My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
RedHat and NT successfully.

Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
successes.

RL

raylopez99 wrote:
> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
> 
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
> 
> RL
What does it matter Ray?

Everything you attempt fails anyway.

Haven't you something better to do?

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> raylopez99 wrote:
>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>>
>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>> successes.
>>
>> RL
> What does it matter Ray?
> 
> Everything you attempt fails anyway.

Back in the old days, I was consulting for the FAA on a computer project
running on batch processing IBM 7090 computer (they had two in the same
room). So they had some machines that read the jobs from decks of punched
cards onto magnetic tape. The machine then read one tape at a time
processing the jobs that wrote their output onto another tape for printing
and punching. The machine looked something like this.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:IBM_7090_computer.jpg

Now they had one programmer who was completely hopeless. He would submit his
job and then hang around for it to run. The operator would look at the front
panel of the computer at the blinking lights and tell the programmer that
his job had failed. The operator was always right. The programmer wondered
how the operator could tell, and the operator explained he could tell by
looking at the lights. Pretty funny joke because the lights were
incandescent bulbs and the clock rate on the machine was about 500 MHz, slow
by today's standards, but way to fast for you to tell much from the lights:
you could not even tell what job was running, much less what it was doing.

-- 
  .~.  Jean-David Beyer          Registered Linux User 85642.
  /V\  PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A         Registered Machine   241939.
 /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey    http://counter.li.org
 ^^-^^ 11:20:01 up 2 days, 16:08, 6 users, load average: 4.36, 4.39, 4.42

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:32:33 GMT, Jean-David Beyer
<jeandavid8@verizon.net> wrote:

>The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> raylopez99 wrote:

Some more trollish crap.



>> What does it matter Ray?
>> 
>> Everything you attempt fails anyway.
>
>Back in the old days, I was consulting for the FAA on a computer project
>running on batch processing IBM 7090 computer (they had two in the same
>room). So they had some machines that read the jobs from decks of punched
>cards onto magnetic tape. The machine then read one tape at a time
>processing the jobs that wrote their output onto another tape for printing
>and punching. The machine looked something like this.
>
>http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:IBM_7090_computer.jpg
>
>Now they had one programmer who was completely hopeless. He would submit his
>job and then hang around for it to run. The operator would look at the front
>panel of the computer at the blinking lights and tell the programmer that
>his job had failed. The operator was always right. The programmer wondered
>how the operator could tell, and the operator explained he could tell by
>looking at the lights. Pretty funny joke because the lights were
>incandescent bulbs and the clock rate on the machine was about 500 MHz, slow
>by today's standards, but way to fast for you to tell much from the lights:
>you could not even tell what job was running, much less what it was doing.

Ah, but with the right timing loops you could spell out "merry xmas"
and other messages on the register lights.  IIRC - it's been a very
long time since my 7094/7040 days at the UW.

Sorry to contribute to one of Ray's BS threads, but I couldn't resist.

Bill
-- 
William D Waddington
william.waddington@beezmo.com
"Even bugs...are unexpected signposts on
the long road of creativity..." - Ken Burtch

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, raylopez99
<raylopez99@yahoo.com>
 wrote
on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
<c9afab5f-2c09-4d79-9f10-eca86cc98f23@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
>
> RL

It's a bit tricky, mostly because I don't know how to
restore the MBR if something goes wrong and I want pure
Windows back (yes, yes, I know about FDISK/MBR, but I would
need a 3 1/2" diskette with a small part of Windows on it,
or to boot from a Windows Installation disc to use it).
However, given that caveat, GRUB is very easy to set up,
and in a pinch one can save the existing MBR by simply
doing

dd if=/dev/hda of=/mnt/whatever/bootblock.img bs=1024 count=1

while using a Linux LiveDisc;  this 'dd' just snarfs the
first 1024 bytes (2 sectors) of the boot drive into a file
for later restore using

dd if=bootblock.img of=/dev/hda

(Big Disclaimer: these commands twiddle a user's boot block,
drive, and partition table; use with appropriate caution).

If you want to use GRUB, the magic words to boot Windows
are in /boot/grub/menu.lst, where /boot is a
mounted ext2 partition where GRUB has been installed.

------
title Windows NT / Windows 95 boot menu
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
makeactive
chainloader  +1
------

and the title is adjustable [*].  If one is not using C:
(in LinuxSpeak, /dev/hda1) for Windows, one might have to
adjust the rootnoverify argument, using GRUB's
rather idiosyncratic syntax:

/dev/hda1 (hd0,0) -- first drive, first partition
/dev/hda2 (hd0,1) -- first drive, second partition
/dev/hda3 (hd0,2) -- first drive, third partition
/dev/hdb1 (hd1,0) -- second drive, first partition
/dev/hdb2 (hd1,1) -- second drive, second partition
etc.

(If one has a pure SCSI system and boots from the first
SCSI drive, the first drive is still /dev/hda.  A mixed
system with Linux on the SCSI drive and Windows on
an IDE drive might have to adjust the lines for
booting Linux, but if Windows is on the first IDE drive
no changes for *it* are required here.)

[*] as far as GRUB is concerned, the only difference
between Win95 and Vista is that the boot block might be
slightly different. ;-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
New Technology?  Not There.  No Thanks.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> raylopez99 wrote:
>>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>>>
>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>> successes.
>>>
>>> RL
>> What does it matter Ray?
>>
>> Everything you attempt fails anyway.
> 
> Back in the old days, I was consulting for the FAA on a computer project
> running on batch processing IBM 7090 computer (they had two in the same
> room). So they had some machines that read the jobs from decks of punched
> cards onto magnetic tape. The machine then read one tape at a time
> processing the jobs that wrote their output onto another tape for printing
> and punching. The machine looked something like this.
> 
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:IBM_7090_computer.jpg
> 
> Now they had one programmer who was completely hopeless. He would submit his
> job and then hang around for it to run. The operator would look at the front
> panel of the computer at the blinking lights and tell the programmer that
> his job had failed. The operator was always right. The programmer wondered
> how the operator could tell, and the operator explained he could tell by
> looking at the lights. Pretty funny joke because the lights were
> incandescent bulbs and the clock rate on the machine was about 500 MHz, slow
> by today's standards, but way to fast for you to tell much from the lights:
> you could not even tell what job was running, much less what it was doing.
> 

I guess you never had a chance to use a "real" computer. Of course a good operator 
could tell what's going on just by looking at the lights. 

When I was in school the operators would also put a transistor radio on top of the
console and they could also tell what was going on just by listening to the 
interference from the console electronics. 

/dan

On Jul 23, 11:11=A0am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware. =A0I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
>
> RL

I've done it. It's just a matter of using the DSL bootable medium to
run cfdisk and make a Linux partition and make a swap partition and to
make the Linux partition bootable, then install DSL, then let DSL
install Grub.

We tried dual boot on a machine that ran a high performance (CPU and
network) app. It was with Ubuntu. 

It worked and the app was several times more effective under Linux due
to better network performance.

Otherwise I think that dual boot is for the poor who cannot afford two
computers. 

i

On Jul 23, 10:35=A0am, Daniel Ganek <degs...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Jean-David Beyer wrote:

>
> I guess you never had a chance to use a "real" computer. Of course a good=
 operator
> could tell what's going on just by looking at the lights.
>
> When I was in school the operators would also put a transistor radio on t=
op of the
> console and they could also tell what was going on just by listening to t=
he
> interference from the console electronics.
>

Good one Dan.  I was just about to post the same thing when I saw this
post.  The human eye and human ear have the ability to detect fairly
high frequency information.  So the joke was on Jean-David Beyer all
those years, and he was completely unaware.

RL

On Jul 23, 11:33=A0am, Ignoramus12000 <ignoramus12...@NOSPAM.
12000.invalid> wrote:
> We tried dual boot on a machine that ran a high performance (CPU and
> network) app. It was with Ubuntu.
>
> It worked and the app was several times more effective under Linux due
> to better network performance.
>
> Otherwise I think that dual boot is for the poor who cannot afford two
> computers.
>
> i

OK, thanks.  I have a link http://www.geocities.com/epark/linux/grub-w2k-HO=
WTO.html,
which Ghost apparently refers to, and I can follow that for the
mechanics, but I wanted actual war stories.

RL

On Jul 23, 10:35=A0am, Darth Chaos <DarthChaosofR...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 11:11=A0am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> > 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware. =A0I did this 10 years ago wit=
h
> > RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> > Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> > successes.
>
> > RL
>
> I've done it. It's just a matter of using the DSL bootable medium to
> run cfdisk and make a Linux partition and make a swap partition and to
> make the Linux partition bootable, then install DSL, then let DSL
> install Grub.

