My conversion from windows

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

hello all,

since this is my first post i thought i'd introduce myself. i've been using windows for as long as i've been using computers. i've gotten used to it, it's pretty familiar now. but lately my cousin has been raving about the wonders of linux, and well, it sounds pretty good. so this is my test run to see if i like it enough to switch over from microsoft. i have no great love for ms, if any, it's just all i've ever used. to date i've never even seen a linux system.

so far, it's not going so well, i've run into a number of problems with the install. several i've solved, some i havn't. so i'm starting this thread in order to post any problems i run into along the way, and hopefully some of the gentoo experts in the forum will be kind enough to lend me a hand. so, without further ado:

QUESTION 1: i want to dual boot, but i want to keep the partitions to a minimum. i understand that there's more security with more partitions, but there's also more wasted drive space. i have a 200GB SATA and i've decided to break it up like so:
/dev/sda1 20GB NTFS (for windows)
/dev/sda2 32MB linux (boot)
/dev/sda3 2GB linux swap (swap)
/dev/sda4 remainder linux (root)
my question is, can i use the big root drive to hold my windows and linux files? movies, mp3s, cd images, and so on? i want to convert that partition to ntfs later on so that windows can recognize it. since linux can read ntfs but windows can not read linux fs it seems to be the best course. but will linux be corrupted when i convert the partition to ntfs?

Maedhros · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:37 am Post subject:

Welcome to the forums.

About your question: you can't really run Linux on a Windows partition. Especially not ntfs, which the kernel can't actually write to at the moment. :wink:

Both Windows and Linux can write to a fat32 partition, but since that doesn't understand UNIX permissions, I'm not sure you could run Linux from that either. The only way you can really do this is to have a seperate partition for sharing between Linux and Windows.

2Gb of swap is also possibly excessive. I can't really see you using more than 1Gb.

_________________
No-one's more important than the earthworm.

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:51 am Post subject:

dogfeat,

There is a special version of linux that installs as a program on Windows. It wan't really give you a taste of Linux though as it still has many of the disadvantages of Windows and is slow, as Linux does not manage the hardware.

I would reccomend the following partition scheme
hda1 Windows NTFS
hda2 /boot 32 Mb ext2
hda3 <extended partition - rest of drive>
hda5 / (root) ext3
hda6 <swap> No more that 1Gb
hda7 FAT32 (common to both linux and Windows)
There will be no hda4 but thats OK

The 3 linux partitions make following the handbook easier., the FAT32 partition allows data exchange between Windows and Linux, although there are other ways of doing this. e.g. CD-RW, USB drive. Floppies are not satisfactory.
Its already been said that 2Gb is big for swap. I have 1Gb of memory and my swap is rarely used.
The FAT32 size is up to you. You can put your music and DVD collection there, so both systems can use it.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

that was fast. thanks for the quick reply. (btw, i love your signature quote, just finished reading that book again)

okay well that's nice to know before i go any further with the install. but now i'm wondering how best to resolve it. i would like the bulk of my drive to be shared for larger files, and i'd like both OS's to be able to open, edit, and save files in that partition. it seems i'm going to have to favor windows filesystems since linux is more versatile. so which filesystem should the shared partition be? and what would be a reasonable size for the linux root partition? (i know, i know, that's highly subjective, just looking for a guideline) and can linux have software installed into the shared partition and run from there?

EDIT: goodness, another post before i finished replying to the first. okay, great. i think i'm getting to like this community.
thanks for the suggestion neddy. now, forgive my ignorance but am i correct in understanding that the extended partition /dev/hda3 is not in fact a partition at all unto itself, but rather it's a means of making more than 4 total partitions? in other words, data can not actually be in /hda3 without having to also be in either /hda5,6,or7.

nosecretnow · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 11:06 am Post subject:

I had a spare 80 gig hard drive lying about so I got on eBay and bought a USB external enclosure ($25) for it. Formatted the drive as two partitions - one NTFS and the other FAT32 and now use it for both Windows and Linux plus the added benefit of its portability among my friend's PC's. I chose two partitions because NTFS allows files over 2 gigs (such as 4.7 Gig DVD ISO's) and FAT32 because Linux can write to that in the event I need to save something to the drive from Linux (under 2 Gig file size).

