Linux's HPFS Support - OS2

This is a discussion on Linux's HPFS Support - OS2 ; For several years, I've been recommending Mandrake & SuSE to OS/2 & eCS users who wish to try Linux. This has been because HPFS support has been compiled into their stock configurations by default, as opposed to RedHat (since about ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Linux's HPFS Support

  1. Linux's HPFS Support

    For several years, I've been recommending Mandrake & SuSE to OS/2 & eCS
    users who wish to try Linux. This has been because HPFS support has been
    compiled into their stock configurations by default, as opposed to
    RedHat (since about v7) and Fedora that don't.

    This seems to have changed in SuSE 9.2. I get error messages on
    attempting to mount HPFS on two different machines, that IIRC are the
    same messages I see trying to do the same on Fedora.

    It would be nice if the community had a wiki to host information about
    HPFS access in Linux. So far, I've not found an existing one. It could
    include 1-HOWTOs for noobs for compiling kernels for the more popular
    distros; 2-lists of which distros do and don't compile HPFS support into
    stock configurations; and 3-locations of or hosting for custom HPFS
    support kernels that our community members have compiled on their own
    for those wishing more expedience than learning how to and waiting on
    kernel compilation. Since we haven't lost Hobbes yet, it could host
    kernels contributed by those who've already performed the task and would
    like to share. :-)
    --
    "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and
    whoever lives and believes in me will never die." John 11:25 NIV

    Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

    Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  2. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    Felix Miata wrote:
    > For several years, I've been recommending Mandrake & SuSE to OS/2 & eCS
    > users who wish to try Linux. This has been because HPFS support has been
    > compiled into their stock configurations by default, as opposed to
    > RedHat (since about v7) and Fedora that don't.
    >
    > This seems to have changed in SuSE 9.2. I get error messages on
    > attempting to mount HPFS on two different machines, that IIRC are the
    > same messages I see trying to do the same on Fedora.
    >
    > It would be nice if the community had a wiki to host information about
    > HPFS access in Linux. So far, I've not found an existing one. It could
    > include 1-HOWTOs for noobs for compiling kernels for the more popular
    > distros; 2-lists of which distros do and don't compile HPFS support into
    > stock configurations; and 3-locations of or hosting for custom HPFS
    > support kernels that our community members have compiled on their own
    > for those wishing more expedience than learning how to and waiting on
    > kernel compilation. Since we haven't lost Hobbes yet, it could host
    > kernels contributed by those who've already performed the task and would
    > like to share. :-)


    Hi Felix

    Your e-mail is opportune, as I've been spending most of my weekend so
    far on this very issue. I usually run SuSE 9.2 alongside OS/2, but I
    just got hold of Xandros 3.0 yesterday and have been experimenting.

    I've never had a problem with SuSE 9.2 recognising my HPFS partitions
    for both read and write access. The 9.2 kernel certainly is compiled
    for HPFS support (as a module I think - need to check). All I really
    have to do is modify /etc/fstab for my HPFS partitions and set up the
    mount points. Works fine for me in both KDE and Gnome. GRUB is also
    very OS/2 friendly, I tend to use it in my MBR to fire up OS/2's Boot
    Manager. It can work the other way around if GRUB lives in the SuSE
    boot partition, but that's messier and I don't recommend that way.

    Xandros 3.0 is a totally different and unhappier story. It *doesn't*
    have HPFS support compiled in (in fact it doesn't recognise anything
    other than ext2, ext3, Reiser, FAT, FAT32, NTFS etc.) My whole OS/2
    setup is totally invisible to Xandros, it can't even see Boot Manager.
    Another negative is that Xandros uses LILO instead of GRUB. Xandros
    installs as smooth as butter, but it can't see HPFS partitions and can't
    boot OS/2 out of the box. I've been messing around trying to compile
    HPFS support into the Xandros kernel or as a module, with no success.
    Xandros also seems to have an automated script that builds LILO's conf
    file on each reboot, wiping away anything I put into it. If I had to
    summarise Xandros, I'd say it's both "too dumb" and "too smart" for its
    own good. To be fair though, it's targetted at WIN XP boxes. I really
    got it for my wife but couldn't resist playing with it. Forgetting its
    OS/2 blindness for a moment, it's actually very polished and pleasant to
    use, so I may still press on with the HPFS compiling attempts and boot
    configurations.

