-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hakuna Matata
Fletcher Bonds wrote: | No actually it wasn't clear at all. | | You made an argument on virtualzation in opposition to a statement I | didn't make. I gave progressive examples of virtualization usage. I at | no point said that Xen servers and a Thinkpad's disk utilization were in | anyway equivalent. | | You then raised emotion-laden point about what was and wasn't | "admirable" in comparison of reboots and VMs. In response to what? I | made no statement to the contrary. Your entire second paragraph was a | rant in opposition of nothing I said. I in fact suggested that in the | instance of crash coursing Linux it was better to go all the way than | either rebooting or virtualizing. | | Bryan I'm wholly uninterested in any emotional investment you have in | the multi-booting. I don't say that to offend you, but this is a | technical discussion. It should be dry and factual. I have an opinion | of my own; one based on /my/ experience and devoid any concepts of | admiration, which is: multi-booting is a fundamentally flawed idea. It | presents a model of resource usage that is inherently wasteful. | | It's just my opinion though and there's no need for you to agree with | me. My objective is merely to share my opinion with K7AAY and the | group. Not to convince you. I'm not arguing. Disagreeing, but without | ego or the need to be right. | | Going forward, I would appreciate it if you disagree with me that you | accurately represent my statements that you disagree with and make your | points devoid of ego or emotional-laden comments about what is and isn't | admirable. That to me is a reasonable discourse and all that I'm | interested in having. | | Thank you. | | On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Bryan Smith <[email protected] | <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: | | | I read it right the first time; we have different points in the end. I | was primarily addressing your dislike of multi-booting, ie running each | OS in a native environment(for desktop purposes). Where we both say the | same things is where we agree, yet where we differ is clearly evident. | | Bryan | | Fletcher Bonds wrote: | | I think you might want to reread my mail because you just restated my | | points. I don't think we're arguing. | | | | On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Bryan Smith | <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | | <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> | wrote: | | | | | | Howdy Fletcher, | | | | Virtualization with Xen and 1U servers is a bit different from a | | ThinkPad with a 10Gig free partition. I use Xen quite a bit(20U of | | servers just for Xen) and yes you're right that virtualization in the | | server world is common place, but this is a totally different matter. | | | | If you want a crash course in Linux you install it rather than "play" | | with it in a VM. Bailing out by rebooting is far more admirable than | | just closing the VM and going back to ms Paint and msn messenger. The | | big thing is realizing that Linux can accommodate you in your daily | | needs. You're just dabbling with a system when you run it in a VM. | Lets | | not forget that these are multitasking OS's so while that VM is | running | | in windows the user is doing various other things outside of the | VM on a | | non Linux OS; further deepening reliance on it rather than Linux. You | | learn by utilizing and being engrossed. Desktop VM's get you to the | | cliff but to install is to jump off and experience the feeling. | | | | Times have changed but to make it through a *BSD/Linux install used to | | be a mark of excellence itself. If we all relied on VM's for our needs | | then where would the state of our kernel and device support be today? | | VM's are awesome, but even with the newest motherboards it's a foreign | | system that negates all the benefits of buying specific hardware. The | | reality is that windows has things that Linux doesn't, just as FreeBSD | | has things Linux doesn't and you can't experience these things unless | | you are running that system natively. | | | | Photoshop or Solid Works in a VM? - ZFS filesystem in a VM...I think | | not. | | | | Bryan | | | | Fletcher Bonds wrote: | | | I both agree and disagree K7AAY (what is your name really? I feel | | weird | | | addressing you that way). | | | | | | What are you solving for? Because that really effects the choice of | | | solution. | | | | | | Bryan makes a valid point in regard to having real time experience | | with | | | real hardware. If your intent is to learn everything you can about | | | running Linux - a virtualized install isn't the way to go. | | | | | | A good use of virtualization at that level is for instance testing | | | Windows client side applications agains nix server side apps on | | the same | | | box. Larger scale virtualization is to make 4 1U servers in a | | rack act | | | as a dozen virtual servers with a product like Xen. Larger still.. | | | Make a piece of big iron like a Z series mainframe act like | dozens or | | | hundreds of servers with Z/VM. Point is virtualization has it's | place | | | dependent on what you're solving for. | | | | | | I'm still not a fan of multi-boot though - especially if what your | | | solving for is a