Linux-Setup Digest #53, Volume #19 Sun, 2 Jul 00 11:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: 1024 cylinder limit info please? (M. Buchenrieder)
Re: 1024 cylinder limit info please? (M. Buchenrieder)
Re: RH6.0, SCSI tape & rescue ("Robert Jones")
Re: network question ("Arne Bohle")
Re: How do I upgrade rpm to version 4.0 ? (Colin Watson)
Re: Sound Problem (Newbie) (Colin Watson)
Re: Why is my harddisk so slow? (Robie Basak)
Re: Makeing Linux into a dumb(ish) term (Robie Basak)
Telnet not starting on RH 6.2 (Randy Mullican)
We are selling software (Richard Vanstory)
Re: resizing virtual desktop (J Bland)
Re: Mandrake 7.1 ("Gonzo")
Re: How do I set the path? (Mary P)
Destroyed VFAT Filesystem ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Fetchmail Question (Rod Smith)
Floppy install only - Newbie-ish question. (pastorJohn)
Re: Destroyed VFAT Filesystem ("Andrew E. Schulman")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M. Buchenrieder)
Subject: Re: 1024 cylinder limit info please?
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 08:34:09 GMT
Homer Jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Ken Knecht:
>...
>> Is this 1024 limitation just for LILO or would System Commander
>> and/or a floppy boot disk not work either?
>You can usually boot from a floppy without worrying about the 1024
>restriction. The BIOS is sometimes incapable of booting an OS beyond
>the 1024th cylinder, but a floppy circumvents that pretty well.
Right.
>The 1024 limit works out to 504MB.
For a non-LBA BIOS, yes.
[...]
>The cylinder limit is a very common problem with IDE disks. There, the
>number of cylinders may already exceed 1024 if the drive has a capacity of
>more than 504 MB. Many SCSI driver BIOSes present the disk geometry in a
>way that makes the limit occur near 1 GB. Modern disk controllers may even
>push the limit up to about 8 GB.
SCSI controllers do not have this problem.
>All cylinders beyond the 1024th are
>inaccessible for the BIOS.
Wrong. Since almost 2 years, Int13h extensions can be used to circumvent
this. There's no technical reason (using a recent BIOS) that would
limit booting to 1024 cyl. anymore.
[...]
>This makes me wonder, if the _BIOS_ supports access to cylinders
>beyone 1024, why can't lilo, which depends upon the BIOS?
LILO couldn't because of a bug/limitation in the older versions.
The newest LILO variants do not have this problem. So if you do
have a new BIOS and a new LILO, you can practically boot from wherever
your /boot partition may be situated.
Michael
--
Michael Buchenrieder * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.muc.de/~mibu
Lumber Cartel Unit #456 (TINLC) & Official Netscum
Note: If you want me to send you email, don't munge your address.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M. Buchenrieder)
Subject: Re: 1024 cylinder limit info please?
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 08:25:45 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ken Knecht) writes:
>I'm trying to gather info before I try to install my TurboLinux
>4.0 desktop system.
>Can someone explain this Linux 1024 cylinder limit to me?
It is/was basically a problem with the translation method used to
inform the bootloader about the location of the kernel image to
be booted.
>My HD
>has, as far as I can read the number on the installed unit,
>16989 cylinders. My Amibios 1.00.06.BSO BIOS doesn't seem to
>have an LBA option for IDE HDs.
You want a BIOS update.
>My Maxtor DianondMax V20 91021U2
>drive has 10.2G. The BIOS setup says 16320 Cylinders, 16 heads,
>63 sectors, 8,033 Mb capacity. MSD (ancient MS DOS Diagnostic)
>says 128 cylinders, 255 heads, 512 bytes/sector, 63
>sectors/track (this adds up to 1G, the size of the only
>formatted partition). Seems like there's some translation going
>on somewhere. That means I have to install the Linux root within
>about 600M of the beginning of the HD?
If your BIOS doesn't even support LBA, then you're in troubles, anyways.
Either get a newer BIOS or a new board - your problems will not shrink
in the future but get worse and worse.
>I was going to put a 1G
>DOS partition in there but I guess I'll gave to use Partition
>Magic to reduce it to a couple of hundred M. That also means I
>can't put anothe Linux on the HD as I had planned to do?
You can. The partition table allows up to 4 primary partitions (though
DOS' fdisk.exe won't allow you to create more than one), and one
of these may be created as an extended partition that can hold up
to 16 or more logical volumes. Since Linux doesn't make any
difference in between logical volumes and primary partitions, you can
simply create a small /boot partition with the first 504MB, and then
add your primary DOS partition after that.
>I
>currently only have a 1G DOS (MS 6.22) partition on the HD and
>it seems to work fine and a DIR gives a C: capacity of 1G. So
>maybe it'll work for Linux and LILO?
A possible problem is the way Win sees your partition layout/ drive
geometry. This _may_ work as long as there's no other OS installed, but
might result in problems after installing Linux; if the various
operating systems do not agree in the logical geometry, then they'll
be overwriting each other's partitions sooner or later.
>Is this 1024 limitation just for LILO or would System Commander
>and/or a floppy boot disk not work either?
With modern BIOS variants that use Int13h extensions for big disks
(above 8GB), it is a LILO restriction, that can be overcome by using the
newest LILO version (which doesn't have this limitation anymore).
Older BIOS versions, however, simply do not provide the needed
functionality to be able to read and store the drive's geometry correctly.
And since the BIOS is needed to fire up the bootloader and the kernelimage,
this will create problems.
Michael
--
Michael Buchenrieder * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.muc.de/~mibu
Lumber Cartel Unit #456 (TINLC) & Official Netscum
Note: If you want me to send you email, don't munge your address.
------------------------------
From: "Robert Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RH6.0, SCSI tape & rescue
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 06:35:36 -0600
On Saturday, July 1, 2000 10:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (B'ichela)
scribed in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, 01 Jul 2000 18:35:51 -0500, Robert Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>So that makes me wonder if maybe I don't need to do both mknod -m 660
>>/dev/st0 b 9 0
> First /dev/st0 is a Character device! Heres my settings for
> your persual.
>
> crw-r----- 1 root disk 9, 0 Jul 18 1994 /dev/st0
>
> try mknod /dev/st0 c 9 0 This device is NOT a block system, its just a
> basic character device like a ttyS1 entry.
>
You're right, of course! The thought of block vs character floated through
my mind at some point yesterday but I had some distractions.
mknod -m 660 /dev/st0 c 9 0 and
mknod -m 660 /dev/nst0 c 9 128
are the ticket. Next project: Document all the stuff I have to do to restore
from tape in my notebook. (And probably misplace the notebook about
30ms before I really need it :-()
Thanks for straightening me out!
------------------------------
From: "Arne Bohle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: network question
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 12:57:48 +0100
Sorry for jumping into this discussion, but I also have some problems at the
moment configuring my Linux box (Red Hat 6.0) in a local environment I am
setting up.
The local network will be a Win98 and a Linux node, connected to a hub, both
nodes running a Linksys Combo EtherPCI LAN Card.
Unfortunately, I tried out different network drivers to try to get the PCI
card on my Linux node working (since Linksys did not mention Linux specific
drivers in their set-up guide), which now has resulted in my Linux node not
booting. It hangs when "Bringing up interface eth0".
Later last night, after looking through Linksys' WEB site, I realised what
driver I should have used (Tulip).
My question now is, how do I restore my network settings so I can load the
correct driver ? I have tried my rescue disk, but it does not seem to work
(or I am doing it wrongly).
Any ideas ?
