variety hammer for five bucks. :-) > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Wood, Mary > Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 1:28 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: [techtalk] Re; biscuit jack > > > Thanks guys! I wasn't coming up with much on the web myself > and don't know if I was brain-farting or too involved in other > work today to put proper effort into surfing. > > I kind of guessed that's what it was, but figured, "Hey! That's > what TechTalk is for!" > > Thanks again... > > - Mary > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Biscuit jack?
I should apologize up front for the "me too!" but I couldn't resist seconding that motion. Google is amazing for all kinds of searches, particularly tech searches. Its search results are far more relevant than any other search engine I've used. I use IE. I like IE. But the MSN search engine it uses is horrible. Quite frankly, I'm beginning to think MSN stands for Microsoft Shopping Network. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of terry > Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 11:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [techtalk] Biscuit jack? > > > I'm constantly amazed at how well google works for > just about any technical subject - and their servers > run what else? ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Re; biscuit jack
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Wood, Mary > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 2:26 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: [techtalk] Re; biscuit jack > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] muses... > > > I just wanna know which marketeer came up with the nondescript > > term "biscuit jack" for a simple surface-mount phone jack. It > > doesn't look anything like a biscuit to me. Sounds rather similar > > to those "neoprene high energy impact devices" the US military > > purchased for a grand each instead of going to the local hardware > > store and purchasing a garden variety hammer for five bucks. :-) > > Well, I decided when I first started tinkering in this industry that > back in the day, there was a conversation between inventors that went > something like this: > > "Dick, I predict that computers and technology -- and most importantly, > we computer/technology geeks -- will rule the world someday." > > "Yes Jane, but the trick is to keep the power for ourselves." > > "I know, how about we give all the parts and devices really > complex, scary, or meaningless names? That way, people will think > our jobs are way harder than they are and they will be in awe of us." > > "Good idea! Plus, with all those technobabble terms, we can pretend > we're on Star Trek while we work." > > And so it was. "Pictures on a screen" became "Graphical User > Interface," "surface mount phone jack" became "biscuit jack," and > so on. Knowledge is power. Be careful with whom you share power. LOL! I suspect there is far more truth in this than I want to admit. One of the first tasks I undertook when I became a technical editor for a computer magazine (almost another lifetime ago) was to rid all of the publications of those nasty three letter acronyms and other archaic terminology (aka technobabble). > By the way, the job went fine today ... on my end. While the help > desk and I went back over everything to determine why the LAN couldn't > see the world and vice versa, I started looking at the router. > Though it wasn't part of my task and I don't know jack about Cisco > routers, I put my problem-solving skills into action found that MCI > Worldcom had miswired the thing when they installed it. To top that > off, there was a typo on MCI's end and they had remotely configured > the wrong store. So at least I went away happy that the extra 2 > hours spent on site was due to MCI's incompetence and not only did > I do everything right, I caught *their* error. Whoo-hoo! Congratulations! I'm glad to hear everything went so well. I know just enough about network wiring to be dangerous. ;-) Just be glad you were working with MCI Worldcom instead of US West. > - Mary; suddenly feeling very networky for a hardware geek! ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] RE: [issues] Re: [grrltalk] Re: linuxchix logo
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Mary Gardiner > Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 8:41 PM > To: minae > Cc: Grrltalk@Linuxchix. Org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [issues] Re: [grrltalk] Re: linuxchix logo > > > On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 08:01:51PM -0700, minae wrote: > > It seems to go well with the name > > "Linuxchix" which sounds to me like it's trying to be a hip, catchy > > young-sounding moniker. Else why not Linux Women? > > Actually now that you bring this up, a lot of my feminist friends > are rather > unable to take the name seriously at all because of the use of > the word 'chicks' > and thought that we must have some formal position on reclaiming > derogatory > terms. > > Has anyone else ever had or encountered issues with the name? > > Mary. This is kinda funny because I never really gave the name Linuxchix much thought. But now that you mention it, I wouldn't be caught dead referring to the female gender as chicks. I remember even in high school (eons and eons ago) the girls didn't like to be referred to as chicks. Use of the term was considered a quick and easy way to spend a Friday night at home alone. On the other hand, I think these are confusing times for a lot of people. For example, I was taught while growing up that you referred to someone as sir or ma'am out of respect. I still remember those demanding drills in Boy Scouts... Who sir, me sir? Yes sir, you sir. No sir, not me sir. Same drills with the ma'am as well. It's heavily ingrained in my system and I often automatically respond "yes, ma'am." These days it seems many women consider ma'am to be derogatory as well. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [issues] Re: [techtalk] Desktop OS?
