posted
I understand sometimes people post computer questions on Hatrack. If this question is too involved or out of place, I will understand.
I have decided to "up" my computer knowledge. I am going to create a multiboot system. The biggest reason I am doing this is just to do it. I have already learned a lot in the process. I also want to start working with mandrake. The system I have devloped and want to get operational meets my work and private needs.
Right now I have a computer with a 80 gig hard drive and a 120 gig hard drive. I have used Fdisk to format my computer like this: *note I have not installed anything yet, this is just my design* 80G drive: C: 4G primary Fat32 partition for Dos and files that easily fragment. D: 12G Primary NTFS for Windows XP home. E: 8G Primary Fat32 for Windows 98. F: 19G extended Fat32 for video editing. ripping music, creating DVD from home video or with DVD burner. G: 25G extended Fat 32 for Back up files, Ghost images, drivers, old reports, power points..et cetera. **This leaves 12G untouched that mandrake will format on its own system.
120G Drive: 20G Primary Fat32 for games. 10G Primary NTFS for images. 90G Primary NTFS for storage--mostly media files.
My question is this. I understand I need a boot manager so when I boot my computer I can choose which OS to use. I have read good things about XOSL and Boot Part. What I don't know is when do I install the programs? Do I install Dos first and then this program and then the other OS? Do I install all OS and then the boot manager? Which manager is better and when do I install it?
This leads to my next question. MY XP home that I will put on my computer uses DOS 5.1.2600. I want Dos on it's own partition. I have no Dos discs. Can I make them? Do I need to download them? DO I have to buy them? Money is an issue right now, and I want to pull this off with freeware. Ideally I would like to update my Dos to 6.22, but I don't know if that is done through windows update, a bought update disk, or through a free/paid download.
Any help or suggestions on how to get started would be GREATLY appreciated. Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there a specific reason for mandrake? I'd suggest that you'd use something with better package management than rpms, the easiest way would be to download Knoppix (which is a LiveCD based on debian). and see if you like that, if you do install it (or install debian) and work from there... apt-get is a wonderful, wonderful thing. :: runs off to lecture :: Satyagraha
Posts: 359 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I remember the first hard drive I got. I think it was 10 Mbytes. I remember thinking "this is like having more floppy diskettes than I could ever use in a lifetime!!!"
LOL.
I had a computer with multiple OS on it. Never could get that to work. Getting it back to usable condition required a complete wipe of everything. I think I had to unhook the fan even...
A web site I was at recommended Mandrake because it is the easiest Linux based OS. I wanted something easy to start with, but I will look into your suggestion. I am not tied to any idea for Linux yet. I am still trying to figure out about Dos and the boot loaders so I can start to install Windows. I will certainly look into Knoppix. I have never heard of it. Thank you.
quote: I had a computer with multiple OS on it. Never could get that to work. Getting it back to usable condition required a complete wipe of everything. I think I had to unhook the fan even...
Not very encouraging! I will do it or ruin my computer trying! Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are certain legal issues surrounding the use of MS-DOS; if you don't already have a legal copy, your best bet is to go with FreeDOS. I'm wondering, though, why you're even bothering with DOS, when there's a great emulator freely available called DOSBox. DOSBox is not error-free, but I find it works for most of my old games, including (and this is significant) Privateer and Ultima VII. I recommend nixing the DOS partition; you really shouldn't need it.
Also, your statement that XP Home "uses DOS 5.1.2600" is somewhat in error. XP (and 2000 and versions of NT) does not use DOS. The command prompt in those operating systems is actually a simulated DOS environment, and is very limited in its abilities. Better to think of it as just a command console for Windows, or maybe as a far less capable version of DOSBox.
All that said, here's how I'd go about setting up the system:
1) Create FAT32 partitions and install Win98. 2) Create NTFS partitions and install XP (you can set up those partitions just using the XP installer). 3) Install Mandrake. The Mandrake installer will create whatever partitions it needs.
Each of these operating systems comes with its own boot loader, but only the boot loaders that come with Mandrake will recognize all operating systems. That's why you should install Mandrake last. During the install, you'll be given an option to choose a boot loader (either LILO or Grub); it'll also scan your drive to see what other operating systems are currently installed, and should set most of that up for you.
quote:The command prompt in those operating systems is actually a simulated DOS environment, and is very limited in its abilities.
You are so wrong. More.Even more. That's not even mentioning the GNU Utilities that can be added. Just because you aren't aware of the capabilities does not mean they do not exist.
