Linux-Setup Digest #397, Volume #20 Thu, 11 Jan 01 04:13:04 EST
Contents:
Line editor in bash (Eric Wertman)
ACCTON EN1207D (Tomek W)
Re: ATI RADEON DOES *NOT* WORK WITH LINUX ("Frank")
Re: Step-by step to install Linux RH7 and Win98. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: first upgrade -2.4 from Mandrake, no more internet ("Brian Morrison")
Re: Kernel 2.4.0 & modules (Bob Martin)
SCSI + IDE drives ("Robert Morelli")
Installing across the network (Mark McWiggins)
Re: can't execute an executable file..... (FitzDean)
printcap:account name ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: 2.4 boot w/scsi issue on RH6.2 (David)
Re: Ethernet card setup (David)
Re: Line editor in bash (David)
Re: change partitioning for freeBSD install (drumvudu)
Re: Erratic Mouse Behaviour (=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen?= Simonsen)
Re: filesystem corruption (Eric)
Caldera versus Red Hat ("Robert Morelli")
Re: install win95 over linux (Graham Wilson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eric Wertman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Line editor in bash
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 00:12:40 -0500
All-
Could anyone tell me how to make vi the default line editor in bash?
set -o vi works great on the command line, but no matter where I put it
(be it /etc/profile, /etc/bashrc, or any of the config files in the user
home directory .bashrc, etc.. ) I can't make it take effect
automatically. There must be something simple that I am missing, but I
can't figure out what. Any help greatly appreciated. thanks!
Eric Wertman
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 06:49:07 +0100
From: Tomek W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ACCTON EN1207D
I have a problem with a ACCTON EN1207D network card because I have burn
a
bootrom for linux and now I don't know type EPROM which working with
this
card. Please help me.
Tomek
------------------------------
From: "Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati
Subject: Re: ATI RADEON DOES *NOT* WORK WITH LINUX
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 06:07:34 GMT
Eric..Your 2 statements alone got me on the floor tearing with laughter!
Windows is about as flexible as glass. It is a perfect name for its OS.
Linux on the other hand is my idea of flexible...You know OPEN SOURCE.
And besides flexibility...It is *VERY* stable.
Yes, It isn't for the weak hearted but if you are a manager, supervisor or
admin. boasting on windows over a unix-based system, chances are that you
don't have much of a skill. MCSEs are beginning to show up on subway
platforms holding cups with coins in it.
Microsoft's Software packages have enough "Patches" to have their very own
TV station assigned for it.
Ever wonder why Microsoft uses SunUnix for thier Email servers rather than
their very own EXCHANGE SERVERS! Hmmm
OS/2 was awesome and WARP...well that was down-right incredible. But like
you said about IBM's mistake....
Radeon for Games only? What are you kidding me? Its OpenGL kicks butt for
CAD and 3D Graphics apps. e.g (3D Max, Truespace, ProE, Blender3D, etc...)
The only good thing Microsoft has for the people is Employment. You
know...the guy whom sits next to the NT server and a phone waiting to hit
reboot when requested to.
Its funny how the bashers are always the ones whom are just naive. Kind of
like the MAC users. hehehe Just kidding guys/gals!
All in all, I will have to side with Eric against Bill's statement. Linux
is FAR more flexible than Windows and FAR more stable. Linux is also
supported by tons of Hardware Manufacturers. And if it isn't supported, the
millions of programmers out there on Linux will make sure it will be.
"Eric Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hhahahhhhhaahahaha... Windows has a monopoly because its flexible?! Not
> a chance. Windows has a monopoly because of intelligent marketing.
> Windows 3.1 was an absolute pile of you know what. OS/2 blew it away,
> yet because IBM couldn't market themselves out of a paper bag, and
> Microsoft knew how to market, 3.1 was far more popular.
>
> I suppose you think being an MCSE is a good thing too right?
>
>
> Eric
>
>
> In article <nLg66.16975$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > Alternatively forget Linux because its crap. The reason Microsoft has a
> > monopoly is basically because windows is flexable and doesnt require a
> > degree to use, where as Linux is unforgiving, unsupported and hideous.
> >
> > Q. why buy a radeon?
> > A. To play games.
> > Q. How many good games run on Linux?
> > A. About 3
> >
> > Ben
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:93bvkf$4fu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Please take note that ATI Radeon still doesn't work with the Linux OS.
I
> > > have tried the latest XFree86 and it still goes south after the
install.
> > > I am using Mandrake 7.2.
