Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-15 Thread Mike Corbeil

Andrew George wrote:



[snipped]

May have already been answered, but in case it hasn't ...

 
 Heres a related question
 The following is part of my partition table
 Device  Mount Point Distribution
 /hdb5   /boot   Debian
 /hdb6   /   Debian
 /hdc6   /boot   Mandrake
 /hdc7   /   Mandrake


[snipped]

 For example...If I'm in Mandrake with dev/hdb5 mounted as /mnt/debboot
 should I specify the kernal location for Debian as /mnt/debboot/vmlinuz-2.0.38
 and Lilo will set the MBR to go to hdb5 (even though it will mount hdb5 as /boot
 when the kernal reads Debian's fstab)?

No.  When you'ld boot into Deb, lilo would look for the kernel image in
/mnt/debboot/ in Deb's / filesystem, because that's how you'ld have defined or
spec'd it in your lilo configuration.

If the kernel image for Deb is in /boot of that configuration, then you need to
specify the kernel image and location as this for lilo.

This means that either you need to copy your Deb kernel image to your Mandrake
/boot directory, or create a symlink to it in your Mdk /boot directory.  This sym
link would be

/boot/vmlinuz-2.0.38 - /mnt/hdb5/boot/vmlinuz-2.0.38

or
/boot/vm... - /mnt/hdb5/vm...

I think it'ld need to be /mnt/hdb5/boot/vm...  The boot part does not actually
exist in your /mnt path, except once /dev/hdb5 has been mounted.

/mnt/hdb5 would be mounted to /dev/hdb5, however I'm not sure if /dev/hdb5 actually
needs to be mounted.  This would be easy and quick to test, but if you don't want
to bother with trial and error, then simply mount /dev/hdb5 to /mnt/hdb5 (or vice
versa - in wording) before modifying your lilo conf.

If you don't  use /mnt/hdb5 for the name of this mount point, then I'ld suggest not
placing an entry for this mount in your fstab file.  For example, if you name it
instead /mnt/hdd, and you define the fstab entry as /dev/hdb5, then to mount
/mnt/hdd to any other /dev filesystem, you'ld need to either type out the entire
mount command, for mount to not use fstab, or you'ld need to modify fstab, when
ever you'ld want to mount a different filesystem to this mount  point.

If you name it /mnt/hdb5, then you can safely define the entry in fstab, for
/dev/hdb5.

That's why I used this for the mount point name.  Directories don't take up any
space worthy of mention, especially when it's only the hardlink of the directory;
therefore, you can create as many different mount points in /mnt as you want and
then define these in fstab, probably with the noauto option, to avoid needing to
type out the complete mount command each time, letting you mount this filesystem
for example by simply running

mount /mnt/hdb5

which is shorter than

   mount -vt ext2 /dev/hdb5 /mnt/hdb5

When using the former case, mount automatically looks in fstab for the definition
of the mount point.

F.e., I have two Linux configurations with different filesystems for /boot, /,
/usr, /usr/local, /usr/src, /home, /var, and /tmp.  One of these configs is the
primary Linux config and the other is test/build, relative to the primary config;
therefore, I created /mnt points named boot, root, usr, local, src, home, var and
tmp (besides also a:, c:, floppy, and cdrom).  Then I created fstab file entries
for each of these, because when ever I say, for example,

 mount /mnt/boot

I always want it mounted to the same partition.  If I ever want to access my other
single and small filesystem configuration, then I merely run mount typing out the
full mount command, mapping it to /mnt/root, albeit could also mount it /mnt/boot
or any other /mnt point which is not in use.

e.g.

mount -vt ext2 /dev/hdb2 /mnt/root

If I want to access /boot of that config, then it's through /mnt/root/boot.  If I
want to access the /var directory, then it's /mnt/root/var, or for /root, it's
/mnt/root/root.

Based on this, you'ld need to create the symlink in your Mdk /boot directory,
accessing the Deb /boot through /mnt/debroot/boot/...  Add the fstab entry and you
can mount by simply running

mount /mnt/hdb5

and

ls /mnt/hdb5/boot/vm*

would show all of the vm* files in the /boot of Deb.