It is the kernel that is 5.1.2600 (SP2). There is the Windows Command Promt (CMD.EXE), which is not DOS at all, and then there is still the old CLI (COMMAND.COM), which is more DOS-like and less useful because of it.
If you're going to correct someone, it's best to give accurate information. Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's why you should install Mandrake last. During the install, you'll be given an option to choose a boot loader (either LILO or Grub);
Am I to understand that I do not need any loaders? Mandrake will set it up for me? Which option do you suggest I choose, LILO or Grub? Does it matter?
quote:You are so wrong. More. Even more. That's not even mentioning the GNU Utilities that can be added. Just because you aren't aware of the capabilities does not mean they do not exist.
Popcorn popcorn--sounds like a techno fight. My brothers sometimes get into it. I like the idea of having a seperate Dos, of course I have not used Dos much and have an unfounded belief system.
Off topic, I installed XP on my D:partition, but now my sound doesn't work. grrr My soundcard is loaded an updated with the sis7012 audio driver, but my system recognizes to "other"hardware--PCI modem and Multimedia Audio Controller. Neither accept my Sis driver, but my system says I have a sound card sis7012 that is updated. any thoughts before I install Windows 98?
Thank you again so much for all the help. Healthy discussions help us who feel like we are groping through the dark to find solutions/experience.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
I would not suggest having so many different partitions using so many different file systems. You are setting yourself up for trouble by making loads of partitions with all kinds of different file systems. If you want something that every OS you have can access, a single FAT32 will be perfectly sufficient, since DOS can handle FAT32 just fine unless you are using a version which is basically useless. Linux can read FAT32 just fine as well. I do not suggest using anything but NTFS for the XP install.
Boot order-- DOS if you really must, Windows 98, Windows XP, then Linux. This will allow Linux to be the last operating system to place what is called a "boot loader" on your hard disks MBR, or Master Boot Record. XP uses a boot loader as well, and can be used to boot Linux, but the results vary and some have expressed inability to get it working in some situations. GRUB or LILO are a bit more friendly to other operating systems, and are somewhat more graphically friendly than the Windows boot loader as well.
Using Mandrake-- I agree that Mandrake is one of the more easy versions out there. I will warn you ahead of time that you will run into lots of suggestions to run other distributions of Linux instead, usually because those who suggest it are using the different distro. The most common reason for suggesting a different distro is simple distro-specific snobbery, but there are also differences from distribution to distribution in terms of where system files are placed and the general interface layout (though usually not much). With the easier versions out there, you will experience a smaller learning curve for getting things installed and being able to actually do stuff on the machine, in case you were wondering. Other than that, no distribution is better than another, no matter what anyone says. Use what makes you comfortable, not what makes others comfortable.
DOS-- you really do not need DOS at all unless you are running software that is over 15 years old. Even then, you could more likely find alternatives or emulation software out there to allow you to run it in Windows. With Windows XP and 2000, there is no more DOS in the install. The major operating system files are located in the Windows directory, but placing that separate from everything else will not work because there are so many "linked" files during startup that you will probably not even get to a boot screen in XP to notice what went wrong. I suggest you install the whole OS on a single partition.
Partitioning-- If I were you, and you really want to run multiple operating systems, I would put each separate operating system on its own partition, then set the rest of the space up as the whole of the remaining space on the hard drive. I suggest FAT32 again because you will experience the least trouble reading the files no matter what OS you use (there are NTFS drivers for Linux and Win98, but they are often buggy, and there are ext2 drivers for Windows, but they are equally buggy)
Good luck, and I hope I have answered some of your questions.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, I suggest that you join or at least lurk in the Ars Technica Forum for more information from a higher number of qualified people. Just lurking there has gotten me quite a few nifty answers, but there are some there who have gotten very good at walking others through issues that seemed otherwise impossible or silly.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jutsa pretty much said what I would have said.
I'm kind of goofing around with Linux, too, as in I've been goofing around with it off and on for a couple years just to play with it. I just started using Redhat 9.x and am really enjoying it. Everything worked out of the box. Very easy install.
The main thing I would recommend that hasn't been said already for a multi-boot situation is to give one hdd for Linux and one for Windows. *DO* make a boot floppy if you're going to use GRUB or LILO as your boot loader on the same hdd. When I tried to do Linux and XP on the same hdd, I never managed to get it to work without just using a boot floppy to get into Linux, even after installing Linux after XP. Something about hte way XP boots up where it loads itself on the first sector, ahead of Linux.
