Professional Web Applications Themes

Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!! - Linux Setup, Configuration & Administration

Two days later, and I finally got Windows back... I think I'm gonna have to give up on this dual boot thing. Here's how it went: Since I had no cd-burner, I had to install what I could of Linux off of floppies. Before this I had Win ME, taking up most all of my space on my one HD. So time to repartition right? I tried to put Linux (Slackware) first, but Windows screamed bloody murder and refused to even see the disk, which was broken up into a large Linux type 83, a smaller swap type 82, then ...

  1. #1

    Default Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    Two days later, and I finally got Windows back... I think I'm gonna have
    to give up on this dual boot thing. Here's how it went:
    Since I had no cd-burner, I had to install what I could of Linux off of
    floppies. Before this I had Win ME, taking up most all of my space on my
    one HD. So time to repartition right? I tried to put Linux (Slackware)
    first, but Windows screamed bloody murder and refused to even see the
    disk, which was broken up into a large Linux type 83, a smaller swap
    type 82, then what ever was left went to Windows. Well that didn't work,
    so I tried to put Windows first, then Linux. Windows still wouldn't
    allow that, it wants ALL disk, all of it set FAT32 or 16 or whatever,
    and infact, if you don't later format all your drivers with Windows,
    like it or not, windows will simply quit and dump you at the dos prompt,
    no install.
    For some reason Linux's fdisk wouldn't actually write the info to the
    table. cfdisk would, but only if you access the whole thing as one big
    disk, not as serperate logical drives. Window's fdisk can't "see"
    partitions unless they are nice and clean dos/windows ones, but it can
    write the table, as long as it can see the partitions. So now I'm using
    both fdisk's, from linux and windows, and keep rebooting and trying
    various different things. In the process, the table got so over written
    that it was not even usable! I thought for sure that I had lost my HD
    for good, but linux was able to write it back as one big dos disk, so
    the windows could see it, and later format it. All. So, after almost 2
    days of straight install time, I'm back where I started, with Windows on
    the entire disk. I tried to keep just C: for win, then a primary Linux
    of D:, then a swap of E, (by dos's standards), which really was
    /dev/hde1, /dev/hde5, and /dev/hde6.
    Has anyone successfully setup a windows partition and a Linux one
    together with these two versions of OS's? I would ditch Windows, but i
    couldnt' do anything without it really, since the Slackware I finally
    did get installed only had a mini, basic system on it. Ritht now Im
    thinking that a dual-boot system is not going to happen for me. Should
    I try and put as much of the distro on a CD, since I can again burn
    cd's, then go back and repartition and reformat, wiping Windows off?
    Or maybe this is just bad idea all
    the way around, but I'm determined to have a working Linux system even
    if it kills me!

    -jay

    jayjwa Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    <linux/windows trouble>

    How did you repartition?
    What steps did you take(starting from an empty disk)?

    It should have been :

    partition HDD for windows and linux

    install windows in hda1 (in windows terms C:)

    ################################################## #################
    if your windows is an OEM version, it may ignore the partitiontable
    completely and occupy the entire disk. If so, use a FAT FS for windows
    and use parted (or Partition Magic if you have it) to resize the
    partition and the filesystem.

    Create the partitions for linux. Again only if needed as this should
    preferably be done before the first OS is installed.
    ################################################## #################

    install linux.

    Eric
    Eric Moors Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 00:29:42 -0600, jayjwa wrote:
    > Two days later, and I finally got Windows back... I think I'm gonna have
    > to give up on this dual boot thing. Here's how it went: Since I had no
    > cd-burner, I had to install what I could of Linux off of floppies.
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > Has anyone successfully setup a windows partition and a Linux one
    > together with these two versions of OS's?
    >
    Yes. Definitely.
    Here are some doents to study:
    [url]http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/mini/Install-Strategies/index.html[/url]
    [url]http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Linux+Win9x+Grub-HOWTO/index.html[/url]
    [url]http://www.gnu.org/manual/grub/html_node/DOS-Windows.html#DOS%2fWindows[/url]
    > Or maybe this is just bad idea all
    > the way around, but I'm determined to have a working Linux system even
    > if it kills me!
    >
    This was posted to you earlier, and is good advice:
    [url]http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=vh1lacpu7mva5a%40corp.supernews.com&rnum =1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Dvh1lacpu7mva5a%2540corp.supernews.com[/url]


    If you are committed to switching to Linux, then switch. Setting up a
    single boot Linux system is actually an easier first project than a dual
    boot system with Windows 98. Otherwise, the "degree of difficulty" can vary
    substantially from one user to the next and from one hardware setup to the next.
    If you want a dual boot system, follow the doented instructions to
    create one.

