install Ubuntu into NTFS partition? - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on install Ubuntu into NTFS partition? - Ubuntu ; NoStop illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing: > Moog wrote: > >> NoStop illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing: >> >>> Each o/s can access the filesystems of the other operating systems with >>> the proper drivers installed. That isn't the same thing as ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 122

Thread: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

  1. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    NoStop illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > Moog wrote:
    >
    >> NoStop illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>
    >>> Each o/s can access the filesystems of the other operating systems with
    >>> the proper drivers installed. That isn't the same thing as trying to
    >>> install Linux on an NTFS partition. :-)

    >>
    >> "wubi" springs to mind
    >>

    > Yeh, well the best that could happen with that thing is that it springs out
    > of mind.


    Heh. Quite.

    However, It does offer a quick solution for the curious windows user.
    Can this be a bad thing for people wanted to "try out" before fully
    committing?

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  2. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    Timothy Daniels illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > "Moog" wrote:
    >> NoStop illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>
    >>> Each o/s can access the filesystems of the other operating systems
    >>> with the proper drivers installed. That isn't the same thing as trying
    >>> to install Linux on an NTFS partition. :-)

    >>
    >> "wubi" springs to mind

    >
    >
    > Wubi sounds cute - with some reservations. It's betaware, and
    > some forum postings mention a few bugs and there's mention of
    > real slowness. And it's not clear whether Windows could read the
    > files under Linux since the NTFS files, in acting as the media for the
    > Linux files, would be one down from the Linux files. I.e., the Linux
    > metadata would be seen as data by Windows. It's worth keeping
    > an eye on it, though.


    Yup

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  3. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

    >
    > Wonderful!
    >
    > http://wubi-installer.org/screenshots.php
    >
    > Would you trust someone who can not configure their own webserver to
    > serve php files properly?


    The page looks fine here on firefox. As does the source.

    Maybe their database was having problems when you viewed the page.

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  4. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    On 2008-02-14, Timothy Daniels wrote:
    > Indenting differentiates my comments from those of others
    > in a long thread. Just consider it personal style.


    No, it makes long threads get real messy really quick. But to each
    his own...

    > The server will be a "localhost" - on the same PC as the client.
    > I'd love to do the demos using 2 laptops, but finances intrude...


    Then what is the problem? Just drag and drop the files into the web
    folder. Why would you need ftp to connect to the machine you are
    running and sitting in front of?


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  5. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    "Moog" wrote:
    > Timothy Daniels illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >
    >>
    >> Yeah, I was just trying to avoid having to use special drivers for one
    >> brand of OS to access the files of the other brand of OS. BTW, there's
    >> a short article on sharing files between Windows and Linux in March's
    >> PC Magazine (p. 116). It mentions NTFS-3G, Samba, and NTFS for
    >> Linux as solutions.

    >
    > Tim, I think somebody else has mentioned your indentation.
    > It's making your postings hard to follow for me.
    >
    > Anyway. Samba is a networking solution. This is only achievable
    > if both OS's are running. Obviously, you cannot do this in a
    > dual boot environment.
    >
    > From what I've garnered from this thread so far, simply make
    > an extra data partition in either ntfs (ubuntu will read and write
    > using ntfs-3g) or FAT seems to be your ideal solution.
    >
    > NTFS for linux? Isn't that paragon's "paid for" solution. I'd steer
    > clear of that. Simply because what you want to do is perfectly
    > achievable and readily available without cost.
    >
    > Alternatively, if you want both running at once, then virtualisation
    > is the only way.
    > My preferred virtualisation software is
    > www.virtualbox.org
    > Then configure samba or smbfs within the virtual machine.



    I suspect that my indentation's "ugliness" is due to your Linux
    news client. It looks perfectly beautiful in my Outlook Express,
    but since this is a Linux NG, I'll quit the indentation.

    NTFS For Linux costs $30 as a full-featured product, but for
    read-only Linux access to NTFS files its a free download.
    For my limited purposes, though, access by both Windows
    and Linux to the same data files isn't a necessity, so I'll just do
    without it. And there's no need for more than one OS to be
    running at one time..... unless..... I use a Windows-based client
    to access a Linux-based server..... hmmmm. I see there is a
    VirtualBox for Gutsy Gibbon hosts... Do you know if a Linux
    app runs natively with VirtualBox when the host OS is Linux?
    Or does Linux run on the virtual machine regardless of what OS
    supports the virtual machine?

    *TimDaniels*



  6. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?



    "Timothy Daniels" wrote in message
    news:47b41a7a$0$6129$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
    > "Moog" wrote:
    >> Timothy Daniels illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Yeah, I was just trying to avoid having to use special drivers for
    >>> one
    >>> brand of OS to access the files of the other brand of OS. BTW,
    >>> there's
    >>> a short article on sharing files between Windows and Linux in
    >>> March's
    >>> PC Magazine (p. 116). It mentions NTFS-3G, Samba, and NTFS for
    >>> Linux as solutions.

