I need to run Windows and Linux. It has been this way for years. I am
getting fed up with it to be honest. But this isn't just about going
between win and nix. I also am compelled to run at least two different
distro's.
My solution was to do this:
HDD1: Ubuntu (for web dev and basically
well,
I know how you feel.
only I run three.
I use Linux as a host and then run windows under a VM (with its own HDD). I
have a shared drive (using NFS) and a separate machine that runs OS X and
accesses the shared drive on my local lan. I wish I could host all three on a
single machine, but
. not a bad unit for fresh built 4 years ago.
Definitely a nice system. I bet it cost a pretty penny 4 years ago,
even now it seems expensive!
-Eric
On Dec 6, 2010, at 3:12 AM, Mike Hoy wrote:
I need to run Windows and Linux. It has been this way for years. I am
getting fed up with it to
I have a Window$ laptop that I can't officially touch.
I boot it in Linux from a USB HD.
I created a VirtualBox VM that runs Window$ from its native HD, which allows
me to shutdown the thing, unplug the USB and boot Window$ native like it
never ever happened.
I've done it with XP and 7.
The
I don't have quite the same situation, but I do need fairly large storage
shared between multiple systems.
I use a nice little 2TB NAS box for the storage, since then it's on a separate
system (so one power surge doesn't take out everything), I can use cron to
schedule rsync backups, and I can
On 12/06/2010 03:12 AM, Mike Hoy wrote:
I need to run Windows and Linux. It has been this way for years. I am
getting fed up with it to be honest. But this isn't just about going
between win and nix. I also am compelled to run at least two different
distro's.
My solution was to do this:
HDD1:
OK, Thanks for the advice. Alas, that still didn't work. What is
still happening is the RAMFS boots fine and the final messages shown
before it barfs indicate that it found my internal haard drive and its
4 windows partitions. But then it shows /dev/sdb to be a mass storage
device but it never
Did you do anything special to get your installed system to run on the
external drive? In a separate thread here, I've been trying to do this
vary same thing but my latest problem is I can't get the RAMFS to hand
off to the full system on the same drive from which the boot image was
just
under $1,000 for all the pieces. an antic box with 650W PSU, 2 500 GB HDD's
(I've added a lot more since then), nvidia 9800 graphics, 8 GB ddr2 1,000 Mhz
FSB ram, AMD X2 3.00 Ghz CPU Tayan server grade motherboard with daughterboard
management solution, Sb Audigy and Emperex 22 wide screen
Well, the chroot lenny install was not able to access the firewire hardware.
I tried a vm player version of lenny, and vmware is not able to access
firewire. So, I am back to my amd64 machine trying to get the video off my
camera.
I see that raw1394 have been replaced in newer kernals. Some posts
Sorry, Mark. I have the configuration working on my Linux box and have not
touched it in over a year. I am not aware of recent kernel or driver
changes.
I know and feel your frustration. I've been through similar DV issues
before. :-|
Alan
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Mark Phillips
Maybe I am old fashioned, but aren't the current Video cameras on the
market standardized now like cellphones by being UMS devices and have
eith SD/HC cards or USB interfaces. Then with that you can use
mencoder/ffmpeg/mplayer to to a data dump with a one liner rather
easily.
vp
Lisa, the 11th IS the this Saturday he mentioned.
Steve, I cannot speak to your several attempts with Arch and other distros.
I can say that if you INSTALL ubuntu to a USB drive (not use a loader with
the .iso), then when you get to the end of the partitioning phase there is
an advanced button on
Did you do anything special to get your installed system to run on the
external drive?
Nope, bu I have seen what you mention before.
It normally due to a BIOS issue, how old is the puter?
ET
Steve Holmes writes:
Did you do anything special to get your installed system to run on the
well depending on what drives you are using for OS you can dual-boot
with both OS's on the same drive then use the remaining drives for
data. but my preference is to give windows its own drive and a
untouched boot-sector just in case i do something silly to grub. and
then put the Linux drive and
I'm pretty much doing all that though it is with Arch Linux. What
seems to be at the core of the matter is When I use the installation
media from CDROM, The internal hard disk, containing original windows
partitions, is /dev/sda and the attached USB drive is /dev/sdb; so far
so good.
