From: Ronny B (fvacuum at domain yahoo.com)
Date: Mon 24 Sep 2001 - 22:26:35 IST
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:40:59PM +0100, Catherine Ansbro wrote:
> Would dual-booting in 2K & linux present the same risks as NT & linux?
I do have experience with various releases of Win2k forking up Linux
paritions. These were release candidates and full releases of Win2k,
but all had one thing in common: Linux was on a partition on the same
physical harddrive as Win2k. I always recommend having Linux on its own
harddrive for this reason (it's also messed up things for me personally
with earlier releases of win32 - mostly first edition of Win98 and
Setting up from scratch isn't difficult - install Win2k, leaving room
for Linux partitions, maybe in an extended partition. Start installing
Linux, using fdisk or any of those utilities. Make at least one swap and
one Linux partition.
Linux has an advantage in that you can set it up the "unsafe" way and
later simply move all data to a new harddrive, should you want to :)
> I have to be careful, as our computer friend says "if I put anything other
> than Windows on our machines it's the last I'll see of him!" So I don't
> want to crash the whole system by doing something stupid.
They run in fear when faced with the unknown. Whatever happened to
curiosity? Are people really that unwilling to learn something new now
> Thanks for pointing me anywhere I can get more info about how to do this, or
> whether or not it is wise to attempt it.
Friends who run Win2k report no problems after separating operating
systems to different drives - it's about as close as you can come to
"wise" and still mention Windows in the same sentence ;)
-- O-RB NP:Ice IV.V - Del Taco Man (Ice IV.V vs. Huh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:12:16 GMT