OK, you are implying DSL has a bootable medium tool built in--I was
planning to use Partition Magic to set up a bootable sector. If you
have (and if it's not too much of a bother) instructions on how to do
this for LInux DSL (Damn Small LInux) please let me know--right now it
keeps defaulting to the CD-Live version, and upon startup I don't know
what command line parameters to use in Linux DSL (despite the F3 key
instructions) to know now to load the Linux into my HD.

I'll figure it out eventually, but again it underscores installing
Linux is not a "cinch".

RL

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:20:19 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:

> On Jul 23, 10:35 am, Darth Chaos <DarthChaosofR...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 23, 11:11 am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>> > 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago
>> > with RedHat and NT successfully.
>>
>> > Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>> > successes.
>>
>> > RL
>>
>> I've done it. It's just a matter of using the DSL bootable medium to
>> run cfdisk and make a Linux partition and make a swap partition and to
>> make the Linux partition bootable, then install DSL, then let DSL
>> install Grub.
> 
> OK, you are implying DSL has a bootable medium tool built in--I was
> planning to use Partition Magic to set up a bootable sector. If you have
> (and if it's not too much of a bother) instructions on how to do this
> for LInux DSL (Damn Small LInux) please let me know--right now it keeps
> defaulting to the CD-Live version, and upon startup I don't know what
> command line parameters to use in Linux DSL (despite the F3 key
> instructions) to know now to load the Linux into my HD.
> 
> I'll figure it out eventually, but again it underscores installing Linux
> is not a "cinch".
> 
> RL

No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dual 
boot setting,  may not be as automated as installing other distros.


-- 
Rick

On Jul 23, 3:20=A0pm, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 10:35=A0am, Darth Chaos <DarthChaosofR...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 23, 11:11=A0am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> > > 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware. =A0I did this 10 years ago w=
ith
> > > RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> > > Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> > > successes.
>
> > > RL
>
> > I've done it. It's just a matter of using the DSL bootable medium to
> > run cfdisk and make a Linux partition and make a swap partition and to
> > make the Linux partition bootable, then install DSL, then let DSL
> > install Grub.
>
> OK, you are implying DSL has a bootable medium tool built in--I was
> planning to use Partition Magic to set up a bootable sector. If you
> have (and if it's not too much of a bother) instructions on how to do
> this for LInux DSL (Damn Small LInux) please let me know--right now it
> keeps defaulting to the CD-Live version, and upon startup I don't know
> what command line parameters to use in Linux DSL (despite the F3 key
> instructions) to know now to load the Linux into my HD.
>
> I'll figure it out eventually, but again it underscores installing
> Linux is not a "cinch".
>
> RL

WHAT?  Linux just works.  You would would have
taken that 3 week class on linux, you would not
be an ignorant user.

DSL is not linux.  Nobody knows what linux is,
but it is not Ubuntu or DSL.

You must have the wrong distro.  Did you try
Mostly Small Linux instead of Damn Small Linux?

Did you read the manual?  Wait, that one if from
3 versions ago.  Well, go ask somebody that figured it
out.

You might have lousy hardware.  Did you check to be
sure it is compatible?  There is no list, but if you would
get a Computer Science Degree, you might figure it out.

Did you verify the download?

Could be a Windows Virus.

Well, I will work on finding you another distro.
You got the wrong one.

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:34:57 -0700, Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:

> On Jul 23, 3:20 pm, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 23, 10:35 am, Darth Chaos <DarthChaosofR...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Jul 23, 11:11 am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>> > > 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago
>> > > with RedHat and NT successfully.
>>
>> > > Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>> > > successes.
>>
>> > > RL
>>
>> > I've done it. It's just a matter of using the DSL bootable medium to
>> > run cfdisk and make a Linux partition and make a swap partition and
>> > to make the Linux partition bootable, then install DSL, then let DSL
>> > install Grub.
>>
>> OK, you are implying DSL has a bootable medium tool built in--I was
>> planning to use Partition Magic to set up a bootable sector. If you
>> have (and if it's not too much of a bother) instructions on how to do
>> this for LInux DSL (Damn Small LInux) please let me know--right now it
>> keeps defaulting to the CD-Live version, and upon startup I don't know
>> what command line parameters to use in Linux DSL (despite the F3 key
>> instructions) to know now to load the Linux into my HD.
>>
>> I'll figure it out eventually, but again it underscores installing
>> Linux is not a "cinch".
>>
>> RL
> 
> WHAT?  Linux just works.  You would would have taken that 3 week class
> on linux, you would not be an ignorant user.
> 
> DSL is not linux.

Correct. It is a distribution based on a Linux kernel.

> Nobody knows what linux is, but it is not Ubuntu or
> DSL.

Lot's of people know what Linux is. It's too bad you don't.


> 
> You must have the wrong distro.  Did you try Mostly Small Linux instead
> of Damn Small Linux?

Why must he have been using the wrong distro?

> 
> Did you read the manual?  Wait, that one if from 3 versions ago.  Well,
> go ask somebody that figured it out.
> 
> You might have lousy hardware.  Did you check to be sure it is
> compatible?  There is no list, but if you would get a Computer Science
> Degree, you might figure it out.
> 
> Did you verify the download?
> 
> Could be a Windows Virus.
> 
> Well, I will work on finding you another distro. You got the wrong one.


Could you be any more of a horse's ass?

-- 
Rick

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, raylopez99 wrote:

> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
>
> RL
>
Come on. First you say you did it a decade ago, now you're trolling for
"success or failure stories"?  Which is it?

Since most people run Windows, it's likely most people running Linux
continue to use it to some extent, hence they must dual boot.  Hence
there must be loads and loads of success stories.

The problem is when people don't grasp the concept, and then have
to rely on the software to do the work, and then they may have
problems.

I'm set up for triple booting, though it's 3 different releases of
the same distribution.  One day I might toss MSDOS on it, even though
I've never really used MSDOS.

I do the fiddling by hand, so I know what I'm doing.

   Michael

On Jul 23, 12:30=A0pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:

>
> No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dual
> boot setting, =A0may not be as automated as installing other distros.
>


OK, do you have any recommendations for a distro that will fit onto a
old Pentium 100 with 38MB Ram I believe, and a 2 GB or so HD?  Only
DSL seemed to fit the bill.

And, re DSL, do you know which parameter to set to install it to the
HD (even without a dual boot), rather than "Live CD" when it boots
from the CD?

Those are the questions I'm trying to answer.

RL

In comp.os.linux.misc raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 12:30�pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>> No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dual
>> boot setting, �may not be as automated as installing other distros.
>>
> 
> 
> OK, do you have any recommendations for a distro that will fit onto a
> old Pentium 100 with 38MB Ram I believe, and a 2 GB or so HD?  Only
> DSL seemed to fit the bill.

Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding threads
will do the fucking job you tosser!
-- 
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste!         |
|   Andrew Halliwell BSc   |  I can SMELL!!!  KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and    |
|            in            |  get out the puncture repair kit!"              |
|     Computer Science     |     Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf              |

>The problem is when people don't grasp the concept, and then have
>to rely on the software to do the work, and then they may have
>problems.

That is what I been saying. The software can't do the work.
People should terminal after taking a class in what they want to do.

For example, if somebody wants to load the word processor.

They should not rely on the software to load it using a simple double
click, they
should learn:

#cd usr/bin
#sudo ./openoffice/bin/run/linux/eat/my/shorts/oowriter.sh /home/
whoami/documents/me/where/confused/resume.odt

I am with ya.  No programmer can figure out they want to load the word
processor.
They need to be specific what they want to do.

I mean, a boot loader is a tricky thing.  There are over 67833
options.
Instead of a program with a few check boxes, they need to buy a book
on it, as soon as it comes out.

I am on board.  I am with ya......  USERS  geeezeeeeee

On Jul 23, 11:11=A0am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware. =A0I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
>
> RL

Na, we not dual booting.  That is so yesterday technology.
We are all now doing Virtual OS's on Xen.

Start with installing Gentoo, and you be on the right track.

Many successes; no failures.

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:37:46 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:

> On Jul 23, 12:30 pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dual
>> boot setting,  may not be as automated as installing other distros.
>>
>>
> 
> OK, do you have any recommendations for a distro that will fit onto a
> old Pentium 100 with 38MB Ram I believe, and a 2 GB or so HD?  Only DSL
> seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> And, re DSL, do you know which parameter to set to install it to the HD
> (even without a dual boot), rather than "Live CD" when it boots from the
> CD?