This extra rap may be helpful in illustrating the use and flexibility of mount.

Hopefully that's not too long winded.

mike



 Trying to burn my boot floppies (and play with another distribution while I've
 got a spare Hard Drive)

 Andrew






Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-15 Thread Andrew George

On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, you wrote:
 Andrew George wrote:
 
 
 
 [snipped]
 
 May have already been answered, but in case it hasn't ...
 
  
  Heres a related question
  The following is part of my partition table
  Device  Mount Point Distribution
  /hdb5   /boot   Debian
  /hdb6   /   Debian
  /hdc6   /boot   Mandrake
  /hdc7   /   Mandrake
 
 
 [snipped]
 
  For example...If I'm in Mandrake with dev/hdb5 mounted as /mnt/debboot
  should I specify the kernal location for Debian as /mnt/debboot/vmlinuz-2.0.38
  and Lilo will set the MBR to go to hdb5 (even though it will mount hdb5 as /boot
  when the kernal reads Debian's fstab)?
 
 No.  When you'ld boot into Deb, lilo would look for the kernel image in
 /mnt/debboot/ in Deb's / filesystem, because that's how you'ld have defined or
 spec'd it in your lilo configuration.
 
Actually tried it yesterday and it does work.
I think LILO needs to be able to find the kernel using a valid path in
lilo.conf  when it writes the MBR, but it writes the MBR using disk geometry
location not filesystem tree location (makes sense, there is no filesystem at
that point)
heres the lilo.conf I used - only hassle with it is I've got to remember to
mount the other boot partition in the same place when I want to run an update
on the MBR (/mnt/spare is of course /boot when Debian's running)


boot=/dev/hda
read-only
prompt
timeout=150
vga=normal

image=/boot/vmlinuz
root=/dev/hdc6
label=linux
append=""

other=/dev/hda1
label=win
table=/dev/hda

image=/mnt/spare/vmlinuz-2.0.38
root=/dev/hdb7
label=deb
append=""

Thanks for everyones comments on LILO recently, I would never have figured this
out without reading what everyone had to say

Andrew



Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-14 Thread Kirk McElhearn

On 14/04/00 0:06, Alan Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] is reported to have said:

Kirkyour designations of boot1, boot2etc.  Do partitions
exist with those namesnot!?  Ok, do me a favor.  You say
Caldera is running, so go into a console in Caldera and type 
fdisk /dev/hda  then do a p command and capture the results and
post them. Ok?

No, that's not their names, I just wrote that to show what they were 
being used for...

Kirk



   vice versa
 Translations - French to English, English to French | Technical Writing
 Traductions francais-anglais, anglais-francais  | Redaction technique
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.mcelhearn.com
Kirk McElhearn | Chemin de la Lauze | 05600 Guillestre | France 




Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-14 Thread Mike Corbeil

Jean-Louis Debert wrote:

 Mike Corbeil wrote:
  Actually, I guess that the boot directory doesn't need to be named /boot, as
  long as the correct path is specified in the boot configuration.  This may be
  incorrect; however, the reason I say this is because linuxconf lilo boot
  configuration requires the name of the kernel image file as well as the
  directory path, at least when linuxconf isn't run in or from the /boot
  directory, or the directory the kernel image(s) are located in.
 
  Otherwise, if /boot is strictly required, then I don't know why linuxconf would
  require for the directory to be specified.

 You're perfectly right: lilo only needs to find the kernel image,
 and you could often, in theory, put that anywhere as long as you
 specify it correctly in lilo.conf

What I was wondering is if not only the vmlinuz kernel file was sufficient, or if
I'ld need to create symlinks to all of the /boot files associated with a kernel
existing only on another configuration's partition, which is invisible if not
mounted.

For example, assume the following:

Linux config #1:

/dev/hda5 - /boot (vmlinuz-2.0.36-3, only)

Config #2:

/dev/hdb2 - /boot (vmlinuz -2.0.34-0.6, 2.0.36-3,  only)


Config #3:

/dev/hdb5 - /boot (vmlinuz -2.0.36-3, and 2.2.x,  only)
/dev/hdb6 - /root

Config #4:

/dev/hdb13 - /boot (Mdk 7.0.2, vmlinux 2.2.y)
/dev/hdb14 - /root (Mdk 7.0.2)

Configs #1-3 are RH.

Now, let's say I want to configure and run lilo from on config #4, say using
linuxconf.
Can I simply mount /boot for configs #1-3 and create symlinks in #4's /boot
directory to the vmlinuz kernels in the /boot directories of configs #1-3, and then
run linuxconf successfully, without a glitch?

That's what I meant, that is, that this would work and that symlinks to the system
map files would not also be needed.

I think that I was just trying to be safe, before actually doing this.  On the other
hand, that was probably just a little nervousness, because linuxconf doesn't ask for
the other files; only for the kernel image file itself.  It may be necessary to also
mount the / filesystems, but that's not important, at least not wrt the question I
had in mind.

Hence, between your reply and this additional thinking, while recognizing that I was
just a little nervous about this, I think this is the answer, that is, other than
getting rid of some of my Linux configurations.  However, until I get an hd.img file
for the Mandrake 7.0v2 cdrom I got with the Planete Linux mag, I only have one
unnecessary configuration.  Once I get this Mandrake cdrom (not made by Mandrake
itself as far as I can tell), then, well, I may still only have one unnecessary
Linux configuration to get rid of, if I don't get rid of any between now and getting
this cdrom installed.

I prefer having at least a couple configurations from each Linux distrib installed.




 However, the /boot directory is part of the File System Standard (FSS)
 in linux, and this standard has been elaborated for several reasons:
  .. mainly to aim for better interoperability between different
  Linux distributions.
  .. in the case of /boot, this also provides a suitable mount point
  to mount a different partition. This is mostly used for older
  BIOSes that can't deal with the 1024-cylinder limit, so that
  you can make sure that a boot kernel will be physically below
  the limit.

Was aware of most of that.  Wasn't thoroughly aware or remembering the first ..,
though.
However, in following the general guideline, I make /boot a separate filesystem or
partition, and do this regardless of the filesystem being above or below the 1024
limit.  The reason for this generalized approach is merely to make sure that there's
more flexibility for future modification to the system, and I don't think it can
hurt to make /boot a separate fs, even if the entire configuration fits below cyl
1024.

I'll experiment with creating only symlinks to the vmlinuz kernel images and
omitting do the same for the /boot system map files.  Doing that would probably only
be unnecessary extra.

Part of the intent of the question, though, is that some programs seem to not accept
symlinks, and I don't recall which program I recently encountered this problem with,
but this happened within the past couple or few days (am spread over many, varied
tasks and the name of that program is currently, well, absent - still haven't gotten
any sleep, been up all night working on various aspects of my Linux configurations,
so am zonked, deep fried, right now).

Thanks anyway,

mike





Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-14 Thread Andrew George


 You're perfectly right: lilo only needs to find the kernel image,
 and you could often, in theory, put that anywhere as long as you
 specify it correctly in lilo.conf
 
 However, the /boot directory is part of the File System Standard (FSS)
 in linux, and this standard has been elaborated for several reasons:
  .. mainly to aim for better interoperability between different
  Linux distributions.
  .. in the case of /boot, this also provides a suitable mount point 
  to mount a different partition. This is mostly used for older
  BIOSes that can't deal with the 1024-cylinder limit, so that 
  you can make sure that a boot kernel will be physically below
  the limit.  
 
 
Heres a related question
The following is part of my partition table
Device  Mount Point Distribution
/hdb5   /boot   Debian
/hdb6   /   Debian
/hdc6   /boot   Mandrake
/hdc7   /   Mandrake

Two distributions running. Set up so that neither is in the the others FSTAB
with those mountpoints (for instance if I'm running Debian, I mount /dev/hdc7
as /mnt/Mandrakeroot)
Nowin that situation...Setting lilo by specifying the base image as
/boot/vmlinuz with different root directories for each distro results in LILO
dying (probably becasuse it's looking for both Kernals in the same partition)
So the question is...does lilo translate based on existing mountpoints to
partition locations?