Anyways, if you're going to load all those OSs on your computer, you're probably not going to be able to use GRUB or LILO. You're almost going to have to get some kind of 3d party software, as you mentioned.
I don't know why you want to screw with DOS, since it's just a command line interface that norrows somewhat from Unix for the commands, and then you screw around with a little BASIC for the autoexec.bat and config.sys stuff. That's it. There's really not much there. If you want to really be a badass and use a CLI, just use the Linux CLI. Once you're familiar with it, it's very easy to use DOS. More to the point, it's almost impossible not to use the Linux CLI, even within KDE or Gnome. And as far as that goes, why not check out BeOS or some of the other Linux variations? They are living, breathing OSes and the cool factor would be much higher goofing around with those, rather than crappy DOS for the love o pete.
As far as getting familiar with other versions of Windows, I respect that. There are a few companies out there that are still using that stuff, but at this point Microsoft doesn't support anything before, what, Windows ME at this point? Windows 2000? And if MS doesn't support it, companies are almost certainly not using it, which doesn't make learning older versions of Windows a very valuable skill.
Let me also recommend getting some kind of Linux Bible or Linux for dummies. If you buy The Linux Bible right now, it comes with Redhat 9.x. It's a million, million times easier to use Linux with a well indexed book that's written by people who understand syntax and logic, rather than spending hours tunneling through forums trying to ferret out what the hell you need to do. Not that you won't be doing that anyway. I wouldn't even try to use the MAN pages or the in OS 'help' functions. At least, I haven't found them helpful AT ALL.
posted
Thank you everyone for your help. After consistent (spelling?) advice, I am ditching Dos. For some reason I thought it was the backbone of everything else and a valuable system. I must of been wrong.
Does anyone have any experience with third party loaders?
I heard Windows 98 is the best to play games off of. It doesn't matter if it is true, my computer is powerful enough. Another reason I was going to use Windows 98 is because I still have my install disc and CD code of an old computer that has long since been stripped.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I honestly don't think you'll need win98, if you have XP, it works perfectly well with pretty much anything you'll be playing (and VirtualPC handles the rest).
I suggest using debian not only because it's what I'm using, but Mandrake still uses RPMs which are a horribly outdated system of package management, you don't want to have to worry about dependencies, the computer should figure it out BY ITSELF, that's my main argument against Fedora and Mandrake, also the Debian installer has gotten a whole lot easier, so the main argument against debian is now pretty much moot. apt-get saves you days and weeks of frustration.
In the way of boot-loaders, GRUB and LILO both work well, I personally like grub better because it's to the point, but it's very much personal preference, but work...good enough.
I suggest ditching FAT32, and using NTFS for Windows and Ext3 for linux, especially if you're doing DVD ripping, fat32 doesn't handle file sizes above 2g. The linux drivers for reading ntfs are pretty good, especially the one that actually use the windows dll files, and there are programs for windows that mount ext2/3 file systems such as Paragon Ext2FS Anywhere (though you have to pay for it...not much though...and it works very well). Satyagraha
quote:You are so wrong. More. Even more. That's not even mentioning the GNU Utilities that can be added. Just because you aren't aware of the capabilities does not mean they do not exist.
Erm... you misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about the XP command prompt's ability to help you manage your system, I was talking about its ability to run programs written for DOS -- specifically, DOS 6.22 or lower. XP's command line really is a simulated DOS environment that doesn't have nearly the flexibility of a clean DOS boot. If you doubt me, try running Privateer or Ultima VII (without the Windows patch) in XP. You'll find that, no matter how you configure it, it just won't work.
During the glory days of DOS, in the times before and just after Win95 came out, programmers had to get more and more creative with memory management, in some cases finding ways to "trick" the processor into giving programs more memory than would otherwise be available -- keeping in mind that DOS (meaning, real DOS -- not XP's command line) is a 16-bit environment. A lot of the code they used is completely incompatible with any distribution of Windows. Going back to Privateer and U7, there doesn't exist any version of Windows that is capable of running them natively. That's the whole reason we have things like DOSBox, the emulator I mentioned above.
XP's command line does have a fair amount of functionality -- I myself installed Cygwin a while back when I was developing cell phone games, because I needed gcc to compile code for the ARM architecture, and I love the fact that unix commands now work in the console -- but it cannot handle a lot of code that was written for DOS.
XP's command line is a pretty good simulation of a DOS environment, but it is not DOS and cannot do everything that DOS could. That was my point.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Iem: Re: Win98 being the best games platform -- that was once true, but now it really isn't. XP will run the vast majority of programs that 98 will, and is far, far more stable. If you don't have a specific need to run 98, then I would also recommend removing it from your setup; it's more or less useless if you already have XP.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I suggest using debian not only because it's what I'm using, but Mandrake still uses RPMs which are a horribly outdated system of package management, you don't want to have to worry about dependencies, the computer should figure it out BY ITSELF, that's my main argument against Fedora and Mandrake, also the Debian installer has gotten a whole lot easier, so the main argument against debian is now pretty much moot. apt-get saves you days and weeks of frustration.
Can you elaborate on this, please? I haven't seen anything other than RPMs that are as easy to use to install software in Linux. What do you mean about dependencies? If you try to install an RPM that doesn't have the proper dependencies, it tells you that you need to upgrade 'X' in order to run the software.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is debian more difficult to navigate and learn then mandrake? If it is, I want to stick with Mandrake because I am not techno savy. If it is close to Mandrake in learning curve, then it sounds like Debian is the way to go for me
Bekenn, is DosBox something that is just installed into windows xp? I may never need it, but it is nice to know about it. Privateer sounded so familliar that I looked it up, and it sounds a lot like a text based game I played with in Highschool. The only thing I remember about U7 is eating apples. lol. It is a good memory.
Insantiy Plea, I did not realize Mandrake and Debian can read NTFS files. A web site I was at said be sure to put them on Fat file systems. I am glad to know. I still want 4G of Fat 32...I don't know why. Call it a security blanket. Are apt-get files just bundled up software you can download into Debian? I have been reading up on it but am a little unclear what they do. I am going to look for a Debian book tonight.
Incidently, I downloaded three Mandrake discs earlier, and I tried to install them, but they were ISO files and the computer would not boot off of it. I found a program to unzip it onto my desktop, but when I tried to fit all the contents of Disc 1 onto a new disc to burn, the files would not all fit.
If I download Debian or try to install Mandrake, how do I work around this problem? Am I downloading images I need to do something to to get my CD player to boot off of it? The instructions on the website make it sound like I can boot from the image.
Last question in my long series. IF I download a program like Jukebox or a game like Civ 3, do I install them in seperate folders within the OS partitions so both operating systems can read them, or do I download them in the same location on a different partition? My plan in my head is for the creation of a game partition that I could share games in the same folder. *Download the game in in the same location for Both Debian and XP. I would then keep programs (like Office xp, DVD-Burner, Juke Box) withing the different OS and would have to have two seperate complete programs. Maybe I could share programs like DVD burner and CD extractor on my Media Manipulation partition.hmm...
After all the good advice, I think I will redo my computer like this"
quote: 80G drive: C: 4G primary Fat32 partition for Dos/Dos Emulators, files that easily fragment, and/or a Fat32 format I can use to transfer files from NTFS to Fat if a need ever arises. D: 15G Primary NTFS for Windows XP home. E: 20G extended NTFS for video editing. ripping music, creating DVD from home video or with DVD burner. F: 25G extended NTFS for Back up files, Ghost images, drivers, old reports, power points, resumes..et cetera. **This leaves 16G untouched that Mandrake/Debian will format on its own system.
120G Drive: G: 20G Primary NTFS for games. H: 10G Primary NTFS for images. I: 90G Primary NTFS for storage--mostly media files.
*would like to end this long post with something colorful* Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ooh, Storm re-opens the Mandrake vs. Debian discussion. I wash advised to start with Mandrake, but Insanity Plea was putting my fears aside.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, no. I'm not arguing that one flavour of Linux is better than another. I don't have that knowledge. I'm just asking a question.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
When you burnt the ISOs to your cdroms, they should have been bootable from the beginning. Most ISOs come with some kind of checksum to run on the cdroms and make sure the cds downloaded and insalled properly. Run that.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"apt-get" for debian, and "emerge" for gentoo.
For instance, if you wanted to install say....python, for fedora you would have to find the, proper package, try to install it to find that you need of all things gcc (for some odd reason), go find the GCC package, and it's half a million dependencies, install those, compile GCC, and try installing python again hoping that it works. In Debian all you do is "apt-get install python" and it automatically takes care of all your dependency issues, or if you're upgrading "apt-get upgrade" upgrades the majority of your major packages. In otherwords, instead of spending hours trying to track down rpms, all that stuff is done for you so you can spend more time configuring and learning how to use the system. I tried learing using RH7,8,and 9, as well as Mandrake, and gave up each time because I hated RPMs so very much (mind you every once in a while you have to use one because it isn't in the library, but it's not that much of a hassle). Note that I use python as an example because I just compiled it for OSX, so I have a gave memory of what it's dependencies are.
