Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:39:34 +0900 (JST)
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96LJ1.1b7.981007092838.635C-100000@example.com>
- References: <199810062007.UAA00264@example.com><Pine.LNX.3.96LJ1.1b7.981007092838.635C-100000@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Sender: owner-tlug@example.com
>>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Byrne <- 3Web <jq@example.com>> writes: Jonathan> On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Karl-Max Wagner wrote: >> Check that the bootdevice in lilo.conf is given as /dev/xxx >> WITHOUT (!!!!!!!!!!!) a number behind it. In this case LILO >> installs in the MBR. If you give a number it installs in the Jonathan> That part seems OK. Here's my lilo.conf. Does anything Looks good to me. Jonathan> seem wrong with it? The disk has two partitions on it. Jonathan> The first is a 64 meg swap partition, and the second is Jonathan> all the rest, which Linux is installed in. The fact that BIOS/CMOS reports that the number of heads is unset is very, very bad magic, I would say trash the LBA approach. One reason I never ever use large partitions is that I want my root partition to be small enough to (a) fit within BIOS limits and (b) be mirrored (YOWSA!) when I'm feeling rally, rally paranoid, rally ah do. I've actually used a root partition mirror twice, both times due to pilot error. Normal structure of a hard drive with a system installed on it: /dev/?da1 50 MB / /dev/?da2 128 MB <swap> /dev/?da3 512 MB /usr # this is much too # small nowadays :-( /dev/?da4 <extended> /dev/?da5 100 MB /var and the rest gets allocated to /home (on multi-human-user systems), /playpen, /WWW, etc depending on use and size of disk. Paranoid structure: /dev/?da1 50 MB / /dev/?da2 128 MB <swap> /dev/?da3 50 MB /.root_mirror etc. I've yet to have a LILO problem with this, I think that's because everything of interest to LILO always fits under the magic BIOS limit. (But maybe somebody can tell me whether that's right or wrong; I could just be lucky.) -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +1 (298) 53-5091 --------------------------------------------------------------- Next Meeting: 10 October, 12:30 Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate Featuring the IMASY Eng. Team on "IPv6 - The Next Generation IP" Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691 --------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- From: Jonathan Byrne - 3Web <jq@example.com>
- tlug: Re: root mirror (was: LILO Vs. 1024??)
- From: Rex Walters <rex@example.com>
- References:
- Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- From: karlmax@example.com (Karl-Max Wagner)
- Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- From: Jonathan Byrne - 3Web <jq@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- Next by Date: tlug: Sparc Classic memory
- Prev by thread: Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- Next by thread: Re: tlug: LILO Vs. 1024??
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links