For example...If I'm in Mandrake with dev/hdb5 mounted as /mnt/debboot
should I specify the kernal location for Debian as /mnt/debboot/vmlinuz-2.0.38
and Lilo will set the MBR to go to hdb5 (even though it will mount hdb5 as /boot
when the kernal reads Debian's fstab)?

Trying to burn my boot floppies (and play with another distribution while I've
got a spare Hard Drive)

Andrew



Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-13 Thread Matt Stegman

 Caldera was the only one I could fully install.  It started up, but
 there was no option during the install to create a boot disk ...

Hmmm... that sounds suspiciously like a bug.  They really didn't give you
the option to create a boot floppy?

 Then I tried Corel Linux.  This was an instant failure, since it only 
 recognized my HD as having two partitions - one of 32 megs (boot1) and 
 the other having 20 gigs (it is a 20.4 gig HD).

When I helped a friend install (an earlier version of) Corel Linux, it
would not let you install to already-created partitions.  This looks like
a different problem; it's not looking inside your extended partition.  
Anyhow, I don't think you're missing much.  Their KFM hack made it
function more like explorer, which is positive.  However, they use
Debian's package management system, which I, for one, find confusing, and
their distribution is lacking a whole buttload of functionality.  Worse, I
think, than the functionality that comes with Windows.

 Next try was Suse.  This did not work either, because the Suse installer 
 would only let me install it on contiguous partitions.  This seems to be 
 quite stupid, actually, and I can't figure out any reason for it, but 
 that's the way it is.  

That just sounds wrong.  SUSE is, so I've heard, a moderately good
distrbution.  This isn't positive.

 I also tried a RedHat 6.2 beta CD I have from a magazine.  That didn't go 
 very far in the install, it would not recognize my CD-Rom drive.  It gave 
 a list of only a few CD-Roms, and I tried them all, but none of them 
 worked.

Probably, I would think, because it is a beta.  You might get the official
6.2 version - it is out now, isn't it? - and try that.


-Matt Stegman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-13 Thread Mike Corbeil

Actually, I guess that the boot directory doesn't need to be named /boot, as
long as the correct path is specified in the boot configuration.  This may be
incorrect; however, the reason I say this is because linuxconf lilo boot
configuration requires the name of the kernel image file as well as the
directory path, at least when linuxconf isn't run in or from the /boot
directory, or the directory the kernel image(s) are located in.

Otherwise, if /boot is strictly required, then I don't know why linuxconf would
require for the directory to be specified.

Is there are slight inconsistency or discrepancy in this sense, or is there a
valid technical reason I'm not aware of?

Anyone know?

mike





Re: [expert] Follow-up - Multiple Linux systems on one hard disk?

2000-04-13 Thread Jean-Louis Debert

Mike Corbeil wrote:
 Actually, I guess that the boot directory doesn't need to be named /boot, as
 long as the correct path is specified in the boot configuration.  This may be
 incorrect; however, the reason I say this is because linuxconf lilo boot
 configuration requires the name of the kernel image file as well as the
 directory path, at least when linuxconf isn't run in or from the /boot
 directory, or the directory the kernel image(s) are located in.
 
 Otherwise, if /boot is strictly required, then I don't know why linuxconf would
 require for the directory to be specified.

You're perfectly right: lilo only needs to find the kernel image,
and you could often, in theory, put that anywhere as long as you
specify it correctly in lilo.conf

However, the /boot directory is part of the File System Standard (FSS)
in linux, and this standard has been elaborated for several reasons:
 .. mainly to aim for better interoperability between different
 Linux distributions.
 .. in the case of /boot, this also provides a suitable mount point 
 to mount a different partition. This is mostly used for older
 BIOSes that can't deal with the 1024-cylinder limit, so that 
 you can make sure that a boot kernel will be physically below
 the limit.  



-- 
Jean-Louis Debert[EMAIL PROTECTED]
74 Annemasse  France
old Linux fan