    --Douglas Mayne
    Douglas Mayne Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    Eric Moors wrote:
    > <linux/windows trouble>
    >
    > How did you repartition?
    > What steps did you take(starting from an empty disk)?
    I didn't really care about what was on the disk, so I just ended up
    putting Linux first, its swap after that, then last Windows, which would
    throw a fit and its fdisk was totally unusable at this point. I tried
    about any way you can think of: win 1st, linux 2nd, primary part's,
    logical part.s', any config at all. Really, I spent a good 6-7 hours
    just trying to get both of these guys to fit on one disk together. I've
    done win machines before, NT's, Macs, but Liux part is new, although I
    did my homework on how it sees HD's. On my sys, it is /dev/hde- new,
    clean. That I broke down (on one of many attempted config.'s) to
    /dev/hde1 : windows, so it wouldn't freak, then /dev/hde5 : Linux
    primary, /dev/hde6 : linux's swap. fdisk labeled these like this, and if
    you tried to write any other partition than /dev/hde (notice- no number
    after /hde) it would say it was writing and updating the table, but it
    never actually did it. There is a program called cfdisk which comes with
    this Linux too, it can cfdisk -P{r} /dev/hde, to show you the raw output
    of the partition table, and that was how I figured out that it had gone
    really wrong, as it had blanked over certain markers with zero's. A
    partition table has special markers in it that must be there for
    windows/dos to even think about looking at it (from my assembler
    programming days). Linux's fdisk isn't as picky, and if I didn't have
    this, I would be setting with a useless HD right now, (unless there's
    another fdisk that can do the same as Linux's).

    >
    > It should have been :
    >
    > partition HDD for windows and linux
    >
    > install windows in hda1 (in windows terms C:)
    You'd think it would be /dev/hda, but it's really /dev/hde, I posted
    back a few days about my little mini-Linux distro being able to r/w to
    it. /hda is invalid on this system. I learned that trying to install Debian.
    >
    > ################################################## #################
    > if your windows is an OEM version, it may ignore the partitiontable
    > completely and occupy the entire disk. If so, use a FAT FS for windows
    > and use parted (or Partition Magic if you have it) to resize the
    > partition and the filesystem.
    >
    Who knows what's in this box? I got it second hand (really, a good deal,
    because it was ahead of its time before, now just average) and have
    since replaced some stuff inside, and I've found a new case for it
    that'll let me fit my CD-RW in it (it kinda hangs out right now- had to
    do some plastic surgery to get it to fit) If you haven't guess yet,
    computers are mostly just fun and a hobby for me, I like to take them
    apart and fix them up, install new OS's and programs...so it's really no
    big loss if I spend a while trying to get Linux to run.

