1. RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
- Posted by Gerardo <gebrandariz at YAHOO.COM>
Mar 06, 2001
-
Last edited Mar 07, 2001
Irv,
I believe Windows will see every DOS partition in the system, as long as one
is the main one and all others are created as logical units within an
extended DOS partition. Takes some juggling; I've done it with Partition
Magic, worked fine. Even created, deleted and moved partitions on the fly,
and Windows (3.1, 95, haven't tried it lately) saw them right away, as soon
as PM rebooted.
As for Linux, there is a way to see its partitions from Windows, but it's
not cheap (around $300). You need a Virtual Machine. There's a very good one
at http://www.vmware.com (try the download area), both for Linux (to run
Windows) and for WinNT/2000 (to run Linux). You install the virtual machine,
then you install the second OS inside it. Most versions are 30-day
shareware. Download the VMTools too (free), or you'll end up with 16-color
Windows.
Then you boot Linux and raise Apache (or your favorite ftp server), and use
any ftp-enabled Win file manager. Explorer can do it, though I prefer
Windows Commander by far.
I've even had the experience of running a Windows Virtual Machine within
Linux, Midnight Commander in a Linux terminal seeing the virtual Windows
'partition' and Windows Commander in Windows seeing the Linux partitions.
This way you can copy, move, rename and view files, just as if all of them
were Linux or all Windows. This setup worked reasonably fast on a 400 MHz,
128 MB RAM system, though most of that was gobbled up by the Virtual
Machine.
I don't recommend this for a standard home or work environment, but if you
are already running Linux...
Gerardo
----- Original Message -----
From: Irv Mullins <irvm at ellijay.com>
To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
>
> You could take the current HD out and put it on a shelf, where it will be
> safe while you try Linux. Once you have Linux (and maybe Windows,
> DOS, Beos?) on the new HD, you can put the old HD back in, and set LILO
> (the Linux boot loader) to give you the choice of booting up Win, Linux,
> or Win on the old HD. Windows won't see the Linux partition (or the other
> Windows partition, afaik), but Linux will be able to use all three.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
2. RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
its not entirely true that windows can see any dos partition. win3.1 and
early versions of win95 can't see FAT32 partitions, only FAT16. but if
you've got win98 or win95B, they can see either FAT16 or FAT32.
however, your bootmanager (eg partition magic) may by default label a
partition hidden to other bootable partitions to avoid a clash of
command.com files at boot time. you can change this in partition magic,
usually without problems, at least if the second partition is beyond the
1024 cylinder of the first drive.
cheers
tacitus
Irv Mullins wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerardo <gebrandariz at YAHOO.COM>
> To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 11:28 PM
> Subject: RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
>
>
> > Irv,
> >
> > I believe Windows will see every DOS partition in the system, as long as
> one
> > is the main one and all others are created as logical units within an
> > extended DOS partition.
>
> If I have two drives, both with Windows, so that I can boot from either
> (via
> CMOS
> settings) will Windows be able to use both drives? I haven't tried this.
>
> > As for Linux, there is a way to see its partitions from Windows, but
> > it's
> > not cheap (around $300). You need a Virtual Machine. There's a very good
> > >
> one at http://www.vmware.com
>
> For far less than $300 (read: free) I got an old 486, without monitor,
> which
> runs Samba and NFS (SuSE Linux), so its files are usable by any pc on my
> home.net.
> Any file I think I might want Windows to be able to use, I store there.
