Professional Web Applications Themes

paritioning for linux and windows on same drive - Linux Setup, Configuration & Administration

Hello, I want to split up a drive for use with linux and windows. I've done this before by mixing paritioning tools (winme fdisk, system commander and linux fdisk) I've had random problems with corrupted data for about the last year both in linux and in windows. Usually after copying a lot of files, or installing a large game. I've been told it's due to mixing partitioning tools. What's everyone else using to partition for a dual-boot setup? I obviously would like to spend more time using the system than restoring from backup. :/ thanks bl8n8r...

  1. #1

    Default paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Hello,
    I want to split up a drive for use with
    linux and windows. I've done this before
    by mixing paritioning tools
    (winme fdisk, system commander and linux fdisk)

    I've had random problems with corrupted data for
    about the last year both in linux and in windows.
    Usually after copying a lot of files, or installing
    a large game. I've been told it's due to mixing
    partitioning tools.

    What's everyone else using to partition for a
    dual-boot setup? I obviously would like to spend
    more time using the system than restoring from
    backup. :/

    thanks
    bl8n8r
    bad_knee Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    bad_knee wrote:
    > I want to split up a drive for use with
    > linux and windows. I've done this before
    > by mixing paritioning tools
    > (winme fdisk, system commander and linux fdisk)
    >
    > I've had random problems with corrupted data for
    > about the last year both in linux and in windows.
    > Usually after copying a lot of files, or installing
    > a large game. I've been told it's due to mixing
    > partitioning tools.
    There is a very good program testdisk
    which checks your partition-table,
    and corrects it if necessary.
    Though I think it is a little unlikely
    that your problems _are_ due to partitioning errors --
    I think fdisk for example would see any such errors at once.

    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: [email]timbirdsnest.maths.tcd.ie[/email]
    tel: +353-86-233 6090
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
    Timothy Murphy Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    On 22 Sep 2003 10:03:09 -0700, bad_knee <bl8n8r> wrote:
    > Hello,
    > I want to split up a drive for use with
    > linux and windows. I've done this before
    > by mixing paritioning tools
    > (winme fdisk, system commander and linux fdisk)
    >
    > I've had random problems with corrupted data for
    > about the last year both in linux and in windows.
    > Usually after copying a lot of files, or installing
    > a large game. I've been told it's due to mixing
    > partitioning tools.
    >
    I just got mine redone with dos622, 98se, w2k, and Debian.
    (Well Debian's partitions I did using fdisk and inputting the
    sectors as I had them before, and editing my /etc/fstab.)

    But I used 622's fdisk for the first 32M fat16. I then used
    Debian to make a partition ~8G for FreeBSD, then 98 to make
    the extended partition, an ~1G logical for 98, and used w2k
    to create the NTFS.

    One thing to remember is that if you format a 64M partition
    in dos, then resize it to 32M, and format it again, depending
    on the tools you used you'll get a 64M disk which dos will
    happily use. I don't know if that has ever been fixed, but
    format only checks the partition table if the format is
    invalid. Which leads to the note in man fdisk to the effect
    of when resizing dos partitions use dd to blank the beginning
    of the partition. such as:

    dd if=/dev/null of=/dev/hda1 bs=512 count=2

    That's from memory, check it before you use it.

    Michael C.
    --
    [email]mcsuper5usol.com[/email] [url]http://mcsuper5.freeshell.org/[/url]
    Registered Linux User #303915 [url]http://counter.li.org/[/url]


    Michael C. Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    com (bad_knee) wrote in message news:<google.com>... 


    Well I bought a new WD 80 gig drive last week and partitions are
    as attatched. I created the partitions using diskdrake only.
    Yesterday - after C&C Generals blew up - I ran norton disk doctor
    and it had a problem reading from the D: drive (hda6 I guess).
    Scandisk still complains it cannot read from the last cluster of
    the D: drive.

    I think Linux must be putting something in the partition table
    that windows doesnt like, or vice versa. Someone also mentioned
    something about separating the Windows and Linux parittions with
    small FAT16 partitions. I have no idea why.