    If anyone's managed to get Xandros 3 working well with OS/2, I'd like to
    know!

    I also used to play around with Red Hat and Caldera in particular, but
    that was a while back and I can't remember what my findings were.

    Cameron

  3. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    stonebank2 wrote:

    >
    > I've never had a problem with SuSE 9.2 recognising my HPFS partitions
    > for both read and write access. The 9.2 kernel certainly is compiled
    > for HPFS support (as a module I think - need to check). All I really
    > have to do is modify /etc/fstab for my HPFS partitions and set up the
    > mount points. Works fine for me in both KDE and Gnome. GRUB is also
    > very OS/2 friendly, I tend to use it in my MBR to fire up OS/2's Boot
    > Manager. It can work the other way around if GRUB lives in the SuSE
    > boot partition, but that's messier and I don't recommend that way.
    >

    Would you share your setup? I am playing about with Ubuntu which is
    suspect is the same as Xandros re: HPFS. I haven't got a working system
    yet though as I can't seem to get the BM to see the GRUB on the Linux
    EXT3 drive. Maybe I missed something in the setup but I really did not
    want to screw my system putting GRUB in the MBR.
    Just for your info and if anyone wants to jump in here please do: I have:
    OS/2 Boot manager 8MB
    Primary with WinNT Fat16
    Logicals D: Fat16
    E: Fat16
    F: Fat16
    G: HPFS OS/2
    H: Fat16
    I: Fat16
    J: HPFS
    K: HPFS
    L: HPFS
    M: NTFS WinData
    N: HPFS Data
    O: Ext3 Ubuntu Linux

    Pretty messy, long story...
    Whats it best to do here? I guess I need GRUB on O: but someone
    suggested it needs to be at sector 0 of /boot.

    Craig

  4. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    OK

    First off, if any distro kernel packagers are reading, please consider
    compiling HPFS support into your distro kernels as standard - it's not
    called the HIGH PERFORMANCE FILE SYSTEM for nothing! I'd also comment
    that I think LILO's best days are behind it - GRUB is the future.

    I also suspect that Ubuntu wouldn't have HPFS support compiled in - it
    seems to be a fact of life these days. I actually bit the bullet last
    night and created a FAT32 "shared data" partition so that OS/2 and any
    Linux flavour can see it, which obviates the need to recompile kernels
    for HPFS support. It irritates me a bit that I have to use an M$ file
    system when I don't even run M$, but FAT32 seems to be a pragmatic way
    to get around this issue. The latest FAT32IFS is now at version 0.99,
    which means it's pretty solid these days. More info here:

    http://fat32.netlabs.org/

    Anyway, until a few days ago I had the following setup more or less:

    Primaries
    OS/2 Boot Manager hda1
    C: HPFS (OS/2 "production") hda2
    Extended hda4

    Logicals
    D: HPFS (OS/2 "maintenance") hda5
    E: HPFS (Data) hda6
    F: HPFS (Data) hda7
    Linux swap hda8
    reiserfs (SuSE 9.2) hda9

    With this setup, I had SuSE's GRUB in the MBR configured for SuSE itself
    and OS/2 Boot Manager - the latter booted either C: or D: in the classic
    way. I also had SuSE configured to have E: and F: mounted on /os2/E and
    /os2/F respectively for read and write access. No kernel recompiling is
    needed for this to work, SuSE 9.2 has HPFS support compiled as standard.
    A SuSE 9.2 install will automatically find OS/2 Boot Manager without
    any problem and add it to GRUB's menu. You need to manually edit
    /etc/fstab and create your mount points, but other than that it just
    works for me.

