On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 03:44, Kevin McKinley wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:17:21 +1200
>
> cr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Conclusions:
> >
> > 1. Back up the MBR and everything else, first!
> > 2. Be very, very careful when using 'map' to swap drives around
> > 3. It's probably safest to le
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:44:00 -0400, Kevin McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> penned:
>
> Should you need to recreate your partition table you can do so using fdisk
> (not cfdisk and certainly not parted).
>
What do you have against parted?
I started using it a little over a year ago and have used it
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:17:21 +1200
cr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Conclusions:
>
> 1. Back up the MBR and everything else, first!
> 2. Be very, very careful when using 'map' to swap drives around
> 3. It's probably safest to let DOS/Windows occupy Drive 1, where in its
> blinkered arrogan
On Friday 26 September 2003 04:04, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> > Conclusions:
> >
> > 1. Back up the MBR and everything else, first!
> > 2. Be very, very careful when using 'map' to swap drives around
>
> I've used 'map' without any damages, but Win* didn't want to finish
> booting using it.
I act
cr said:
> On Friday 19 September 2003 21:12, cr wrote:
>
> (DOS / Win95 / Win98 install)
>
>> Next step, see if I can boot the whole thing with GRUB
>>
>> cr
>
> "Progress" report... :)
> The 'rgh' was prophetic
>
> Well, it all booted happily with Grub while it was Drive 1 in my
On Friday 19 September 2003 21:12, cr wrote:
(DOS / Win95 / Win98 install)
> Next step, see if I can boot the whole thing with GRUB
>
> cr
"Progress" report... :)
The 'rgh' was prophetic
Well, it all booted happily with Grub while it was Drive 1 in my spare PC.
So I put it
On Friday 19 September 2003 21:12, cr wrote:
(Finally got DOS, w95 and w98 each installed in their own partitions).
>
> Next step, see if I can boot the whole thing with GRUB
>
> cr
Yep, GRUB booted fine, DOS, w95 and w98.
I just made a Grub boot floppy as instructed in the Howtos, made
On Thursday 18 September 2003 10:09, Pigeon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:12:02AM +1200, cr wrote:
>
>
> > But neither Win95 nor Win98 would install on Partition 2.They both
> > siezed shortly after the 'License Agreement' stage, and on rebooting
> > displayed a message about disabling t
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:12:02AM +1200, cr wrote:
> But neither Win95 nor Win98 would install on Partition 2.They both siezed
> shortly after the 'License Agreement' stage, and on rebooting displayed a
> message about disabling the virus checker (*what* virus checker?)
In the BIOS?
Or d
On Monday 15 September 2003 09:20, Pigeon wrote:
> > But anyway, this is the revised scheme:
> > 1 Pri DOS 500MBBootableDOS6.22
> > 2 Pri DOS 600MB W95
> > 3 Pri DOS 600MB W98
> > 4 Extended 5 DOS 500MB
> >
On Tuesday 16 September 2003 12:19, Karsten M. Self wrote:
(much snippage for bandwidth)
> > What I was thinking of, solely for the purposes of quick swapping
> > between DOS and Linux, was a floppy with an absolutely minimal kernel
> > on it, to which I could add the one app I really wanted - cf
on Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 10:27:51PM +1200, cr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Monday 15 September 2003 18:52, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > on Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 09:23:47PM +1200, cr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > It'd be nice to have a self-contained floppy with just the basic
> > > componenets ne
On Monday 15 September 2003 09:20, Pigeon wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 09:23:47PM +1200, cr wrote:
> > On Sunday 14 September 2003 12:39, Pigeon wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 04:33:22PM +1200, cr wrote:
> >
> > It'd be nice to have a self-contained floppy with just the basic
> > componen
On Monday 15 September 2003 18:52, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 09:23:47PM +1200, cr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > It'd be nice to have a self-contained floppy with just the basic
> > componenets needed to boot a Linux system, so there's room to add a
> > few utilties of ones c
On Sunday 14 September 2003 23:40, Robert Storey wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:23:47 +1200
>
> cr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I thought DOS could only handle partitions of up to ~500MB (512?
> > 528?). I must be wrong, it happily formatted 600MB, at least for
> > partition 3.
>
> DOS (that
on Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 09:23:47PM +1200, cr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> It'd be nice to have a self-contained floppy with just the basic
> componenets needed to boot a Linux system, so there's room to add a
> few utilties of ones choice.I've done that with my DOS floppy.
> But reading the HOW
On Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 09:23:47PM +1200, cr wrote:
> On Sunday 14 September 2003 12:39, Pigeon wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 04:33:22PM +1200, cr wrote:
> It'd be nice to have a self-contained floppy with just the basic componenets
> needed to boot a Linux system, so there's room to add a fe
On Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 07:40:21PM +0800, Robert Storey wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:23:47 +1200
> cr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I thought DOS could only handle partitions of up to ~500MB (512?
> > 528?). I must be wrong, it happily formatted 600MB, at least for
> > partition 3.
>
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:23:47 +1200
cr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I thought DOS could only handle partitions of up to ~500MB (512?
> 528?). I must be wrong, it happily formatted 600MB, at least for
> partition 3.
DOS (that is, FAT16) can handle partitions up to two gigabytes in size.
And
On Sunday 14 September 2003 12:39, Pigeon wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 04:33:22PM +1200, cr wrote:
> > On Thursday 11 September 2003 09:38, Pigeon wrote:
> >
> > (preliminaries snipped)
> > The Linux boot floppy is a bit more tricky.I thought I'd better first
> > delete the existing Linux p
On Sunday 14 September 2003 16:53, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> Pigeon wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >Conclusion: DOS can't cope with the presence of non-DOS extended
> >partitions. How dead and chewed.