<http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/wiki/index.php/Installing_to_the_Hard_Disk>

> 
> Those are the questions I'm trying to answer.
> 
> RL


Well go to the DSL Web pages. You will find the answer.



-- 
Rick

On Jul 23, 1:56=A0pm, Andrew Halliwell <spi...@ponder.sky.com> wrote:

>
> Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding threads
> will do the fucking job you tosser!

Don't lie, hellboy.  You will be cast into a hotter hell if you lie.
Stay on the outer circle, you don't want to be down in the level that
Stalin, Hitler and the anti-Christ are.

Tell me specifically WHICH distros will fit the target machine--from
your PERSONAL experience or from a WEB CITE. Not hearsay and "I think
so".

RL

On Jul 23, 2:03=A0pm, "Psyc Geek (TAB)" <psycge...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Na, we not dual booting. =A0That is so yesterday technology.
> We are all now doing Virtual OS's on Xen.
>
> Start with installing Gentoo, and you be on the right track.

I don't know enough to know if you are serious or not.  Are you saying
Gentoo will fit on a Pentium with little Ram and a 1-3 GB HD?

RL

On Jul 23, 3:15=A0pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:37:46 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 12:30=A0pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
> >> No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dua=
l
> >> boot setting, =A0may not be as automated as installing other distros.
>
> > OK, do you have any recommendations for a distro that will fit onto a
> > old Pentium 100 with 38MB Ram I believe, and a 2 GB or so HD? =A0Only D=
SL
> > seemed to fit the bill.
>
> > And, re DSL, do you know which parameter to set to install it to the HD
> > (even without a dual boot), rather than "Live CD" when it boots from th=
e
> > CD?
>
> <http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/wiki/index.php/Installing_to_the_Hard_Disk=
>
>
>
>
> > Those are the questions I'm trying to answer.
>
> > RL
>
> Well go to the DSL Web pages. You will find the answer.
>
> --
> Rick

Thanks Rick!  I've saved this page and will try it tomorrow.

RL

raylopez99 wrote:

> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
> 
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
> 
> RL

Is the sky blue?

-- 
Tayo'y mga Pinoy

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:17:22 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:


> OK, thanks.  I have a link
> http://www.geocities.com/epark/linux/grub-w2k-HOWTO.html, which Ghost
> apparently refers to, and I can follow that for the mechanics, but I
> wanted actual war stories.
> 
> RL



Is this really what you do with your time?  Where do you get this 
supposed collection of ancient hardware?  What do you with the box 
*after* the OS is installed?  You're a serial installer, for no apparent 
reason.



-Thufir

* thufir peremptorily fired off this memo:

> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:17:22 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:
>
>> OK, thanks.  I have a link
>> http://www.geocities.com/epark/linux/grub-w2k-HOWTO.html, which Ghost
>> apparently refers to, and I can follow that for the mechanics, but I
>> wanted actual war stories.
>
> Is this really what you do with your time?  Where do you get this 
> supposed collection of ancient hardware?  What do you with the box 
> *after* the OS is installed?  You're a serial installer, for no apparent 
> reason.

No, he's a serial /staller/.

-- 
narcolepulacyi, n.:
	The contagious action of yawning, causing everyone in sight
	to also yawn.
		-- "Sniglets", Rich Hall & Friends

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:45:40 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:

>> Well go to the DSL Web pages. You will find the answer.
[...]
> Thanks Rick!  I've saved this page and will try it tomorrow.


LOL.  What if you'd just told him to google it?  However, now that he has 
*saved* the webpage (he downloaded it for some reason?), *now* all 
questions are answered.  He couldn't have found that webpage on his own, 
but now that he has saved it, now he can complete the install.  Waiting 
eagerly for the next step.  Reading the website?  Clicking on the 
instructions?



-Thufir

"raylopez99" <raylopez99@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:c9afab5f-2c09-4d79-9f10-eca86cc98f23@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
>
> RL

Just be careful. My machine has 3 drives. A couple of SATA drives and a 
external SCSI. During the POST I can press (F12?) and select the drive that 
I want to boot from. I currently have XP installed on one of the SATA 
drives (the other SATA is just for data). My intent was to install linux on 
the external SCSI drive and boot from it when I felt like it.

GRUB decided to ignore the SCSI drive and install itself onto my primary 
SATA drive without ever asking. GRUB worked fine if I wanted to boot to 
linux. But when I tried to boot XP from GRUB it would get confused and give 
some sort of cryptic error message. Eventually I was able to edit the 
config file and get it straightened out.



** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
news:cp5kl5-gji.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, raylopez99
> <raylopez99@yahoo.com>
> wrote
> on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
> <c9afab5f-2c09-4d79-9f10-eca86cc98f23@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>>
>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>> successes.
>>
>> RL
>
> It's a bit tricky, mostly because I don't know how to
> restore the MBR if something goes wrong and I want pure
> Windows back (yes, yes, I know about FDISK/MBR, but I would
> need a 3 1/2" diskette with a small part of Windows on it,
> or to boot from a Windows Installation disc to use it).

Ah, those evil 3.5" diskettes.


> However, given that caveat, GRUB is very easy to set up,
> and in a pinch one can save the existing MBR by simply
> doing
>
> dd if=/dev/hda of=/mnt/whatever/bootblock.img bs=1024 count=1
>
> while using a Linux LiveDisc

Okay... so if this is live CD where does one write the MBR image - perhaps 
a 3.5" diskette?

(Don't expect to write to a NTFS partition because many LiveCD's still 
don't support it and when it is supported, I don't fully trust it yet.)


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 1:56�pm, Andrew Halliwell <spi...@ponder.sky.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding threads
>> will do the fucking job you tosser!
> 
> Don't lie, hellboy.  

Who's lying?
Apart from you claiming you want to use linux on this machine in the first
place.

> You will be cast into a hotter hell if you lie.

Well, if it was a choice between believing in a god and spending eternity
surrounded by twats like you, and hell... 

Sorry ray, but it'd have to be hell, definitely.

> Stay on the outer circle, you don't want to be down in the level that
> Stalin, Hitler and the anti-Christ are.
> 
> Tell me specifically WHICH distros will fit the target machine

Any one of the recommended distros will work.
ANY single one of them.
From xubuntu to dsl, from puppy to whatever the hell else was suggested over
the past 10 sodding threads.

--from
> your PERSONAL experience or from a WEB CITE. Not hearsay and "I think
> so".

My own personal experience? you're not worthy of it.
ANY ONE of them that has an installer that allows you to select packages
will work. And my recommendation was one of those.
If you can't remember what my recommendation was, well I suggest you sodding
well read the whole of the 10 threads you created on the subject.

Rather than just ignore the responses like you have been so far!
-- 
|                          |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
|  spike1@freenet.co.uk    |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
|                          |can't move, with no hope of rescue.             |
|  Andrew Halliwell BSc    |Consider how lucky you are that life has been   |
|           in             |good to you so far...                           |
|    Computer Science      |   -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:26:23 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
> message news:cp5kl5-gji.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com>
>> wrote
>> on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
>> <c9afab5f-2c09-4d79-9f10-eca86cc98f23@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>>>
>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>> successes.
>>>
>>> RL
>>
>> It's a bit tricky, mostly because I don't know how to restore the MBR
>> if something goes wrong and I want pure Windows back (yes, yes, I know
>> about FDISK/MBR, but I would need a 3 1/2" diskette with a small part
>> of Windows on it, or to boot from a Windows Installation disc to use
>> it).
> 
> Ah, those evil 3.5" diskettes.
> 
> 
>> However, given that caveat, GRUB is very easy to set up, and in a pinch
>> one can save the existing MBR by simply doing
>>
>> dd if=/dev/hda of=/mnt/whatever/bootblock.img bs=1024 count=1
>>
>> while using a Linux LiveDisc
> 
> Okay... so if this is live CD where does one write the MBR image -
> perhaps a 3.5" diskette?
> 
> (Don't expect to write to a NTFS partition because many LiveCD's still
> don't support it and when it is supported, I don't fully trust it yet.)

You don't trust anything Linux. Write it to any partition (except, of 
course, swap) on the hard drive.