Mind you, I like Mandrake, I have nothing against it specifically, I just HATE rpms, with an undying passion...though I will say...everybody should thank their stars they're not doing anything for a r/s-6000, cost isn't the only reason there are so few of them. Satyagraha
posted
As to installing programs so 'both programs can read them', Linux can't run Windows software unless you get either WINE or a Windows emulator. The name of the emulator escapes me, but I've used Wine before. It will work with programs without problems about 20% of the time, I'd say. I haven't tried using it with Windows installed on the same hdd, which would make it work better, I think, since all the DLLs and Windows system files are already right there. Part of using Wine is that you can pay a small five dollar fee each month to get the Wine people to work on certain Windows software to make it so that it runs with Wine. You vote on software you'd like to see worked on.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: In Debian all you do is "apt-get install python" and it automatically takes care of all your dependency issues, or if you're upgrading "apt-get upgrade" upgrades the majority of your major packages.
*Very* interesting. In theory, there is some kind of automatic upgrader that comes with Redhat, but I couldn't make it work with Redhat 7.x, and it certainly didn't kick in when installing specific apps that had dependency problems. I haven't tried to use it with Redhat 9.x. Thanks for the info.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Bekenn, is DosBox something that is just installed into windows xp?
DOSBox is a standalone program that you download from the website I linked up above; it's actually available for several different operating systems, including XP and Linux.
quote:Insantiy Plea, I did not realize Mandrake and Debian can read NTFS files.
I'm not sure about Debian, but I do know that Mandrake can read NTFS files. Note, however, that it cannot modify them. NTFS partitions are read-only as far as Mandrake is concerned.
At least, that's what my own (rather limited) experience with Mandrake tells me; anyone out there better educated who can confirm this?
quote:Incidently, I downloaded three Mandrake discs earlier, and I tried to install them, but they were ISO files and the computer would not boot off of it. I found a program to unzip it onto my desktop, but when I tried to fit all the contents of Disc 1 onto a new disc to burn, the files would not all fit.
Your first mistake was in "unzipping" the isos. Don't do that. Instead, burn the ISOs to discs. Pretty much all CD burning software should support burning disc images, which is what ISOs are.
Note: Try to find an option in your burner software that says "burn image" or something along those lines; don't simply burn the .iso to disc as a file.
Once you've done that, the discs should be bootable.
quote:Last question in my long series. IF I download a program like Jukebox or a game like Civ 3, do I install them in seperate folders within the OS partitions so both operating systems can read them, or do I download them in the same location on a different partition?
Each program you use will have to be installed separately for each OS you want to use it on.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
bump..just because there is so much useful information in here that I don't want to loose yet. This weekend I will work on this and tell you my outcome or cry for help Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
FreeDOS is an operating system, so I suggest not using that. As for DOSBox, just get the latest version; if you have trouble setting it up, leave a message here, and I'll walk you through it.
Note that you only really need either of these if you still have old DOS programs (usually games) you want to run that won't work within Windows. Most old DOS software will work without having to use these, so I doubt it'll even be an issue.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm gonna second Insanity Plea's dislike for RPM's. I would have to caution tho that straight Debian can be a bit daunting for a beginner. I would recommend trying Knoppix as a live distrobution (running straight from the cdrom or the distro I use Libranet if you wish to try Debian. If you have a broadband connection you can download, burn and install for free. Good luck!
Posts: 2022 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Running straight debian requires a fairly intimate knowledge of your computer and all of its' settings as well as a decent grasp of the way linux is set up. Distrobutions that utilize debian and offer some sort of adminstration tool are simpler for those just beginning with Linux. I would encourage you to explore the link that I supplied.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
I will do it or ruin my computer trying! ![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I like the idea of having a seperate Dos, of course I have not used Dos much and have an unfounded belief system.![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
My soundcard is loaded an updated with the sis7012 audio driver, but my system recognizes to "other"hardware--PCI modem and Multimedia Audio Controller. Neither accept my Sis driver, but my system says I have a sound card sis7012 that is updated. any thoughts before I install Windows 98?![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