    -Jay
    > Create the partitions for linux. Again only if needed as this should
    > preferably be done before the first OS is installed.
    > ################################################## #################
    >
    > install linux.
    >
    > Eric
    jayjwa Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    Douglas Mayne wrote:
    > On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 00:29:42 -0600, jayjwa wrote:
    >>Has anyone successfully setup a windows partition and a Linux one
    >>together with these two versions of OS's?
    >>
    >
    > Yes. Definitely.
    > Here are some doents to study:
    > [url]http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/mini/Install-Strategies/index.html[/url]
    > [url]http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Linux+Win9x+Grub-HOWTO/index.html[/url]
    > [url]http://www.gnu.org/manual/grub/html_node/DOS-Windows.html#DOS%2fWindows[/url]
    I'm about ready for another go 'round with it, thanks I'll check those
    out. I was so tired from staying up all night trying to get these two OS
    to install that I fell asleep standing up, and then fell over like a
    dead tree!
    > This was posted to you earlier, and is good advice:
    > [url]http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=vh1lacpu7mva5a%40corp.supernews.com&rnum =1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Dvh1lacpu7mva5a%2540corp.supernews.com[/url]
    >
    >
    > If you are committed to switching to Linux, then switch. Setting up a
    > single boot Linux system is actually an easier first project than a dual
    > boot system with Windows 98. Otherwise, the "degree of difficulty" can vary
    > substantially from one user to the next and from one hardware setup to the next.
    > If you want a dual boot system, follow the doented instructions to
    > create one.
    >
    > --Douglas Mayne
    When I started this, I didn't have any mass-media to bring the Linux
    packages with me (RPM's to other linuxes, Slackware uses tarballs) once
    the internet connection was cut off, because a.) Linux wasn't able to
    access my CD, b.) I've got a winmodem, and I don't think I'm (or anyone
    for that matter) ready to set that thing up for Linux. I've seen the
    doentation for it, and it's terrible long and complex. All things
    considered, it would be easier to write a new driver for it from scratch...
    Dual boot was never an idea I was hip on, it was about the only way I
    could get Linux installed, because I needed windows to get the
    packs/setup stuff off the internet and pass them on to Linux. No one in
    my area even knows what Linux is, let along have disks for it.
    (Actually, there was one guy from a computer shop that said he'd burn
    Debian for me, but he never did. Thinking back now, he's the same guy
    that kept my WinNT machine for about a month because he refused to give
    me the boot floppy to install NT, the CD wasn't bootable, years and
    years ago...now I remember him :( ) The idea was, I'd wipe the disk,
    put Linux + swap first, then windows. Since I have about 7 floppys worth
    of Slackware Linux, I could setup a basic little system, then add to it
    to the point that I could evetually have linux take over the last
    windows part., so then Linux would have just had an extra space to work
    with.
    Keep in mind that this isn't a typical new install with a full set of
    ready-made Cd's on a factory-spec system. I can't get a box distro
    because most places want a credit card or account, neither one do I
    have, and I am the only person that uses Linux that I know on a
    face-to-face basis. But then to my credit, I don't rely on my machine
    for my job or livelyhood- it's just more for fun than anything else.
    Thanks for the links though, I'll see what they have, because every
    little bit helps, and I'll give this another try tonight. If I can get
    my CD visible to Linux, I'm good to go, as now I can burn CD's, so I can
    get all the packs that I need to make a nice system. The CD-RW is a LG
    Electronics, I didn't see it on the Linux compatability page...

    -Jay

    jayjwa Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    jayjwa wrote:
    I'll give this another try tonight. If I can get
    > my CD visible to Linux, I'm good to go, as now I can burn CD's, so I can
    > get all the packs that I need to make a nice system. The CD-RW is a LG
    > Electronics, I didn't see it on the Linux compatability page...
    >
    > -Jay
    >
    Yeah! I found a boot disk that is compatible with my CD drive! I'm all
    set now, I can take as much of the distro as I need. I'll most likely
    get X too.
    I hope I can get lucky with that modem I have too....

