"Aric S. Bergren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> windows on my system has access to c,d,and,e drives normally, and all of the
> rest of my hard drive space is for linux, so i know it must be a linux
> formated area...sectorwise, it is located between win c and the normal win d
> on the drive....i had to do that because of the 1024th sector thing (its a
> red hat 7 system and still has this limitation)...it worked fine for a
> while, and then during the time when i was attempting to mount windows
> drives in linux, it was detected, given a new drive letter d, and the old d
> and e were moved to where they are now (e and f)...also, i was only able to
strange that it should happen during mounting dos in linux.
But, what does fdisk -l /dev/hda say? Are the partition types correct for
what's actually in the partitions?
Note that you can (carefully ;-) change partition types on a live partition without
damaging the data in them. (I've used this to keep drive letters the same
between a windows 98 boot and a dos 6.2 boot - but thats a different story - the
point being that you can change the system type of a partition without affecting
whats in it - just be sure you only change its type code!)
> mount the old windows c and e drives for some reason...mounting d would not
> work, and even though according to fdisk, win d should have been hda6, if i
> mount that section with an auto format option, it works but is not the right
> partition (i see the kernal in there, etc)....i wonder if this has anything
again, this is weird. What happens if you specify the filesystem type on
your mount? (And, btw, where are you tryin to mount these things?)
> to do with it.....if i was able to put linux after windows on the drive and
> just put the /boot partition before 1023 i wonder if all of the drives would
> be mountable and maybe windows wouldn't see linux...otherwise, is there a
I doubt this would help...
> way to add mandrake 7.2's version of lilo (which does not need to have the
> /boot dir before 1024) to a red hat system
Sorry, I cannot help you there. Anyone else?
> (which seems to be more stable
> than mandrake on this particular system..........
I wonder if the 'hard disk optimizations' problems others have mentioned
here on the list may have something to do with your evaluation that
M7.2 is less stable than M7.1? What makes you say its less stable?
> am i making any sense at all
I *think* I understood you - but thats no guarantee! ;-)
> or should i relax for a while and just have many beers?
Relax, have a few, but don't drive! ;-)
Just kidding. I'm curious to see the output of your fdisk -l and what's in
your /etc/fstab (sorry, forgot to mention that before ;-)
rc
Rusty Carruth Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: (480) 345-3621 SnailMail: Schlumberger ATE
FAX: (480) 345-8793 7855 S. River Parkway, Suite 116
Ham: N7IKQ @ 146.82+,pl 162.2 Tempe, AZ 85284-1825