    Anyone have any ideas why I get these errors?
    Maybe my parititoning scheme is too complex..hmmm

    Thanks,
    bl8n8r


    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Disk /dev/hda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes
    255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders
    Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

    Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
    /dev/hda1 * 1 101 811251 6 FAT16
    /dev/hda2 102 9729 77336910 5 Extended
    /dev/hda5 * 102 126 200781 83 Linux
    /dev/hda6 127 3950 30716248+ b Win95 FAT32
    /dev/hda7 3951 4013 506016 83 Linux
    /dev/hda8 4014 4102 714861 83 Linux
    /dev/hda9 4103 4203 811251 83 Linux
    /dev/hda10 4204 4712 4088511 83 Linux
    /dev/hda11 4713 4966 2040223+ 83 Linux
    /dev/hda12 4967 9619 37375191 83 Linux
    /dev/hda13 9620 9729 883543+ 82 Linux swap

    Command (m for help):
    bad_knee Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    bad_knee on Friday 03 October 2003 12:01 wrote:
     
    >
    >
    > Well I bought a new WD 80 gig drive last week and partitions are
    > as attatched. I created the partitions using diskdrake only.
    > Yesterday - after C&C Generals blew up - I ran norton disk doctor
    > and it had a problem reading from the D: drive (hda6 I guess).
    > Scandisk still complains it cannot read from the last cluster of
    > the D: drive.
    >
    > I think Linux must be putting something in the partition table
    > that windows doesnt like, or vice versa. Someone also mentioned
    > something about separating the Windows and Linux parittions with
    > small FAT16 partitions. I have no idea why.
    >
    > Anyone have any ideas why I get these errors?
    > Maybe my parititoning scheme is too complex..hmmm
    >
    > Thanks,
    > bl8n8r
    >
    >
    > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    > - Disk /dev/hda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes
    > 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders
    > Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
    >
    > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
    > /dev/hda1 * 1 101 811251 6 FAT16
    > /dev/hda2 102 9729 77336910 5 Extended
    > /dev/hda5 * 102 126 200781 83 Linux
    > /dev/hda6 127 3950 30716248+ b Win95 FAT32
    > /dev/hda7 3951 4013 506016 83 Linux
    > /dev/hda8 4014 4102 714861 83 Linux
    > /dev/hda9 4103 4203 811251 83 Linux
    > /dev/hda10 4204 4712 4088511 83 Linux
    > /dev/hda11 4713 4966 2040223+ 83 Linux
    > /dev/hda12 4967 9619 37375191 83 Linux
    > /dev/hda13 9620 9729 883543+ 82 Linux swap[/ref]

    Yes, things are a little messed up. First, what's with that FAT16
    partition? What's it used for?

    Secondly, you should only have one partition set bootable. If you
    have more than one, it confuses Windows.

    Thirdly, your Extended partition should have an 85 ID, Linux Extended.
    (5 is a DOS Extended.)

    Fourth, your Win95 partition should be the 1st Primary partition, that
    is C: or in Linux /dev/hda1, on the drive to boot Windows properly.
    Set it bootable. (You CAN have it some other partition, but why
    complicate things? All Windows OSs LIKE to be on the first, Primary
    partition of the first Master drive.)

    Fifth, try to put your SWAP partition as close to the physical
    beginning of the drive as possible. This improves access times.

    If I were doing this, here's how I'd partition things (Linux
    designations):

    /dev/hda1 Main Windows System -- bootable
    /dev/hda2 Windows Partition -- FAT32 (shared Windows/Linux)
    /dev/hda3 Linux Extended -- ID 85
    /dev/hda5 Linux Swap
    /dev/hda6, etc. The rest of your Linux partitions.

    You don't have to partition all the Extended space. I like to leave
    empty, unpartitioned space in it for future expansions.

    I would use Windows fdisk to partition Windows partitions, and Linux
    fdisk (or similar) to partition the Linux parts. Theoretically,
    Linux fdisk, cfdisk, diskdrake, etc. should be able to do it all, but
    I've found through experience that theory doesn't always work.

    Install Linux last, so that it can set up your dual boot system.