My initial response is that you have too many partitions, which just over-complicates matters. No, I am not saying it is wrong. It's just that things get really complicated with extended partitions. Of course, I should also fully disclose the fact that I dislike extended partitions and all of the inherit problems they cause. Invisible partitions is one of the side effects of extended partitions. When I was running dual boot between Windows 95 and Redhat 6.1, I used a total of four primary partitions: Windows, /boot, /, and swap. Granted, I had to use Partition Magic to create those partitions. Windows fdisk won't create linux partitions (surprised?) and the Redhat partition manager refused to create anything other than extended partitions for Linux. Grrr... Another full disclosure statement: I attempted to create the partitions *I* wanted with Redhat, got disgusted on the second attempt and yanked out the Partition Magic CD which just happened to be within arm's reach. I then installed Windows 95, rebooted and installed Redhat. When asked if I wanted to partition my drive, I yelled "You do it and DIE!" and it magically used the partions I had created with Partition Magic. :-) Anyway, I was able to access my Windows FAT32 partition from within Linux and could access the Linux partitions from within Windows. Bt... I think I just fried my brain. I can't for the life of me remember the name of the utility I used to access the Linux partitions from within Windows. All I remember now is that it provided stuff like ls and cp to ext2 partitions (albeit read-only access) from a DOS prompt. One point of worthy note here is that I found it trivially easy to partition the drive using Partition Magic. I first jotted down the default sizes recommended by Redhat's partition manager for /boot and swap then just typed those numbers into Partition Magic and chose the type of partition (FAT32, Linux or Linux Swap). I don't remember the exact size of each partition, but it was something like this: Device Boot Start End Blocks System /dev/hda1 * 1 x x /boot + lilo /dev/hda2x x x FAT32 /dev/hda3x x x Linux /dev/hda4x x x Linux Swap > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mary Gardiner > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 10:17 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [issues] Re: [techtalk] Desktop OS? > > > The trouble I've had sharing hard drives with Windows... :) > > Quick poll: can anyone who has ever managed to solve this situation please > mail their fdisk partition output, with discussion if you can. > > I have: > 3 primary partitions > hda1 is win C: > hda2 is /boot (back from lilo needing /boot to be within 1024 cylinders) > hda3 is D: > hda5- hda9 are on the extended > > fdisk has: > DeviceBootStart End Blocks Id > System > /dev/hda1 * 1 262 2104483+b Win95 FAT32 > /dev/hda2 263 275 104422+ 83 Linux > /dev/hda3 276 913 5124735 b Win95 FAT32 > /dev/hda4 914 18677663005 85 > Linux extended > /dev/hda5 914 977 514048+ 83 Linux > /dev/hda6 978 12392104483+83 Linux > /dev/hda7 124013701052226 83 Linux > /dev/hda8 13711396208813+ 82 Linux swap > /dev/hda9 139718673783276 83 Linux > > This all works fine now, except that Debian's lilo now follows > the FAT partition > convention that only one of them can be primary and 'hides' the > other. I have a > config option that turns this off, but would like to know if > anyone has ever > gotten Windows to share an extended partition with Linux. > > I had a terrible time with it. No matter what I did, Windows > would grab the > first two GB of the extended partition and say 'mine', without paying any > attention to the logical drives. Window's fdisk labelled hda3 > (which was the > extended at the time) as 'DOS extended partition'. I had to mark > it 85, Linux > extended, and now Windows ignores it as 'non-DOS'. > > Anyone got any better solutions - I got in a terrible IRC flamefest over > 'but it's incorrect', 'but it works!', 'but it's incorrect!' > > Mary. > > PS Back to techtalk. People should be posting to *both* while we > all resubscribe > and the DNS moves over. Not seeing DNS changes here btw. > > -- > Mary Gardiner > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > GPG Key ID: 77625870 > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
