On Sat, Sep 18, 2004 at 03:29:59PM -0700, Alvin Oga wrote:
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004, Robert Epprecht wrote:
Alvin Oga [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- /boot should NOT be a separate partition
That NOT true. The right line today is
/boot no longer needs to be a separate partition.
It
hi ya micha
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004, Micha Feigin wrote:
- /boot should NOT be a separate partition
That NOT true. The right line today is
/boot no longer needs to be a separate partition.
okay ... i'll bite ...
It used to be required due to bios limitations on the location
On Sat, Sep 18, 2004 at 07:42:53PM -0700, Matthew Jackson wrote:
Ok. I posted earlier about not being able to boot GRUB or LILO on my second
HD from the XP NTLDR. It gave me the error Unable to load from hard drive.
Please insert System disk and hit enter I though that was bootpart giving
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: Bootloader for Sarge
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 01:39:23PM -0700, Matthew Jackson wrote:
I just downloaded the weekly build for Sarge and burnt the first iso.
The install goes great but when asked to install GRUB, I decide
Matthew Jackson wrote:
I just downloaded the weekly build for Sarge and burnt the first iso.
The install goes great but when asked to install GRUB, I decide not to
install to the MBR so it asks me where to install it to. The reason is
I have XP on one hard disk and Linux on the other hard
Alvin Oga [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- /boot should NOT be a separate partition
Why? Please elaborate.
Robert Epprecht
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004, Robert Epprecht wrote:
Alvin Oga [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- /boot should NOT be a separate partition
Why? Please elaborate.
even if you can boot, you do NOT have a root fs ..
( /etc /bin /sbin /lib /dev ... )
you can always use a fd or cd or network to boot
I just downloaded the weekly build for Sarge and
burnt the first iso. The install goes great but when asked to install GRUB, I
decide not to install to the MBR so it asks me where to install it to. The
reason is I have XP on one hard disk and Linux on the other hard disk. the linux
hard
Matthew Jackson wrote:
I just downloaded the weekly build for Sarge and burnt the first iso.
The install goes great but when asked to install GRUB, I decide not to
install to the MBR so it asks me where to install it to. The reason is I
have XP on one hard disk and Linux on the other hard disk.
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 01:39:23PM -0700, Matthew Jackson wrote:
I just downloaded the weekly build for Sarge and burnt the first iso.
The install goes great but when asked to install GRUB, I decide not
to install to the MBR so it asks me where to install it to. The
reason is I have XP on one
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 04:24:17PM -0500, hugo vanwoerkom wrote:
Do you have 2 hard disks? The 1st must be hda and the second hdb. Why
hdc? Also it ought to be possible by this release of the installer to
use LILO. I always use LILO.
FYI, under Linux, for IDE drives,
hda = master on
Matthew Jackson wrote:
On it I have partitioned it into these:
/boot 250mb
/tmp 750mb
/var 1gb
/ 10gb
/usr 20gb
swap 1gb
/home remainder ~40gb
I think you might find that /boot is about 10 times larger than
necessary, and / is about 50 to 100 times what you need for a
workstation.
hth,
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 11:32:53PM -0500, Patrick Albuquerque wrote:
Matthew Jackson wrote:
On it I have partitioned it into these:
/boot 250mb
/tmp 750mb
/var 1gb
/ 10gb
/usr 20gb
swap 1gb
/home remainder ~40gb
I think you might find that /boot is about 10 times larger than
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004, William Ballard wrote:
I know what the reasons are for using seperate partitions,
but I just can't bother. Linux isn't Unix, it's closer to
being Windows than it is Unix. It's a crummy desktop O/S on
commodity Intel whiteboxes.
Just use one big giant / part and
14 matches
Mail list logo