> > >
> > > Interestingly, Mandrake's install doesn't ask about the video card. It
> > > just silently sets it to something which works fine except for the
> > > horrible flicker. Any attempt to, then, fix that is a recipe for a
> > > crash. If you absolutely have to run Linux on a machine with Radeon
> > > plugged in, my suggestion: just put up with the flicker. Atleast it
> > > works and you can run your programs, etc.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Mark.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent via Deja.com
> > > http://www.deja.com/
> >
> >
> >
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Step-by step to install Linux RH7 and Win98.
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 06:04:05 GMT
yah sure, just make sure to install linux at last, it's all taken care
of by lilo.. i suggest RedHat7, it's easy install.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
gataway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But if i want to install more OS like win2000, winNT, can i still use
lilo?
>
> ID wrote:
>
> > 1= install win98
> > 2= install partitionmagic.. but do NOT install bootmagic.
> > 3=resize your existing partition with partitionmagic to create
ampty space
> > for linux. (min. 600mb. 2+GB is good idea)
> > do NOT need to create a partition, just an empty space for linux.
> >
> > than try to install RH7-linux, follow on-screen instructions, you
don't need
> > a boot manager, linux has its own bootmanager called "lilo" that
will take
> > care of your win98 too.
> >
> > good luck
> > ismet
> >
> > "gataway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I'm going to setup a new system with two ATA 100 harddisk, one
for win
> > > 98 the other for Linux RH7.I'm planning to have BootMAgic and
Partition
> > > Magic install .
> > > So which OS do i install first? And what partition is needed for
noth
> > > win98SE and Linux? Can i have and exmaple of how much space for
each
> > > partition? I will
> > > Install most of the application and games on win98SE ,as for
linux i am
> > > a newbie still
> > > need to explore more about it.Kindly give me a senerio on what to
do.
> > >
> > >
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Brian Morrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: first upgrade -2.4 from Mandrake, no more internet
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 23:09:07 +0100 (BST)
Reply-To: "Brian Morrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 09:30:18 -0000, Jason Dix wrote:
>I just upgraded to version 2.4 and my internet connection is
>now gone. Any idea what I did?
Look for ppp-2.4.0, this is needed for 2.4 kernels.
--
Brian Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to reply, change address from 'news' to 'bdm'
...Grim faced, cold as fishwife's fingers, he snatched from the wall
the sickle-sharp boar tusks he used for defacing Readers' Digest....
------------------------------
From: Bob Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.4.0 & modules
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:12:38 -0600
Zayin Krige wrote:
>
> when i make modules_install, it puts my modules in directories other than
> the normal /lib/modules/2.4.0
> also, modprobe is not pick up my parport.o and lp.o
>
> why??
>
Because it's changed, read the Changes file in
/usr/src/linux/Documentation. The modules directory layout
is different and you need modutils 2.4. The modules config
file is now modules.conf instead of conf.modules
--
Bob Martin
------------------------------
From: "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SCSI + IDE drives
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 23:26:57 -0700
I have a Red Hat 6.2 system that boots from a SCSI drive. I've recently
installed a 15 gig IDE (Ultra ATA) drive in the computer. The IDE drive is
connected to the primary IDE controller, at the master position on the
cable, and with its switch set to master.
1. I want to keep the SCSI drive as the boot drive and I'd like it to be
treated as drive 1.
2. Currently, I haven't let the BIOS setup program recognize the IDE
drive. (My impression is that it will make it harder to keep the SCSI
drive as drive 1 if I do so.)
3. I also have OS/2 installed on a partition on the SCSI drive, and I
use the OS/2 boot manager to boot the machine.
4. At the moment Linux recognizes the IDE drive as /dev/hda and the
SCSI as /dev/sda, but I can no longer boot off the linux partition. (I
have been booting off a rescue floppy.) When the OS/2 boot manager
transfers control to the linux partition, I just get a repeating pattern
01 01 01 01 01 ...
continuing indefinitely. When I run lilo I get the warning message:
Warning: /dev/sda8 is not on the first disk
5. OS/2 boots and recognizes the IDE drive as drive 2. I can control
which drive OS/2 treats as first by the order in which the IDE and SCSI
drivers are loaded.
My basic question is what is going wrong with linux and/or lilo, and
how can I get linux to boot again. More specifically,
Question A. What determines which drive linux and/or lilo considers drive 1?
Can I change it?
Question B. If I can't change which drive is drive 1, can I still boot linux
off the SCSI drive as drive 2? (Why can't lilo boot from drive 2?) The
lilo user's manual states,
``LILO's boot sector can only be booted from the first disk unless
some special boot manager is used.''