> 
> 
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, ray
<ray@zianet.com>
 wrote
on 24 Jul 2008 00:17:22 GMT
<6eq00iF884c5U2@mid.individual.net>:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:26:23 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
>
>> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
>> message news:cp5kl5-gji.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote
>>> on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
>>> <c9afab5f-2c09-4d79-9f10-eca86cc98f23@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>>>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>>>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>>>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>>>>
>>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>>> successes.
>>>>
>>>> RL
>>>
>>> It's a bit tricky, mostly because I don't know how to restore the MBR
>>> if something goes wrong and I want pure Windows back (yes, yes, I know
>>> about FDISK/MBR, but I would need a 3 1/2" diskette with a small part
>>> of Windows on it, or to boot from a Windows Installation disc to use
>>> it).
>> 
>> Ah, those evil 3.5" diskettes.
>> 
>> 
>>> However, given that caveat, GRUB is very easy to set up, and in a pinch
>>> one can save the existing MBR by simply doing
>>>
>>> dd if=/dev/hda of=/mnt/whatever/bootblock.img bs=1024 count=1
>>>
>>> while using a Linux LiveDisc
>> 
>> Okay... so if this is live CD where does one write the MBR image -
>> perhaps a 3.5" diskette?
>> 
>> (Don't expect to write to a NTFS partition because many LiveCD's still
>> don't support it and when it is supported, I don't fully trust it yet.)
>
> You don't trust anything Linux. Write it to any partition (except, of 
> course, swap) on the hard drive.

The simplest partition would be a vfat or fat32 variant,
if one is handy.  Both Linux and Windows can read from
and write to files on such a partition.

There might be a shareware utility to grab the MBR on
Windows, if one wants to go that route.  I frankly don't
know but theoretically it's possible.

[.sigsnip]

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #10239993:
char * f(char *p) {char *q = malloc(strlen(p)); strcpy(q,p); return q; }
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

* ray peremptorily fired off this memo:

> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:26:23 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
>> 
>> Okay... so if this is live CD where does one write the MBR image -
>> perhaps a 3.5" diskette?

USB key.  In fact, use the USB key instead of a Live CD.

>> (Don't expect to write to a NTFS partition because many LiveCD's still
>> don't support it and when it is supported, I don't fully trust it yet.)
>
> You don't trust anything Linux. Write it to any partition (except, of 
> course, swap) on the hard drive.

You can use the vendors small "restore" partition to boot the thing.
Mark it as bootable and just overwrite the MBR.

Once you get Linux running, you won't be wanting to use Windows anyway.

You can always get the drivers direct from the vendor.

I'll bet Zeke knows how it feels to be thick as a brick.

-- 
Your wise men don't know how it feels
To be thick as a brick.
		-- Jethro Tull, "Thick As A Brick"

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, raylopez99
<raylopez99@yahoo.com>
 wrote
on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
<4c29369f-8ab4-400b-9661-987df2ef3abf@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:
> On Jul 23, 11:33�am, Ignoramus12000 <ignoramus12...@NOSPAM.
> 12000.invalid> wrote:
>> We tried dual boot on a machine that ran a high performance (CPU and
>> network) app. It was with Ubuntu.
>>
>> It worked and the app was several times more effective under Linux due
>> to better network performance.
>>
>> Otherwise I think that dual boot is for the poor who cannot afford two
>> computers.
>>
>> i
>
> OK, thanks.  I have a link http://www.geocities.com/epark/linux/grub-w2k-HOWTO.html,
> which Ghost apparently refers to, and I can follow that for the
> mechanics, but I wanted actual war stories.
>
> RL

I can't say I refer to Ed's Software Guide,
but it's not unreasonable as a HOWTO.

One can also refer to FAQS:
http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-mini/Multiboot-with-GRUB.html

though Ed's Software Guide might be more understandable for some.

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #10239993:
char * f(char *p) {char *q = malloc(strlen(p)); strcpy(q,p); return q; }
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Andrew Halliwell
<spike1@ponder.sky.com>
 wrote
on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:56:52 +0100
<khikl5-nro.ln1@ponder.sky.com>:
> In comp.os.linux.misc raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 23, 12:30�pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>
>>> No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dual
>>> boot setting, �may not be as automated as installing other distros.
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> OK, do you have any recommendations for a distro that will fit onto a
>> old Pentium 100 with 38MB Ram I believe, and a 2 GB or so HD?  Only
>> DSL seemed to fit the bill.
>
> Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding threads
> will do the fucking job you tosser!

No they won't.  I'd have to do some testing but 38 MB is
not something one can cram Gnome or KDE into without a very
large loss in performance; it also must be able to install
and set up his hard drive.  Best bet: something very light,
like DSL, though it depends on his other requirements (for
example, he might want to run a Word workalike; if so,
OpenOffice is rather heavy for such a configuration).

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #10239993:
char * f(char *p) {char *q = malloc(strlen(p)); strcpy(q,p); return q; }
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Rick
<none@nomail.com>
 wrote
on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:38:34 -0500
<UJKdnQXZmcQnFRrVnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@supernews.com>:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:34:57 -0700, Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
>
>> On Jul 23, 3:20�pm, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Jul 23, 10:35�am, Darth Chaos <DarthChaosofR...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Jul 23, 11:11�am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > > My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>>> > > 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware. �I did this 10 years ago
>>> > > with RedHat and NT successfully.
>>>
>>> > > Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>> > > successes.
>>>
>>> > > RL
>>>
>>> > I've done it. It's just a matter of using the DSL bootable medium to
>>> > run cfdisk and make a Linux partition and make a swap partition and
>>> > to make the Linux partition bootable, then install DSL, then let DSL
>>> > install Grub.
>>>
>>> OK, you are implying DSL has a bootable medium tool built in--I was
>>> planning to use Partition Magic to set up a bootable sector. If you
>>> have (and if it's not too much of a bother) instructions on how to do
>>> this for LInux DSL (Damn Small LInux) please let me know--right now it
>>> keeps defaulting to the CD-Live version, and upon startup I don't know
>>> what command line parameters to use in Linux DSL (despite the F3 key
>>> instructions) to know now to load the Linux into my HD.
>>>
>>> I'll figure it out eventually, but again it underscores installing
>>> Linux is not a "cinch".
>>>
>>> RL
>> 
>> WHAT?  Linux just works.  You would would have taken that 3 week class
>> on linux, you would not be an ignorant user.
>> 
>> DSL is not linux.
>
> Correct. It is a distribution based on a Linux kernel.

Indeed.

>
>> Nobody knows what linux is, but it is not Ubuntu or
>> DSL.
>
> Lot's of people know what Linux is. It's too bad you don't.

They do and they don't.  At best they might know a little
bit about Linux, but have not dug through the details in
the source code -- and there's a lot of details, about 48
MB worth compressed.  Even I can't pretend I know every
line of code in there.

Of course the good news is that they can poke through the
source on an as-needed basis, unlike certain other options
such as Windows Vista. ;-)  Also, the modules that aren't
loaded are generally irrelevant for a given user.

>
>
>> 
>> You must have the wrong distro.  Did you try Mostly Small Linux instead
>> of Damn Small Linux?
>
> Why must he have been using the wrong distro?

Accusing us of The DistroDance(tm) is a favorite strawman
complaint among trolls.

[rest snipped]

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Linux makes one use one's mind.
Windows just messes with one's head.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
> No they won't.  I'd have to do some testing but 38 MB is
> not something one can cram Gnome or KDE into without a very
> large loss in performance;

Gnome and kde aren't essensial y'know.
Even in ubuntu you can select not to install (or run) gnome.

-- 
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |   Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a    |
|                          | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|   Andrew Halliwell BSc   | operating system originally  coded for a 4 bit |
|            in            |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|     Computer Science     |        can't stand 1 bit of competition.       |

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Psyc Geek (TAB)
<psycgeeks@yahoo.com>
 wrote
on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
<6421f9ab-87f9-4ee4-bd24-48d3c2eebb74@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>>The problem is when people don't grasp the concept, and then have
>>to rely on the software to do the work, and then they may have
>>problems.
>
> That is what I been saying. The software can't do the work.
> People should terminal after taking a class in what they want to do.

Um....I'm hoping you mean command-line interpreter, as opposed
to something like shooting themselves in the head...?

>
> For example, if somebody wants to load the word processor.
>
> They should not rely on the software to load it using a simple double
> click, they
> should learn:

Should != have to.  Granted, I'm all for a user understanding
what goes on underneath the hood, if he wants to.

>
> #cd usr/bin
> #sudo ./openoffice/bin/run/linux/eat/my/shorts/oowriter.sh /home/
> whoami/documents/me/where/confused/resume.odt

Try again; the above contains several errors.

[1] The cd is incorrect.  For root on my system, 'cd'
with no parameters leaves one at /root; cd usr/bin
would leave one at the nonexistent directory /root/usr/bin.

[2] The cd is also unnecessary if one specifies the full
pathname in the sudo command.