Thanks in advance,
Arne
Michael Nadler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> sylvain hutchison wrote:
>
> > Hello, I am loking for a driver for my network card which is a 3Com
> > Etherlink 10/100 PCI NIC (3C905C-TX), I've been trying to phone Dell for
> > the last fucking 30 min, they are getting on my nerves, and I can't find
> > anything on their web page, so I was wondering if any of you knew where
> > I could download this driver!!! BTW I've got Red Hat 6.1, I don't know
> > if that makes a difference!!!!!
> >
> > Thanks a lot,
> >
> > Sly.
>
> I wonder if this card is supported by the same driver as the 3c905b --
> 3c59x.o -- have you tried that module? It was in my Slack7 distro, might
> be in yours. The Ethernet-HOWTO tells how to find it otherwise.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson)
Subject: Re: How do I upgrade rpm to version 4.0 ?
Date: 2 Jul 2000 11:46:16 GMT
Cédric Chausson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I want to upgrade my RPM package to version 4.0-0.33. I currently have
>version 3.0-8. So I dowload version 4.0-0.33 and I do rpm -Uvvh --test
>rpm-4.0-0.33.i386.rpm but I get this error message :
Hmm, I don't see any such version at Red Hat's FTP site, but anyway ...
>D: counting packages to install D: found 1 packages D: looking for
>packages to download D: retrieved 0 packages only packages with major
>numbers <= 3 are supported by this version of RPM error:
>rpm-4.0-0.33.i386.rpm cannot be installed D: found 0 source and 0 binary
>packages
>
>So what gives ? How do I upgrade to 4.0-0.33 if I cant use my current rpm
>package ?
Have you tried upgrading to something in between, like rpm-3.0.4-0.48
from the Red Hat 6.2 distribution?
--
Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
"Abandon the search for Truth; settle for a good fantasy."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson)
Subject: Re: Sound Problem (Newbie)
Date: 2 Jul 2000 11:48:45 GMT
John T Pogue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>YamYam wrote:
>> Which linux distribution do u have? If u have a redhat-like
>> distribution redhat,
>
>I have the same problem , Please advise. I am using Linux-Mandrake 7.0
>my system is a Dual Pentium II 400mhz, with 512MB Ram running Raid 1
>and a Sound Blaster Ensoniq sound card. Everything else works great!!
So which problem is this? (Articles posted more than a couple of weeks
ago, like the ones you're following up to, have a habit of expiring from
news servers. You need to provide enough context that we can work out
what you're talking about.)
--
Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Linux: the choice of a GNU generation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robie Basak)
Subject: Re: Why is my harddisk so slow?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2 Jul 2000 12:14:57 GMT
On Sun, 02 Jul 2000 12:00:04 +0200, Cliff Pennock said:
>I've posted this on other newsgroups before, but nobody seems to be able
>to answer my question so I'll try in this newsgroup too...
>
>Hardware: Celeron500, 128 Mb Samsung 15.3Gb UDMA mode4 HDD, SiS5513 IDE
> controller.
>Kernel : 2.2.16, patched with ide-2.2.16.20000630
>BIOS : Detects the harddisk as PIO4 and UDMA4
>hdparm : 3.9-1, params: -d1 -m16 -c1 -A1 (even tried -X66)
> (for some reason, after installing 3.9-1 my hdparm
> manpages were gone)
>
>Enabled SiS5513 support in the kernel, including CONFIG_IDEDMA_AUTO
>(yes, and even recompiled and installed the new kernel :) ).
>
>hdparm -t /dev/hda gives me on average 8Mb/s (slow!)
>hdparm -T /dev/hda gives me on average 17Mb/s (waaaaaaay to slow!)
>
>I've tried all I can think off (like idebus=66, ide0=0x1f0, hdparm
>-X68), but it won't go any faster and stays in UDMA mode 2...
>
>Anyone has any ideas?
My drive was going super-slow (0.2 MB/s!) until I turned DMA _off_. No
idea why, though.
Robie.