    --
    Stefan Patric
    com
    Stefan Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Stefan Patric wrote:
     
    >
    > Yes, things are a little messed up. First, what's with that FAT16
    > partition? What's it used for?
    >
    > Secondly, you should only have one partition set bootable. If you
    > have more than one, it confuses Windows.
    >
    > Thirdly, your Extended partition should have an 85 ID, Linux Extended.
    > (5 is a DOS Extended.)
    >
    > Fourth, your Win95 partition should be the 1st Primary partition, that
    > is C: or in Linux /dev/hda1, on the drive to boot Windows properly.
    > Set it bootable. (You CAN have it some other partition, but why
    > complicate things? All Windows OSs LIKE to be on the first, Primary
    > partition of the first Master drive.)
    >
    > Fifth, try to put your SWAP partition as close to the physical
    > beginning of the drive as possible. This improves access times.
    >
    > If I were doing this, here's how I'd partition things (Linux
    > designations):
    >
    > /dev/hda1 Main Windows System -- bootable
    > /dev/hda2 Windows Partition -- FAT32 (shared Windows/Linux)
    > /dev/hda3 Linux Extended -- ID 85
    > /dev/hda5 Linux Swap
    > /dev/hda6, etc. The rest of your Linux partitions.
    >
    > You don't have to partition all the Extended space. I like to leave
    > empty, unpartitioned space in it for future expansions.
    >
    > I would use Windows fdisk to partition Windows partitions, and Linux
    > fdisk (or similar) to partition the Linux parts. Theoretically,
    > Linux fdisk, cfdisk, diskdrake, etc. should be able to do it all, but
    > I've found through experience that theory doesn't always work.[/ref]

    I agree with most of your advice --
    though I doubt if what you say about the swap partition is true,
    do you have any evidence that the access to earlier partitions is faster?
    I don't recall ever seeing this advice before.

    However, I assume the poster chose this partitioning
    because he wanted to bring the linux boot partition
    within the first 1024 cylinders, as often advised,
    but at the same time wanted a large Windows partition.
    (I know it is not usually necessary to bring Linux /boot
    within the first 1024 cylinders with modern BIOSes.)

    I'm interested to know if it is actually possible
    to set up Windows-2000 or Windows-XP on an extended partition in this way?
    More precisely, is it possible to do this using Windows or DOS fdisk. etc?
    My recollection is that DOS fdisk would not even look at my 120GB disk,
    while Windows insisted on being installed on the first primary partition.
    (I don't recall being asked if I wanted any other choice.)
    Admittedly this is on a rather old Pentium II which I use for archiving.

    So could one eg make a small /boot partition on /dev/hda1,
    using Linux fdisk,
    and then install Windows on a large /dev/hda2, using Windows fdisk?

    I haven't seen a HOWTO or other site
    that dealt with matters like this in an authoritative way.





    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: maths.tcd.ie
    tel: +353-86-233 6090
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
    Timothy Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Timothy Murphy <maths.tcd.ie> wrote: 

    He doesn't need evidence - it's simply a fact that cylinder zero is on
    the outside of the disk, and the outside rotates faster. This may be
    partially compensated or obscured by lower data density there, and
    by internal disk remapping, but in general it will be true. Try it with
    bonnie of hdparm -tT on different partions.
     
     

    It is.
     

    It can be put most anywhere, no matter what it tries to insist on.

    Peter
    Peter Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Peter T. Breuer wrote:
     
    >
    > He doesn't need evidence - it's simply a fact that cylinder zero is on
    > the outside of the disk, and the outside rotates faster. This may be
    > partially compensated or obscured by lower data density there, and
    > by internal disk remapping, but in general it will be true. Try it with
    > bonnie of hdparm -tT on different partions.[/ref]

    I did test access times on my 120GB disk before I posted the above comment,
    and I found no consistent difference between partitions.

    Do you have evidence (you do need evidence for assertions like this)
    to support your belief?
    Did _you_ actually try what you recommend?
    If so perhaps you could post your figures
    showing the difference in access times between partitions.

    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: maths.tcd.ie
    tel: +353-86-233 6090
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
    Timothy Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Peter T. Breuer wrote:
     
    >
    > It is.[/ref]

    Unfortunately you are not an oracle.
    I have read people who claim the exact opposite.
    Do you have Windows-2000 or XP installed on an extended partition?
    If so, how exactly did you install it there?
     
    >
    > It can be put most anywhere, no matter what it tries to insist on.[/ref]

    Do you have some way of ordering Windows to do what you want,
    even if it doesn't give you the option?
    Please share your technique with us less-gifted people.


