So, does Linux have a problem being a slave to windows? The following scenario would be optimal for both linux and windows, according to the cited webpage:
/dev/hda -> windows (master primary) /dev/hdb -> linux (slave primary) /dev/hdc -> cdrom (master secondary) /dev/hdd -> none -Rob > On 20020212.1642, Jacob Meuser said ... > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 04:34:27PM -0800, Rob Hudson wrote: > > For windows, the preferred is...? > > > > /dev/hda -> Windows hard drive (master primary) > > /dev/hdb -> none > > /dev/hdc -> Linux (master secondary) > > /dev/hdd -> CDROM (slave secondary) > > > > I originally put the CD on the other IDE controller b/c I've heard it > > is faster this way. If I use Linux more, would I then put the CD on > > hdb or does it really matter? > > It may be OpenBSD specific, but ... > > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=atapiscsi > > (skip to the paragraph starting with "For performance reasons") > > -- > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- Rob <rob_at_euglug_dot_net> my @euglugCode = qw(v+++ e--- eug+ bsd+++ gnu+ S+++);
