Tranfering Linux

[Cyber Source]

The main reason I use FAT32 for my windows partition, is that I won't
have a problem writing to it from Linux (share files, etc. but these
days really only go back to windows for ms money). Although windows
actually runs better on an NTFS partition (doesnt fragment as much, and
different security features are added), writing to an NTFS partition
from Linux is still experimental.
  I always write my lilo to the MBR and I don't even think you have a
choice from the latest RedHat install, but depending on your BIOS and
other factors, here is why lilo probably isnt working for you;
1. It may have called out "linear" in lilo.conf for your drive type, you
can change this to "fat32" instead. OR
2. If the OS's are on different drives, you may need to put the
"map-drive to" syntax in the lilo.conf file, like "0x80 to 0x81", so it
knows 1, where to write lilo in the first place, 2, where the different
OS's are, especially if you have SCSI and IDE's together.

On Sat, 2003-05-17 at 15:35, Kevin E. Glosser wrote:

> On Sat, 2003-05-17 at 15:01, Cyber Source wrote:
> > I have also never had a problem with it being master/slave or
> > whatever, it is totally configurable in lilo
> 
> When I put XP on, neither Grub nor Lilo would enter the second boot
> stage and become responsive. My machine just sat there.
> 
> I scoured the net looking for solutions. I found tons. Unfortunately,
> none of them were correct. Some pointed to the BIOS, some pointed to the
> boot loader being in the MBR as opposed to the first boot sector on the
> hard drive.
> 
> Other people gave workarounds for using XP's bootloader and then editing
> boot.ini. I didn't want to try this. There was no reason for Grub or
> Lilo to not work.
> 
> In the end, although the great majority of people(including Redhat's own
> documentation) said NOT to put Grub in the MBR, that is where I put it.
> 
> I have no real answer why previously it did not work, other than i
> believe a newer version of Grub may be the reason I eventually got it to
> work. However, it was odd that Lilo didn't work either. I had always
> used Lilo in the past.
> 
> Regardless, my previous post was meant to state that 1) the solution i
> used, does work 2) it IS possible to have issues dual booting NT/2000/XP
> and Linux and 3) for convenience I added the other recommendations.
> 
> Peter, is there a particular reason why you favor FAT32 over NTFS 5.1?
> Other, than what I already stated.
> 
> Microsoft file systems are traditionally considered crap. So, choosing
> one evil over the other isn't necessarily a joyful occasion. I've never
> heard anyone say they loved the FAT file system. I've never heard anyone
> say they liked NTFS either, but it does have some abilities FAT32
> doesn't. I'm just curious to what makes it unappealing.
> 
> Thanks for any response in advance.
> 
> KEG

-- 
Cyber Source <peter at thecybersource.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nflug.org/pipermail/nflug/attachments/20030518/ec9ba3e2/attachment-0001.html