Triple booting question
Does anyone know a good tutorial on setting up a triple boot between Linux (haven't picked a flavor yet, but probably Ubuntu since it's been a while), XP, and Vista? Each will be on a separate hard drive, with a fourth shared for media.
Oh yes, I'm new. Hello everyone. :wink:
Oh yes, I'm new. Hello everyone. :wink:
0. Install XP
1. Install Vista
2. Install Ubuntu, Fedora, whatever
GRUB will pickup windows and add them to the boot menu most of the time.
If it does not all you have to do is add about 6 lines in the GRUB config file.
Something like this:
This assumes xp is on the 0th HDD, vista on the 1st HDD and Linux on the 2nd HDD.
So in this example, does this require setting drive 1 as the boot drive (in the BIOS) and installing Vista on that, bypassing its default dual-booting garbage? Like this:
With Drive 0 as boot, install XP.
Setting Drive 1 as boot, install Vista.
Resetting Drive 0 as boot, install misc. GNU/Linux flavor on Drive 2, letting GRUB do its thing with the MBR.
Is that about right?
Last time I used Linux was when kernel 2.4 was new, and even then I was completely green. I didn’t have a decent comp, with only 3GB for Linux, so I only used it for freeciv and GIMP. :wink:
Hehe.. You know its telling how many of the other are starting to appear down here.
If you are looking to install Ubuntu I really would recommend waiting just another couple of weeks before installing as the new release is out then. I've got the beta running on a spare disc at the minute and it is much improved. I think you are going to be presently surprised by just how much work has been done since the early distributions. To be honest you could install the Beta its certainly stable and you can do a simple click and upgrade procedure when the release is made available.
Nice thing about the liveCD install is that you have Ubuntu running whilst you install so you can browse the web whilst copying files. I did a rough timing on my system, from clicking on the install icon to having Ubuntu 7.04 Beta up, running and fully patched took under 25 mins on an XP2500 with a slow old IDE drive.
I've added a few toys but as I'm planning a full spring clean up I'm not going to waste time or their bandwidth getting everything set up just yet. Even from 6.10 this is a big upgrade. From the days of 2.4 you should be in for a much easier ride.
I'm a developer. Not a professional developer yet, but I'd like to be, so I try to stay current. /:(
For hard-drives, I currently have a 500GB, 2x250GB, and a 60GB. The big three are SATA, and the 60 is PATA. I plan to use the 500 for data, the 250s for Windows, and the 60 for Linux. Though I'm not against splitting the drives up and throwing out the 60.
What do you guys think?
/me chiming in
Firstly, welcome VBDude.
I can completely understand where you are at with the multiple OS's for dev work,and for right now triple-booting isn't a bad idea, but if I absolutely need one of the OS's, I just crank up VMware Server and use that. Yes, it's not as fast as if it were natively running on my machine, but for simple checking, it more than suffices (then again, this suggestion comes pre-loaded with assumptions about your type of dev work, so please adjust accordingly)
Also, in regards to setting up a multiboot system where one OS is on a RAID, unless that RAID is on an honest-to-Flying Spaghetti Monster hardware RAID (your motherboard cost $500USD+ or you have a $250USD+ add-in card), trying to work with the motherboard-based RAID is pretty trick at best. Trying to use a Windows-made "dynamic disk" RAID is impossible from what I remember.
Long story short, unless you have a very compelling reason to use a RAID setup (lots of working on very large amounts of data, such as video editing or, in my case, working with very large data sets in MATLAB) it's easiest by far to leave RAID alone.
I agree with bmouring fakeRAID is a pain and can cause all kinds of issues.
Real hardware RAID from 3Ware, Areca or LSI will be much faster a lot more stable and will not cause issues. Unfortunately you can expect to pay $250 to $700 for a nice hardware RAID card, anything below that is not worth it.
If you have an SLI motherboard you can use one slot for a RAID card and the other for your VGA.
If you do not have an SLI board you'll be fine as long as you have a least one free PCI-Express 1x or x4 slot.