I can't really make sense of this statement.
Thanks,
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark McWiggins)
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.install
Subject: Installing across the network
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 06:40:01 GMT
I'd like to configure some Red Hat (or other) Linux systems with
not-very-standard NICs (Sis900) across the network.
Is there a way to do this? I don't see this driver in the menu when
booting from the Red Hat bootnet.img file, and actually haven't had
any luck with network installation since 5.2.
Any suggestions? Do I have to use an NE2000 or something?
I'm not transfixed on Red Hat; I'll use something else if I can do
this (install across the net) with less hassle.
Thanks much for any suggestions.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
425-369-8286
www.printcop.com
Printcop is a system for authenticating and billing
printer users.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FitzDean)
Date: 11 Jan 2001 06:44:50 GMT
Subject: Re: can't execute an executable file.....
>>What can be wrong? Why doesn't it execute?
>
> It has to be called explicitly, since it's probably not in your $PATH.
>You can do this by prepending "./" to the filename (ie: "./a.out"). It's a
>Unix anti-trojan security measure to prevent users from executing jobs that
>don't exist in the far more well-protected $PATH directories.
If $PATH doesn't solve it, make sure
the file is truely an executable. You
may have to do a chmod +x.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: printcap:account name
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 06:38:57 GMT
Hi,
I am able to print to the hp8100 printer fine but it does not
print the "account name" as the first page or last page. This RH
box is a print server for its own printing jobs. Other print servers
do print "account name" of each user. I read the man pages but not much
got out of it.
J
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2.4 boot w/scsi issue on RH6.2
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 07:25:01 GMT
mark kennett wrote:
>
> [root@home1 /boot]# mkinitrd /boot/initrd-2.4.0.img 2.4.0
> /sbin/mkinitrd: [: /lib/modules/2.4.0/./kernel/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx.o:
> binary operator expected
> error: -d option is not supported on Linux
> error: -d option is not supported on Linux
> Error creating temporaries. Try again
>
> Yes I have made and installed the modules. Any one have an idea what is
> going on? If I compile the low-level scsi support for my card into the
> kernel will it remove my problem? My compressed kernel file
> "vmlinuz-2.4.0" be getting to large, isn't the limit like 1 meg? Thanks
>
> Mark
I haven't upgraded to the 2.4 kernel yet but I always compile the
aic7xxx module and a few of the other modules into the 2.2.xx kernels
without any problems.
Did you try "cd"ing into the /boot directory and then try "mkinitrd"?
--
Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
Completed more W/U's than 98.992% of seti users. +/- 0.01%
------------------------------
From: David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ethernet card setup
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 07:27:21 GMT
"Kevin Davis�" wrote:
>
> I've got a Linksys LNE100TX Ethernet card that I am trying to set up.
> The card seems to show up in the Networking Control Panel applet as
> eth0 but I can't seem to get it to start with dhcp. I am of the
> understanding that the "tulip" driver needs to be associated with the
> device but I can't figure out where to go to to set this up. Any help
> is appreciated. I'm running Redhat 6.1
Edit /etc/conf.modules and add this line to it.
Then configure and restart the network.
alias eth0 tulip
--
Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
Completed more W/U's than 98.992% of seti users. +/- 0.01%
------------------------------
From: David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Line editor in bash
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 07:32:00 GMT
Eric Wertman wrote:
>
> All-
>
> Could anyone tell me how to make vi the default line editor in bash?
> set -o vi works great on the command line, but no matter where I put it
> (be it /etc/profile, /etc/bashrc, or any of the config files in the user
> home directory .bashrc, etc.. ) I can't make it take effect
> automatically. There must be something simple that I am missing, but I
> can't figure out what. Any help greatly appreciated. thanks!
If your trying to make it the default editor in X for the user. For
Gnome look in the Gnome configuration tool for a "Default editor"
choice. In Helix-Gnome it is under the "Document Handlers" section.
--
Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
Completed more W/U's than 98.992% of seti users. +/- 0.01%
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
From: drumvudu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: change partitioning for freeBSD install
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 08:02:18 GMT
you'll have no problem repartitioning without deleting you Fat32
partitions. Create a new partition on the drive, then install to that
partition. Install Lilo in the mbr and setup for dual boot :)
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I have a win98 machine that I want to dual boot with FreeBSD. Win98
> is installed on a 6GB drive. I have a 40GB secondary disk that
> currently has the following partitions:
>
> 1: PRI DOS 28.6 G FAT32
> 2: EXT DOS 10.4 G
> logical: 8.4 G FAT32
> logical: 2.0 G FAT32
>
> I'd like to install FreeBSD on this drive. Do I have to repartition
> so that the FreeBSD partition starts in the first 1024 cylinders? Or
> will I just be able to repartition the "EXT DOS" partition above?