    jayjwa Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    >> <linux/windows trouble>
    >>
    >> How did you repartition?
    >> What steps did you take(starting from an empty disk)?
    >
    > I didn't really care about what was on the disk, so I just ended up
    > putting Linux first, its swap after that, then last Windows, which would
    > throw a fit and its fdisk was totally unusable at this point. I tried
    > about any way you can think of: win 1st, linux 2nd, primary part's,
    > logical part.s', any config at all. Really, I spent a good 6-7 hours
    > just trying to get both of these guys to fit on one disk together. I've
    > done win machines before, NT's, Macs, but Liux part is new, although I
    > did my homework on how it sees HD's. On my sys, it is /dev/hde- new,
    Okay, then it's on a external (PCI) IDE controller.
    > clean. That I broke down (on one of many attempted config.'s) to
    > /dev/hde1 : windows, so it wouldn't freak, then /dev/hde5 : Linux
    > primary, /dev/hde6 : linux's swap. fdisk labeled these like this, and if
    > you tried to write any other partition than /dev/hde (notice- no number
    You shouldn't write a table to any partition directly.
    The partition chain starts from the MBR.
    > after /hde) it would say it was writing and updating the table, but it
    Yes it did. If it writes it writes.
    > never actually did it. There is a program called cfdisk which comes with
    > this Linux too, it can cfdisk -P{r} /dev/hde, to show you the raw output
    > of the partition table, and that was how I figured out that it had gone
    > really wrong, as it had blanked over certain markers with zero's. A
    > partition table has special markers in it that must be there for
    > windows/dos to even think about looking at it (from my assembler
    > programming days). Linux's fdisk isn't as picky, and if I didn't have
    > this, I would be setting with a useless HD right now, (unless there's
    > another fdisk that can do the same as Linux's).
    Only the partitiontable endmarker 55AA is important
    >> ################################################## #################
    >> if your windows is an OEM version, it may ignore the partitiontable
    >> completely and occupy the entire disk. If so, use a FAT FS for windows
    >> and use parted (or Partition Magic if you have it) to resize the
    >> partition and the filesystem.
    >>
    > Who knows what's in this box? I got it second hand (really, a good deal,
    > because it was ahead of its time before, now just average) and have
    > since replaced some stuff inside, and I've found a new case for it
    > that'll let me fit my CD-RW in it (it kinda hangs out right now- had to
    > do some plastic surgery to get it to fit) If you haven't guess yet,
    > computers are mostly just fun and a hobby for me, I like to take them
    > apart and fix them up, install new OS's and programs...so it's really no
    > big loss if I spend a while trying to get Linux to run.
    >
    You did reinstall windows right?
    Did it ignore the partitiontable?
    If so, you will have to install windows first, shrink the partition and
    afterwards install linux.

    Go read a good intro on installing linux first. [url]www.tldp.org[/url] should
    get you started :-)

    Eric
    Eric Moors Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    Eric Moors wrote:
    >>><linux/windows trouble>
    >
    > You did reinstall windows right?
    > Did it ignore the partitiontable?
    > If so, you will have to install windows first, shrink the partition and
    > afterwards install linux.
    >
    > Go read a good intro on installing linux first. [url]www.tldp.org[/url] should
    > get you started :-)
    >
    > Eric
    Yeah, I've done lots of win installs- 3.1's, 95's,98's, ME's- the
    trouble is not really with Linux, it's getting both of the OS's to get
    on peacefully. Windows tries to look at areas of the table that it
    shouldn't, I mean, should it matter to windows what is on another
    partition that is not labeled as being for windows? For example, what I
    have now on this machine (the one that only 3 days ago I had whiped
    clean and had a basic Linux Slackware system on) is windows ME, first
    partition, I labeled as type 6, which is FAT16 (thought that Linux would
    be able to read it if it had to), there's 1gig there for windows.
    That's all I want windows to use!! But unless I type the extended (which
    would have been the Linux one) and all the logical as FAT16 ALSO,
    windows FDISK refuses to access the disk. That sounds like a load of
    crap to me, considering that not only can Linux'x FDISK & CFDISK see and
    work with many types of many OS's, but it can also create partition
    table values for other OS's too! In fact, when my MBR was totally
    zero'ed out (opps!), windows fdisk just screamed, then exitted. If I
    didn't have Linux's fdisk to change it back to FAT16, then I would have
    lost use of my HD, since it was perfectly acceptable to windows to just
    quit when the MBR looked un-Microsoft-ish. And at the time, I couldn't
    just change over all together to Linux, because I didn't have enough
    packages to install any more than a very basic install-system.
    Now I can use CD's, and I'm burning Linux's stuff little by little, and
    soon I'll have enough for a complete system! : P

    -Jay


    jayjwa Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    jayjwa <jayjwahotmail.com> wrote:
    > Eric Moors wrote:
    >> <linux/windows trouble>
    >>
    >> How did you repartition?
    >> What steps did you take(starting from an empty disk)?
    > I didn't really care about what was on the disk, so I just ended up
    > putting Linux first, its swap after that, then last Windows, which would
    > throw a fit and its fdisk was totally unusable at this point.
    Well that's why. Windows should always go first on a disk, for several
    reasons, one of them being that it doesn't care about other operating
    systems already present, and will overwrite the MBR during the install.