crash course in Linux. I've seen far too many | people | | | approach Linux this way professing to want to /learn the OS/, but | | every | | | time something isn't Windows-intuitive to them or momentarily in | their | | | way.. Windows is only a reboot away and they bail. | | | | | | IF (big if here) Learning Linux is the objective. You have to first | | | accept as a given that Linux can do everything Windows can (and | | much of | | | better than Windows can) and make the switch. Do a full Linux | install | | | and make a commitment to hit those Not-the-way-Windows-does-it | moments | | | and prevail (Google knows all - just ask it). Otherwise you'll | spend | | | most of your time in Windows with a chunk of your drive dedicated | | to an | | | OS that doesn't often see the light of day. | | | | | | On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Bryan Smith | | <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> | | | <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>> | | wrote: | | | | | | | | | Well K7AAY, | | | | | | I strongly encourage you to multi boot your system with as many | | | OS's/distros that you can. Someone gave you a suggestion to run the | | | distro in a VM. Running a system in a vm really cheats you out of | | | serious interaction with the bootloader and using the Linux kernel | | with | | | real-time performance. With VM's systems you'll really never | know what | | | modules or chipsets your devices use because the kernel sees virtual | | | hardware. I don't know your intentions but you already have | | proficiency | | | in Windows. If anything run Windows in a vm and learn to cope with | | | Linux. It's cool to run a VM but not as cool as installing Linux | | on your | | | box. | | | | | | You should create an extended partition with several logical | | partitions | | | within it. Linux is not like Unix and other systems when it comes to | | | booting from partitions. You can put that kernel ANYWHERE and | | it'll boot | | | as long as the boot loader knows where to find it. Ff you had enough | | | space you could actually make one Extended partition and have a | | bunch of | | | logical ones inside it. Then you can put Linux on anyone of | them. Here | | | is my drive on my laptop | | | | | | Number Start End Size Type File system Flags | | | ~ 1 32.3kB 10.7GB 10.7GB primary ntfs boot | | | ~ 2 10.7GB 17.2GB 6440MB primary ext2 | | | ~ 3 17.2GB 56.9GB 39.7GB extended | | | ~ 5 17.2GB 32.2GB 15.0GB logical reiserfs | | | ~ 6 32.2GB 55.8GB 23.6GB logical reiserfs | | | ~ 7 55.8GB 56.4GB 535MB logical linux-swap | | | ~ 8 56.4GB 56.9GB 535MB logical linux-swap | | | ~ 4 56.9GB 80.0GB 23.1GB primary reiserfs | | | | | | This drive has 3 separate Linux installs and each share a /home | | and load | | | balanced swap space between 2 partitions(7,8). Partition 1 is XP, | | | Partition 2 is Linux, 3 is the extended container that's 40 | Gigs. 5 is | | | Linux, Partition 6 is the shared /home. 7-8 are both swap and 4 | | changes | | | from OpenBSD-FreeBSD-BeOS-RHEL 5, depending on how I feel. | | | | | | Unix(Solaris, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc) requires a primary partition to | | | boot. Yet Linux can boot from logical partitions...how nice. | | | | | | There is no need to shrink your Windows partition in this case. | | Just use | | | that unallocated space and make it a logical partition. The only | issue | | | might be the size of your home partition which I highly | recommend you | | | making separate. No swap means no suspend to disk so in light of | that | | | and the possibility of using logical partitions I'd make one that is | | | 512MB at least. 7-8 Gigs for root and 2 gigs for home. | | | | | | Have fun | | | | | | Bryan | | | | | | K7AAY wrote: | | | | 149GB hd from factory in my Lenovo SL400. Vista's Disk Management | | | snap- | | | | in shows this partitioning for Disk 0: | | | | | | | | Letter Volume Size Status | | | | -- ----------- ------ | | | ------------------------------------------- | | | | S: SERVICE003 1004 MiB Healthy (System, Active, | | | Primary Partiion) | | | | C: SW_Preload 135 GiB Healthy (Boot, Crash Dump, | | | Primary Partition) | | | | unallocated 10 GiB recovered from C: w/ Disk Mgt | | | snap-in & by | | | | shrinking Q: w/ EASUS Part. Mgr. | | | | Q: Lenovo 6 GiB Healthy (Primary Partition) | | | | | | | | It's my intent to install a Linux (eLive? Kubuntu? pcE17OS | 2nd Ed.? | | | | Dislike GNOME, fer sure) and I've been given to understand | there's a | | | | maximum of four (4) Primary Partitions on a hard drive, so how | do I | | | | overcome that? With extended partitions? Linux wants two | partitions | | | | (well, three, but since I have 2GB RAM, I think Linux will do OK | | sans | | | | swap). | | | | | | | | Your on-topic responses are truly appreciated. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - -- A healthy diet includes Linux, Linux and more Linux. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkoArKoACgkQh+MLjl5SKYRYOgCfSLDcumx6iXKuiSyse0HWAWIB bLcAnj+wFAxtZ15rXaJbZsX7GrEGzcv7 =SXnZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Linux Users Group. To post a message, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit our group at http://groups.google.com/group/linuxusersgroup -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