>
> I guess I'm just trying to avoid having to backup 17 GB of stuff. I
> could make backups, if necessary, to CDs, but that would, in a word,
> suck.
>
>
"Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and
plain dealing"...Ralph Waldo Emerson
"It takes a wonderful brain and exquisite senses to produce a few
stupid ideas"...George Santayana
Confucious say "If you play in root,
eventually you will kill tree"
Linux: t h e c h o i c e o f a
G N U g e n e r a t i o n . . .
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:11:20 +0100
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen?= Simonsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Erratic Mouse Behaviour
Hello,
I think you forgot to specify the most important thing to specify:
your mouse type.
Does you have an ms-intelli-mouse?
Than you must set an entry in /etc/X11/XF86Config
(I have no Linux by the hand but I think the
parameter is
protocol=IMPS/2
brancht schrieb:
>
> I have problem with erratic mouse behavior with my freshly installed
> version of Mandrake 7.1 and 7.2.
> During the installation portion of Mandrake Linux the mouse works fine.
> There are no problems with mouse tracking on the screen or erratic
> behavior. However once the Linux system reboots with xFree86 system the
> problem with the mouse begins.
> The mouse works but the tracking is not always correct on the screen and
> programs called that are executed that were not called.
> I have tried Mandrake Linux distributions 7.1 with xFree86 version 3.3.6,
> and Mandrake Linux 7.2 with xFree86 versions 3.3.6, 4.0.0 and 4.0.1 with
> any success.
> I've also tried using different mouse(s) to correct the problem; two
> button, three button, and two button with scroll wheel still without any
> success.
>
> This PC is a dual OS with Windows ME The mouse(s) work proper with Windows
> ME.
>
> Does anyone have suggestions or have encountered this problem also?
> I will appreciate any feedback concerning this problems.
>
> PC Specs:
>
> ABIT A7 Motherboard
> ATI All In Wonder 128 (Rage 128) Video Card
> Maxtor 40.9 Gig HDD
> 256 MB Ram
> Soundblaster 16 PCI
> Zoom ISA Modem
> Athlon 750
>
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
--
Mit freundlichen Gr��en
J�rgen Simonsen
==============================================================
Softwareentwicklung | DAG, OWF-EDV-SWE | FON: 040-34915-394
| Joh.-Brahms-Platz 1 | FAX: 040-2880951-394
| D-20355 Hamburg | http://www.dag.de
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: filesystem corruption
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:26:41 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Is this a gotcha I should be aware of (and defend against)
> >
> > Yes, partition tables are monsters
> >
> <chomp>
> >
> > You should post the *full* output of `fdisk -l /dev/hdc`
> > I suspect that the problem is there, but as you stripped the important
> > stuff, I can't tell yet.
> >
> > very likely, hda4 has the wrong partition ID
> >
> > Eric
>
> Thanks for your quick response, Eric. Here's the full output:
>
> Disk /dev/hdc: 16 heads, 63 sectors, 38792 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 1008 * 512 bytes
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/hdc1 * 1 19 9544+ 83 Linux
> /dev/hdc2 20 3894 1953000 83 Linux
> /dev/hdc3 3895 7769 1953000 83 Linux
> /dev/hdc4 7770 18449 5382720 5 Extended
> /dev/hdc5 7770 8017 124960+ 82 Linux swap
> /dev/hdc6 8018 8265 124960+ 82 Linux swap
> /dev/hdc7 8266 12140 1952968+ 83 Linux
> /dev/hdc8 12141 12636 249952+ 83 Linux
> /dev/hdc9 12637 18449 2929720+ b Win95 FAT32
>
> Thanks for your help. G.
As I expected. hda4 has the wrong ID.
In your case it should be type 0x0F
(And most likely this is causing the problems you expierience)
BTW, this disc has really large values for the cylinders. This is due to
the low number
of heads defined (16 instead of 255). Probably this is setup wrong in
the BIOS.
If you ever plan to reinstall everything on this disc, it's a good idea
to change the
detection in the BIOS.
Eric
------------------------------
From: "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.caldera
Subject: Caldera versus Red Hat
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 01:29:21 -0700
I'd like to gather some opinions regarding the relative merits of
Caldera versus Red Hat.