    One possibility is (with the linux second scenario)...
    force lba32 by putting "lba32" in the lilo conf.
    That gets rid of the cylinder limit (if the hardware can handle it)
    Oh, and just to be safe, the best order is

    windows
    linux /boot
    linux /
    (other linux parts to taste, like /home /usr and /var)
    linux swap
    spike1@freenet.co.uk Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    Jeremy Whiting wrote:
    > The trick to getting linux on for the first time is to first install
    > windows with only part of the drive (I use about half, because
    > linux can still put stuff on the windows part, windows just cant
    > put stuff on the linux part.)
    >
    > Then after windows is working with only part of the harddrive, install
    > linux on the rest, use fdisk in windows to set up windows partition
    > and use linux install methods to set up linux partitions.
    > P.S. if this is your first Linux install by yourself, I would
    > seriously recommend starting with redhat, or mandrake, or even suse
    > rather than Slakware. It has a reputation for being less user
    > friendly to install.
    I got lucky today, both Linux and win are getting alone, and I even got
    Lilo to settle in so I don't have to use a floppy boot to get at Linux,
    which is just more convinient. I installed everything I'll need
    (hopefully) lastnight. It installed so fast I thought it wasn't working,
    I'm used to windows grinding the disk for 20 minutes first before
    launching 5 pop-up's, but this morning when I booted it, it was still
    there. Now I need to learn all the basics. I see that lots of programs
    need libraries to work correctly (or at all). I have the right library,
    it just seems like the program's no finding the location of it. In
    windows/dos I'd say it wasn't in the Path, does Linux have this too? I
    think it has a path environment variable, but I'm not sure where or how
    to set it...

    jayjwa Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    jayjwa <jayjwahotmail.com> wrote:
    > there. Now I need to learn all the basics. I see that lots of programs
    No you don't so see. You are not underrstanding what you are seeing.
    > need libraries to work correctly (or at all). I have the right library,
    No you don't.
    > it just seems like the program's no finding the location of it. In
    No, that is not it.
    > windows/dos I'd say it wasn't in the Path, does Linux have this too? I
    Yes, there is a path, and a load library path, and a link library path,
    etc.
    > think it has a path environment variable, but I'm not sure where or how
    > to set it...
    Then become sure. And start by stopping thinking you know what you are
    doing. You don't. You don't even know whether you are installing or
    compiling.

    If you are installing, then

    you are installing stuff that is NOT FOR YOU!

    If you are compiling, then

    you don't have development support installed!

    So please stop it. Just stop it. It's annoying.

    Start by installing the stuff from the cd that you need. Your distro
    has everything you need. You do not go elsewhere or need to go
    elsewhere for anything. A distros job is precisely to prepare
    installation packages for you. That is FOR YOU. And use the right tool
    to do so.


    Peter
    Peter T. Breuer Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    Peter T. Breuer shot back with:
    > jayjwa <jayjwahotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>there. Now I need to learn all the basics. I see that lots of programs
    >
    >
    > No you don't so see. You are not underrstanding what you are seeing.
    >
    >
    >>need libraries to work correctly (or at all). I have the right library,
    >
    >
    > No you don't.
    Wrong, buddy, I program myself.
    >
    >
    >>it just seems like the program's no finding the location of it. In
    >
    >
    > No, that is not it.

