you can use grub doe debian also.
You will need to use fstab to mount the proper partition
On Sun, 6 Jan 2002, dx wrote:
>Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 01:17:52 -0500
>From: dx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Debian and Redhat on the same PC
>
>Hi,
>
>I am newbie Lin
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 01:17:52AM -0500, dx wrote:
| I just like to know how can I install Debian and Redhat
| on the same PC.
With separate partitions for each OS.
| I already installed Redhat using Grub,
No problem (I like grub too, much easier to use than lilo, IMO)
| but Debian is using L
dx, I'll just reverse the order I'll answer your questions.
>And how do you make/allocate partitions for both of them without
>stepping on each other?
Easy. Just make a separate partitions for RHL and Debian. Be it
primary or logical whatever. Your call. Fortunately, you can
make them share the
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 01:17:52AM -0500, dx wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am newbie Linux user.
> I just like to know how can I install Debian and Redhat
> on the same PC. I already installed Redhat using Grub,
> but Debian is using LILO. And how do you make/allocate partitions
> for both of them without s
>
> However, there are some software that these servers MUST have, right now
> it's
> Legato Networker and the UPS software (not sure which UPS system we will use
>
> If you are using APC UPS then you should check their website. I sent them
If using Best, they gives you source code to compile
"Craig H. Block" wrote:
> If you are using APC UPS then you should check their website. I sent them
> an email a couple months ago about PowerChute for Linux and they said it
> should be available this quarter.
http://www.apc.com/products/management/pcp_linux.cfm
http://www.apc.com/tools/downlo
However, there are some software that these servers MUST have, right now
it's
Legato Networker and the UPS software (not sure which UPS system we will use
yet). Both have support for Linux, but only RedHat. I'v made debian packages
of Networker from the RPM package, and they works fine. I'll try t
fockface dickmeat wrote:
>
> > Your thinking of the personal user, which isn't Linux's
> >strongsuit right now. Corporate customers are looking at the
> >Calderas and RedHatters of the Linux distributions. Without
> >commercial support, they won't even bother to *look* at Debian.
> >Withou
> Your thinking of the personal user, which isn't Linux's
>strongsuit right now. Corporate customers are looking at the
>Calderas and RedHatters of the Linux distributions. Without
>commercial support, they won't even bother to *look* at Debian.
>Without the attention of the corporate worl
On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, Frankie wrote:
> ) Obviously recommending debian to colleagues/associates/friends
> ) sticking a debian logo on your website
> ) pestering major sites to display a debian logo
> ) Making sure that articles are written for stuff like
> slashdot/32bitsonli
>>>
And some guy at MIT wrote a text editor in TECO...
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
-
Opps, yeah that's right. The ORIGINAL Emacs was written in Teco. RMS
must be more talented that I thought. Tec
Kenneth Scharf writes:
> I remember when working at DEC being told that teco was more than an
> editor, it was a language. Infact someone had written a StarTrek game in
> teco.
And some guy at MIT wrote a text editor in TECO...
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
El
On Fri, Mar 05, 1999 at 05:13 (-0800), Kenneth Scharf wrote:
>
> But TECO was the greatest, most programmable, powerful editor ever. If
> only
> it had run on a *NIX OS :-(
>
> -
> I remember when working at DEC being told that teco was mo
Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> Frankie wrote:
> >
> >
> > > You are perhaps referring the "Linux Standard Base" that RH and
> > > Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the
> > > greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they
> > > will no longer see this kind
But TECO was the greatest, most programmable, powerful editor ever. If
only
it had run on a *NIX OS :-(
-
I remember when working at DEC being told that teco was more than an
editor, it was a language. Infact someone had written a StarTre
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> > I dunno. There's a lot of people who would like to find out about
> > Linux, but aren't prepared to bet the whole farm on it sight unseen.
>
> Without advertising, how are we supposed to get to these
> prospective customers before RH does?
Advertis
Ralph Winslow writes:
> But TECO was the greatest, most programmable, powerful editor ever. If
> only it had run on a *NIX OS :-(
I believe I recall once reading of a Linux port (or clone) of TECO.
Personally, I've done my best to suppress all my memories of it.
--
John HaslerThi
Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 12:44:20PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
> > > an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for
> > ^
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 12:44:20PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
> > an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for
> ^
>
> Th
On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 12:44:20PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
> an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for
^
This is an excellent summary of why you
I'm going to start a co that builds cheap boxen with debian. I have what
I believe a creative marketing scheme. My target market is mid to low
income families.
Contact me if you have an interest. I'm ready for some serious
planning/implementation.
NatePuri
Certified Law Student
& Debian GN
mike shupp wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> > Like George Bonser has said previously, I think the only way that
> > Debian is going to grow its market share better than its currently
> > growing is for the creation of a commercial company which adopts
> > Debian as its b
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> Like George Bonser has said previously, I think the only way that
> Debian is going to grow its market share better than its currently
> growing is for the creation of a commercial company which adopts
> Debian as its base distribution. This company c
Frankie wrote:
>
>
> > You are perhaps referring the "Linux Standard Base" that RH and
> > Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the
> > greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they
> > will no longer see this kind of cooperation as desirable, and i
> You are perhaps referring the "Linux Standard Base" that RH and
> Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the
> greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they
> will no longer see this kind of cooperation as desirable, and in
> effect decide on their o
Wayne Cuddy wrote:
>
> If there is one feature that I would LOVE to see in dselect it would be to
> save all the packages I have selected and allow my to load the selection on a
> new system so I don't have to do it everytime. Maybe this feature is already
> there and I don't know about it...
