currently i have a 20 gig maxtor drive with 3 partitions. C:/ is for windows, D:/ is for my dada, and E:/ is for my programs. I'm thinking about installing linux on another hard drive, probably a 10 gig, nothing more. I have Corel Linux. How would i go about installing it onto the NEW hard drive and not messing up anything on my 20 gig windows hard drive. And how will my computer handle the boot up process? Anybody advice?
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
linux on seperate hard drive
- Thread starter phungilax
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2000
It should be no problem at all to do what you want. Just choose the new HD as the install location. The boot manager will go into the mbr of your primary hd and you will get a menu that lets you choose what OS to boot to.
In the past I have done some crazy multi boot setups. I had W2k, W98, BeOS, and 2 linux distros on 1 machine spreadout over 2 drives. Now I do things a better way, just get more machines
In the past I have done some crazy multi boot setups. I had W2k, W98, BeOS, and 2 linux distros on 1 machine spreadout over 2 drives. Now I do things a better way, just get more machines
I'm not familiar with the Corel installation, but it should be just a matter of telling it what drive to use. /dev/hda will be your master HD and /dev/hdb will be the slave. It should display the partitions of the drives so just make sure you don't pick the one with 3 partitions already on it.
Also for the boot loader, just install it to the master boot record and it should work fine. I've done this set up many times in the past and I've had no problems.
Also for the boot loader, just install it to the master boot record and it should work fine. I've done this set up many times in the past and I've had no problems.
- Thread Starter
- #4
distribution??
you guys seem pretty knowledgable about Linux. I have used Linux before, not a lot, but i have used it on another computer. So i have not gone through the installation process. what distribution would you recommend for a first time installer and a newbie linux user like myself?
you guys seem pretty knowledgable about Linux. I have used Linux before, not a lot, but i have used it on another computer. So i have not gone through the installation process. what distribution would you recommend for a first time installer and a newbie linux user like myself?
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2000
Corel has the most "brain dead know nothing" install but it is somewhat limited in what you can do with it after the install. A little to much hand holding at the expense of flexibility.
The 2 distros I highly recomend are Mandrake and SuSE. Most users here seem to really like Mandrake but I have found SuSE to be even better, I don't think many people here have tried SuSE which is a shame because it rocks!
Both of these distros have great gui based installs and gui configuration utils you wouldn't go wrong either way. Heck dl and try them both
The 2 distros I highly recomend are Mandrake and SuSE. Most users here seem to really like Mandrake but I have found SuSE to be even better, I don't think many people here have tried SuSE which is a shame because it rocks!
Both of these distros have great gui based installs and gui configuration utils you wouldn't go wrong either way. Heck dl and try them both
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2000
There is enough that can be done in the gui to get you going and productive then you can learn the geek stuff when you have the time. I would recomend buying Mandrake or SuSE at a store for about $30 because it will come with a set of manuals that are written to help out beginers. They contain a install walk through, basic configuration procedures, application instructions, and an intro to the command line.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2001
I think that yes, SuSE is the best. I have v7 and the only things it didn't like were my WinModem and my GeForce 2 MX.
The learning curve is quite shallow when using the GUI, but diving into the command line means that there is a lot to learn. If you just use the commandline as a normal user it is hard to do too much damage, and You can exit the shell at any time by typing exit. To cancel any command do ^C (that is <ctrl>-<c>).
There are plenty of good books and websites, and theres always us here at the forum so it shouldn't be too hard.
The learning curve is quite shallow when using the GUI, but diving into the command line means that there is a lot to learn. If you just use the commandline as a normal user it is hard to do too much damage, and You can exit the shell at any time by typing exit. To cancel any command do ^C (that is <ctrl>-<c>).
There are plenty of good books and websites, and theres always us here at the forum so it shouldn't be too hard.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2000
- Location
- Seattle, Wa
I've found that dedicating the D:\ Physical drive to Linux(aka the Primary Slave, also known as "/dev/hdb," in Linux "talk") is ideal. One nice thing about having Linux on its own HDD is that I store ~400 Mb of Windows progs on this /dev/hdb HDD. Saves monumental time and trouble when my Win drive must be reformatted, which as we know occurs extremely rarely. Hah!
As to a choice of distributions. Most people get used to a flavor of Linux, then stick with it through future releases. Even though Mandrake 5.3 wasn't rock solid, I "got used" to it. So I tried Mandrake 6.0, and maybe two years later, Mandrake 7.0. Both the 6.0 and 7.0 releases did NOT like me. At all. I tried Caldera and Red Hat in the interim. Then I picked up SuSE 6.0. It was kinda weird after the Red Hat family. I got used to it, then bought SuSE 6.1. Now I'm running SuSE 7.0, which is a bit old nowadays.
To me, SuSE is what Linux is supposed to be. Rock solid, and it has very few quirks. Unlike Mandrake, which is nearly all quirks, and solid as quicksand. IMHO.
As to a choice of distributions. Most people get used to a flavor of Linux, then stick with it through future releases. Even though Mandrake 5.3 wasn't rock solid, I "got used" to it. So I tried Mandrake 6.0, and maybe two years later, Mandrake 7.0. Both the 6.0 and 7.0 releases did NOT like me. At all. I tried Caldera and Red Hat in the interim. Then I picked up SuSE 6.0. It was kinda weird after the Red Hat family. I got used to it, then bought SuSE 6.1. Now I'm running SuSE 7.0, which is a bit old nowadays.
To me, SuSE is what Linux is supposed to be. Rock solid, and it has very few quirks. Unlike Mandrake, which is nearly all quirks, and solid as quicksand. IMHO.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2000
I do have to agree that SuSE is about as good as it gets. I dl and play with many of the popular distros and none of them work as good as SuSE. It just seems to have the right versions of all the libs that work with all the software I like to compile/install and it is also incredibally stable. I am running SuSE 7.2 and am very very happy with it. I run a GF2MX in the box and with NVidias drivers I am able to play Q3A, Unreal Tourney, Tribes just to name a few. Check out http://www.lokigames.com The addition of excellent 3d drivers and good games means that Linux is now suitable as a MS replacement for a lot of people.