    Yes, it was, I set the path correctly, now it works.
    >
    >
    >>windows/dos I'd say it wasn't in the Path, does Linux have this too? I
    >
    >
    > Yes, there is a path, and a load library path, and a link library path,
    > etc.
    >
    >
    >>think it has a path environment variable, but I'm not sure where or how
    >>to set it...
    >
    >
    > Then become sure. And start by stopping thinking you know what you are
    > doing. You don't. You don't even know whether you are installing or
    > compiling.
    Sure, and that's why I came here to ask a question, like all the other
    people, and all I've gotten so far are negative responses....
    >
    > If you are installing, then
    >
    > you are installing stuff that is NOT FOR YOU!
    >
    > If you are compiling, then
    >
    > you don't have development support installed!
    >
    > So please stop it. Just stop it. It's annoying.
    No, people that think they are better that everyone else just because
    they bought a candy-coated Redhat distro off the "official" site for
    $$$, (I saw that today, I was appalled...) and it installs itself are
    annoying!
    >
    > Start by installing the stuff from the cd that you need. Your distro
    > has everything you need. You do not go elsewhere or need to go
    > elsewhere for anything. A distros job is precisely to prepare
    > installation packages for you. That is FOR YOU. And use the right tool
    > to do so.
    Yes, correct, and it's VI, the vast majority of stuff is setup thru
    editing config files....

    Jay
    >
    >
    > Peter
    jayjwa Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Fun with Partition Tables and Zero's!!!

    jayjwa <jayjwahotmail.com> wrote:
    > Peter T. Breuer shot back with:
    >> jayjwa <jayjwahotmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>there. Now I need to learn all the basics. I see that lots of programs
    >> No you don't so see. You are not understanding what you are seeing.
    >>
    >>>need libraries to work correctly (or at all). I have the right library,
    >>
    >> No you don't.
    > Wrong, buddy, I program myself.
    Tough. What you have likely done is confuse several different sorts of
    path. Most probably. If you program, then provide correct debugging
    information - not the dross you served up, which was typical luserdom.
    I guessed. If the guess is wrong it's because you made me guess instead
    of providing info that I could use for a diagnosis.
    >>>it just seems like the program's no finding the location of it. In
    >>
    >> No, that is not it.
    > Yes, it was, I set the path correctly, now it works.
    No, it does not. Changing your path cannot fix library problems,
    because libraries are not looked up via the path.
    >>>windows/dos I'd say it wasn't in the Path, does Linux have this too? I
    >> Yes, there is a path, and a load library path, and a link library path,
    >> etc.
    Library directories are configured in ld.so.conf, and may be
    additionally specified in LD_LIBRARY_PATH, not PATH.
    >>>think it has a path environment variable, but I'm not sure where or how
    >>>to set it...
    >>
    >> Then become sure. And start by stopping thinking you know what you are
    >> doing. You don't. You don't even know whether you are installing or
    >> compiling.
    > Sure, and that's why I came here to ask a question, like all the other
    Oh - then you can act a bit more like you are interested in learning.
    > people, and all I've gotten so far are negative responses....
    >>
    >> If you are installing, then
    >>
    >> you are installing stuff that is NOT FOR YOU!
    >>
    >> If you are compiling, then
    >>
    >> you don't have development support installed!
    >>
    >> So please stop it. Just stop it. It's annoying.
    > No, people that think they are better that everyone else just because
    > they bought a candy-coated Redhat distro off the "official" site for
    > $$$, (I saw that today, I was appalled...) and it installs itself are
    > annoying!
    Eh? Yes, they're annoying. Also messing up a debugging report is
    annoying. Heck, being annoying is annoying.

    >> Start by installing the stuff from the cd that you need. Your distro
    >> has everything you need. You do not go elsewhere or need to go
    >> elsewhere for anything. A distros job is precisely to prepare
    >> installation packages for you. That is FOR YOU. And use the right tool
    >> to do so.
    > Yes, correct, and it's VI, the vast majority of stuff is setup thru
    > editing config files....
    Peter
    Peter T. Breuer Guest

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 20th, 10:07 AM
  2. backing up partition tables
    By Florian von Savigny in forum Linux / Unix Administration
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: July 18th, 12:34 AM
  3. Expand Partition
    By Joe Sorenson in forum Windows Server
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 9th, 06:40 PM
  4. reading an ufs partition
    By mess-mate in forum Debian
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 1st, 12:40 PM
  5. Partition problem
    By in forum Sun Solaris
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 30th, 10:14 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139