>
> On Sunday 11 June 2006 03:11, Jerry McAllister wrote:
>
> > In FreeBSd world, a slice is the primary division of the disk. It is
> > generally referred to as a primary partition in Microsloth land. But
> > that is the same.
>
> IIRC It's actually more of an IBM PC term than a Microsoft t
On Sunday 11 June 2006 03:11, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> In FreeBSd world, a slice is the primary division of the disk. It is
> generally referred to as a primary partition in Microsloth land. But
> that is the same.
IIRC It's actually more of an IBM PC term than a Microsoft term.
I'm being v
On Saturday 10 June 2006 11:55, Hunter Fuller wrote:
> On 10 Jun 2006, at 11:45 AM, julien Chaffraix wrote:
> > Hello,
> > chainloader +1
>
> Well, this is a different way to do it, usually this is used with
> Microsuck products... but I suppose it'd work here too.
If you chainload you don't need
On 2006-06-10 22:44, Jerry McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > much excised ---
> > > Anyway, this all works just fine. The MBR and initial boot
> > > record in the boot sector of each slice (or primary
> > > partition if you must degrade to MS terminology) have just
> > > enough standa
Beech Rintoul wrote:
Maybe it can be a FAQ. How do they get there?
jerry
I'd ask that question on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. I've never
submitted anything to any of the docs, so I have no clue what their procedure
is.
Beech
Probably something like this:
1. Chat it up on the d
On Saturday 10 June 2006 18:44, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > much excised ---
> >
> > > Anyway, this all works just fine. The MBR and initial boot record in
> > > the boot sector of each slice (or primary partition if you must degrade
> > > to MS terminology) have just enough standardization t
> much excised ---
> > Anyway, this all works just fine. The MBR and initial boot record in
> > the boot sector of each slice (or primary partition if you must degrade
> > to MS terminology) have just enough standardization that the FreeBSD MBR
> > or most any of the other more fancy ones,
On Saturday 10 June 2006 18:11, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > On Jun 10, 2006, at 8:00 AM, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > >> Hello;
> > >> If I want to set up a dual boot of either Linux or FreeBSD, what is
> > >> the
> > >> best way to go about it?
> > >> Use Lilo, grub, or does FreeBSD have a boot loa
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2006, at 8:00 AM, Jerry McAllister wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Hello;
> >> If I want to set up a dual boot of either Linux or FreeBSD, what is
> >> the
> >> best way to go about it?
> >> Use Lilo, grub, or does FreeBSD have a boot loader that it likes
> >> better
> >> and Linux won't o
On 10 Jun 2006, at 11:45 AM, julien Chaffraix wrote:
Hello,
I have made the same configuration (Debian and FreeBSD). I used
Grub and it works very well, here is the entry in menu.lst:
I'll tell you which of these were different and why...
title FreeBSD
root(hd0,0)
>
> Hello;
> If I want to set up a dual boot of either Linux or FreeBSD, what is the
> best way to go about it?
> Use Lilo, grub, or does FreeBSD have a boot loader that it likes better
> and Linux won't object to?
Mabye you are using the term 'boot loader' for what I am used to seeing
called t
Hello,
I have made the same configuration (Debian and FreeBSD). I used Grub and
it works very well, here is the entry in menu.lst:
title FreeBSD
root(hd0,0)
makeactive
chainloader +1
savedefault
boot
(It is strange that the entry is not the same as the previous answer !?
Grub does well for me. Set it up for Linux and then set it up for
BSD, making sure the UFS driver's in there. Here's my command-list
for booting FBSD.
root (hd0,0,a)
kernel /boot/loader
boot
I might have the spacing wrong, I'm doing it from memory, but the
data's all there.
On 10 Jun 20
Hello;
If I want to set up a dual boot of either Linux or FreeBSD, what is the
best way to go about it?
Use Lilo, grub, or does FreeBSD have a boot loader that it likes better
and Linux won't object to?
i'm planning on using Debian on a separate bootable hard drive. I have
to get more info on w
14 matches
Mail list logo
