> I figured since I had the software and the full overpriced M$ > > certification books/ training courses, I might as well. > > I'm impressed that you managed to do this without a drive cable. :) > Seriously, if you could install NT, why not install Linux? Not like the > hardware requirements are harder. *sniff*
I only have a SCSI cable with 2 drops right now. I only have the Maxtor and CDrom running currently. I knew that when the 6 drop cable came in, I could simply attach the other drives and NT would recognize them and run. I was not confident doing this with Linux. I figured I had better wait until I got the box fully functional before attempting a linux install. > > > Anyway, I now have the crazy idea that I want to leave NT installed and > have > > the machine choose it's OS on boot. (Like I won't already have enough to > > learn w/ linux). > > Dammit Neo, ONE pill. Pick ONE pill! If the machine had it's way, it would > prefer Linux. :) I just want to know which you'll have boot by default. Which ever one is running properly. :) This box was originally an NT server at one point so I knew resource wise it was capable. I don't really need the box to be fast just work so I can learn. FYI, The NT install went smooth but I still don't have the networking going. NT keeps telling me that the Linksys DHCP server won't give it an IP. I think the Linksys is scared of letting it on the net ;-). We see if I get a chance to read up in the networking essential book before the SCSI cable gets here. > I > know it's possible to dual-boot Linux & NT. I installed RedHat on > my laptop > as a test before attempting Debian (nice to see the X config > working once), > and it detected my Windows 2K install and configured LILO to allow me to > select either one. That is cool. I also remember reading something like "if you know you are going to dual boot you should install windoz first. LILO will respect the windoz partition but windoz will try to wipe out lilo." > > > I also want to have my 2 segate file storage drives > accessible/readable by > > either OS. > > OK, that's going to be trickier. Using NT, you'll typically want to use > NTFS. However, Linux support for read-write access on NTFS is currently > experimental (and not too stable from what I recall). Read-only support > works well. Bummer. I was really hoping you would tell me Linux could handle NTFS. This may change my dual boot plans. > > You could do something perverse like format them using FAT (does > NT support > FAT32? I don't recall) that would allow read-write access from both. No it does not. Fat 16 or NTFS only. Fat 16 would be a huge waste of space. > > > If you remember, I have one 2gig maxtor SCSI and two 9 gig > > Segate SCSIs for storage. I figure if the 2 segate's are accessible by > > either OS, If I trash one OS I can still get to my files via the other. > Is > > this possible? > > Yes, it's definitely possible IF you select a filesystem both can > understand. FAT may fit the bill, but it has it's annoyances on either OS. > *gag* So much for RAID, eh? :) All the raid I was planning on was striping for speed and to join the drives. I believe you said I could join the drives to one mount point with LN? If so, I don't really need the raid. Yes, improved speed would be nice, but it's not like the drives will be taking hits from lots of users at once. I will have to think about it some more. Especially since fat 16 looks like my only choice of common ground. It might not be worth the hassle. > > > Does it take some special distro or package? Will everyone > > cast me away for some kind of sacrilege ;-)? > > No, but we reserve the right to snicker when it begins to crawl > when running > NT. :) Fair enough :) John To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message. Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies. More info can be found at; http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