    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: maths.tcd.ie
    tel: +353-86-233 6090
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
    Timothy Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Timothy Murphy <maths.tcd.ie> wrote: 
     
    > >
    > > He doesn't need evidence - it's simply a fact that cylinder zero is on
    > > the outside of the disk, and the outside rotates faster. This may be
    > > partially compensated or obscured by lower data density there, and
    > > by internal disk remapping, but in general it will be true. Try it with
    > > bonnie of hdparm -tT on different partions.[/ref][/ref]
     

    Then you are alone.

    /dev/hda1:
    Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.23 seconds =104.07 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 6.48 seconds = 9.88 MB/sec

    /dev/hda15:
    Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.18 seconds =108.47 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 4.35 seconds = 14.71 MB/sec

    W0nd3rfu1. My laptop disk is upside down. I'll quote the Partition
    HOWTO at you:


    3.3. Where should I put my swap space?


    <B7> Older disks have the same number of sectors on all tracks.
    With this disks it will be fastest to put your swap in the middle of
    the disks, assuming that your disk head will move from a random
    track towards the swap area.

    <B7> Newer disks use ZBR (zone bit recording). They have more
    sectors on the outer tracks. With a constant number of rpms, this
    yields a far greater performance on the outer tracks than on the
    inner ones. Put your swap on the fast tracks.

    Etc.
     

    Yep. As well as a head on my shoulders.
     

    Yep.
     

    No. I refuse. You post yours.

    Peter
    Peter Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Timothy Murphy <maths.tcd.ie> wrote: 
     
    > >
    > > It is.[/ref][/ref]
     

    It was installed that way here for years. I don't know if any of the old
    P100s are still around to show you, however. I seem to recall that one
    needed one primary partition for windows somewhere, but that it could be
    shared between many copies of windows, including some based on extended
    partitions.

    Perhaps you are confused becuase you do not realise that you can install
    windows on two partitions?
     
    > >
    > > It can be put most anywhere, no matter what it tries to insist on.[/ref][/ref]
     

    I used to. This is the 95-98 era we are talking about.
     

    It's not mine. I am merely reporting the way windows WAS set up. The
    techs did it. I avoid windows like the plague myself. I merely know
    that it was so because the two windows installs were on the same disk as
    the slackware install.

    I remember finding out from that install that whichever windows used as
    the boot partition it called "C:".

    Peter
    Peter Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    > Disk /dev/hda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes 

    This is BAD.
    hda2 has the wrong type. (Should be 0x0F)
    hda6 should probably also be changed, but that's less of
    a problem. I would advise to change it to 0x0C

    Not all windows will read this table properly.
    Not sure about XP, but most certainly older windows would
    corrupt your filesystems.

    The preferred option is to backup, repartition and reinstall.
    You can change the partition IDs on this system, but I can't tell
    how much data (or which data) has been corrupted.

    Eric
    Eric Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Eric Moors wrote:
     
    >
    > This is BAD.
    > hda2 has the wrong type. (Should be 0x0F)
    > hda6 should probably also be changed, but that's less of
    > a problem. I would advise to change it to 0x0C
    >
    > Not all windows will read this table properly.
    > Not sure about XP, but most certainly older windows would
    > corrupt your filesystems.[/ref]

    Are you sure this statement about hda2 is true?
    I've had Windows and DOS partitions on an extended partition
    created with Linux fdisk,
    and I have never had any problems on this score.

    (I should add that I always give the main Windows partition
    the first primary partition -- but that is a different issue.)

    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
    (all email over 80k dispatched to /dev/null)
    tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
    Timothy Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    >>> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System [/ref][/ref]
    <snip> [/ref][/ref]
    <snip>
     
    >
    > Are you sure this statement about hda2 is true? I've had Windows and DOS
    > partitions on an extended partition created with Linux fdisk, and I have
    > never had any problems on this score.[/ref]

    Yes I'm sure. DOS determines the mode in which to access a partition
    by the parittion type it finds. If DOS detects an extended partition of
    type 0x05, it uses CHS addressing. Yet this mode means cylinders will not
    be correct if the partition extends beyond cylinder 1024. Therefore the
    data will be written at a totally different location. (probably somewhere
    at (cylinder mod 1024). Most likely this will be another partition. So
    data corruption will be the result. To this end the LBA types have been
    created. If DOS detects 0x0F, it will use LBA adressing inside that
    partition. (Which is why it doesn't really matter that hda6 isn't of the
    proper LBA type. DOS already detects from the extended partition type
    that LBA addressing is required. Would hda6 have been a primary partition
    extending beyond cylinder 1024, it would have to be of type 0x0C to tell
    DOS to use LBA addressing.
     