The
From: Steve Holmes st...@holmesgrown.com
[USB drive, GRUB installed on its bootsector]
Now when I boot the machine and choose USB from the BIOS boot menu,
grub starts up but now the USB drive is (hd0) and the internal disk is
(hd1). Now at this point, I get the boot menu with the two Arch
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:52:15PM -0700, Stephen wrote:
well depending on what drives you are using for OS you can dual-boot
with both OS's on the same drive then use the remaining drives for
data. but my preference is to give windows its own drive and a
untouched boot-sector just in case i
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 04:49:32PM -0500, kitepi...@kitepilot.com wrote:
Did you do anything special to get your installed system to run on the
external drive?
Nope, bu I have seen what you mention before.
It normally due to a BIOS issue, how old is the puter?
Oh, I bought the thing last week
you know, you probably could use Wubi, and install Linux into a flat
file on top of NTFS... but still might be simpler...
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Steve Holmes st...@holmesgrown.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:52:15PM -0700, Stephen wrote:
well depending on what drives you are
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 04:27:21PM -0700, Matt Graham wrote:
Does your initrd/ramfs/whatever have the ehci_hcd, scsi_mod, sd_mod, usbcore,
and usb_storage modules available in it? Are those modules loaded? If this
thing was always going to run from a USB drive and I had control over the
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 05:04:43PM -0700, Stephen wrote:
you know, you probably could use Wubi, and install Linux into a flat
file on top of NTFS... but still might be simpler...
I thought about Wubi at first but from what I read, it sounds like it
uses an old version of Ubuntu. I didn't think
It uses the current version
On Dec 6, 2010 5:13 PM, Steve Holmes st...@holmesgrown.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 05:04:43PM -0700, Stephen wrote:
you know, you probably could use Wubi, and install Linux into a flat
file on top of NTFS... but still might be simpler...
I thought about Wubi
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Steve Holmes st...@holmesgrown.com wrote:
I'm pretty much doing all that though it is with Arch Linux. What
seems to be at the core of the matter is When I use the installation
media from CDROM, The internal hard disk, containing original windows
partitions,
That's good to know. I think when I was reading around on the web
about it, I thought I saw something about using version 7.04 or
something like that. Maybe the website is behind the times then. I
might give it a look. One of my other hesitations about trying it is
that some of that setup
Hi,
I'm looking at version systems for two different projects each on their own
server. I used Subversion about 3 years ago for just a few week so I have
little recall of subversion.
I was doing some research and it seems Git is emerging. That makes me believe
that I should look at Git
I like the idea of local repos so I can check in files as I go, then push to
the server when I am comfortable with my changes. There is no way I could've
made the change from SVN to Git without Syntevo's software. Its not free for
commercial use, but its well worth the $75.
Services like Github
I have begun to learn and use git somewhat extensively over the past
year or so and am really liking it. To me it seems just so much more
powerful than svn or even cvs for that matter. Of course, with that
power, comes complexity and a steeper learning curve. I have a few
notes that other git
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:29 PM, keith smith klsmith2...@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm looking at version systems for two different projects each on their own
server. I used Subversion about 3 years ago for just a few week so I have
little recall of subversion.
I was doing some research and it
Keith,
You know how much of an expert I am, but I have put some serious mind share
into groking Git in the past month, and I can speak to it a bit. (My
previous experience was with CVS.)
I personally wouldn't bother with anything but Git if I had the choice. I
would install it, then play a bit
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 07:26:33PM -0700, Dazed_75 wrote:
Sure, that is why someone told you above to use the UUID to identify the
drive instead of the changeagble /dev/?da type references. Here is a
reference:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UsingUUID
With this last test, I did use the
Austin William Wright said:
I would go as far to say Git is *fun*.
Yes, Git is even fun. And if you read the blogs instead of the man pages,
your eyes won't gloss over, guaranteed. Google Git tutorial or Git work
flow and read only blogs. It's great fun.
--
To forgive is the highest, most
One thing I would note is that some revision control systems are about
versions of files, often groups of files with the same version number. Git
is different. It is about changes. This paradigm shift was difficult for me,
but once I got over it, Git really made sense to me.
Also, some version
33 matches
Mail list logo