    Two things I'd note:

    1)
    Linux literature seems to state that HPFS support extends only to *read*
    access. I've always been able to *write* as well, so the literature has
    always puzzled me on that point.

    2)
    If you're certain that you've got an HPFS enabled kernel - either out of
    the box or modified - and your /etc/fstab and mount points look ok, then
    it's worth doing at least a simple chkdsk /f:2 on the HPFS partitions if
    it doesn't seem to work (from OS/2 of course). Linux, being of the same
    quality as OS/2, will do consistency checks before mounting.

    My current setup, which I'm still playing with, looks like this:

    Primaries
    OS/2 Boot Manager hda1
    C: FAT16 (PC DOS 2000) hda2
    C: HPFS (OS/2 "production") hda3
    Extended hda4

    Logicals
    D: HPFS (OS/2 "maintenance") hda5
    E: HPFS (Data) hda6
    F: HPFS (Data) hda7
    G: FAT32 (shared) hda8
    Linux swap hda9
    reiserfs (SuSE 9.2) hda10
    reiserfs (Xandros 3) hda11

    SuSE 9.2 and Xandros 3 share the Linux swap without drama.

    What I'm attempting to do with this setup now is something like this:

    * use OS/2 Boot Manager to boot both C: partitions and D:
    * install Xandros LILO on root of hda11 only, *not* MBR
    * install SuSE GRUB on MBR to boot OS/2 Boot Manager and Xandros LILO

    I'm still playing around with permutations of this idea.

    You say that you "can't get the BM to see the GRUB". By "BM" I assume
    you mean OS/2's Boot Manager. If so, I don't recommend trying that.

    OS/2 Boot Manager can be made to boot LILO (and GRUB I think), but you
    *must* use OS/2's FDISK (or LVM) to create the partitions that will be
    used for Linux as FAT16 and add them to the BM menu *before* installing
    Linux. Then use Linux install to reformat them (as ext2/3, reiserfs or
    whatever). This sort of setup is quite fragile and can be messy to fix
    if it breaks.

    Cameron

    Craig wrote:
    > stonebank2 wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> I've never had a problem with SuSE 9.2 recognising my HPFS partitions
    >> for both read and write access. The 9.2 kernel certainly is compiled
    >> for HPFS support (as a module I think - need to check). All I really
    >> have to do is modify /etc/fstab for my HPFS partitions and set up the
    >> mount points. Works fine for me in both KDE and Gnome. GRUB is also
    >> very OS/2 friendly, I tend to use it in my MBR to fire up OS/2's Boot
    >> Manager. It can work the other way around if GRUB lives in the SuSE
    >> boot partition, but that's messier and I don't recommend that way.
    >>

    > Would you share your setup? I am playing about with Ubuntu which is
    > suspect is the same as Xandros re: HPFS. I haven't got a working system
    > yet though as I can't seem to get the BM to see the GRUB on the Linux
    > EXT3 drive. Maybe I missed something in the setup but I really did not
    > want to screw my system putting GRUB in the MBR.
    > Just for your info and if anyone wants to jump in here please do: I have:
    > OS/2 Boot manager 8MB
    > Primary with WinNT Fat16
    > Logicals D: Fat16
    > E: Fat16
    > F: Fat16
    > G: HPFS OS/2
    > H: Fat16
    > I: Fat16
    > J: HPFS
    > K: HPFS
    > L: HPFS
    > M: NTFS WinData
    > N: HPFS Data
    > O: Ext3 Ubuntu Linux
    >
    > Pretty messy, long story...
    > Whats it best to do here? I guess I need GRUB on O: but someone
    > suggested it needs to be at sector 0 of /boot.
    >
    > Craig


  5. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    Felix Miata wrote:

    > For several years, I've been recommending Mandrake & SuSE to OS/2 & eCS
    > users who wish to try Linux. This has been because HPFS support has been
    > compiled into their stock configurations by default, as opposed to
    > RedHat (since about v7) and Fedora that don't.


    > This seems to have changed in SuSE 9.2. I get error messages on
    > attempting to mount HPFS on two different machines, that IIRC are the
    > same messages I see trying to do the same on Fedora.


    I was wrong. I managed to err on both 9.2 installs. On one, I forgot to
    create the mount points to match the hpfs partitions to be mounted. On
    the other, I set an invalid mount option in fstab that created a useless
    generic error message when mount was attempted. Both systems now happily
    access hpfs partitions.

    If only Samba 3 on 9.2 could access my OS/2 shares. :-(
    --
    "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and
    whoever lives and believes in me will never die." John 11:25 NIV

    Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

    Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  6. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    stonebank2 wrote:

    > Felix Miata wrote:


    > > It would be nice if the community had a wiki to host information about
    > > HPFS access in Linux. So far, I've not found an existing one. It could
    > > include 1-HOWTOs for noobs for compiling kernels for the more popular
    > > distros; 2-lists of which distros do and don't compile HPFS support into
    > > stock configurations; and 3-locations of or hosting for custom HPFS
    > > support kernels that our community members have compiled on their own
    > > for those wishing more expedience than learning how to and waiting on
    > > kernel compilation. Since we haven't lost Hobbes yet, it could host
    > > kernels contributed by those who've already performed the task and would
    > > like to share. :-)


    > I've never had a problem with SuSE 9.2 recognising my HPFS partitions
    > for both read and write access. The 9.2 kernel certainly is compiled
    > for HPFS support (as a module I think - need to check). All I really
    > have to do is modify /etc/fstab for my HPFS partitions and set up the
    > mount points. Works fine for me in both KDE and Gnome. GRUB is also


    As you can see from my post a few minutes ago, I botched my 9.2
    installs. HPFS support is indeed included and working in SuSE 9.2.

    > very OS/2 friendly, I tend to use it in my MBR to fire up OS/2's Boot
    > Manager. It can work the other way around if GRUB lives in the SuSE
    > boot partition, but that's messier and I don't recommend that way.


    That's the only way I do it. OS/2 boot on logical needs BM anyway, so I
    see no reason not to use it for everything.

    > Xandros 3.0 is a totally different and unhappier story. It *doesn't*
    > have HPFS support compiled in (in fact it doesn't recognise anything
    > other than ext2, ext3, Reiser, FAT, FAT32, NTFS etc.) My whole OS/2
    > setup is totally invisible to Xandros, it can't even see Boot Manager.
    > Another negative is that Xandros uses LILO instead of GRUB. Xandros
    > installs as smooth as butter, but it can't see HPFS partitions and can't
    > boot OS/2 out of the box. I've been messing around trying to compile
    > HPFS support into the Xandros kernel or as a module, with no success.
    > Xandros also seems to have an automated script that builds LILO's conf
    > file on each reboot, wiping away anything I put into it. If I had to
    > summarise Xandros, I'd say it's both "too dumb" and "too smart" for its
    > own good. To be fair though, it's targetted at WIN XP boxes. I really
    > got it for my wife but couldn't resist playing with it. Forgetting its
    > OS/2 blindness for a moment, it's actually very polished and pleasant to
    > use, so I may still press on with the HPFS compiling attempts and boot
    > configurations.


    > If anyone's managed to get Xandros 3 working well with OS/2, I'd like to
    > know!


    I had no problem installing Xandros 2 open (standard/download) edition.
    I put it on a multiboot system with DOS, W2K, OS/2, RedHat 7.3, Mandrake
    8.1 & SuSE 8.2. Xandros lilo went to its root on /dev/sdc9, and I added
    a Xandros entry to the SuSE /dev/hda5 /boot/grub/menu.lst file to load
    that. Naturally, without HPFS support, I don't often boot Xandros, but
    it is nice as a distro for windoze users to migrate to.

    > I also used to play around with Red Hat and Caldera in particular, but
    > that was a while back and I can't remember what my findings were.


    RedHat dropped HPFS after version 6.2 sometime. It was gone by 7.3.
    Fedora Core, as successor to RedHat, omits HPFS support.

    Caldera I already forgot. It's dead now, and so shouldn't matter to
    anyone, but I think it did have HPFS built in.
    --
    "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and
    whoever lives and believes in me will never die." John 11:25 NIV

    Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

    Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  7. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    Craig wrote:

    > Would you share your setup? I am playing about with Ubuntu which is
    > suspect is the same as Xandros re: HPFS. I haven't got a working system
    > yet though as I can't seem to get the BM to see the GRUB on the Linux
    > EXT3 drive. Maybe I missed something in the setup but I really did not
    > want to screw my system putting GRUB in the MBR.
    > Just for your info and if anyone wants to jump in here please do: I have:
    > OS/2 Boot manager 8MB
    > Primary with WinNT Fat16
    > Logicals D: Fat16
    > E: Fat16
    > F: Fat16
    > G: HPFS OS/2
    > H: Fat16
    > I: Fat16
    > J: HPFS
    > K: HPFS
    > L: HPFS
    > M: NTFS WinData
    > N: HPFS Data
    > O: Ext3 Ubuntu Linux


    > Pretty messy, long story...
    > Whats it best to do here? I guess I need GRUB on O: but someone
    > suggested it needs to be at sector 0 of /boot.


    It needs to be on the partition mounted as /boot, but /boot is just a
    directory on / unless you consciously made a separate partition to mount
    as /boot, which is what I normally do with at least the first Linux
    distro per system. To get the Ubuntu partition into your BM menu, all
    you need do is the same thing you would do if it was an OS/2 boot
    logical. If your system is lacking INT13X either in your OS/2 BM version
    or in your motherboard BIOS, then the position of the Ubuntu partition
    at the end of the disk might be your problem (above cylinder 1023). New
    machines with WSeB, MCP or eCS don't have this problem. Warp 4 typically
    does. See also below URL.
    --
    "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and
    whoever lives and believes in me will never die." John 11:25 NIV

    Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

    Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/partitioningindex.html

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  8. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    Hi Felix

    Could you possibly post your GRUB stanza for Xandros as you've described
    in the scenario below.

    I think I'm terribly close, but no cigar on that part of my setup. Have
    tried both the image and chainloader approach - probably just one or two
    parms not quite right.

    Thanks

    Cameron

    Felix Miata wrote:
    > stonebank2 wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Felix Miata wrote:

    >
    >
    >>If anyone's managed to get Xandros 3 working well with OS/2, I'd like to
    >>know!

    >
    >
    > I had no problem installing Xandros 2 open (standard/download) edition.
    > I put it on a multiboot system with DOS, W2K, OS/2, RedHat 7.3, Mandrake
    > 8.1 & SuSE 8.2. Xandros lilo went to its root on /dev/sdc9, and I added
    > a Xandros entry to the SuSE /dev/hda5 /boot/grub/menu.lst file to load
    > that. Naturally, without HPFS support, I don't often boot Xandros, but
    > it is nice as a distro for windoze users to migrate to.
    >
    >



  9. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:33:47 +1000, stonebank2
    wrote:
    > I also suspect that Ubuntu wouldn't have HPFS support compiled in - it
    > seems to be a fact of life these days. I actually bit the bullet last
    > night and created a FAT32 "shared data" partition so that OS/2 and any
    > Linux flavour can see it, which obviates the need to recompile kernels
    > for HPFS support. It irritates me a bit that I have to use an M$ file
    > system when I don't even run M$, but FAT32 seems to be a pragmatic way
    > to get around this issue.


    Why the aversion to recompiling the kernel with HPFS support? IMO every
    serious Linux user should know how to recompile their kernel, and in fact
    should do so when customizing their system, to get rid of all the crap
    (unused drivers etc) that get compiled into it by the distributors.

    It's not that hard, especially not once you've done it a couple of times.
    Just don't make the mistake of using 'make config'; I recommend 'make
    menuconfig'.

    > Linux literature seems to state that HPFS support extends only to *read*
    > access. I've always been able to *write* as well, so the literature has
    > always puzzled me on that point.


    Because for years it was true. Read-write HPFS support is a relatively
    recent development (I think it was first integrated in the 2.4 kernel,
    although it was available as a third-party module for 2.2). By that time,
    though, nobody who was writing Linux literature really gave a damn about
    OS/2 anymore.

    --
    Alex Taylor
    http://www.cs-club.org/~alex

    Remove hat to reply (reply-to address).

  10. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    Alex Taylor wrote:
    > On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:33:47 +1000, stonebank2
    > wrote:
    >
    >>I also suspect that Ubuntu wouldn't have HPFS support compiled in - it
    >>seems to be a fact of life these days. I actually bit the bullet last
    >>night and created a FAT32 "shared data" partition so that OS/2 and any
    >>Linux flavour can see it, which obviates the need to recompile kernels
    >>for HPFS support. It irritates me a bit that I have to use an M$ file
    >>system when I don't even run M$, but FAT32 seems to be a pragmatic way
    >>to get around this issue.

    >
    >
    > Why the aversion to recompiling the kernel with HPFS support? IMO every
    > serious Linux user should know how to recompile their kernel, and in fact
    > should do so when customizing their system, to get rid of all the crap
    > (unused drivers etc) that get compiled into it by the distributors.
    >
    > It's not that hard, especially not once you've done it a couple of times.
    > Just don't make the mistake of using 'make config'; I recommend 'make
    > menuconfig'.
    >


    I agree it's not hard and it is a fairly simple concept, but that wasn't
    really what I was getting at. I've been compiling Linux kernels for the
    past seven years or so. As a systems manager for many years before that
    I also had to regularly squeeze every bit of performance I could from HP
    minicomputers and so on, quarter ton things with architectures that made
    anything smaller seem like toys to me - OS/2 and Linux made me change my
    view there! So as an ex tech-head, I still have a tweaking urge for any
    PC operating system operating that's worth it.

    In recent years though, I've been on the other side of the fence, with a
    business as well as technology focus. I've got a keen interest in doing
    my little bit, as many others around the world are also, to make Linux a
    serious desktop alternative for government use in particular. I'd argue
    that a "serious Linux user" in this wider context is not about compiling
    kernels, it's about business users, open standards, interoperability and
    being able to get the job done better with a lower TCO and good support.

    So on my home setup, I prefer to get things up and running smoothly so I
    can start being productive, the tweaking should come later. That for me
    means having at least one partition that any modern Linux flavour should
    be able to see out of the box, so that I have instant access to drivers
    and configuration notes I may need straight away. FAT32 seems to be the
    pragmatic choice for that these days. Another consideration is that the
    modern Linux distributions are becoming more sophisticated in the way of
    scripting and configuration. Poking around in Xandros reveals some
    very fancy stuff that needs some study first. I did a quick kernel
    recompile the other night with no errors but quite a few module warnings
    which I'd prefer to look closely at later rather than installation time.
    Now that I have everything operational, I'll probably revisit Xandros
    & HPFS when I get some spare time.

  11. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    Felix Miata schrieb:
    >
    > RedHat dropped HPFS after version 6.2 sometime. It was gone by 7.3.
    > Fedora Core, as successor to RedHat, omits HPFS support.
    >
    > Caldera I already forgot. It's dead now, and so shouldn't matter to
    > anyone, but I think it did have HPFS built in.


    You can always recompile the kernel with HPFS support.

    Hendrik

  12. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    stonebank2 wrote:

    > Felix Miata wrote:


    > > stonebank2 wrote:


    > >>Felix Miata wrote:


    > >>If anyone's managed to get Xandros 3 working well with OS/2, I'd like to
    > >>know!


    > > I had no problem installing Xandros 2 open (standard/download) edition.
    > > I put it on a multiboot system with DOS, W2K, OS/2, RedHat 7.3, Mandrake
    > > 8.1 & SuSE 8.2. Xandros lilo went to its root on /dev/sdc9, and I added
    > > a Xandros entry to the SuSE /dev/hda5 /boot/grub/menu.lst file to load
    > > that. Naturally, without HPFS support, I don't often boot Xandros, but
    > > it is nice as a distro for windoze users to migrate to.


    > Could you possibly post your GRUB stanza for Xandros as you've described
    > in the scenario below.


    > I think I'm terribly close, but no cigar on that part of my setup. Have
    > tried both the image and chainloader approach - probably just one or two
    > parms not quite right.


    title Xandros Linux 2 Text Console - runlevel 2
    root (hd2,8)
    kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.4.24-x1 ro root=/dev/sdb9 acpi=on
    initrd /boot/initrd-2.4.24-x1.gz
    --
    "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and
    whoever lives and believes in me will never die." John 11:25 NIV

    Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

    Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  13. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    stonebank2 wrote:

    > OS/2 Boot Manager can be made to boot LILO (and GRUB I think), but you


    Lilo is an anachronism. Grub is today and the future. BM doesn't boot,
    it just shifts control, and Grub accepts.

    > *must* use OS/2's FDISK (or LVM) to create the partitions that will be


    Hogwash. Multibooters should be using an agnostic partitioner. I use
    DFSee.

    > used for Linux as FAT16 and add them to the BM menu *before* installing
    > Linux. Then use Linux install to reformat them (as ext2/3, reiserfs or


    There's no need for any formatting prior to installation. Linux wants to
    format during install anyway.

    > whatever). This sort of setup is quite fragile and can be messy to fix
    > if it breaks.


    No need to break it if you stay away from OS-specific tools for disk
    management. Partition first, then begin installation. Easy. Safe.

    See also URL below.
    --
    "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and
    whoever lives and believes in me will never die." John 11:25 NIV

    Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

    Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/partitioningindex.html

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  14. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    Hendrik Schmieder wrote:

    > Felix Miata schrieb:


    > > RedHat dropped HPFS after version 6.2 sometime. It was gone by 7.3.
    > > Fedora Core, as successor to RedHat, omits HPFS support.


    > > Caldera I already forgot. It's dead now, and so shouldn't matter to
    > > anyone, but I think it did have HPFS built in.


    > You can always recompile the kernel with HPFS support.


    You can. I have better things to do with my time after all the time it
    takes to get Linux installed and set up housekeeping and connectivity.
    This is precisely when I want HPFS to work, while I'm trying to get up &
    running using my OS/2 data, not many hours or days later after figuring
    out kernel compilation, then waiting for compile and another reboot (or
    more).

    Sometimes Linux installs nice and clean, but as likely it can take days
    to figure out why it has a problem with your hardware, and then fix it,
    and/or switch to a distro that doesn't have that problem.
    --
    "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and
    whoever lives and believes in me will never die." John 11:25 NIV

    Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

    Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  15. Re: Linux's HPFS Support

    A very nice debunking of all the urban legends surrounding multi-OS
    partitioning!
    This is precisely the way I deal with the situation as well (DFSEE is a key
    ingredient in the game)

    On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:40:41 UTC, Felix Miata
    wrote:
    >
    > Lilo is an anachronism. Grub is today and the future. BM doesn't boot,
    > it just shifts control, and Grub accepts.
    >
    >

    Multibooters should be using an agnostic partitioner. I use
    > DFSee.
    >
    > There's no need for any formatting prior to installation. Linux wants to
    > format during install anyway.
    >
    >
    > No need to break it if you stay away from OS-specific tools for disk
    > management. Partition first, then begin installation. Easy. Safe.
    >




+ Reply to Thread