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robie Basak)
Subject: Re: Makeing Linux into a dumb(ish) term
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2 Jul 2000 12:19:41 GMT
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 21:46:36 GMT, CoryJ said:
>My patience is running out, so I have to come to all you gurus and
>linux-heads :) for help.
>
>What I'm trying to do:
> Part 1: Set up a 386 with KBT, NIC, and monitor with about 8MB of RAM
>so it boots to a telnet session instead of a Linux login. There is
>going to be little on the system except telnet and whatever needs to be
>there for it to work. I would like the system to boot, and when someone
>presses ENTER, attempt to login to telnet into a server.
> Part 2: Set up system so that they can hot-key to different virtual
>terminals (via Alt+F1, Alt+F2) and log in a 2nd time if needed.
>
>What I've managed so far:
> I have the system set so I can boot straight to a telnet session. When
>telnet is exited (or dies) a new login prompt appears. (yay!)
>
>How I did it:
> I just replaced mingetty in inittab with telnet.
>
>What I can't figure out:
> How can I get a different telnet in each virtual terminal? Since
>telnet doesn't know anything about the different terminals accessed via
>ALT+F1, etc. the 2nd and higher copy of telnet that I run just bleeds
>over onto the Alt+F1 session. Is there any way I can get them to leave
>each other alone?
Checkout `man 1 open`.
I discovered it the other day :-)
Robie.
--
------------------------------
From: Randy Mullican <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Telnet not starting on RH 6.2
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 12:30:03 GMT
I am try to get telnet working on a RH 6.2 machine.
I have done a custom install of RH 6.2, verified that the telnet client
and server packages are installed, checked my hosts.allow file,
verified that the inetd will start and run.
Here is the problem with the telnet line uncommented inetd will not
start, and places the following in /var/log/messages:
inetd[468]: telnet: too many arguments, max 20.
I have tried searching all the archives I can think of and have found no
help.
So what did I miss?
Thank you for your help.
Randy Mullican
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: Richard Vanstory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows
Subject: We are selling software
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 14:39:49 +0200
We are selling software
for lowest price in the world (40$-140$)
Check it out at http://www.cdnow2000.com immediately
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J Bland)
Subject: Re: resizing virtual desktop
Date: 2 Jul 2000 13:15:29 GMT
On Sun, 2 Jul 2000 11:38:30 +0100, rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How do you start gnome without being in a virtual desktop? When gnome
>starts, everything is so big as to be unusable. I looked at my xf86config
>file, and the virtual line seems to be commented out. I would like to use a
>resolution of 1024 x 768, and am using the svga driver. rob
Make sure the largest resolution at the bitdepth you are using is 1024x768.
This will be the size of the desktop when you are start up and also the size
of the virtual desktop if you switch to other resolutions eg 800x600, with
CTRL-ALT-(+/-).
Usually you can simply do this by editing /etc/XF86Config and adding
"1024x768" to the bitdepth you use, and removing anything larger.
Frinky
------------------------------
From: "Gonzo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mandrake 7.1
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 08:46:14 -0500
I tried it and to me Mandrake 7.1 is much faster than RH 6.2 when installed
as with the partitionless option.
Im still messing around with it but I have always thought that Mandrake was
more user friendly than RH anyway. The install from within and boot from
within Windows98 works great. The default size is too small though so I
would choose custom install when using the partitionless installation option
for Mandrake.
james <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Tiz75.5193$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> RH 6.2 can install on a FAT/FAT32 partition, so that in windows it appears
> to be a single file. nice way to do it if you don't like to partition (or
if
> you are just testing the linux waters). see, i'm using an ABIT BE6 mobo,
> with my HDDs plugged into a HPT366 (ata66) controller. i've tried linux in
> the past on these drives, to no avail. now i wanna try again with Mandrake
> 7.1, but i wanna avoid partitioning, cause i only wanna see if i can get
it
> to work - then i will think about partitioning...
>
> -james.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mary P)
Subject: Re: How do I set the path?