[3] The dot form is slightly dangerous if one is on the
wrong subdirectory, because of impersonators.  Try,
for instance, the following:

$ cd ~
$ vi ls (or emacs, or gedit, or xedit, or any editor you happen to like)
---
#!/bin/sh

echo 'Hahahahahahahaha'
---
$ chmod +x ls
$ ./ls
Hahahahahahahaha
$ PATH=.:$PATH; export PATH
$ ls
Hahahahahahahaha
$ mv ls ls.script.sav
$ ls
....
$ ls.script.sav
Hahahahahahahaha
$

(I won't bore you with examples on how to turn this
annoying but harmless thing into something positively evil.)

[4] The sudo command will probably not allow that command
sequence explicitly.  'man sudoers' for details.

[5] There's no particular reason to edit resumes as
the superuser.

[6] The prompt '#' usually indicates someone is already
the superuser; sudo in such cases is largely unnecessary
unless one wants to use the -u option.

>
> I am with ya.  No programmer can figure out they want to load the word
> processor.

"The"?  There are several.

> They need to be specific what they want to do.

One can write a script, you know.

>
> I mean, a boot loader is a tricky thing.  There are over 67833
> options.

We like flexibility.  Wotsamatter, you don't like choice?
Besides, the defaults are adequate, and it wouldn't hurt
you to actually read a manual once in awhile.

> Instead of a program with a few check boxes, they need to buy a book
> on it, as soon as it comes out.

Oh, I see.  If it's not GUIfied, it's incomprehensible.
One wonders if we should even include text in the
textboxes, as opposed to little flag icons showing a
smiling penguin, a colored broken flag (www.microsoft.com),
a marble with horns (www.freebsd.org), a whale
(www.freedos.org), and a planet orbited by four satellites
(www.reactos.org), or a four-square logo with connecting
arcs (www.gnu.org/software/hurd/).

You are reading this post, right?  I'll admit I'm not up
on Egyptian hieroglyphics.

>
> I am on board.  I am with ya......  USERS  geeezeeeeee
>

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Linux makes one use one's mind.
Windows just messes with one's head.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, raylopez99
<raylopez99@yahoo.com>
 wrote
on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
<45a5c0de-ad6f-4cc0-9fd0-7f500f79559d@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
> On Jul 23, 2:03�pm, "Psyc Geek (TAB)" <psycge...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Na, we not dual booting. �That is so yesterday technology.
>> We are all now doing Virtual OS's on Xen.
>>
>> Start with installing Gentoo, and you be on the right track.
>
> I don't know enough to know if you are serious or not.  Are you saying
> Gentoo will fit on a Pentium with little Ram and a 1-3 GB HD?
>
> RL
>

Gentoo will not fit on a 1-3 GB HD, mostly because the
portage tree can get huge as it stores downloads in
/usr/portage/distfiles (by default, but one can edit
/etc/make.conf).  One can of course use Gentoo without
the portage tree (which can be stored elsewhere; it's not
needed unless one wants to update).

What precisely did you want to put on that system?

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
GNU and improved.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Andrew Halliwell
<spike1@ponder.sky.com>
 wrote
on Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:08:05 +0100
<l81ll5-nro.ln1@ponder.sky.com>:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>> No they won't.  I'd have to do some testing but 38 MB is
>> not something one can cram Gnome or KDE into without a very
>> large loss in performance;
>
> Gnome and kde aren't essensial y'know.
> Even in ubuntu you can select not to install (or run) gnome.
>

Correct.  I've run X in as little as 8 MB, but it's
painful, and I'd have to use something on the order
of twm in that particular case.  Twm has a very light,
unconventional GUI by today's standards -- for starters,
windows are resized by using the upper right corner and
show a rubberband effect.  Twm also has no concept of
panels, and window icons are just dropped on the root
window.  There are no icons for files, directories,
symlinks, "My Computer", etc.

With 38 MB, one might be able to run xfce or fvwm-95,
both of which have a bottom bar and popup menus.

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Does anyone else remember the 1802?
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Linonut wrote:

> Once you get Linux running, you won't be wanting to use Windows
> anyway.

s/use Windows anyway/live any longer

ray wrote:
> Many successes; no failures.

Senility is making you switch words around, raytard. 

Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> raylopez99 wrote:
>>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>>>
>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>> successes.
>>>
>>> RL
>> What does it matter Ray?
>>
>> Everything you attempt fails anyway.
> 
> Back in the old days, I was consulting for the FAA on a computer project
> running on batch processing IBM 7090 computer (they had two in the same
> room). So they had some machines that read the jobs from decks of punched
> cards onto magnetic tape. The machine then read one tape at a time
> processing the jobs that wrote their output onto another tape for printing
> and punching. The machine looked something like this.
> 
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:IBM_7090_computer.jpg
> 
> Now they had one programmer who was completely hopeless. He would submit his
> job and then hang around for it to run. The operator would look at the front
> panel of the computer at the blinking lights and tell the programmer that
> his job had failed. The operator was always right. The programmer wondered
> how the operator could tell, and the operator explained he could tell by
> looking at the lights. Pretty funny joke because the lights were
> incandescent bulbs and the clock rate on the machine was about 500 MHz, slow
> by today's standards, but way to fast for you to tell much from the lights:
> you could not even tell what job was running, much less what it was doing.
> 
When I was drafted in 1971, I was assigned as a systems analyst of an HP 
2116 minicomputer for a medical research facility. It had a row of 
lights across the front that represented the contents of the accumulator 
while the thing was running. It didn't take long for me to learn which 
general patterns indicated normalcy, and which indicated some sort of 
hangup.

TJ

raylopez99 wrote:
> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
> 
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
> 
> RL

I've always done it with Mandrake/Mandriva and Windows 98. The Mandriva 
installer takes care of setting up the whole thing. Easy as pie. It'll 
repartition the unused Windows space for Linux for you,too. All you have 
to do is tell it to do so when it asks. The installer medium will even 
restore the Windows boot sector should you decide to go back to the Dark 
Side.

Tom A.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On 2008-07-24, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, raylopez99
><raylopez99@yahoo.com>
>  wrote
> on Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
><45a5c0de-ad6f-4cc0-9fd0-7f500f79559d@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>> On Jul 23, 2:03�pm, "Psyc Geek (TAB)" <psycge...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Na, we not dual booting. �That is so yesterday technology.
>>> We are all now doing Virtual OS's on Xen.
>>>
>>> Start with installing Gentoo, and you be on the right track.
>>
>> I don't know enough to know if you are serious or not.  Are you saying
>> Gentoo will fit on a Pentium with little Ram and a 1-3 GB HD?
>>
>> RL
>>
>
> Gentoo will not fit on a 1-3 GB HD, mostly because the
> portage tree can get huge as it stores downloads in
> /usr/portage/distfiles (by default, but one can edit
> /etc/make.conf).  One can of course use Gentoo without
> the portage tree (which can be stored elsewhere; it's not
> needed unless one wants to update).

You don't need to install the portage tree. You can network mount it
from another machine.

http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Using_a_shared_portage_via_NFS

> What precisely did you want to put on that system?

Nothing of course. It's all a troll.


-- 
Regards,

Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

Baho Utot wrote:
> raylopez99 wrote:
> 
>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>> successes.
> 
> Is the sky blue?

Is bagoong alamang pink?   :-)

-- 
HPT

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:10:58 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

>> #cd usr/bin
>> #sudo ./openoffice/bin/run/linux/eat/my/shorts/oowriter.sh /home/
>> whoami/documents/me/where/confused/resume.odt
> 
> Try again; the above contains several errors.
> 
> [1] The cd is incorrect.  For root on my system, 'cd' with no parameters
> leaves one at /root; cd usr/bin would leave one at the nonexistent
> directory /root/usr/bin.
> 
> [2] The cd is also unnecessary if one specifies the full pathname in the
> sudo command.


Why use sudo to launch an app?


-Thufir

On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 08:11 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:
> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
>=20
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
>=20
> RL

not much to tell; Grub works

i run VirtualBox instead of dual booting now though (not an option on
small hardware ofc.)

--=20
Lars Rune N=C3=B8stdal
http://nostdal.org/

Andrew Halliwell <spike1@ponder.sky.com> writes:

> In comp.os.linux.misc raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 23, 12:30 pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>
>>> No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dual
>>> boot setting,  may not be as automated as installing other distros.
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> OK, do you have any recommendations for a distro that will fit onto a
>> old Pentium 100 with 38MB Ram I believe, and a 2 GB or so HD?  Only
>> DSL seemed to fit the bill.
>
> Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding threads
> will do the fucking job you tosser!

Resume : "A degree in CS and a plethora of Usenet posts swearing and
frothing at the mouth".

Next!