> This
> works fine,
> and gives me some protection against losing stuff whenWindows crashes.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
>
>
3. RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
sorry
having stuck my nose in, it occurred to me that i overlooked something
else too important not to mention.
you have to be mindful of paths. the OS on the first drive will see the
second partition or drive as d:, whereas the second OS will see its same
partition as c:. (or at least, you hope so, otherwise its autoexec.bat
and config.sys will not be properly read). that works on my system ok
because i have win3.11 on the second drive and it can't see the first
FAT32 drive anyway. but i'm not sure if it recognises its own drive as
c: because the first partition is invisible to it or because the dos OS
labels its own drive first regardless.
you can see this could cause problems if you put win95B or win98 on the
second drive and they see their own drive as d: (and fail to load
properly) or if you want to share files between both OS's that include
absolute path references.
have i confused things sufficiently now?
tacitus
Irv Mullins wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerardo <gebrandariz at YAHOO.COM>
> To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 11:28 PM
> Subject: RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
>
>
> > Irv,
> >
> > I believe Windows will see every DOS partition in the system, as long as
> one
> > is the main one and all others are created as logical units within an
> > extended DOS partition.
>
> If I have two drives, both with Windows, so that I can boot from either
> (via
> CMOS
> settings) will Windows be able to use both drives? I haven't tried this.
>
> > As for Linux, there is a way to see its partitions from Windows, but
> > it's
> > not cheap (around $300). You need a Virtual Machine. There's a very good
> > >
> one at http://www.vmware.com
>
> For far less than $300 (read: free) I got an old 486, without monitor,
> which
> runs Samba and NFS (SuSE Linux), so its files are usable by any pc on my
> home.net.
> Any file I think I might want Windows to be able to use, I store there.
> This
> works fine,
> and gives me some protection against losing stuff whenWindows crashes.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
>
>
4. RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
- Posted by Gerardo <gebrandariz at YAHOO.COM>
Mar 07, 2001
-
Last edited Mar 08, 2001
Irv,
----- Original Message -----
From: Irv Mullins <irvm at ellijay.com>
To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
> If I have two drives, both with Windows, so that I can boot from either
(via
> CMOS
> settings) will Windows be able to use both drives? I haven't tried this.
I guess it should. At least that's what all the Windows lit I've read says.
I haven't tried it either. Yet both Win98 and NT (and, I suppose, Me and
2000), say that a dual system (i.e. two coexisting versions of Windows) is
quite functional. Perhaps you shouldn't need to boot from CMOS: there are
many adequate boot managers.
> For far less than $300 (read: free) I got an old 486, without monitor,
which
> runs Samba and NFS (SuSE Linux), so its files are usable by any pc on my
> home.net.
> Any file I think I might want Windows to be able to use, I store there.
This
> works fine,
> and gives me some protection against losing stuff whenWindows crashes.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
Of course that works fine. I was talking about sharing files within a single
system.
Gerardo
5. RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
- Posted by Gerardo <gebrandariz at YAHOO.COM>
Mar 07, 2001
-
Last edited Mar 08, 2001
tacitus,
----- Original Message -----
From: tacitus <indorlaw at zdnetonebox.com>
To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: Exe files(For Tuncaydin6)
> you have to be mindful of paths. the OS on the first drive will see the
> second partition or drive as d:, whereas the second OS will see its same
> partition as c:. (or at least, you hope so, otherwise its autoexec.bat
> and config.sys will not be properly read). that works on my system ok
> because i have win3.11 on the second drive and it can't see the first
> FAT32 drive anyway. but i'm not sure if it recognises its own drive as
> c: because the first partition is invisible to it or because the dos OS
> labels its own drive first regardless.
>
> you can see this could cause problems if you put win95B or win98 on the
> second drive and they see their own drive as d: (and fail to load
> properly) or if you want to share files between both OS's that include
> absolute path references.
>
> have i confused things sufficiently now?
>
> tacitus
Not really. Let me confuse them a little farther. If you are running two
versions of Windows, they don't really need to be in different partitions:
they can both reside in c:, as long as they live in different directories.
However, you can only do this if the second, newer version, is dual-enabled
(i.e. Win95+) and at install time you told it to keep the previous version.
As for the remaining partitions, Partition Magic (and maybe other utilities
too, I don't know) will let you assign them any letter you like.
Gerardo
