Multibooting. Again.

[chemman]

Seeing the amount of posts, some detailing success, some faliure in multibooting, I'd like to ask about some specific info on that. My situation is quite funny, actually.

I'd ike to finally switch to Linux, although my Comp has a ICS with 7 other computers. Most of them have users on them most of the time. The problem is that if I won't be able to multiboot, then there will be no ICS. Which means I will get injured by the users :D

First, I'd like to install Fedora (core 1 for now), switch to win (2000) and then when nobody's using, try to configure the stuff.

Now, here's the config: 1 HDD 2 partitions, 20 for the allready installed win 2000, 10 for the soon to be installed fedora.

If not the possibility of loosing a tooth, I wouldn't ask what's the possible risk of Grub not being able to launch windoze, and how can it be fixed.

[mars_hall]

Could the ICS be switched to one of the other systems in the house so that your's isn't the main system?

[Jman]

I prefer Internet access to be shared with a seperate router, so it doesn't quit when the server inevitably goes down.

Once you setup grub correctly, if Windows doesn't load it's Windows' fault. ;)

This howto (http://www.fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=975) is a good resource for grub.

To get back to just Windows permanently (I don't advise this), check out this thread (http://www.fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=263) (at least with XP, I think 2000 should be similar).

[chemman]

The problem is that the other computer's are way to weak, have about 2 to 5 seperate virus infections a month, and lock up every 5 hours. Above that, the users on those computers aren't the sharpest knives. :)

Nope, I don't think it's possible for the modem to go there.

But is there a way to share the internet connection, windows type?

[Mark_Den]

If you can't move the ICS, only way I can think of to do it, would be to go with a Virtual PC program like vmware and run one within the other.

I'm not sure what your concern is with grub.

[chemman]

Currently with grub, none. Rather the internet sharing. I know it is possible to include a linux machine in a non-server (is it called a p2p?) network. Does anyone know of a way to emulate the work of some proxy then, which does have linux & windows binaries for both the client and the server?

[chemman]

When installing, I got a message saying that the partition table on dev/hdr is inconsistent, which can cause problems. First, what risk is there that the bootloader won't work, second, how to fix it, third, where can I read up on what it is and how it works?

[Mark_Den]

Virtual networking is what I beleive you're thinking of.

Anyhow, I've only used VMware, but theres others out thre. Maybe someone can recommend a different one.

[chemman]

If it's the same as VNC, then no.

Currently, what do those warnings mean?

[Mark_Den]

Well, it's not exactly the same.

I've always looked at VNC as more as a remote desktop connection.

Something like VMWare, you'd essentially be running one as a nested window in the other...still running off the same machine mind you.

My thought here was, while running 2000, load fedora in the background, configure, and when all is said and done, just reload grub onto the MBR.

Without something like that, go spend the money on an external router.

[chemman]

Originally posted by Mark_Den

My thought here was, while running 2000, load fedora in the background, configure, and when all is said and done, just reload grub onto the MBR.


If I understood that, it means running 2 OS'es at the same time. Windows, as well as Linux needs exclusive and direct access to the hardware, right? So, is it by emulation?

Expand on that

[chemman]

So, what does it mean that the partition table on dev/hdr is inconsistent?

How can it be fixed?

[chemman]

I know the problem is trivial, BUT I can't afford to have the connection down for too long, since the users are **very* impatient* to say the least. That is why I'm so concerned.

So, what does it mean that the partition table on dev/hdr is inconsistent?

[Prometheus]

im not sure, but my guess would be that fedora is seeing either two different tables on the same partition, or the single partition that is there has errors in it. Like i said, i dont know, but that would be my best guess. It kinda sounds like when it was formatted, some errors were made or the partition table was not completely formed or something. Thats my best guess

[chemman]

There are two partitions, with which I never had problems before. If it would help, I could write down what anaconda's partition manager output generated after accepting the warning.

But about there being errors - maybe? Considering that the MBR is on the bigger C partition, and the other one, for Linux - D never gave any problems, allowed for pretty much everything I needed, it seems strange. Plus, the two partitions divide the entire disk, without any leftover space.

I did that with fdisk, btw.

So, are there any drive-analysis programs that I could try?

[Prometheus]

i use the one incorporated into Norton System works, but you prolly dont want to go out and spend $60 just for that. I got a similar error upon install, saying something about "the partition yadda yadda yadda, you can click ignore, but may encounter some stability issues" then it has ignore and cancel. Thats what i got, and it sounds similar to yours.

I would just say install it with the inconsistencies and try it. If all else fails, you can get rid of fedora and fix the MBR with a win xp cd under the repair section. I dont really think the inconsisenties mean anything. im assuming that since you have win 2000 you are using NTFS partitions. I think this may be the source of the errors. Fedora has really poor NTFS support in kernel 2.4 (included on the FC1 install disc) and doesnt like being around NTFS partitions. Im guessing *guessing mind you* that this is what its referring to about the inconsistencies. It probably is throwing a hissy fit because it doesnt like NTFS partition. If you install fedora, and then upgrade the kernel to 2.6, i expect that you wont have any problems. 2.6 has A LOT better NTFS support than 2.4 did. It reads with almost no errors (that ive experienced), and kinda has write capability, but i wouldnt try it unless i had to. I think the odds are that if you install and upgrade the kernel to 2.6, youll be fine.

Like i said, im guessing that the inconsistency is referring to the NTFS partition table, becuase NTFS is technically Microsoft property and is subject to copyright laws, so the linux community hasnt really done much with it. Odds are, once past that inital error, Fedora will load just fine, and i dont think there will be any problem with GRUB. If there is, you can always boot off the XP or 2000 disc and say repair MBR, then boot to 2000 and wipe the Fedora partition. Hope this helps, sry for the length.

Prometheus

[chemman]

Thanks for the help.

Actually I'd never use NTFS, and both of the partitions are FAT32. I once had NTSF, and after a pretty much critical system error had *big* problems with recovering the data. After that, I use FAT32 and a 64-character password on files which I want to protect.

After I intstall Linux, *hopefully* I'll be able to reply. :D