    The limit is the addressing scheme. If the partition extends beyond
    cylinder 1024, make sure to use the proper LBA type for the partition.
    If not, at least older windows and DOS will generate write actions at
    location on the HDD where it shouldn't.

    Like I said previously, XP probably no longer suffers from this
    behaviour. It most likely will always use LBA addressing. Just like
    linux does.

    Eric
    Eric Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Eric Moors wrote:
     [/ref][/ref]
     
    >
    > Yes I'm sure. DOS determines the mode in which to access a partition
    > by the parittion type it finds. If DOS detects an extended partition of
    > type 0x05, it uses CHS addressing. Yet this mode means cylinders will not
    > be correct if the partition extends beyond cylinder 1024. Therefore the
    > data will be written at a totally different location. (probably somewhere
    > at (cylinder mod 1024). Most likely this will be another partition. So
    > data corruption will be the result. To this end the LBA types have been
    > created. If DOS detects 0x0F, it will use LBA adressing inside that
    > partition. (Which is why it doesn't really matter that hda6 isn't of the
    > proper LBA type. DOS already detects from the extended partition type
    > that LBA addressing is required. Would hda6 have been a primary partition
    > extending beyond cylinder 1024, it would have to be of type 0x0C to tell
    > DOS to use LBA addressing.[/ref]

    You sound very authoritative, but I'm not completely convinced.
    I'd like to hear someone else confirm what you are saying.

    I've had a second Windows-2000 partition in an extended partition
    created with Linux fdisk,
    and never had any problem with Windows or Linux writing in the wrong place.
    I find it difficult to believe that Windows-2000 will write
    outside the range specified in the partition table;
    I would certainly be amazed if it ever calculates the cylinder mod 1024.
     
    >
    > The limit is the addressing scheme. If the partition extends beyond
    > cylinder 1024, make sure to use the proper LBA type for the partition.
    > If not, at least older windows and DOS will generate write actions at
    > location on the HDD where it shouldn't.[/ref]

    Personally, I always choose LBA format for disks in the BIOS --
    I did wonder if the original poster's problem arose from failure to do this.
    However, I find it difficult to believe that if you didn't do this,
    Windows-2000 might write outside the specified partition table.

    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
    (all email over 80k dispatched to /dev/null)
    tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
    Timothy Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    > I've had a second Windows-2000 partition in an extended partition 

    (1)
    I was talking about DOS/windows9x
    I have no clue what win2000/XP or even as far back as NT will do.
    I would suspect they don't ever use CHS addressing.
     

    It doesn't calculate this. You simply cannot put more then 10 bits in
    the cylinder field. The mod operation is just a result if you try to put
    in anything bigger..
     
    >>
    >> The limit is the addressing scheme. If the partition extends beyond
    >> cylinder 1024, make sure to use the proper LBA type for the partition.
    >> If not, at least older windows and DOS will generate write actions at
    >> location on the HDD where it shouldn't.[/ref]
    >
    > Personally, I always choose LBA format for disks in the BIOS -- I did
    > wonder if the original poster's problem arose from failure to do this.
    > However, I find it difficult to believe that if you didn't do this,
    > Windows-2000 might write outside the specified partition table.[/ref]

    see (1)

    Eric
    Eric Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 


    Thanks for all the feedback guys. Reasoning:
    - fat16 partition
    contains the install files for winME
    when windows s up on the ddrive, I boot to DOS on C
    and reinstall windows. If C were a fat32, I would need
    to boot from floppy, or cdrom.

    if installing windows from cdrom, anytime you add driver, you
    must swap out the windows cd for the driver cd, and back and
    forth. Installing from the hard drive eliminates this.

    - Extended partition Id type ?
    I dunno why that is what it is. I have a feeling that is
    something diskdrake added in the Mandrake install??

    - 2 bootable partitions
    I never had much luck with Lilo - windows would always overwrite
    the mbr and lilo would be toast. I got hooked on system commander
    and it used to need the Linux boot partition active in order to
    see it. I didn't bother installing paritition commander this
    time, so maybe I'll just run with lilo and see what happens again.
    In that case I can probably take the boot flag off hda5.

