> Dan Treacy wrote:
>
> Firstly does anyone know of any good resources for info on Win2k/linux
> multibooting. I have a few but most aren't that great. Just wondering if
> there were some that I missed.
SLUG is a pretty good resource... ;)
My preference is to ignore the OS-specific boot loaders (the NT loader and
LILO) and use GAG. The author's page is http://raster.cibermillennium.com/
but it doesn't seem to be up at the moment.
Tell LILO to store itself the *partition* boot record instead of the master
boot record (hda1 as opposed to hda), and when you install Win2K (NT, Win98,
whatever), put your GAG setup onto a floppy (you can do this within the
software very easily) and *hide every other partition*. NT has a habit of
taking over everything and turning it all to mush in my experience. ;)
If your hard drive ever looks like mush and you can't seem to fix it at all,
try out Lost & Found from PowerQuest. Tres cool, and it has saved my bacon a
few times. From memory it only supports the Microsoftian partition types.
> Just quickly are there any main/radical difference that one should be
> aware of, traps for the unwary coming from the other distros etc..
Aye. You know how to make me bite...
Debian's a cinch. The main differences are package management, init scripts
and network configuration stuff.
Package management: So good that RPM-based distros seem labotomised once
you've used it. Some people say it's hard to get used to, but I don't really
understand that argument. You learn about four commands (apt-get install,
apt-get remove, apt-cache search and as much of dpkg as you need) and you're
set. You'll never need to fossick for RPMs or fight Freshmeat again
(although it's always good finding about new stuff).
Configuration: You know that song "Bye, Bye Love"?
Bye bye, crud,
Bye bye sysconfig,
Hello Debian,
I'll never go back again... (where did that come from?!?)
It's different, but very nice. I've been told that it's similar to Solaris,
but I can't confirm that.
> And the second is about 2.1/2.2 what's the general consensus on which to
> use at present. My intial impression was 2.2 but I imagine some of the
> Debian gurus out there might be able to shed a little more light.
I'm not a guru, but I can heartily recommend potato (2.2). Of course, woody
makes for a much better desktop. woody is referred to as "unstable", but
many people misunderstand this terminology. It doesn't mean your software is
unstable, nor does it mean the way your software works is unstable...
It means the distribution is unstable. For instance, for a number of weeks
last month, I couldn't install the new OpenSSL package because other
software that relied on it hadn't been updated as well. Rather than
installing it and breaking my OS, it was "held back", safely letting me
continue with my software.
I've only downloaded *one* broken package without fair warning; the php4 xml
module. Fine by me! :)
Why does woody make for a better desktop? You can install Helix GNOME!
> Finally. I've been given the exultant task of designing and implementing
> the ritual scarring for the peguinillas at the Installfest.
I reckon rub on tattoos would be cool. Find out if you can print these!
They'd be way fun on the day. If you find out, I'm sure we can fund them one
way or another.
- Jeff
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------- http://linux.org.au/installfest/
http://linux.conf.au/
I am Jack's implicit trust of ActiveX & VBScript. http://slug.org.au/
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
