w2k/u7.10 dual-boot

[chris-n/jUll39koHNgV/OU4+dkA at public.gmane.org]

Lennart Sorensen writes: 

> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 02:27:31PM -0500, chris-n/jUll39koHNgV/OU4+dkA at public.gmane.org wrote:
>> Well, I could try installing W2K on ntfs but won't that make other problems 
>> for me later doing backups from machine to machine or remote printing or 
>> sharing files and whatnot? I just want to run W2K because it runs the 
>> emu1212m, but I don't want to constantly be fooling around with permissions 
>> because of ntfs. I mean our home network will remain mostly linux... 
> 
> Writing to NTFS is a problem from linux.  Reading works fine, so while
> you would not be able to add files to windows from linux, you can copy
> files from windows using linux.  Having a shared drive for data using
> FAT32 is handy, but for the main drive for windows I would recommend
> sticking with NTFS.

This is uncharted territory so I don't know if you'll want to hazard a 
guess. What do you think the chances are that this problem would be 
rectified by doing the W2K/u7.10 dual-boot installation again, this time 
with W2K on ntfs? 

I just don't want to waste a couple of hours if there's no hope. 

I seem to recall there was some scenario in which the bootloader should be 
installed on the "first sector of the boot partition" instead of the MBR. 
Maybe that's for a dual-boot of W98 and NT or somesuch (and nothing to do 
with linux). Does that ring a bell? 

Chris 


> --
> Len Sorensen
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
 

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists