Re: installing on a partition
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 08:32:53 -0600
Kent West <westk@acu.edu> wrote:
>Ivan Glushkov wrote:
>
>> messmate wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:39:27 +0100
>>> Jochen Schulz <kannstmichma@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just use the Windows installer for creating an NTFS or FAT
>partition>>> and leave the rest of the disk empty. When you're
>finished, use the>>> Debian installer to partition the rest. You may
>want to have a 'shared'>>> partition, on which Windows *and* Linux can
>write (mp3s, movies...).>>> The best way to do this is to create a
>large FAT partition because>>> Linux has no (free) NTFS write support.
>You can do that at install time>>> and select a mount point for it (eg
>"/data").>>
>I like cfdisk better than the new installer's partioning routine, but
>that's for me. For a neophyte not understanding what a partition is,
>the new installer routine os probably better. Perhaps I should file a
>wishlist bug to have cfdisk as an "advanced" option.
>
>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've installed win98 on a vfat partition (first of cource) and after
>>> that ( 1 year later) i've installed win200 + professionnal on the
>same>> partition !
>>> So, win200 is a ntfs filesystem, do it ?
>>> I can write/read without any problem to win.
>>
>IIRC, Win2K can install on top of an NTFS or FAT32 partition. Since
>this was an upgrade, unless you specifically told W2K to convert the
>partition, it's still FAT32.
>
>>>
>>>
>> How do you do that? I have tried a lot of thinks, but I never saw
>> sombody writing from Linux to ntfs... Some program, or just options
>in > fstab that I have missed in man page?
>
>
>Newer kernels have the ability to write to NTFS, but it's still
>experimental, and dangerous. Don't use the built-in capabilities to
>write to NTFS unless you don't mind risking your data.
>
>BTW, just a swipe at Microsoft - writing to NTFS is not a problem
>because of the inability of Linux developers; it's a problem because
>Microsoft intentionally keeps the needed specs proprietary. The Linux
>developers have done very good at reverse-engineering the scheme, but
>haven't gotten all the details down pat, yet. Not to mention that they
>quietly changed the specs of NTFS somewhere about SP3 for Win2K which
>made it a totally different format.
><sarcasm_on>
>Thanks once again, Microsoft, a true friend to the computing community!
></sarcasm_off>
>
>--
>Kent
>
>
Thanks for this info.
mess-mate
Reply to: