Chris L

I want to partition the HD on my PC to run Linux (Redhat 9 and possibly 7.x later on to) as well as XP.

Drive is 120GB capacity, with roughly 100 Gb free (P4 2.4 Ghz, 256 Mb RAM). Any recommendations on the practical size of the partition for each copy of Linux? Also recommendations on swap file size and which bits should be primary and which bits should be logical drives? I'm also going to up the RAM, probably to 512K

I will probably access Linux via something like VMware if possible.

Any advice?

Cheers
Chris

vindaloo

Chris,

Try 3-4Gb for the root partition and approx. 100-150% of the installed memory for the swap partition.

If you install (or have the option to install) GRUB, which is a boot loader/manager, you can boot multiple copies of Linux and Windows.

If you want to share data you may find that XP runs NTFS format. I think Linux can read this but not write to it (that always used to be the case). If the windows partitions are type FAT32, both Linu and Windows can read/write them.

Vindaloo.

Chris L

Cheers Vindaloo

Anyone any thoughts on logical and primary partitions?

Chris

jason4656

personally i set the swap disk size to 2x ram so if i have 512 i give it 1gb, but the kernels have real problems mounting ntfs unless you can edit them and know what you are doing i wouldnt suggest this, trying to copy data i ended up with many i/o errors and ended up ruining alot of data trying to copy from ntfs. I find it easier to read the linux box by using samba and reading accross my network didnt have any problems doing this

[Edited by jason4656 - 11/29/2003 4:25:17 PM]

Chris L

Well that has been my experience aswell. I wasn't too worried about reading across from XP to Linux, so I probably won't bother with making the Linux partition NTFS. I would like some thoughts on primary and logical partitions though.

Ta
Chris

Chris L

No reason for this post, except it is my 5000th!!

Chris

Gedi

Not sure what brought you to that conclusion, but there are absolutly no problems reading NTFS partitions from Linux. The Linux drivers do not alter the filesystem in any way so you data is completly safe. I do not know what you were doing to corrupt data by simply copying it from an NTFS filesystem, but you were doing something very wrong.

Also, samba reads from tne NTFS filesystem in exactly the same way as mounting it on the local machine would. The only difference is that samba uses SMB to transport the data over the network.

If your kernel version is 2.4.*, or 2.5.0 - 2.5.10, then you probably have the Original NTFS Driver. If you have 2.5.11 or later, then you have got the New NTFS Driver.
The new driver, introduced in 2.5.11, has some write code, but it's very limited. The driver can overwrite existing files, but it cannot change the length, add new or delete existing files. Best to stay clear for the time being.

[Edited by Gedi - 11/29/2003 6:18:29 PM]

jason4656

the kernel i used pre was 2.4* and once edited to mount ntfs could no longer be upgraded, my friend who is linux network admin at ibm tweaked the kernel, then each time i tried to update it via redhat update it kept saying there was something wrong. And what i said above is true, mounted the ntfs drive, tried to copy data and alot of it was corrupted, im not exactly an amateur, even though you may never have experienced it, it did happen and im just sharing my experience

and what i meant about samba was i share the drive on teh network, then i read via my xp box whats in the linux box, i dont have any problems that way, but when i tried to physically mount the ntfs partition of the hard drive that the linux box is hosted on, thats when i had problems

peace

[Edited by jason4656 - 11/29/2003 6:30:01 PM]

Gedi

Appologies if that came over in the wrong way. I wasn't disputing the fact that it happened, I was just pointing out that something was diffinitely wrong somewhere. In order for a filesystem to become corrupt, it must be altered in some way. Reading from the filesystem cannot alter it in anyway, so reading NTFS from Linux is perfectly safe. There must have been some other underlying issue in your case.

Also, in the newer Linux distros, NTFS support is automatically compiled into the kernel, so unless you go into advanced mode at install and stop it, it will be there anyway.

Enabling it is just a case of saying y or m at CONFIG_NTFS_FS in the kernel config.
cat /proc/filesystems will tell you if your kernel understands NTFS

vindaloo

Chris L,

Regarding primary versus extended partitions and filesystems....

I haven't had to worry too much as I have two 6.4GB drives. ISTR that you can have up to four primary partitions and some random number of extended ones per drive. I don't know what boot restrictions you have - there used to be a 2GB issue in that bootable had to be within 2GB of the start of the drive.... I didn't learned anymore as I never hit the problem.

I'd run a WINXP primary partition at 8-10GB, then the Linux "/boot" at maybe 64-128MB, then swap, then create an extended partition containing the rest of linux "/" and Linux and/or Winxp data in logical partitions for the rest of the drive.

Good luck re-sizing any current drives

Vindaloo.

stevencotton

Chris, why don't you just ply me with alcohol and I'll pop over

Chris L

Do you know Steve -I was going to drop you a line Are you around next week? I'll email you too.

Cheers
Chris