On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, R Joseph Wright wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 03:29:08PM -0600, Fred Clift wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 Jul 2000, John Baldwin wrote:
> >
> > > the geometry of a disk. At the very least, dangerously dedicated mode
> > > should specify a valid length for the slice the way that t
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Chad R. Larson wrote:
> So, I think leaving things the way they have been (letting the
> administrator decide at installation time) with regard to
> "dangerously dedicated" is the way to go. Perhaps with a little
> more verbose warning about "don't try this unless you know w
As I recall, John Baldwin wrote:
>> Folks, gemoetries are for brain damaged PC operating systems.
>> All the box needs to boot is a proper MBR. BIOSes that
>> don't boot from a dedicated disk are _broken_.
>
> No, they are actually smart in that they attempt to use a geometry
> that matches the M
On Sun, 23-Jul-2000 at 18:57:12 -0400, Adrian Filipi-Martin wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2000, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> > Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> > > Hello all!
> > >
> > > Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> > >
> > > > John Baldwin once stated:
> > > >
> >
> > > Folks, gemoetries are for brain damaged P
On Sun, 23-Jul-2000 at 15:33:43 -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> Doug White once stated:
>
> => Wait! Smarter then what? So it can boot NT and Win98 for some
> => weenies, or, actually do something useful (not sure what, though)?
> => Why am I to waste space (even so little) "to be comp
On Sun, 23 Jul 2000, John Baldwin wrote:
> Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> > Hello all!
> >
> > Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> >
> > > John Baldwin once stated:
> > >
>
> > Folks, gemoetries are for brain damaged PC operating systems.
> > All the box needs to boot is a proper MBR. BIOSes that
> > don't
Thomas Stromberg once stated:
=> > As for geometry, I tried both with and without "dangerously
=> > dedicated." My understanding was that if I used the dos partition
=> > entry method that we should be able to pick up the geometry
=> > correctly, but should I try the old dos fd