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:37:46 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:

> On Jul 23, 12:30 pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> No, it shows that installing --Damn Small Linux--, especially in a dual
>> boot setting,  may not be as automated as installing other distros.
>>
>>
> 
> OK, do you have any recommendations for a distro that will fit onto a
> old Pentium 100 with 38MB Ram I believe, and a 2 GB or so HD?  Only DSL
> seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> And, re DSL, do you know which parameter to set to install it to the HD
> (even without a dual boot), rather than "Live CD" when it boots from the
> CD?
> 
> Those are the questions I'm trying to answer.
> 
> RL

Ray, I have done this with DSL and it is simple.  The key is to install 
Windows first.  Then install DSL, choosing Grub rather than Lilo as your 
boot manager.  DSL will ask if you have Windows on the other partition, 
you answer yes, and when you reboot, you will get a menu that allows you 
to choose either OS.

Charlie

TJ wrote:
> Jean-David Beyer wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> raylopez99 wrote:
>>>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>>>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>>>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>>>>
>>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>>> successes.
>>>>
>>>> RL
>>> What does it matter Ray?
>>>
>>> Everything you attempt fails anyway.
>> Back in the old days, I was consulting for the FAA on a computer project
>> running on batch processing IBM 7090 computer (they had two in the same
>> room). So they had some machines that read the jobs from decks of punched
>> cards onto magnetic tape. The machine then read one tape at a time
>> processing the jobs that wrote their output onto another tape for printing
>> and punching. The machine looked something like this.
>>
>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:IBM_7090_computer.jpg
>>
>> Now they had one programmer who was completely hopeless. He would submit his
>> job and then hang around for it to run. The operator would look at the front
>> panel of the computer at the blinking lights and tell the programmer that
>> his job had failed. The operator was always right. The programmer wondered
>> how the operator could tell, and the operator explained he could tell by
>> looking at the lights. Pretty funny joke because the lights were
>> incandescent bulbs and the clock rate on the machine was about 500 MHz, slow
>> by today's standards, but way to fast for you to tell much from the lights:
>> you could not even tell what job was running, much less what it was doing.
>>
> When I was drafted in 1971, I was assigned as a systems analyst of an HP 
> 2116 minicomputer for a medical research facility. It had a row of 
> lights across the front that represented the contents of the accumulator 
> while the thing was running. It didn't take long for me to learn which 
> general patterns indicated normalcy, and which indicated some sort of 
> hangup.
> 
> TJ

Well, I could tell things on that 7090 console too. When I saw a lot of
11000000 in the MQ register, they were probably spaces getting put into the
printer output file, so it was likely an assembler listing or a report. But
I would not be able to tell whose job it was, what language it was written
in (they used mostly JOVIAL at that place), or even if it were a compilation
or execution.

-- 
  .~.  Jean-David Beyer          Registered Linux User 85642.
  /V\  PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A         Registered Machine   241939.
 /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey    http://counter.li.org
 ^^-^^ 07:00:01 up 3 days, 11:48, 4 users, load average: 4.11, 4.12, 4.09

High Plains Thumper wrote:
> Baho Utot wrote:
>> raylopez99 wrote:
>>
>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>> successes.
>> Is the sky blue?
> 
> Is bagoong alamang pink?   :-)
> 
Only on alternate Tuesdays.

-- 
  .~.  Jean-David Beyer          Registered Linux User 85642.
  /V\  PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A         Registered Machine   241939.
 /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey    http://counter.li.org
 ^^-^^ 07:05:01 up 3 days, 11:53, 4 users, load average: 4.22, 4.13, 4.10

On Jul 23, 4:22=A0pm, "Ezekiel" <f...@u.com> wrote:
> "raylopez99" <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c9afab5f-2c09-4d79-9f10-eca86cc98f23@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> > 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware. =A0I did this 10 years ago wit=
h
> > RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> > Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> > successes.
>
> > RL
>
> Just be careful. My machine has 3 drives. A couple of SATA drives and a
> external SCSI. During the POST I can press (F12?) and select the drive th=
at
> I want to boot from. I currently have XP installed on one of the SATA
> drives (the other SATA is just for data). My intent was to install linux =
on
> the external SCSI drive and boot from it when I felt like it.
>
> GRUB decided to ignore the SCSI drive and install itself onto my primary
> SATA drive without ever asking. GRUB worked fine if I wanted to boot to
> linux. But when I tried to boot XP from GRUB it would get confused and gi=
ve
> some sort of cryptic error message. Eventually I was able to edit the
> config file and get it straightened out.
>
> ** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

I found out the hard way.  Using Rick's page from the DSL Wiki, I did
install Linux DSL to the HD today, and used "LILO" as the boot loader,
but in the process nuked my WIndows partition.  Now if somebody can
kindly recommend which "File Manager" to use--I cannot tell whether my
second drive is being detected (I suspect not) whether the swap file
is being used (I did set the right parameters during the install), I
know my floppy is detected, but only by saving from a text editor to
the floppy, and then reading the file.

Doesn't Linux have a GUI 'icon based' file manager for DSL Linux?  I
want to right click on an icon and see how much free space my HD
has... or, create a new folder without screwing around with
MKDIR...and where is my non-root directories?  ONe was created called
"DSL" but where is it?  How do I search for
directories....Linux...rather, DSL LInux...I keep having to write "DSL
LInux" since there are so many Linux variants.

In short, Linux has has a steep learning curve but I'm giving it an
honest shot.

So far, for a power user like myself, it's not too bad, but really I
need help or a good book.  There are too many choices...even, as you
say, for the boot loader (LILO, GRUP, and a half dozen others--I just
stuck with LILO, being the oldest, and it was pretty primitive but
seems to work).

HELP!  Is that a fair question for Linux newbies?  :)

RL

On Jul 23, 5:17=A0pm, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:

>
> You don't trust anything Linux. Write it to any partition (except, of
> course, swap) on the hard drive.
>

Ray--the swap file is temporary, but how do you view it?  Where is
it?  How do I know it's working?  I did set it up correctly during
installation I'm pretty sure... I am using emelFM version 0.9.2 as a
file manager...and it's pretty primitive and non-icon driven (just
text).  Do you have a better File Manager?

Ray Lopez

raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:

> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.

And if it worked 10 years ago, of COURSE it must be broken now, eh?
Let us know when you have a REAL question.

On Jul 23, 5:42=A0pm, Linonut <lino...@bollsouth.nut> wrote:

Linonut--what File Manager do you use?  I am using emelFM version
0.9.2 and want something better, more GUI, if possible.
Tx

RL

raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:

> OK, thanks.  I have a link http://www.geocities.com/epark/linux/grub-w2k-HOWTO.html,
> which Ghost apparently refers to, and I can follow that for the
> mechanics, but I wanted actual war stories.


Yup. You want more reasons to do nothing, so you can claim success.

On Jul 23, 5:46=A0pm, The Ghost In The Machine
<ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:

>
> > Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding thread=
s
> > will do the fucking job you tosser!
>
> No they won't. =A0I'd have to do some testing but 38 MB is
> not something one can cram Gnome or KDE into without a very
> large loss in performance; it also must be able to install
> and set up his hard drive. =A0Best bet: something very light,
> like DSL, though it depends on his other requirements (for
> example, he might want to run a Word workalike; if so,
> OpenOffice is rather heavy for such a configuration).
>
> --

Right you are Ghost, as usual, you can read unlike Andrew.

I nuked the HD of Windows, so forget dual boot.  Now my concern is a
decent file manager (FM)--as I posted here, I am reading and writing
to the floppy, but want to 'see' it in the FM (using emelFM 0.9.2--is
there something more GUI?).  Also a 'systems tool' to tell me if I'm
using the swap partition (pretty sure I did it correctly--its about
250 MB while the rest of the primary bootable drive--hda2 was the
assigned number--is 750MB).

Also, I have a second HD, that I think still has Windows NT--how do I
view all hardware on my machine and reformat this for Linux?

Too many choices and wrong paths in Linux---that's the problem.

I really need a book...should I spend the $30 on the LInux Bible?  Or
what webpage?

Tx in advance,

RL

raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:

> I'll figure it out eventually, but again it underscores installing
> Linux is not a "cinch".

Yes. Installing Linux on a machine with 48MB of RAM is not a "cinch."

On Jul 23, 6:13=A0pm, The Ghost In The Machine
<ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:

> What precisely did you want to put on that system?
>
> --

FOr now, DSL is working, but I need a list of 'common tools' and faqs
on how to use these tools, said tools being DSL Linux tools (ie tools
that come with the DSL Linux distro).

RL

On Jul 23, 9:03=A0pm, High Plains Thumper
<highplainsthum...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> > Is the sky blue?
>
> Is bagoong alamang pink? =A0 :-)
>
> --
> HPT

What is that, a vagina?  You perv.

RL

The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> writes:

> No they won't.  I'd have to do some testing but 38 MB is
> not something one can cram Gnome or KDE into without a very
> large loss in performance; it also must be able to install
> and set up his hard drive.  Best bet: something very light,
> like DSL, though it depends on his other requirements (for
> example, he might want to run a Word workalike; if so,
> OpenOffice is rather heavy for such a configuration).


DSL has abiword - which can edit MS word documents.

On Jul 23, 9:46=A0pm, Hadron <hadronqu...@googlemail.com> wrote:

>
> > Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding thread=
s
> > will do the fucking job you tosser!
>
> Resume : "A degree in CS and a plethora of Usenet posts swearing and
> frothing at the mouth".
>
> Next!

haha! Good one Hadron.  Andrew is a perpetual student...the university
won't toss the tosser since he pays his tuition and that's enough for
them.

RL

raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:

>> > And, re DSL, do you know which parameter to set to install it to the HD
>> > (even without a dual boot), rather than "Live CD" when it boots from the
>> > CD?
>>
>> <http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/wiki/index.php/Installing_to_the_Hard_Disk>
>
> Thanks Rick!  I've saved this page and will try it tomorrow.


Yeah. Google is so darrrrrrn complicated.

thufir <hawat.thufir@gmail.com> writes:

> LOL.  What if you'd just told him to google it?  However, now that he has 
> *saved* the webpage (he downloaded it for some reason?), *now* all 
> questions are answered.  He couldn't have found that webpage on his own, 
> but now that he has saved it, now he can complete the install.  Waiting 
> eagerly for the next step.  Reading the website?  Clicking on the 
> instructions?

The mind boggles.......

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:11:02 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:

> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
> RedHat and NT successfully.
> 
> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> successes.
> 
> RL
>
grub is the _bootloader_ that I use. It is important to realize that the
bootloader is not part of any OS- it is a "thing" unto itself. Luckily,
the grub bootloader is straight forward. A little bit of time reading its
documentation, and then practicing using it can pay big dividends in the
future, especially if you want to use dual boot capabilities. And in
any case, IMO, it is always a good idea to have a basic understanding of
the tools you are using. The major Linux distributions have
attempted to mask the inherent complexities of dealing with the bootloader
and partition tables by "taking over" and handling everything in the
background during setup. I guess this is a good idea because unnecessary
complexity can be an obstacle to new users. However, it also gives the
impression that some "black magic" is required to setup a dual boot
system. In that case, they have no idea of how to fix things when
something breaks in the future. I have found that grub works (mostly) as
advertised. It is a flexible, and straightforward tool to use to boot your
system.

More words of caution...
A fairly high percentage of the questions asked on
comp.os.linux.misc and comp.os.linux.setup involve problems setting up
for dual boot. Definitely, there can be problems. There are more ways to
do something wrong than to do it right. 

It is a good idea to practice learning the grub loader only on a system
where mistakes can be made without dire consequences. For example, don't
practice on any system which does not have a current backup. 

-- 
Douglas Mayne

On 2008-07-24, Maxwell Lol <nospam@com.invalid> wrote:
> raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> I'll figure it out eventually, but again it underscores installing
>> Linux is not a "cinch".
>
> Yes. Installing Linux on a machine with 48MB of RAM is not a "cinch."

Dig up an old copy of Redhat or Slackware.

They really weren't as difficult to do deal with as all the FUD indicated.

-- 
....as if the ability to run Cubase ever made or broke a platform.
                                                                  |||
	                                                         / | \

 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------       
                http://www.usenet.com

On Jul 24, 7:34=A0am, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 4:22=A0pm, "Ezekiel" <f...@u.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "raylopez99" <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:c9afab5f-2c09-4d79-9f10-eca86cc98f23@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com..=
..
>
> > > My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
> > > 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware. =A0I did this 10 years ago w=
ith
> > > RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> > > Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
> > > successes.
>
> > > RL
>
> > Just be careful. My machine has 3 drives. A couple of SATA drives and a
> > external SCSI. During the POST I can press (F12?) and select the drive =
that
> > I want to boot from. I currently have XP installed on one of the SATA
> > drives (the other SATA is just for data). My intent was to install linu=
x on
> > the external SCSI drive and boot from it when I felt like it.
>
> > GRUB decided to ignore the SCSI drive and install itself onto my primar=
y
> > SATA drive without ever asking. GRUB worked fine if I wanted to boot to
> > linux. But when I tried to boot XP from GRUB it would get confused and =
give
> > some sort of cryptic error message. Eventually I was able to edit the
> > config file and get it straightened out.
>
> > ** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**
>
> I found out the hard way. =A0Using Rick's page from the DSL Wiki, I did
> install Linux DSL to the HD today, and used "LILO" as the boot loader,
> but in the process nuked my WIndows partition. =A0Now if somebody can
> kindly recommend which "File Manager" to use--I cannot tell whether my
> second drive is being detected (I suspect not) whether the swap file
> is being used (I did set the right parameters during the install), I
> know my floppy is detected, but only by saving from a text editor to
> the floppy, and then reading the file.
>
> Doesn't Linux have a GUI 'icon based' file manager for DSL Linux? =A0I
> want to right click on an icon and see how much free space my HD
> has... or, create a new folder without screwing around with
> MKDIR...and where is my non-root directories? =A0ONe was created called
> "DSL" but where is it? =A0How do I search for
> directories....Linux...rather, DSL LInux...I keep having to write "DSL
> LInux" since there are so many Linux variants.
>
> In short, Linux has has a steep learning curve but I'm giving it an
> honest shot.
>
> So far, for a power user like myself, it's not too bad, but really I
> need help or a good book. =A0There are too many choices...even, as you
> say, for the boot loader (LILO, GRUP, and a half dozen others--I just
> stuck with LILO, being the oldest, and it was pretty primitive but
> seems to work).
>
> HELP! =A0Is that a fair question for Linux newbies? =A0:)
>
> RL

Well, you used LILO.  That died 2 years ago, and nobody
updated the program.   Grub is in today, but that is being
replaced by Spam.

Get PCLinuxOS and softboot.
Then you can fix your boot record with a GUI.

There is a course on how to fix the boot loader,
but that requires to the boot loader be working
already, and you must have passed the terminal
typing class, which is a dependency.

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 04:37:05 -0700, raylopez99 wrote:

> On Jul 23, 5:17 pm, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> You don't trust anything Linux. Write it to any partition (except, of
>> course, swap) on the hard drive.
>>
>>
> Ray--the swap file is temporary, but how do you view it?  Where is it? 
> How do I know it's working?  I did set it up correctly during
> installation I'm pretty sure... I am using emelFM version 0.9.2 as a
> file manager...and it's pretty primitive and non-icon driven (just
> text).  Do you have a better File Manager?
> 
> Ray Lopez

1. You don't 'view' the swap partition - you would not see anything 
readable.

2. It's where ever you told the installer to put it. If you don't remember 
use 'cat /proc/swaps'.

3. man swapon

4. No, I don't have a "better File Manager" - simply because I don't use 
one.

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 22:36:05 -0400, DFS wrote:

> ray wrote:
>> Many successes; no failures.
> 
> Senility is making you switch words around, raytard.

I don't think so, DooFuS. I'm in the habit of saying exactly what I mean.

> 2. It's where ever you told the installer to put it. If you don't remember
> use 'cat /proc/swaps'.

I love this one.  There is a command, not nobody for sure
is going to remember, to find something, that you don't
remember where you put.  I am sure you had no idea
what it was that you were putting somewhere, or for
what reason.

I guess it would be too hard to automate this?

**** rolling eyes *******

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, raylopez99 wrote:


> I nuked the HD of Windows, so forget dual boot.

That's the second time you've said that.

Yet how do you know?

Just because you can't boot something doens't mean it doesn't exist.
For a while after I started using Linux, I booted with a floppy disk,
so unless that disk was in the drive when I turned things on, nothing
would happen.

I did it later when I added a second distribution, and wasn't prepared
to play with lilo.

A mangled bootloader would not kill a partition.  It would merely be
unaware that there is something worth booting on that partition.

Now yes, you could have destroyed the Windows partition, but not
with a bootloader.  You'd have had to reformat that partition or
run a partitioning tool on it.