If you do decide to get hardware RAID make sure it is PCI-Express and not PCI-X, virtually all boards have PCI-Express but only high-end workstation and servers boards, like bmouring's Tyan S2895, have PCI-X ( 64bit ).
A PCI-X controller will work in regular 32bit PCI slots as long as the voltage is correct however it will run a lot slower so it is not worth it.
Quote:are you someone who would use windows more often or are you the Linux kind of person?
I'm a Windows person right now. I'm trying to expand my skill base and my options, so I'm installing Linux again now that I have the hardware for it.Quote:Second question is would you want a performance pc or max storage pc?
Well, the storage is mostly for videos. I've got my Xbox 360 hooked up as a Media Center Extender. I'm also a PC gamer. So, a little performance, and little max storage. Not leaning one way or the other, currently.Quote:60 XP
Hmmm, I never really thought of that setup. That would future proof things... I'll have to look into that. Thanks.Quote:If you are a performance person - get rid of one OS and RAID the two 250
I'm doing quite the opposite with this project. I currently have XP MCE on the 2x250 in RAID 0, and I have Vista Ultimate RC2 on the 60. I'm trying to avoid RAID with this setup as it was just an experiment. Since that will free up a drive, I'm adding Linux. :wink:Quote:(then again, this suggestion comes pre-loaded with assumptions about your type of dev work, so please adjust accordingly)
My dev work is with Visual Studio, primarily with Visual Basic (hence the name) and XNA (MS's new game development tools). I haven't done enough ANSI C++ to jump with both feet into Linux development. So VMWare isn't really an option yet.
Thanks for the suggestions guys.
I think you misunderstand what VMWare is. The server product can now be downloaded for free. This allows you to run multiple 'Virtual' computers, each running its own independent OS. The advantage of doing things this way is that you have a known stable environment of emulated hardware and the entire system (installed OS) comprises just a few txt files and the disc image files.
For example. I run Ubuntu. On Ubuntu I run VMWare Server. Through this software I can run WindowsXP, Suse, DSL, ReactOS etc... It's a great way to play with different distributions. You can take a snapshot of a configuration (the disc image) before you make changes so its super easy to go back to a known configuration.
You don't need to know ANY programming to run VMWare. Hell the chimp can make it run!! Should you really want you can stick on Windows and just run Linux in virtual machines.
Before Linux_0 posts:
Whilst VMWare is free it is not Open Source. Projects such as Xen and QEMU are the true open solutions. VMWare works and is good. For playing the risks of being tied into a closed format are a personal call.
Quote:I think you misunderstand what VMWare is.
Well, I didn't think I did until you said this:Quote:Should you really want you can stick on Windows and just run Linux in virtual machines.
I understood that it created virtual machines to test things in different OS environments, but I didn't know it could be run from Windows. That is what you said, right?
When I mentioned VMWare, I was really responding to this line:Quote:Yes, it's not as fast as if it were natively running on my machine, but for simple checking, it more than suffices
I wouldn't be running Windows for "simple checking" so I figured it was underkill for me. I can see where there'd be a benefit in using it, even in development, but not what I'm doing. I could conceivably run Linux on a virtual machine, but I'd prefer to have at least one distro non-emulated. Does that make sense?
That makes a lot of sense. I think I missed the line in question. Yes you can run VMWare on windows and then virtual windows / Linux machines from there. As I know you are more of a Windows person and also focussed on the MS dev tools and graphics a Windows VM running on Linux would probably not be a good fit. As said previously you don't get full acceleration.
If you have a working Windows installation now you could have a play with VMWare server and get your distro of choice up and running. I really do wish that this had been around back in my college days...
If somebody asks me now about playing with Linux to get a taste a VM installation is my recommendation. It's just so flexible.
I believe I'll use that to test a number of distros after I get my system set up. One thing I missed in my last foray into Linux was the opportunity to experiment with varying distros. I'd love to take the time to find out which one suits me best, in a harmless environment. Now that I have broadband and system resources to spare, I’m not limited in my options anymore. :wink: