Guest SDMF Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 I want to reinstall linux, and go dual boot. However, I don't want to back up my few gigs of media. I have linux in 2 partitions right now (not counting the swap partition), one mounted at /, and the other mounted at /home. Now this is what I want to do, I just want to make sure I can before I go to try it: Theoretically I should be able to just throw the stuff into my "/" partition, and then go in with the XP setup, delete the "/home" partition during setup and repartition that space, then boot back into linux, mount the windows partition, copy it to the windows partition, and then do a fresh install of linux. As long as I log in as root when I go to mount the windows partition and move the media to it, I shouldn't miss the "/home" partition, right? In other words, the computer should still boot properly and get as far as the GDM login without needing anything from the "/home" partition, and it will not be needed at all for me to log in for that one session as root, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ixthusdan Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Are you installing winxp dual boot with your current linux? Please tell me more info about your current set up, the size of your drive and partitions, and what you want the end product to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SDMF Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 I want to dual boot MDK9 with XP. The idea, though, is not to dual boot with my current installation, but to use my current "/" partition (on hda1) to store some media while I go and remove my "/home" partition (on hda6) and repartition that space into two partitions, one NTFS for XP, the other for the "/home" partition. Then I want to go in and reformat all the linux partitions, and do a fresh install of MDK9. What I wanted to know was, am I going to need the "/home" partition to boot into linux (after installing XP) and move the saved media to the windows partition before doing the fresh install of MDK9? hda1 is 5.3GB, and hda6 is 32 GB. But now that I look at it, hda6 and hda5 (the swap partition) are on the same logical partition (hda2). This may be a problem. I may just have to back up the stuff after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ixthusdan Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Windows is going to want to wipe out everything when it installs. It has no respect for you or linux :wink: So, the best way is to create a fat32 partition that winxp will see and use for its install. It does need to be first on the drive, or windows will throw fits! Linux will see the ntfs (the converted fat32) install and not mess with it, so install windows first and then linux. I thought of a way to save the data as well, but how critical is the save? You would be creating partitions to move data, freeing up the first part of the dive, moving the data, finally creating the fat32 partition, installing windows into that partition, and then installing Mandrake expert mode so as not to format your back up. Sound like fun? Easiest would be to back up, install windows without allowing it the entire drive, and then installing Mandrake. In either case, you should have a seperate fat32 partition inwhich to share data between the ntfs partition and the linux partitions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ndeb Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Windows is going to want to wipe out everything when it installs. It has no respect for you or linux So, the best way is to create a fat32 partition that winxp will see and use for its install. It does need to be first on the drive, or windows will throw fits! This is not true. I know win2k install process detects existing partitions and then asks which partition is to be used for installing the system files. Only the specified partition is formatted, others left untouched. I suppose winxp (home and pro) should do the same. Now this is what I want to do, I just want to make sure I can before I go to try it: Theoretically I should be able to just throw the stuff into my "/" partition, and then go in with the XP setup, delete the "/home" partition during setup and repartition that space, then boot back into linux, mount the windows partition, copy it to the windows partition, and then do a fresh install of linux. This method will work just fine (based on my experience with win2k). In fact, there is no need to do a fresh install of linux. These steps should suffice: 1. Just use the linux install cd, jump to the hard drive step. Create and format a /home in the new (reduced) unused partition. Do not format any other partition. 2. Then skip the rest of the linux install process until the step where the boot-loader is installed. Install the boot loader and reboot to linux. 3. This step will be required only if /etc/fstab is not automatically updated so that /home won't be mounted. Login as root and update /etc/fstab so that /home now points to the correct partition. Once /etc/fstab has the correct entry, u can manually mount /home using the command mount <hd partition> /home. As long as I log in as root when I go to mount the windows partition and move the media to it, I shouldn't miss the "/home" partition, right? In other words, the computer should still boot properly and get as far as the GDM login without needing anything from the "/home" partition, and it will not be needed at all for me to log in for that one session as root, right? Right, since /root is in / partition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 This is not true. I know win2k install process detects existing partitions and then asks which partition is to be used for installing the system files. Only the specified partition is formatted, others left untouched. I suppose winxp (home and pro) should do the same.I personally don't have experience with either XP or 2k, but I read a few threads that suggest XP trashes linux. Maybe user error? I don't know. Just thought I'd mention it :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezroller Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 I would have to say user error. It is possible to install something with the WIN2K kernel over an existing Linux install. You just have to be careful. I for one think that in an instance like this, it is best to have two drives; one for system shit, and one for data. data; who cares what filesystem type, one will read the other. What I did at work was just have a MDK boot floppy. When the WinXP install was done, I used the MDK boot floppy to get to a shell. run LILO, and BAM, rebuilt LILO boot loader, with an option to boot XP, and the best part is, XP has no idea what the hell is going on!!! :shock: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SDMF Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Well, if XP (like 2K) requires itself to be installed at the beginning of the disk then I guess I will need to just back everything up. No biggie, it's like 3 or 4 GB tops. I was just lazy and did not want to back it up :) In that case, will the version of LILO included with MDK9 throw a fit if hda1 is not in the first 1024 cylinders of the disk? This scenario would call for me to allot about 6-8 GB of the 40 GB drive to Windows, and leave the rest to linux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezroller Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 In that case, will the version of LILO included with MDK9 throw a fit if hda1 is not in the first 1024 cylinders of the disk? Experts back me up: NEGATIVE. thats the beauty of UNIX based systems is that they could care less where on the drive they are, as long as at boot it knows where to look. i.e. in my opinion, use a linux boot loader. If it were me, I would back up my data, media, saves, whatever..>and however I found to be easiest, then install windows first. Windows installs are tough about recognizing other filesystems than what it can use. [ seriously...do the linux install and pay attention to how many filesystems it knows of and compare it to a WinXP install.] and then when done, install linux over it. guarunteed, MDK 9 install will recognize it and safely preserve it. If you have the option to backup to some form of removable, or network media, than even better. Then you can take an even more planned out approach to your partition scheme. I do this for example. Linux has no built in partition for what i use, you can make your own. I use one called /stuff thats where I keep all my mp3, videos, pictures, docs...etc. at work, on my dual boot, its a FAT32 filesystem, but I never have media there for long...(c'mon..its work, how miscievious can you be? :mystilol: ) At home, good 'ol rieserFS. What I'm trying to suggest; is back up anything you care about to CD your configuration files in /home /etc and any other directory that you have spent a lot of time working on. then... experiment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ixthusdan Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 For clarification, windblast will work with partitions that it recognizes. From my experience, it does not like to recognize linux partitions. Which means that, in an install, a user could inadvertantly allow windless to "correct" the hard drive and wipe out linux partitions. The other major issue is that windbags will not reduce its stated partition size correctly. So set it up in a presized partition, and do not resize it during the linux install. Win2k is reasonably stable, although it is still one gigantic virus, but xp is a traditional gates' system--expensive and unstable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SDMF Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Yeah. I think I will end up going with 2K anyway, space is a consideration and I don't want 2GB of hard drive space taken up by the base install, as is the case with XP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.