Date: 2 Jul 2000 14:11:18 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 02 Jul 2000 05:56:39 GMT, George
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>Can someone please help this Linux newbie set the path for root. I've
>read that I can do it by adding directory names to the PATH line in the
>login name's .profile file. The proble is I can't find this file for
>root.
Did you try the command
ls -a
instead of only using ls?
The files with a . in front of their
names are hidden unless you append the -a flag.
MP
--
_
. .
V
// \\
// \\
(W W)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Destroyed VFAT Filesystem
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 14:26:56 GMT
The machine has two hard drives, the first used only for operating
systems (currently Windows 98 and Linux) and the second used only for
data. The second drive is partitioned in MSDOS using a single extended
partition with various logical partitions.
The Linux is the VALinux distribution 6.2.1 (RedHat 6.2) and the kernel
is 2.2.14-5.0.14 booted by LILO or Loadlin. I have reinstalled this
distribution several times with no trouble as I have adjusted my
partitioning scheme on the first hard drive.
Now that the partitioning scheme on the first hard drive appears
reasonable, I am moving on to other issues. I added the following
lines to /etc/fstab.
/dev/hdb5 /home/windows vfat defaults 0 0
/dev/hdb6 /home/music vfat defaults 0 0
The second of the two lines worked fine and I could play the MP3s on
the partition fine in Linux.
The first of the two lines appeared to destroy the formatting of the
first logical partition of the second hard drive (/dev/hdb5). A couple
of days ago, Linux went so far as to destroy the partition table by
adding an additional logical drive to the second hard drive. (It
looked to Windows as though the 27Gb HD had logical drives totaling
31Gb.) I spent all day yesterday repartitioning, reformatting, and
surface scanning the entire second hard drive (not to mention restoring
the data files). Thereafter, booting Linux destroyed the formatting
of /dev/hdb5 again (but not the partition table), and I found I could
reformat the partition in Windows and restore the data.
I removed all lines from /etc/fstab that mount FAT32 partitions.
Nevertheless, now I find that simply booting Linux destroys the
formatting of the first partition of the second hard drive, even
without the lines in /etc/fstab that I thought were causing the
problem. (Needless to say, the second hard drive and partitioning
scheme work fine in Windows, and I have no interest in partitioning or
formatting them in Linux.)
Does anyone have any idea what is going on? I will very much
appreciate any help.
(I am new to using Linux and have spent the last several months
installing various distributions on two different machines and have
done a lot of reading. Now I'm wondering if this has been a waste of
time (apart from the knowledge gained about Unix), if Linux can't do
something as basic as booting without destroying filesystems. Is Free
BSD more reliable?)
Bill
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Smith)
Subject: Re: Fetchmail Question
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 14:45:31 GMT
In article <8jlmhr$4bu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson) writes:
> Tom Hoffmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 1 Jul 2000 10:58:23 GMT, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>I've found fetchmail's daemon mode to be unreliable; every so often it
>>>encountered some kind of transient networking error and decided to die
>>>with a SIGTERM.
...
>>I've never heard of anyone else having the problem you mentioned w/
>>fetchmail. Maybe it's the symptom of another problem.
>
> It was quite common at my university at one stage; several people
> complained about something similar, but we could never track it down
> because it happened irregularly. We eventually decided cron jobs were
> the only reliable workaround.
When I used Bell Atlantic as my DSL ISP, I had fetchmail set up to grab
mail. Although I don't believe fetchmail out-and-out died very often,
BA's mail servers would occasionally go unresponsive for a while,
whereupon fetchmail would choke and refuse to try to get more mail from
them. This despite the fact that it was configured in such a way that it
SHOULDN'T have done this, if I was reading the documentation correctly.
As a workaround, I had a daily cron job that killed fetchmail and
restarted it. I've since switched ISPs and now have no problems.