>
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> Ed Cogburn wrote:
> > As Deb becomes bigger, attracting more users, with some
> > of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install
> > problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes
> > dselect? :-) ).
> No, there's at
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Wayne Cuddy wrote:
> If there is one feature that I would LOVE to see in dselect it would be
> to save all the packages I have selected and allow my to load the
> selection on a new system so I don't have to do it everytime. Maybe
> this feature is already there and I don't k
1 Mar 1999, Randy Edwards wrote:
> Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 06:46:05 -0500
> From: Randy Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Debian-Users
> Subject: Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
> Resent-Date: 1 Mar 1999 1
Peter Ludwig wrote:
> January 1999 have net account will download!
> At the beginning of the year I'd gotten very bored with everything and
> decided to attempt to download and install debian off the net. This time
> things went great. To summarize the good points I have found with debian
> :-
> of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install
> problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes
> dselect? :-) ).
While dselect does have an odd interface, I definitely like it. I can see
the original author's motive for force-feeding help screens, which I
http://www.userfriendly.org/static/
Bob Nielsen Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tucson, AZ AMPRnet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DM42nh http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christian Kurz wrote:
> >
> > Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote:
> >
> > > > Now, I have a few problems with it.
> > > > 1) No "IDE" for the compiler.
> >
> > > Try Emacs or XEmacs. Do
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 28-Feb-99, Mark Brown took time to write :
> >> 3) No documentation on how to load/use the original programs that loaded
> >> when installing. That is, can I load again the program that allowed me to
> > Hmm... This problem seems to apply to all t
> Were you a Linux user back when Slackware (or SLS) was the ONLY
> distribution? Corel has now announced that they are going to produce
> their own distribution. That might put a bit of a hurt on Red Hat.
Has anyone suggested to Corel, that they base their new distribution on
Debian?
Cheers,
On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 03:44:55PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote:
> > > 1) No "IDE" for the compiler.
> > Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
> Hm, but there
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, George Bonser wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, King Lee wrote:
>
> > Sorry, bad choice of words. I hope that if debian gains "market share"
> > Red Hat may not be so dominant.
>
> Well, I am not sure that Red Hat being so dominant is anything Debian can
> change unless the
Christian Kurz wrote:
>
> Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote:
>
> > > Now, I have a few problems with it.
> > > 1) No "IDE" for the compiler.
>
> > Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
> > an e
George Bonser wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> > > In other words, the value is the process and not the content.
> >
> >
> > What do mean by content here? The software?
> >
> > I'm saying the 'process' has been positively influenced by the
> > 'politics' (the Soc
Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote:
> > Now, I have a few problems with it.
> > 1) No "IDE" for the compiler.
> Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
> an editor - it's far, far more than a mere ed
Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote:
>
> > Now, I have a few problems with it.
> > 1) No "IDE" for the compiler.
>
> Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
> an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has
On 28-Feb-99, Mark Brown took time to write :
>> 3) No documentation on how to load/use the original programs that loaded
>> when installing. That is, can I load again the program that allowed me to
>
> Hmm... This problem seems to apply to all the distributions I've tried.
> They have a nice
On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote:
> Now, I have a few problems with it.
> 1) No "IDE" for the compiler.
Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs
an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for
compilation and intera
I've just gotten my mail down, so sorry for the lateness of this :)
A Short Linux History (by me)
In 1992/3 I was looking at getting myself a new operating system, well
after chatting to a couple of friends, I heard about "debian linux", now
I hadn't heard of linux before so when I found it was
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, George Bonser wrote:
> I am not sure how gaining market share improves Debian. I think you could
> say that Debian is better than Red Hat for servers. In other words, get
> the message over that Red Hat might be easier for the single-user desktop
> but Debian is the proper
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Frankie wrote:
> OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one
> hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going
> the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very
> far ahead of any of the
Wasn't gonna do it, but what the hell...
_My Linux Story_
In 1994, after learning of it from a friend, I purchased a 4 disk set
of Linux CDs from Infomagic. I soon threw in the towel in
frustration, never getting my proprietary cdrom hardware and that
distribution
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> It seem that dselect and apt-get must use two different Package lists.
Right.
> I would have expected them to use the same one as they both use dpkg.
There's various levels to dpkg - apt just uses it to install packages,
dselect uses it to manage the available file t
Subject: Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Date: Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 01:47:38PM +1100
In reply to:Brian May
Quoting Brian May([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> >>I think dselect, especially in
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, P Asokan wrote:
>
> If I want to write an install program, whom do I get in touch? I do know C
> fairly well and I would give this a crack. Will someone point me to areas of
> study, persons to contact?