My first plan was to make life simple by going with Red Hat,
which has the greatest mind share. After struggling with Red Hat
(and also Mandrake), I've come to doubt whether Red Hat will in
fact make my life simpler.
My personal experience so far is based on much less use of
Caldera than Red Hat. But so far, it looks to me like Caldera
is a more mature and reliable distribution than Red Hat. It also
strikes me as more intelligently assembled. I'd be very interested
in other people's comparisons.
Here are some points to clarify what I'm looking for:
1. Of paramount importance is reliability. Of course, the usual
propaganda is that Linux is a super-reliable system. I'm not
interested in hearing that BS. The reality I've experienced with
Red Hat and Mandrake is very different. Otherwise, I wouldn't
have any need for Caldera. I want to know the reality of Caldera,
whether it's just as bad, or perhaps not quite so.
2. One big plus for me in Red Hat was that it primarily supports
GNOME, on which I've settled. Unfortunately, Caldera seems
to be strongly behind KDE. Will I face many woes trying to run
GNOME on top of Caldera? Also, does Caldera plan to add
more GNOME support in the future?
3. Clearly, Red Hat is a much more popular distribution.
What is the situation with rpm's and compatibility generally?
If I go with Caldera will I end up wrestling with constant
compatibility problems? (By the way, what's the word on
the Linux Standards Base? Will we see it in our lifetime,
and if so will it make a real difference?)
4. Both Red Hat and Caldera claim to be geared towards
business users. I'm a developer and don't consider myself
a business user. On the other hand, I can't really think of
any functional difference between a business workstation
and a non-business workstation that matters to me.
However, there may be some differences in support policies.
Both Caldera and Red Hat seem to offer free installation
support, but only very expensive continuing technical support.
I'm interested in Red Hat's new Red Hat network idea. I
don't know too much about what it's doing right now, but
it seems to me it could potentially become an asset.
5. I mostly use the computer for (apart from writing) development
in Java and C/C++. I'm aware of the big controversy involving
gcc 2.96 and Red Hat 7.0 and the criticism Torvalds cast at RH. In
fact, I take Red Hat's side on that issue. Sadly, it looks like design
flaws in gcc, and linux itself, have left linux in a mess as a
development platform. I don't hold Red Hat responsible for flaws
in the design of gcc and linux.
If there's some other reason to avoid Red Hat 7.0 for
development, I'd be interested in hearing it.
Also, I want to be able to use a commercial alternative if I find
one I like (Borland?), so commercial support is potentially important.
I assume Red Hat might have some advantage here.
Any help appreciated,
------------------------------
From: Graham Wilson <graham01~[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: install win95 over linux
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:46:50 -0800
Markus Werle wrote:
>
> The worst case has come:
> A linux user (that's me) has to install windows 95
> on a disk containing linux.
>
> Situation:
> partition #1: linux (40MB)
> partition #2: linux (50MB)
> partition #3: free for win95 (5GB)
> rest : linux (a lot more GB)
>
> I have absolute low experience with products from
> braindead-m*cr*hard since the old times with win3.11,
> so I better ask before:
>
> Does anyone know whether windows 95 will
> let the linux partitions survive during install?
> (I am aware of the fact that lilo must be reinstalled
> after windows installation)
>
> Is there a secure way to force windows 95
> to take partition #3 as drive C: and ignore other
> partitions?
>
> linux-fdisk may do some of the job.
> Which partition type should be choosed?
> Or should I delete the partition completely
>
> Thanks for any hints,
>
> Markus
>
> P.S.: please do not discuss the reasons for installing
> win95 after so many years without trouble, but sometimes
> life is hard, and we must struggle on for some while ...
I'm sorry life has brought you to this pass. But if it has to be....
I would dearly love to ditch windog off my second disk so I could use it
for .wav files or something else of some value, but the school I go to
has NT for all the arts students (and alas, most of the CS students as
well) so I have to keep it so I can make sure my assignments will work
under the other os.
Anyway, to your problem. You should be able to use the DOS fdisk
command and simply tell partition 3 that it's a FAT32 partition. Then
format it using the DOS format command and it will be the only thing
that windog can see, so it will call it C:\. The commands should be on
the installation disk. I can't tell you what to do about booting, LILO
etc, because I took the easy way and boot my system with a floppy.
I'm pretty sure this is right, but if it isn't, it's sure to draw some
other advice ;) .
I believe adding the other os to a linux box is the easy direction to
move. Too bad you have to go that way. Good luck. G.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.setup.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Setup Digest
******************************