--
Rod Smith, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rodsbooks.com
Author of books on Linux networking & multi-OS configuration
------------------------------
From: j*[EMAIL PROTECTED] (pastorJohn)
Subject: Floppy install only - Newbie-ish question.
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 14:57:28 GMT
Hi...
I have a NEC Versa V/50 laptop - 486 50 MHz processor, 12 Mb
ram, 540 Meg hard drive in two partitions - 230 Mb Dos/WIN95 and 210
Mb Linux - some distro I haven't been using much. No CD drive, and
since networking is not set up well, may as well say no way to network
install. I have tried it unsuccessfully many times.
I want to repartition the HDD into one Linux partition and a small
swap space of about 32 MB. I have Zipslack in 26 1.3 Mb zip files
that I can transfer by floppy.
The major problem right now is that I can't run Linux off of the hard
drive AND wipe the hard drive to do a new install. Since I don't have
a HDD adapter, that is not an option.
Can anyone tell me how to set up a 2 to 3 floppy Linux that I can run
just to do the fdisk, mke2fs, cp and unzip part of the process?
Zipslack has the boot floppy covered for setup once you are that far.
Zipslack is from Slackware 7.1
Thanks in advance for any help.
John Kiehn
pastorJohn
email in header is bogus, it's a long story but I'll email it to you
if you ask here. Otherwise, please reply here.
------------------------------
From: "Andrew E. Schulman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Destroyed VFAT Filesystem
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 10:58:39 -0400
> The machine has two hard drives, the first used only for operating
> systems (currently Windows 98 and Linux) and the second used only for
> data. The second drive is partitioned in MSDOS using a single extended
> partition with various logical partitions.
>
> Now that the partitioning scheme on the first hard drive appears
> reasonable, I am moving on to other issues. I added the following
> lines to /etc/fstab.
>
> /dev/hdb5 /home/windows vfat defaults 0 0
> /dev/hdb6 /home/music vfat defaults 0 0
>
> The second of the two lines worked fine and I could play the MP3s on
> the partition fine in Linux.
>
> The first of the two lines appeared to destroy the formatting of the
> first logical partition of the second hard drive (/dev/hdb5). A couple
> of days ago, Linux went so far as to destroy the partition table by
> adding an additional logical drive to the second hard drive. (It
> looked to Windows as though the 27Gb HD had logical drives totaling
> 31Gb.) I spent all day yesterday repartitioning, reformatting, and
> surface scanning the entire second hard drive (not to mention restoring
> the data files). Thereafter, booting Linux destroyed the formatting
> of /dev/hdb5 again (but not the partition table), and I found I could
> reformat the partition in Windows and restore the data.
>
> I removed all lines from /etc/fstab that mount FAT32 partitions.
> Nevertheless, now I find that simply booting Linux destroys the
> formatting of the first partition of the second hard drive, even
> without the lines in /etc/fstab that I thought were causing the
> problem. (Needless to say, the second hard drive and partitioning
> scheme work fine in Windows, and I have no interest in partitioning or
> formatting them in Linux.)
Are you sure that it's Linux that's clobbering the partitions, and not
Windows? Two reasons I ask:
- if you're not mounting the partitions in Linux, there's no reason it
should even read them, nevermind clobber them.
- in the past I've had trouble with Windows doing exactly what you're
describing, namely refusing to hold a format in VFAT partitions when it
didn't like my partitioning scheme. It also would see merged and/or
phantom partitions.
Try rebooting Windows a few times without starting Linux. Save some
files on /dev/hdb5 in Windows, then reboot into Windows. Are the files
still there?
In my case, the problem was that I had multiple primary partitions,
which Windows couldn't comprehend. You may know that Windows generally
only wants to see one primary and one extended partition per drive. In
your case, maybe Windows can't comprehend that there are zero primary
partitions on /dev/hdb. So, my suggestion is to put exactly one primary
and one extended partition on /dev/hdb, and see if that clears up the
problem.
Good luck,
Andrew.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.setup) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Setup Digest
******************************