>
There is already a big plan for this, you might start with:
http://w
>> Also, I think Red Hat is a "linux virgin" distrib -- first time Linux
>> users have probably only heard of Red Hat, and a lot of people feel
>> the Red Hat installation is easier. Same way with me when I started,
>> but I had only heard of Slackware. Once I knew more about Unix
>> administrati
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>>I think dselect, especially in
>>combination with the apt access method, is terrific - it just takes some
>>time upfront to get used to it.
>
>Many people switching to Linux from the 'Other ' OS may equate spending time
>to learn an install package, with
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, P Asokan wrote:
> It appears to me dselect is more a sysadmin's install tool. Even Yast looks
> a little easier. for my $0.02 i would strongly suggest ywo install programs
> a simpleone with less choices and another for the more adventurous.
It's an interesting thought. The
>I think dselect, especially in
>combination with the apt access method, is terrific - it just takes some
>time upfront to get used to it.
Many people switching to Linux from the 'Other ' OS may equate spending time
to learn an install package, with difficulty of use and/or other nameless
difficul
Hello,
Several years ago , I said that debian should use some of the tools of
marketing to increase the potential universe of users awareness of
debian. i received such flack that i realized that there was a
political bent in many free software users that was anti marketing or
maybe were totally
Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> As Deb becomes bigger, attracting more users, with some
> of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install
> problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes
> dselect? :-) ).
No, there's at least two of us :-) I think dselect, especially in
c
Matt Garman wrote:
>
> I like the machine name, "skunkpussy." Hehe.
>
> On Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 03:54:04AM -, Frankie wrote:
> > ...
> > I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy,
> > to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional
> > m
George Bonser wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> >
> > First, I think a *lot* of the Debian users are using it at least
> > in part based on 'political' issues such as Debian being the only
> > non-commercial distribution (myself included). For one thing, as
> > another
I like the machine name, "skunkpussy." Hehe.
On Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 03:54:04AM -, Frankie wrote:
> ...
> I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy,
> to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional
> marketers counts in redhat's favour.
They easiest way to use dselect is to choose the source, then do not
select extra packages outside of the defaults. Except scroll down and
select apt. Then hit return. This will install the default base system.
Later use "apt-get install" to install the mail client, mta, etc that you
want. This
At 11:51 PM 2/26/99 -0500, Geoffrey Deasey KD4WVF wrote:
>We are attracting windows users and they
>come to us with no linux experience. I tryed
>debian a while ago and became so
>frustrated with dselect that I gave up twice.
Exactly true. I used apt-get to install Slink and believe apt-get is
George Bonser wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Frankie wrote:
> > A couple of weeks ago there was a poll, which showed that redhat hat had
> > about 2 or three times as many users as debian, and that redhat was first
> > with debian was second, but far closer to the other distros than to redhat.
>
Tommy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One last thing I think it is unfortunate that Debian is know as the
> geekiest distribution of a geek os. I have no CS backround but, I
> downloaded 0.93 from the net and have used Debian ever since, except the
> time when my ex girlfriend took my computer. I
I don't think Debian has to be the number one distribution in order to
be successful. Any growth in Linux use, no matter what the distribution,
is good for the whole community.
It is important to understand the developer/user relationship is, or
should, be different in a volunteer structure than th
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Nathan O. Siemers wrote:
> I strongly agree. I have personal convictions that debian is
> the higher quality dist, but I cannot reccomend it to the corporation
> I work for simply because of the install process and dselect issues.
>
The install is actually quite easy
debian-user
Date: Saturday, February 27, 1999 13:35
Subject: Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
> > Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of
> > linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is
> >
Geoffrey Deasey KD4WVF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> I think that the main reason for redhats success in numbers has more to
> do with the installation program. Many of us can peice together
> a broken install and get it working. But we are now venturing into
> a different and larger world.
> > Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of
> > linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is
> > symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of
> > its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of
Paul Nathan Puri wrote:
>
> We need, to work on the install. Debian is so awesome. Yet, will not be
> noticed by the masses unless the install method becomes better than RH.
> RH's method is open sourced. So there should be a way for debian to make
> it better.
>
> I'm willing to participate i
We need, to work on the install. Debian is so awesome. Yet, will not be
noticed by the masses unless the install method becomes better than RH.
RH's method is open sourced. So there should be a way for debian to make
it better.
I'm willing to participate in a marketing effort. Such an effort
Subject: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Date: Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 03:54:04AM -
In reply to:Frankie
Quoting Frankie([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> I don't know where to post this to, but this seemed as good a place as any.
> This is not a Debian vs Redh
> OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one
> hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going
> the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very
> far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I th
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Frankie wrote:
>
> On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that the
> internet should remain free, debian may well be the best distribution, and
> on that basis, redhat the worst.
>
Just for perspective: Red Hat is by far the best commercial distri
Further to my previous posting:
I have just found this article:
http://www.zdnet.com/devhead/stories/articles/0,4413,2217609,00.html
Is it any wonder redhat are number one when they can find people to write
articles like this?
frankie
74 matches
Mail list logo