    Michael

raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:

> On Jul 23, 5:17 pm, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> You don't trust anything Linux. Write it to any partition (except, of
>> course, swap) on the hard drive.
>>
>
> Ray--the swap file is temporary, but how do you view it?  Where is

Or as root : "swapon -s"

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:08:56 -0700, Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:

>> 2. It's where ever you told the installer to put it. If you don't
>> remember use 'cat /proc/swaps'.
> 
> I love this one.  There is a command, not nobody for sure is going to
> remember, to find something, that you don't remember where you put.  I
> am sure you had no idea what it was that you were putting somewhere, or
> for what reason.
> 
> I guess it would be too hard to automate this?
> 
> **** rolling eyes *******

Were born an idiot, or did you work at it?



-- 
Rick

On 2008-07-24, Psyc Geek (TAB) <psycgeeks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 2. It's where ever you told the installer to put it. If you don't remember
>> use 'cat /proc/swaps'.
>
> I love this one.  There is a command, not nobody for sure

    This is not surprising since this generally only comes up
when a TROLL wants a weak excuse to whine.

     If you're clued in enough to even be aware enough of
what this is to whine about it then you have enough of a
clue to figure it out for yourself based on what you would
need to know to get by in Windows.

     Some things really aren't that different...

> is going to remember, to find something, that you don't
> remember where you put.  I am sure you had no idea
> what it was that you were putting somewhere, or for
> what reason.
>
> I guess it would be too hard to automate this?
>
> **** rolling eyes *******
>
>


-- 
      If you are going to judge Linux based on how easy 
it is to get onto a Macintosh. Let's try installing          |||
MacOS X on a DELL!                                          / | \

 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------       
                http://www.usenet.com

raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:

> Doesn't Linux have a GUI 'icon based' file manager for DSL Linux?

Google 
       damnsmalllinux "file manager"

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, thufir
<hawat.thufir@gmail.com>
 wrote
on Thu, 24 Jul 2008 04:41:53 GMT
<lKThk.25827$nD.17838@pd7urf1no>:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:10:58 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>>> #cd usr/bin
>>> #sudo ./openoffice/bin/run/linux/eat/my/shorts/oowriter.sh /home/
>>> whoami/documents/me/where/confused/resume.odt
>> 
>> Try again; the above contains several errors.
>> 
>> [1] The cd is incorrect.  For root on my system, 'cd' with no parameters
>> leaves one at /root; cd usr/bin would leave one at the nonexistent
>> directory /root/usr/bin.
>> 
>> [2] The cd is also unnecessary if one specifies the full pathname in the
>> sudo command.
>
>
> Why use sudo to launch an app?
>

One might cut him a little slack on certain utilities
(e.g., kppp -- maybe), but I covered that under point #5,
since the sudo command is editing some sort of resume.

Or trying to.  (As root yet.)

I probably should add another point in that the full pathname
for OO is incorrect as well, though the exact location is
rather dependent on distro. In Gentoo, it's /usr/bin/oowriter,
which invokes /usr/bin/soffice -writer "$@", which then
does quite a bit of work and ultimately gets to
/usr/lib/openoffice/program/soffice.bin , which most people
won't invoke directly.  I could see, however, other distros
putting it in /opt/openoffice, /usr/openoffice/bin, or
any other location allowed by the Unix File Standard; I'd
frankly have to look.

The Nautilus "new document" creator could be a little
better; all it does is create a 0-byte file named
newfile.odt.  OOWriter doesn't mind, though when saved it
comes back as the bytestream EFBBBF0D0A.  The first three
characters turn out to be U+FEFF, ZERO WIDTH NO-BREAK
SPACE.  (This is a useful character in UTF-16 to indicate
byte ordering; it's otherwise mostly harmless.  It took me
awhile to figure this out mostly because my system draws
fonts very slowly -- and gucharmap wants to draw every
one of them. ;-) )

Or one can simply pull down the Applications -> Office menu
and invoke one of the OO tools.

Is this a little too hard for Psyc Geek to figure out?

*I* am a geek.  I frankly admit it.  I'm pedantic,
knowledgeable and occasionally irritable.  Psyc Geek
is 1/3 of a geek. ;-)

>
> -Thufir

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
New Technology?  Not There.  No Thanks.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Psyc Geek (TAB)
<psycgeeks@yahoo.com>
 wrote
on Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
<5141e2b9-91c8-43ba-923d-4a73c91a294d@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>:
>> 2. It's where ever you told the installer to put it. If you don't remember
>> use 'cat /proc/swaps'.
>
> I love this one.  There is a command, not nobody for sure
> is going to remember, to find something, that you don't
> remember where you put.  I am sure you had no idea
> what it was that you were putting somewhere, or for
> what reason.
>
> I guess it would be too hard to automate this?
>
> **** rolling eyes *******
>

I'll admit it's a bit arcane, but then how often would
the average user even care about fiddling with swap space,
once set up?

I'll admit it might be useful for the Gnome process
monitor to show swap partitions/files in use (one can
get the memory and swap history easily enough, but that's
just total swap).

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Linux.  Because Windows' Blue Screen Of Death is just
way too frightening to novice users.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Maxwell Lol
<nospam@com.invalid>
 wrote
on Thu, 24 Jul 2008 07:38:13 -0400
<87r69j4imy.fsf@com.invalid>:
> raylopez99 <raylopez99@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> My latest project is to dual boot Linux (DSL) with Windows (Windows
>> 2000) for an old piece of junk hardware.  I did this 10 years ago with
>> RedHat and NT successfully.
>
> And if it worked 10 years ago, of COURSE it must be broken now, eh?
> Let us know when you have a REAL question.

As it so happens, it's not broken ... but knowing
Microsoft's propensity to fiddle with the boot record,
one cannot be 100% sure.

Thankfully, I've heard nothing that suggests GRUB and Vista
won't play together; Vista's boot requirements aren't all
that different from NT, apparently.

Ditto for LILO.

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Linux.  Because Windows' Blue Screen Of Death is just
way too frightening to novice users.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

High Plains Thumper wrote:

> Baho Utot wrote:
>> raylopez99 wrote:
>> 
>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>> successes.
>> 
>> Is the sky blue?
> 
> Is bagoong alamang pink?   :-)
> 

OO.... pero hindi alamang  it's hipon mabaho, pero masarap. 

-- 
Tayo'y mga Pinoy

raylopez99 wrote:

> On Jul 23, 9:03 pm, High Plains Thumper
> <highplainsthum...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> > Is the sky blue?
>>
>> Is bagoong alamang pink?   :-)
>>
>> --
>> HPT
> 
> What is that, a vagina?  You perv.
> 
> RL

polpol ka

Ingles translation --> You Idiot

-- 
Tayo'y mga Pinoy

Baho Utot <baho-utot@invalid.invalid> writes:

> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> Baho Utot wrote:
>>> raylopez99 wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>>> successes.
>>> 
>>> Is the sky blue?
>> 
>> Is bagoong alamang pink?   :-)
>> 
>
> OO.... pero hindi alamang  it's hipon mabaho, pero masarap. 
>
> -- 
> Tayo'y mga Pinoy

Hehe pero allergic ako diyan. :-)

To OP: I never had probs dual booting between Windows and various
Linuxen, I've used both LILO and grub.  I used to care about kernel
image placement limits (e.g., kernels withing the first X or so
cylinders/GB of the disk) that I made sure /boot was the first or second
partition, but nowadays I just let the BIOS do its job.

-- 
  I like the idea of 256 bits, though: 32 for the (Unicode) character leaves
  room for 224 Bucky bits, which ought to be enough for anyone.
				-- Roland Hutchinson, in alt.folklore.computers

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 04:46:06 -0700 (PDT), raylopez99 wrote:

> On Jul 23, 9:46�pm, Hadron <hadronqu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>>> Any single one of the distros recommended in the past 10 sodding threads
>>> will do the fucking job you tosser!
>>
>> Resume : "A degree in CS and a plethora of Usenet posts swearing and
>> frothing at the mouth".
>>
>> Next!
> 
> haha! Good one Hadron.  Andrew is a perpetual student...the university
> won't toss the tosser since he pays his tuition and that's enough for
> them.
> 
> RL

The same could be said of Roy Schestowitz, the Van Wilder of University of
Manchester GB....

-- 
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Zak B. Elep wrote:

> Baho Utot <baho-utot@invalid.invalid> writes:
> 
>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>>
>>> Baho Utot wrote:
>>>> raylopez99 wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Wondering if anybody is dual booting and if you've had problems or
>>>>> successes.
>>>> 
>>>> Is the sky blue?
>>> 
>>> Is bagoong alamang pink?   :-)
>>> 
>>
>> OO.... pero hindi alamang  it's hipon mabaho, pero masarap.
>>
>> --
>> Tayo'y mga Pinoy
> 
> Hehe pero allergic ako diyan. :-)

Ano makati 

-- 
Tayo'y mga Pinoy