> >
> >So it seems that the options are something like:
> >
> >- don't have a Linux partition on that drive at
Pigeon wrote:
[snip]
Conclusion: DOS can't cope with the presence of non-DOS extended
partitions. How dead and chewed.
So it seems that the options are something like:
- don't have a Linux partition on that drive at all
- don't have your second DOS partition, so there can be room for the
ext2 p
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 04:33:22PM +1200, cr wrote:
> On Thursday 11 September 2003 09:38, Pigeon wrote:
>
> (preliminaries snipped)
> The Linux boot floppy is a bit more tricky.I thought I'd better first
> delete the existing Linux partitons on the drive using cfdisk rather than DOS
> fdisk
On Thursday 11 September 2003 09:38, Pigeon wrote:
(preliminaries snipped)
OK, I'm aiming for
> 1 Pri DOS500MB Bootable; for DOS
> 2 Pri DOS600MB ; for W95
> 3 Pri DOS600MB ; for W98
> 4 Extended --> 5 DOS 500MB ; DOS "optional"
>
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:58:54PM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 11:28:24PM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:30:06PM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> > > But nowadays I think that what's really needed is to take care that all
> > > windows partitions have
On Friday 12 September 2003 03:37, Pigeon wrote:
>
> > > Don't despair, GRUB is perfectly capable of _hiding_ specific
> > > partitions in the bootprocess, and many(?) BIOSses allow to swap the
> > > order of drives.
> >
> > Or I can just physically swap them over.My machine usually has its
>
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 11:02:53PM +1200, cr wrote:
> On Thursday 11 September 2003 08:30, Carel Fellinger wrote:
...
> > From experience, Win95/98 needs to be on the first drive, needs to be
> > in a bootable primary partition which needs to be the only/first primary
> > partition.
>
> On the fir
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 11:28:24PM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:30:06PM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> > But nowadays I think that what's really needed is to take care that all
> > windows partitions have there first sector(s?) cleaned prior to letting
> > windows format those
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 11:02:53PM +1200, cr wrote:
> On Thursday 11 September 2003 08:30, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 12:07:08AM +1200, cr wrote:
> > > This may seem an odd place to ask this, but I'll bet some of the folks on
> > > this list know more about the technicalitie
--- Kent West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> cr wrote:
>
> >On Thursday 11 September 2003 00:15, John covici wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>You might consider vmware -- seems much safer to me for what you want.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Isn't that commercial?
> >
> >
>
> Yes, it is, but it w
cr wrote:
On Thursday 11 September 2003 00:15, John covici wrote:
You might consider vmware -- seems much safer to me for what you want.
Isn't that commercial?
Yes, it is, but it works very well. You could try bochs (or is it plex
this week? I forget). But last time I tried it, it
On Thursday 11 September 2003 08:30, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 12:07:08AM +1200, cr wrote:
> > This may seem an odd place to ask this, but I'll bet some of the folks on
> > this list know more about the technicalities of booting Windoze than
> > Windoze users do ;)
>
> I kn
On Thursday 11 September 2003 09:38, Pigeon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 07:27:23AM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> > cr wrote:
> > >This may seem an odd place to ask this, but I'll bet some of the folks
> > > on this list know more about the technicalities of booting Windoze than
> > > Windoze users
On Thursday 11 September 2003 00:15, John covici wrote:
> I am pretty sure windows in general always wants to be the first
> partition on a given drive and even if I am wrong about that you
> can't have more than one boot partition per drive -- also make sure
> your machine will boot from the third
On Thursday 11 September 2003 00:27, Kent West wrote:
> >There are plenty of multiboot HOWTOs, but they all seem to be WinNT +
> >something.I can't find a W95 + W98.Before I start trying to figure
> >out the details, I'd just like to know if I'm chasing an impossibility.
> >Incidentally, I
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:30:06PM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> But nowadays I think that what's really needed is to take care that all
> windows partitions have there first sector(s?) cleaned prior to letting
> windows format those, as it seems that windows prefers the partitioning
> informatio
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 07:27:23AM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> cr wrote:
> >This may seem an odd place to ask this, but I'll bet some of the folks on
> >this list know more about the technicalities of booting Windoze than
> >Windoze users do ;)
> >
> >I'd like to add a multi-boot DOS + Win95/98 h
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 12:07:08AM +1200, cr wrote:
> This may seem an odd place to ask this, but I'll bet some of the folks on
> this list know more about the technicalities of booting Windoze than Windoze
> users do ;)
I know next to nothing about Windows and prefer to keep it like that:),
b
cr wrote:
This may seem an odd place to ask this, but I'll bet some of the folks on
this list know more about the technicalities of booting Windoze than Windoze
users do ;)
I'd like to add a multi-boot DOS + Win95/98 hard drive to my Linuxbox.
I currently have Deb 3.0 installed on /dev/hda
I am pretty sure windows in general always wants to be the first
partition on a given drive and even if I am wrong about that you
can't have more than one boot partition per drive -- also make sure
your machine will boot from the third drive.
Also, you should not do the install on a separate box,
This may seem an odd place to ask this, but I'll bet some of the folks on
this list know more about the technicalities of booting Windoze than Windoze
users do ;)
I'd like to add a multi-boot DOS + Win95/98 hard drive to my Linuxbox.
I currently have Deb 3.0 installed on /dev/hda, booting w
41 matches
Mail list logo