With Linux I just mount it and with XP it is detected automatically. This doesn't answer your other questions but this is a start as far as my 2 cents for file sharing between OS's.
_________________
"Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy." -- Isaac Newton

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

ahh nuts, i hadn't even thought of that. dvd images are huge, and i do have some. thanks for bringing that up nose... i'll have to decide again now how to break up my partitions. i suppose i could keep the big files on the 20GB windows partition and if i have to, install windows software onto the shared partition... hmm.

say, just a point out of curiosity, what's the file size limit of the linux file system?

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 11:16 am Post subject:

dogfeat,

On the basis that you will install more than once, 15 Gb min will be OK for root, so lets say 20b.
I will change my partition reccomendations a bit too. Keep the FAT32 outside of the extended partition, so you don't lose it if you want to repartition linux.

It goes like this now
/dev/hda1 Windows NTFS
/dev/hda2 FAT32 (Shared)
/dev/hda3 /boot 32Mb ext2 - you will never need more
/dev/hda4 <extended> 20Gb For Linux,
/dev/hda5 / (root) ext3 19Gb
/dev/hda6 <swap> No more than 1Gb
In the future, if you want to make more space for Linux, you can shrink /dev.hda2, delete /dev/hda3 and up, and either reinstall or install from backups. The above will give you space to build and install Open Office, whic wants 3.5 Gb of workspace during the build.
If space gets tight, you can delete the content of /usr/portage/distfiles, which is the source code you download from the web. That will be a long way off though.

edit
The Linux file size limit is 2TB or 2000Gb - its not a problem
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

nosecretnow · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 11:21 am Post subject:

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

2TB? well i dont think i'll have any files bigger than that for at least the next few months, possibly longer.

okay thanks a lot neddy, i decided to go with your layout, it seemed very reasonable (and uncomplicated). and if linux can run software off the shared fat32 partition then for sure i wont have any problems with space. if it cant then i can always do as you say and resize.

so i'm gonna consider this matter closed for now and move along with the install. i had previously had problems detecting my serial hd and lan, but i found the answers to those problems elsewhere in the forums. the only other big problem i'd been having is with regard to emerging the system. it gave me an error and said i needed perl 5. another person was told to solve that by emerging perl first, i tried that and it generated the same error. but yet another person suggested emerging libwww-perl, so i'm gonna try that when i get there. if it doesn't work, i guess i'll ask you guys for some input. but that probably wont be till later today... got to go to work first.

thanks again to all of you.

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

alas it's happened again.

PROBLEM 1: i tried to emerge libwww-perl and got the same error as before. i'm posting it here, hopefully it makes sense to someone who knows a solution.

>>> md5 src_url ;-)

openssl-0.9.7e.tar.gz
>>> md5 src_url ;-)

openssl-0.9.6m.tar.gz
>>> Unpacking source...
>>> Unpacking openssl-0.9.7e.tar.gz to /var/tmp/portage/openssl-0.9.7e/work
>>> Unpacking openssl-0.9.6m.tar.gz to /var/tmp/portage/openssl-0.9.7e/work
* Applying openssl-0.9.7c-tempfile.patch ...
* Applying openssl-0.9.7e-gentoo.patch ...
* Applying openssl-0.9.7-arm-big-endian.patch ...
* Applying openssl-0.9.7-hppa-fix-detection.patch ...
* Applying openssl-0.9.7-alpha-default-gcc.patch ...
>>> Source unpacked.
Operating system: x86_64-whatever-linux2
You need Perl 5.

!!! ERROR: dev-libs/opensl-0.9.7e failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 146, Exitcode 1
!!! config failed
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.

i got this same error previously when emerging perl, metalog, and system. i'm not sure if it's a really crippling problem, but i'm reasonably certain it can't be helpful.

on a side note, i can only have one computer online at a time; my future gentoo/windows system, and the one i'm using now which i've borrowed from a friend. i couldn't disconnect the gentoo install from the net because adsl-stop doesn't work anymore so i just pulled the lan cable and popped it into this computer. when i switch it back to go online with the install and continue, will it automatically log on to the net or will i have to set it up again (if so, how)?

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 1:56 pm Post subject:

dogfeat,

Which liveCD do you have?
What hardware are you installing on?
Where in the install youide have you got to?

Pearl is a key part of portage, it should have been in the tarball you are using.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

i'm just finishing up chapter 6 of the guide, about to start configuring the kernel. i havn't done the emerge system command yet, that's the next step, but i know it will generate the error so i'm holding off for the moment.

i chose to do a stage-2 install off the universal livecd for amd64

system specs:
athlon64 3200+
asus a8v deluxe motherboard
1GB pc3200 ram
200GB sata
nvidia 5200ultra

if it's of any concern, i got the newest snapshot available, dated 20050305

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 2:18 pm Post subject:

dogfeat,

Do you have a 64 bit liveCD and a 64 bit tarball?
or both 32 bit versions?
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

well that's a good question. i'd assumed they wouldn't bother making a 32bit version for amd64. i'm not sure how to check, but this is the link i used for the liveCD in one of the gentoo mirror sites:
/gentoo/releases/amd64/2004.3/livecd/install-amd64-universal-2004.3-r1.iso
since it was the universal cd i just used the stage2 tarball off the cd since the handbook said it would be the same as the online stage2 anyway.

the snapshot was also downloaded from the chemistry university in wisonson, i just picked the mirror and it brought right to the snapshot choices within the gentoo install.

i'm really not certain how to tell if it's the 32 bit or 64 bit version

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 7:27 pm Post subject:

dogfeat,

You have done all the right things. By stage 2 Pearl should be alive and well.
Its unlikely there would be a 64bit/32 bit mixup on the CD.

I don't know what to try, apart from another (older) liveCD.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

might it have anything to do with USE flags? i've added quite a few.

also, everytime i screw up the install i go back to the beginning, redefine my partitions and continue. now i'm finding a bunch of lost+found's here and there. should i be formatting the hard drive before restarting the install?

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 7:59 pm Post subject:

dogfeat,

Your lost+found folders should be empty. When fsck runs, its puts anything it finds in there.
If you break off and resume, there is no need to do the partitioning and making filesystems (formatting) again.
All you need do is
swapon ...
mount /dev/... /mnt/gentoo (insert your root partition)
mount /dev/... /mnt/gentoo/boot (insert your /boot partiton
... any other mounts, eg proc.
followed by the chroot steps

Now you are back where you were when you stopped.

I don't think you can break pearl with USE flags. They only control optional parts of compiles.
Pearl is not optional Portage depends on it.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

well that was a much easier way to resume the install. i'm fairly certain i found a way to mess it up anyway though. but that's beside the point.

i avoided emerging the system by using a stage 3 install which circumvents that step for me. i used syslog-ng and fcron instead of metalog and vixie-cron and i managed to avoid a couple other areas where i got the perl 5 error. so while i would've preferred a stage-2 install, i can settle for this for now. all steps seemed to go smoothly and i rebooted just in time for:

PROBLEM 2: attempting to boot gentoo resulted in the following:

* Checking root filesystem...
fsck.ext3: No such file or directory while trying to open /dev/ROOT
/dev/ROOT:
The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>

* Filesystem couldn't be fixed

Give root password for maintenance
(or type Control-D for normal startup):

i hate to say it, because i really wanted gentoo to work, but windows is looking pretty nice right about now. ~sigh~

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:37 pm Post subject:

dogfeat,

You skipped the step(s) for editing /etc/fstab.
You need to replace the words ROOT SWAP and BOOT with your partitions.
Your root filesystem is ext3 not xfs too.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

dogfeat · n00b Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 10

urgh, i'm a moron.
okay, i understand now. the fstab really threw me for a loop.
in my defense though, fstab keeps on putting xfs in place of ext3 for the root partition. i always have to change it manually. it's possible that i forgot to this last time.

well, here we go again. though, i may not post till tomorrow as i have to go to work soon.

thanks for being so patient, i dont consider myself a dullard with computers, but gentoo is proving to be rather... humbling.

parsim · Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:37 am Post subject: Re: My conversion from windows