Hi All
Over the weekend I lost my 3rd HD using MC under Mandrake 10.1 in 2 different
computers.
In each case MC was being used to search or move a directory that had over 100
data files with over 2 GB of data.
In the last instance Saturday morning I was transferring a directory with over
5
SOTL wrote:
Hi All
Over the weekend I lost my 3rd HD using MC under Mandrake 10.1 in 2 different
computers.
In each case MC was being used to search or move a directory that had over 100
data files with over 2 GB of data.
In the last instance Saturday morning I was transferring a directory
SOTL wrote:
Hi All
Over the weekend I lost my 3rd HD using MC under Mandrake 10.1 in 2 different
computers.
In each case MC was being used to search or move a directory that had over 100
data files with over 2 GB of data.
In the last instance Saturday morning I was transferring a directory
On Monday 28 March 2005 11:15, Duncan Anderson wrote:
SOTL wrote:
Hi All
Over the weekend I lost my 3rd HD using MC under Mandrake 10.1 in 2
different computers.
In each case MC was being used to search or move a directory that had over
100 data files with over 2 GB of data.
In the
On Monday 28 March 2005 12:30, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
SOTL wrote:
Hi All
Over the weekend I lost my 3rd HD using MC under Mandrake 10.1 in 2
different computers.
In each case MC was being used to search or move a directory that had
over 100 data files with over 2 GB of data.
SOTL wrote:
You missed the point.
I was doing NOTHING with the root file system.
I was simply coping data files [5 gb worth] from one directory to another.
OK. I misunderstood. Were the two directories on the same hard disk or what?
cheers
Duncan
Just terrible.
But i really don't believe that using any program(not only mc) could do
such harm to hardware.
I suppouse that problem is rather technical not software by nature. Are
you using UPS? Bad electricity often causes strange hardware failures.
Check your power, maybe it falls below or
On Monday 28 March 2005 14:12, Duncan Anderson wrote:
SOTL wrote:
You missed the point.
I was doing NOTHING with the root file system.
I was simply coping data files [5 gb worth] from one directory to another.
OK. I misunderstood. Were the two directories on the same hard disk or
what?
SOTL wrote:
On Monday 28 March 2005 12:30, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
What file system were you using?
How is the power source the systems are connected to?
The laptop is battery powered but was plugged into the wall.
The MSI box is not currently connected to a UPS.
I have one
location that I
SOTL wrote:
There were 3 failures each slightly different all occurred while I was using
MC under very heavy load.
HD Failure # 3
details snipped
At the time of the last failure I had decided to use MC to transfer files as
previous transfer had been by root so root permission was required to
On Tuesday September 2 2003 10:35 am, Frankie wrote:
OTOH, I don't believe SATA is that much if any improvement
over ATA/133. I've read Net reports to that affect. Some
Mandrake users have posted SATA hdparm -Tt numbers on various
groups an forums, an they're all less then the numbers
On Wednesday 03 Sep 2003 5:04 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
Yes, that info plus some other stuff I didn't really
understand was in the Net reports I've read. Also it was predicted
that before SATA catches on, we'll be movin into PCI-eXpress ;)
Now to my mind, that's where the improvement was
On Wednesday September 3 2003 09:26 am, Eko Budiharto wrote:
Hi Tom,
isn't the 9.2 still beta? If not, can you tell me where you get
the non beta version?
It's not so much a Mandrake version deal, as it is kernel and
driver. Promise recently released their SATA driver under the GPL,
an
Just my cat /var/log/messages|grep ATA
ep 3 05:16:14 lvghomepc kernel: SiI3112 Serial ATA: IDE controller at PCI
slot 01:0b.0
Sep 3 05:16:14 lvghomepc kernel: SiI3112 Serial ATA: chipset revision 2
Sep 3 05:16:14 lvghomepc kernel: SiI3112 Serial ATA: not 100%% native mode:
will probe irqs
On Tuesday 02 Sep 2003 3:18 pm, Tony S. Sykes wrote:
2800+ Athlon XP and a Asus a7n8x Deluxe with x 2 sata150 7200 120gb
Seagate's. I have tried to speed them up using hdparm -X66 -d1 but them
still use a lot of cpu and still brought my system down but it did speed
them up. I did want to use
Hi,
have anyone of you ever installed in SATA with MDK?
Is HD SATA working with MDK?
*
# NOTICE #
Email sent by MERATUS user is strictly confidential. If it is not intended to you,
please delete it
On Tuesday September 2 2003 05:58 am, Eko Budiharto wrote:
Hi,
have anyone of you ever installed in SATA with MDK?
Is HD SATA working with MDK?
In 9.2 yes, I don't know about 9.1 an older. I have a SATA port,
but no SATA drive. So I can't say how well it works.
--
Tom Brinkman
HD 20 gig
XP
no floppy drive
want to repartition HD to install mandrake, but without losing data.
have partition magic rescue disks but no floppy drive
any ideaz?
thx
_
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to
HD 20 gig
NTFS
win XP
want to repartition HD in order to install mandrake 9.1, but without loosing
data. Have partition magic rescue disks but no disk drive (laptop).
any ideas?
thx
_
Valentijn bij MSN ! http://www.msn.be/valentijn
is mandrake NTFS resizer as safe as partition magic?
From: JoeHill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD-partitioning without f-drive
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 04:50:37 -0400
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:14:52 +0200
ivette brusselmans [EMAIL PROTECTED
Which version of PM are you using?
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 04:34, ivette brusselmans wrote:
is mandrake NTFS resizer as safe as partition magic?
From: JoeHill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD-partitioning without f-drive
Date: Thu
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 17:14, ivette brusselmans wrote:
HD 20 gig
NTFS
win XP
want to repartition HD in order to install mandrake 9.1, but without loosing
data. Have partition magic rescue disks but no disk drive (laptop).
any ideas?
thx
I created a bootable CDROM with not only a basic
PM 5.0
From: Curt Tresenriter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD-partitioning without f-drive
Date: 17 Jul 2003 04:46:58 -0500
Which version of PM are you using?
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 04:34, ivette brusselmans wrote:
is mandrake NTFS
guess I'll give it a try that way
Thx
From: Robin Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD-partitioning without f-drive
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:39:01 +0300
JoeHill wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:14:52 +0200
ivette brusselmans [EMAIL
On 17 Jul 2003 19:56:28 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
I created a bootable CDROM with not only a basic MSDOS system on it,
but a Win98SE installation, WinXP Pro installation, Partition Magic
and Ghost; really nice all-in-one tool for fixing tings - that's how
I manage to get
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD-partitioning without f-drive
Date: 17 Jul 2003 04:46:58 -0500
Which version of PM are you using?
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 04:34, ivette brusselmans wrote:
is mandrake NTFS resizer as safe as partition magic?
From: JoeHill [EMAIL
On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 10:21, ed tharp wrote:
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 05:58, ivette brusselmans wrote:
PM 5.0
I don't think you want to screw with an XP NTFS partition with PM 5.0.
so in this instance, I can saw that the installer in 9.1 is MUCH safer
than PM 5.0 on XP NTFS
PM 6.0 and above
On Friday 18 Jul 2003 1:41 am, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 10:21, ed tharp wrote:
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 05:58, ivette brusselmans wrote:
PM 5.0
I don't think you want to screw with an XP NTFS partition with PM 5.0.
so in this instance, I can saw that the installer in 9.1
On 18 Jul 2003 10:41:28 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
(Just a side note: Ain't it rather funny that MDK is using a kernel
that is further ahead than RH, disk tools that are more sophisticated,
an installation/configuration methodology that is more sophisticated
andfriendly;
On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 10:52, Derek Jennings wrote:
Well look at how long it took to convince you Stephen... ;-)
derek
Five months. Heaps of installs of 9.0; wasn't until 9.1rc2 that I came
around...
--
Fri Jul 18 11:10:00 EST 2003
11:10:00 up 4 days, 3:13, 2 users, load average: 0.00,
On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 11:06, JoeHill wrote:
Marketing. Money. The usual.
Truth doesn't matter, hype does.
That's the way that the world goes round.
The US government uses that strategy.
Microsoft uses that strategy.
AOL uses that strategy.
McDonald's uses that strategy.
--
Fri Jul 18
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 18:06, JoeHill wrote:
On 18 Jul 2003 10:41:28 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
(Just a side note: Ain't it rather funny that MDK is using a kernel
that is further ahead than RH, disk tools that are more sophisticated,
an installation/configuration
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 06:48, civileme wrote:
On Monday 17 February 2003 04:35 am, Greg Meyer wrote:
On Saturday 15 February 2003 08:26 pm, Chuck Burns wrote:
GACK! *clue* You can have MORE than one swapfile! make the other
partition a SECOND swapfile.. done..
Not done. Make sure you
On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 02:14, civileme wrote:
I also do not see the point in a 5GB swap. This was his /home on a 10GB
drive.
I have a friend who has 3G DDR and TWO striping 7G swaps.
I asked and he replied nonchalantly, video editing.
Civileme
Good point - and with that, I remember
On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 11:38, Adolfo Bello wrote:
This answers a question I posted a few days ago about the size of the
swap partition. Thanks.
For most of us - MOST of us, having a swap file that exceeds the size of
the physical RAM is useless and pointless. Unless you're doing really
high end
On Tue, 2003-02-18 at 20:53, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
But overall, the common linux geek, er, user, isn't going to require
anything more than the size of their physical RAM - even the ones that
download large amounts of porno movies and pictures - it ain't going to
speed up their picture viewers
Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
i had one HD 10GB which i splitt to 3 partitions
/, swap and /home
after a while i bought a new HD 80GB and i moved /home to it, so now i have
one big empty partition that i want to transfer its size to swap and to /
should i delete the partition and then resize both / and
On Monday 17 February 2003 6:57 am, John Richard Smith wrote:
Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
i had one HD 10GB which i splitt to 3 partitions
/, swap and /home
after a while i bought a new HD 80GB and i moved /home to it, so now i
have one big empty partition that i want to transfer its size to swap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 15 February 2003 08:26 pm, Chuck Burns wrote:
GACK! *clue* You can have MORE than one swapfile! make the other
partition a SECOND swapfile.. done..
Not done. Make sure you have an entry for the second swapfile in /etc/fstab.
- --
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:57:54PM +, John Richard Smith wrote:
Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
i had one HD 10GB which i splitt to 3 partitions
/, swap and /home
after a while i bought a new HD 80GB and i moved /home to it, so now i have
one big empty partition that i want to transfer its size to
On Monday 17 February 2003 01:51 am, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
i had one HD 10GB which i splitt to 3 partitions
/, swap and /home
after a while i bought a new HD 80GB and i moved /home to it, so now i have
one big empty partition that i want to transfer its size to swap and to /
should i delete the
On Monday 17 February 2003 04:35 am, Greg Meyer wrote:
On Saturday 15 February 2003 08:26 pm, Chuck Burns wrote:
GACK! *clue* You can have MORE than one swapfile! make the other
partition a SECOND swapfile.. done..
Not done. Make sure you have an entry for the second swapfile in
One thing that matters on your 10G drive in the / partition. You might
want to copy it to your second drive and make sure you can actually
Actually that would be pointless, because the next time the OP
restarted his system it would just use the same swap partition if he
set it up to do that.
On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 21:51, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
i had one HD 10GB which i splitt to 3 partitions
/, swap and /home
after a while i bought a new HD 80GB and i moved /home to it, so now i have
one big empty partition that i want to transfer its size to swap and to /
should i delete the
On Saturday 01 February 2003 21:20, civileme wrote:
udma2 is safe--it is only 33Mhz which is in the range of 32-byte CRCs
which the drives can do. The 57-byte CRCs required by udma3 and up
66-133MHz are beyond the capabilities of the 102 and maybe beyond the
80Mb as well; I have not
On Friday 31 January 2003 06:12 pm, Dennis Myers wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:33 pm, Gil Katz wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 20:20, civileme wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:47 am, Gil Katz wrote:
On Thursday 30 January 2003 10:45, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
I bought a new
On Saturday 01 February 2003 10:09, civileme wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 06:12 pm, Dennis Myers wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:33 pm, Gil Katz wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 20:20, civileme wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:47 am, Gil Katz wrote:
On Thursday 30 January
my opinion is you can use this drive OK as long as you are not all that
concerned with hard drive speed, fine as a print server and a backup server,
but if you are building this box to do video or sound capture, forget it.
(but I would most often suggest uwscsi2 at the least for video or sound
udma2 is safe--it is only 33Mhz which is in the range of 32-byte CRCs
which the drives can do. The 57-byte CRCs required by udma3 and up
66-133MHz are beyond the capabilities of the 102 and maybe beyond the
80Mb as well; I have not kept up on the product through its most recent
On Thursday 30 January 2003 10:45, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
I bought a new WD 80GB disk and mount it with HardDrake and made one
partition but when i look in KDiskFree i see that i got only 25 GB.
What is wrong?
Gil
I'll refine the problem
DiskDrake see the disk as is (74 GB)
but KDiskFree see
Once it is mounted, do a df -h on the command line and see what it says.
~~Brad
On Friday 31 January 2003 04:47 am, you wrote:
On Thursday 30 January 2003 10:45, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
I bought a new WD 80GB disk and mount it with HardDrake and made one
partition but when i look in KDiskFree
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:47 am, Gil Katz wrote:
On Thursday 30 January 2003 10:45, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
I bought a new WD 80GB disk and mount it with HardDrake and made one
partition but when i look in KDiskFree i see that i got only 25 GB.
What is wrong?
Gil
I'll refine the problem
On Friday 31 January 2003 20:20, civileme wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:47 am, Gil Katz wrote:
On Thursday 30 January 2003 10:45, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
I bought a new WD 80GB disk and mount it with HardDrake and made one
partition but when i look in KDiskFree i see that i got only
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:33 pm, Gil Katz wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 20:20, civileme wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 02:47 am, Gil Katz wrote:
On Thursday 30 January 2003 10:45, Gil Katz wrote:
Hi
I bought a new WD 80GB disk and mount it with HardDrake and made one
Hi
I bought a new WD 80GB disk and mount it with HardDrake and made one partition
but when i look in KDiskFree i see that i got only 25 GB.
What is wrong?
Gil
--
Fair well and thanks for all the fish
On Tuesday 28 January 2003 02:39 pm, Fabián Reyes Prieto wrote:
I have a hard disk with 3.9 gigs. How much bytes I need for install
Mandrake 9.0 with Windows 2000 in one disk???
Mandrake 9.0 takes up about 1.3 Gb on my system including KDE, Gnome
and Windowmaker, along with Open Office,
I have a hard disk with 3.9 gigs. How much bytes I need for install Mandrake 9.0
with Windows 2000 in one disk???
Depending on just how much you want to install, as there is a good bit of overlapping
stuff, such as the three office suites, I would guess that you could have a good
working
* walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] [021208 09:55]:
Is a 3.7 gig hard drive to small to run mandrake 9.0? one of my hard
drives is going and until I buy a new one, I only have this small one
to use for linux.
That should be adequate for most purposes, assuming you need a fairly
normal workstation or
Hi,
I am running LM8.1 on a laptop (with much help from this list) along with
W2K. I am running out of room so I am considering installing a 30 gig hard
drive. What is the best method of transferring my entire system from one hd
to the other?
Has anyone had any luck with this?
On Sat, 23 Feb 2002 07:41:11 -0800
Bill Winegarden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I am running LM8.1 on a laptop (with much help from this list) along with
W2K. I am running out of room so I am considering installing a 30 gig hard
drive. What is the best method of transferring my
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
OK, I did this:
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hda
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hdb
to set both HD's to spin down after 30 seconds, just to test and see if it
would work. It didn't, and I didn't see anything for troubleshooting on
either the man page, or at
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 15:53:02 -0400 (EDT)
Roger Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
OK, I did this:
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hda
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hdb
to set both HD's to spin down after 30 seconds, just to test and see if it
would work.
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Roger Sherman wrote:
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
OK, I did this:
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hda
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hdb
to set both HD's to spin down after 30 seconds, just to test and see if it
would work. It didn't, and I didn't see anything
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Charles A Edwards wrote:
Try installing drivetweak.
It is on CD3 of 8.1 and is a GUI frontend to hdpram.
Using a GUI for to adjust the settings you need not worry about the syntax
being wrong.
Charles (-:
I don't think that would work for me, as I use 7.2.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roger Sherman
Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2001 5:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD spin down
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Charles A Edwards wrote:
Try installing drivetweak.
It is on CD3
19, 2001 5:48 PM
|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [newbie] HD spin down
|
|
|
|
|rgds
|
|
|Frank Hauptle.
|
|
|
|Fire up webmin, then go to hardware, then I think its under
|partitions or something, there is an IDE parameters section..
|
|you can modify your hdparm settings
parameters..
rgds
Frank
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roger Sherman
Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2001 6:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [newbie] HD spin down
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Franki wrote:
Fire up webmin, then go to hardware
of your best results and use those parameters..
OK man, thanks! :-)
rgds
Frank
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roger Sherman
Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2001 6:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [newbie] HD spin down
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 11:43:55 -0400 (EDT), Roger Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Roger Sherman wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 23:17:35 -0400 (EDT), Roger Sherman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think my hard drives
on the vrious options as well.
rgds
Frank
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roger Sherman
Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2001 5:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD spin down
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Charles A Edwards
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 17:28:42 -0400 (EDT), Roger Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Roger Sherman wrote:
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
OK, I did this:
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hda
hdparm -S 6 /dev/hdb
to set both HD's to spin down after 30
I don't think my hard drives are spinning down when I leave the machine
unattended for a while. I like to leave the PC on pretty much 24/7, so
obviously it would be good for the lives of the hard drives if they were
to spin down. Can anyone tell me what to set to get them to do that?
peace,
Sometimes Windows will erroneously mark sectors as bad especially if it has
been more than a few months since the last time that you re-installed Windows
or if you use (or have used) an old version of Norton Utilities, like 3.0.
Normally I say that once a disk (floppy or hard) starts to go bad,
At 04-02-2001 -0500, you wrote:
One of my old hard drives has some bad sectors. (I know from previous
Windows work.) If I use this hard drive for /home or swap, will Linux care?
Yes, very likely. I try to install Linux on an old drive with bad sectors
and almost blow my top; Suggest scan your
One of my old hard drives has some bad sectors. (I know from previous
Windows work.) If I use this hard drive for /home or swap, will Linux care?
Does it just avoid these sectors? Or am I in for corrupted files and lost
data?
Rootbus
Does it just avoid these sectors? Or am I in for corrupted
files and lost data?
You will be if you use it as is -- assuming ~anything~ even
writes to it without complaint. Run fscheck on it. There are
lots of differnet options available in the man file.
I have a few 580MB drives one
Jacqueline Michell wrote:
Irsquo;m very sorry if this is a dumb question. I bought
Linux-Mandrake 7.2 (powerpack deluxe) and need some advice on
partitions before I install. I have no experience with Linux and find
the installation manual unclear on this point. I have also searched
the
On Fri, 24 Nov 2000, Jacqueline Michell wrote:
My 15G HD now has two partitions: 7.14G (C:) Windows and Windows
applications that are already installed--AND--7.13G (E:) reserved for
Linux--not yet installed. (I need to be able to dual-boot to either
Windows or Linux.)
If you have a C and an E
hi Jacqueline;
how comfortable are you with messing with your computer? i can tell you one way to do
this, tho there might be easer ways. 1st -- have you backed up your windows system
(or have the CDs to reinstall) on the off chance you kill windows? =)
but yes, you can put linux on
Hi, recently when i've been browsing the internet i have noticed,
particularly when scrolling on a webpage that my hard drive is working a bit
harder than usual, just seems a bit noisier and working overtime, it's like
it's just spinning faster when i scroll...i'm running AMD K6-2 450mhz,
My hard drive was partitioned 2 gigs for windows and 4 gigs for linux. I was running
mandrake pkg 6.5. I was loading 7.1 and really messed up. The drive now shows 2 gig
windows and 4 gigs free space.
I cannot reclaim the free space so I can get my linux back in. Tried fdisk and other
) and SystemCommander Deluxe.
Charles
- Original Message -
From: "Paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [newbie] HD problems during install - cylinder 1024
On Fri, 26 May 2000, Fu Shanks wrote:
Installing: Mandrake 7.0 Complet
Installing: Mandrake 7.0 Complete on a 5GB partition
Running: Windows 98
WD 15 GB 7200RPM HD
When trying to install BootMagic, it says it cannot install since the
partition is beyond cylinder 1024. I have the same problem using DiskDrake
and LILO (LILO won't install due to this problem). Any
On Fri, 26 May 2000, Fu Shanks wrote:
Installing: Mandrake 7.0 Complete on a 5GB partition
Running: Windows 98
WD 15 GB 7200RPM HD
When trying to install BootMagic, it says it cannot install since the
partition is beyond cylinder 1024. I have the same problem using DiskDrake
and LILO (LILO
PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 10:10 PM
Subject: [newbie] HD problems during install - cylinder 1024
Installing: Mandrake 7.0 Complete on a 5GB partition
Running: Windows 98
WD 15 GB 7200RPM HD
When trying to install BootMagic, it says it cannot install since the
partition is beyond
--
Date: (No, or invalid, date.)
From: mmcmanus
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [newbie] HD problems
I can not install Mandrake 7.0 linux. It loaded and work perfectly but when
other OS's
where loaded to compare, it would not install properly.
Full install is approximately 1.3GB. You can use custom install and make it
something less than that figure.
HTH,
Matt
From: Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [newbie] HD sizes and such
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 19:05:07 -0800
Howdy all. Just
On Sun, 14 Nov 1999, you wrote:
Howdy all. Just joined this list, and should be installing Mandrake next
week, if all goes well. I am wondering if someone could tell me how much
HD space i should partition for it? I have 1.7 gigs left on my drive.
Winblows and stuff takes the rest up. Would
Howdy all. Just joined this list, and should be installing Mandrake next
week, if all goes well. I am wondering if someone could tell me how much
HD space i should partition for it? I have 1.7 gigs left on my drive.
Winblows and stuff takes the rest up. Would like 1.5 or something be
okay?? I
Howdy all. Just joined this list, and should be installing Mandrake next
week, if all goes well. I am wondering if someone could tell me how much
HD space i should partition for it? I have 1.7 gigs left on my drive.
Winblows and stuff takes the rest up. Would like 1.5 or something be
okay?? I
Sean Pritchard wrote:
OK STEVE:
I now have all the files for 6.1 (Did I need to download the whole
Mandrake/ directory? as
/Mandrake/
/RMPS/
/base/
/instimage/
/lib/
/modules/
/usr/
Sean Pritchard wrote:
OK I found some vague documention to HD Installations, and NFS/FTP/HTTP
Installations.
With cable internet access, I should be able to do an FTP install, but
I could use someone's opinion on wether I should do a HD download and
install versus an FTP install and
Thanx Steve,
I have a feeling an FTP, might work because of the type of NIC that I
have. I have a DFE-530TX (D-Link 10/100 pci). It uses the via-rhine
module, yet at installation in MDK 6.0 it (the download process)
wouldn't recognize it as such. In Linuxconf, I simply had to type in
Sean Pritchard wrote:
Thanx Steve,
I have a feeling an FTP, might work because of the type of NIC that I
have. I have a DFE-530TX (D-Link 10/100 pci). It uses the via-rhine
module, yet at installation in MDK 6.0 it (the download process)
wouldn't recognize it as such. In Linuxconf, I
OK STEVE:
I now have all the files for 6.1 (Did I need to download the whole
Mandrake/ directory? as
/Mandrake/
/RMPS/
/base/
/instimage/
/lib/
/modules/
/usr/
/bin/
On Sat, 28 Aug 1999, David M. Kufta wrote:
I have just about completed a mirror of cooker and was not thinking when
I mirrored the distro to a third 8.4 GB IDE drive this mirror should be
complete in a short time. I had intentions of doing a HD Install to
upgrade my exsisting
Good evening,
I have just about completed a mirror of cooker and was not thinking when
I mirrored the distro to a third 8.4 GB IDE drive this mirror should be
complete in a short time. I had intentions of doing a HD Install to
upgrade my exsisting Linux-Mandrake-6.0 to 6.1 version. I know that
97 matches
Mail list logo
