Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Optimal data access for Win2k, FreeBSD, Linux partitions/s..

Last response: in Windows 2000/NT
Share
Anonymous
October 10, 2004 12:44:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,microsoft.public.win2000.setup (More info?)

Hello,

I'd like to install Win2000, but allow possible experimentation with
Linux (particular distribution to be determined, though I'll accept
recommendations, urls to comparisons, etc. :-) ) and with FreeBSD. I
really doubt I'd also want one of the Win9x, so I believe I'm better off
with NTFS rather than FAT32?

ext2fs for linux OS?
USF for BSD OS?

I've been doing a little Googling for relevant info. Also, someone with
UNIX/BSD & Win2k experience suggests this procedure: with the Win2k
install, create an NTFS partition for Win2k, and any data partitions.
Later if I decide to add Linux or FreeBSD I should be able to add or
'extend' (subdivide?) any of the data partitions to create a partition
for the new OS's installation.

Obviously, I will have to research any additional OSs before I install
each. But perhaps someone can suggest a partition/slice size with which
FreeBSD and typical Linux will be "comfortable" .

To put common data/docs in data partition, I believe Win's My Documents
and Favorites (assuming I'll use IE) can easily be relocated (regedit if
necessary).

It would be nice if could name the partitions, so that each would have
the same "name" when viewed in any of the OSs.

Are there other possible complications if I don't now prepare for the
future OSs?


------
No worries here: only 120gb drive, so no "disc/BIOS overlay"
complications since my BIOS 137gb limit is OK.

Thanks...
October 10, 2004 6:45:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,microsoft.public.win2000.setup (More info?)

In my experience I'd say the easiest thing to do is split your disc up so
you leave room for windoz and linux, maybe 50/50 (I'm not familiar with
BSD, if you got a big disc, reserve 30/30/30). Install windoz first because
linux knows how to setup the dual boot deal painlessly, if it see's windoz
it'll do it for you. Use a fat32 filesystem for win2k, linux support for
NTFS is kinda beta.
also be aware that several distro's have bootable cd's that let you boot and
play with linux without ever loading it on the machine, this is a great
option for just getting your feel wet. check out knoppix and suse.
for an actual install I prefer redhat but that's only cause I live in the
town where they're based so I'm kinda partial to em

have fun

> Hello,
>
> I'd like to install Win2000, but allow possible experimentation with
> Linux (particular distribution to be determined, though I'll accept
> recommendations, urls to comparisons, etc. :-) ) and with FreeBSD. I
> really doubt I'd also want one of the Win9x, so I believe I'm better off
> with NTFS rather than FAT32?
>
> ext2fs for linux OS?
> USF for BSD OS?
>
> I've been doing a little Googling for relevant info. Also, someone with
> UNIX/BSD & Win2k experience suggests this procedure: with the Win2k
> install, create an NTFS partition for Win2k, and any data partitions.
> Later if I decide to add Linux or FreeBSD I should be able to add or
> 'extend' (subdivide?) any of the data partitions to create a partition
> for the new OS's installation.
>


> Obviously, I will have to research any additional OSs before I install
> each. But perhaps someone can suggest a partition/slice size with which
> FreeBSD and typical Linux will be "comfortable" .
>
> To put common data/docs in data partition, I believe Win's My Documents
> and Favorites (assuming I'll use IE) can easily be relocated (regedit if
> necessary).
>
> It would be nice if could name the partitions, so that each would have
> the same "name" when viewed in any of the OSs.
>
> Are there other possible complications if I don't now prepare for the
> future OSs?
>
>
> ------
> No worries here: only 120gb drive, so no "disc/BIOS overlay"
> complications since my BIOS 137gb limit is OK.
>
> Thanks...
!