    - swap on the end or beginning.
    Linux has to be under cylinder 1024 to boot, and I need close
    to 700 meg for the windows install files. This probably isnt'
    right, but it seems the limit used to be around 1gig of space.
    If the Linux boot partition was past that, system commander
    wouldn't find it. This wouldn't leave much room for swap.


    So, I installed amanda over the weekend and I think I got a backup
    out of it. After I check that out, I'll chaange the partition Id
    of hda2 and reinstall windows and see if it complains about
    "Unable to read from last cluster"
    bad_knee Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    > Thanks for all the feedback guys. Reasoning: - fat16 partition 

    I do not understand this. But if it works for your it is fine with me
     

    It is the (incorrect) default behaviour of linux fdisk.
     

    LILO just doesn't care. Leave it as is
     

    Not for newer systems. It depends on your BIOS, but chances are that
    linux will boot from any position. (PS also windows has to be under
    cylinder 1024 to be bootable otherwise)
     

    I don't know system commander, but lilo/grub will be happy wherever
    /boot resides. (If your BIOS is not too old)
     

    Have fun ;-)

    Eric
    Eric Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: paritioning for linux and windows on same drive

    Well for anyone interested, This partition scheme seems to be
    working for me.

    I gave Windows 20+gb for the cdrive, and then thought why
    not just give it the whole extended partition as well since
    my bios is new, linux should be able to boot from anywhere
    (as someone mentioned). So, last minute, I filled up the extended
    dos partition with 1gig, and made a ddrive.

    After formatting with fdisk and installing windows, I installed
    mandrake and used disk drake to create the rest of the partitions
    for linux - past "ddrive". This time, windows did not complain
    about "ScanDisk cannot read from the last cluster of the drive"
    when I installed.

    After all was done, I booted linux and copied a few gigs of
    data onto the cdrive. This normally hosed both windows and/or
    linux in the past, but everything is well now.


    Thanks for all the help guys! This has been a major annoyance
    in the past, and it looks like you've all helped straighten me
    out with it.

    - very grateful. Thank you!
    bl8n8r


    ################ new partition scheme ########################

    The number of cylinders for this disk is set to 9729.
    There is nothing wrong with that, but this is larger than 1024,
    and could in certain setups cause problems with:
    1) software that runs at boot time (e.g., old versions of LILO)
    2) booting and partitioning software from other OSs
    (e.g., DOS FDISK, OS/2 FDISK)

    Command (m for help): p

    Disk /dev/hda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes
    255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders
    Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

    Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
    /dev/hda1 * 1 3825 30724281 c Win95 FAT32 (LBA)
    /dev/hda2 3826 9729 47423880 f Win95 Ext'd (LBA)
    /dev/hda5 3826 3956 1052226 b Win95 FAT32
    /dev/hda6 3957 3968 96358+ 83 Linux
    /dev/hda7 3969 4031 506016 83 Linux
    /dev/hda8 4032 4107 610438+ 83 Linux
    /dev/hda9 4108 4208 811251 83 Linux
    /dev/hda10 4209 4972 6136798+ 83 Linux
    /dev/hda11 4973 5736 6136798+ 83 Linux
    /dev/hda12 5737 9178 27647833+ 83 Linux
    /dev/hda13 9179 9432 2040223+ 83 Linux
    /dev/hda14 9433 9623 1534176 83 Linux
    /dev/hda15 9624 9729 851413+ 82 Linux swap

    Command (m for help):
    bad_knee Guest

Similar Threads

  1. 2 PCs, 1 Linux install/drive?
    By Bob Hyatt in forum Linux Setup, Configuration & Administration
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 13th, 04:42 PM
  2. Running Linux from a FireWire drive
    By NYVApas in forum Linux Setup, Configuration & Administration
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 3rd, 08:30 PM
  3. Mapping Linux Drive to Windows
    By Frogman in forum Linux Setup, Configuration & Administration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 24th, 08:22 AM
  4. Cannot copy a file from NFS mounted drive to windows C:\ drive
    By Jagdish in forum Windows Setup, Administration & Security
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 15th, 03:19 PM
  5. Cannot load Windows on previous Linux drive...
    By Nick Austin in forum Linux Setup, Configuration & Administration
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 1st, 01:22 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