    >>
    >> Tim, I think somebody else has mentioned your indentation.
    >> It's making your postings hard to follow for me.
    >>
    >> Anyway. Samba is a networking solution. This is only achievable
    >> if both OS's are running. Obviously, you cannot do this in a
    >> dual boot environment.
    >>
    >> From what I've garnered from this thread so far, simply make
    >> an extra data partition in either ntfs (ubuntu will read and write
    >> using ntfs-3g) or FAT seems to be your ideal solution.
    >>
    >> NTFS for linux? Isn't that paragon's "paid for" solution. I'd steer
    >> clear of that. Simply because what you want to do is perfectly
    >> achievable and readily available without cost.
    >>
    >> Alternatively, if you want both running at once, then virtualisation
    >> is the only way.
    >> My preferred virtualisation software is
    >> www.virtualbox.org
    >> Then configure samba or smbfs within the virtual machine.

    >
    >
    > I suspect that my indentation's "ugliness" is due to your Linux
    > news client. It looks perfectly beautiful in my Outlook Express,
    > but since this is a Linux NG, I'll quit the indentation.
    >
    > NTFS For Linux costs $30 as a full-featured product, but for
    > read-only Linux access to NTFS files its a free download.
    > For my limited purposes, though, access by both Windows
    > and Linux to the same data files isn't a necessity, so I'll just do
    > without it. And there's no need for more than one OS to be
    > running at one time..... unless..... I use a Windows-based client
    > to access a Linux-based server..... hmmmm. I see there is a
    > VirtualBox for Gutsy Gibbon hosts... Do you know if a Linux
    > app runs natively with VirtualBox when the host OS is Linux?
    > Or does Linux run on the virtual machine regardless of what OS
    > supports the virtual machine?


    It wouldn't be a virtual machine if it ran natively.
    There may be some code saving if the host OS is the same as the virtual OS
    but that would mean making some rash assumptions by the coder which will
    bite someone so I doubt if anyone does it.


  7. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    "Joe" wrote:
    > Then what is the problem? Just drag and drop the files into the web
    > folder. Why would you need ftp to connect to the machine you are
    > running and sitting in front of?



    If the servers were Apache and MySQL running on Linux, and their
    software development were done in a Vista environment, special drivers
    would be needed to allow drag-n-drop between Linux and Windows
    file structures. If the 2 OSes were running on virtual machines, a GUI
    ftp utility might be easier to install and less likely to have "anomalies"
    for the transfer of files between the two OSes. Do you have other
    suggestions for transferring files between file structures in 2 different
    machines?

    *TimDaniels*



  8. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    On 2008-02-14, Timothy Daniels wrote:
    > "Joe" wrote:
    >> Then what is the problem? Just drag and drop the files into the web
    >> folder. Why would you need ftp to connect to the machine you are
    >> running and sitting in front of?

    >
    >
    > If the servers were Apache and MySQL running on Linux, and their
    > software development were done in a Vista environment, special drivers
    > would be needed to allow drag-n-drop between Linux and Windows
    > file structures. If the 2 OSes were running on virtual machines, a GUI
    > ftp utility might be easier to install and less likely to have "anomalies"
    > for the transfer of files between the two OSes. Do you have other
    > suggestions for transferring files between file structures in 2 different
    > machines?


    What are you planning to ftp TO? If you are running Vista on the
    machine, the ftp server on the linux side won't be running, since
    linux won't be running. You said you wouldn't (likely) be using
    virtualiztion, and the only other choice is a dual-boot type system.
    More than one OS cannot be running at the same time without
    virtualization.

    So, in that case, you would want to set your http directory to be in
    the shared location, and drop the files there. There is no way to ftp
    to the web server, if it is the same machine but currently booted as
    Vista...


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  9. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    On 2008-02-14, Timothy Daniels wrote:
    > for the transfer of files between the two OSes. Do you have other
    > suggestions for transferring files between file structures in 2 different
    > machines?


    You have me confused here. A few posts back, you said that this would
    be one machine, not connected to any network or the internet. In that
    case, it is all on the same machine. If you are on 2 different
    machines on the same LAN, a Samba share would work fine.


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  10. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    "dennis@home" wrote:
    > "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
    >> NTFS For Linux costs $30 as a full-featured product, but for
    >> read-only Linux access to NTFS files its a free download.
    >> For my limited purposes, though, access by both Windows
    >> and Linux to the same data files isn't a necessity, so I'll just do
    >> without it. And there's no need for more than one OS to be
    >> running at one time..... unless..... I use a Windows-based client
    >> to access a Linux-based server..... hmmmm. I see there is a
    >> VirtualBox for Gutsy Gibbon hosts... Do you know if a Linux
    >> app runs natively with VirtualBox when the host OS is Linux?
    >> Or does Linux run on the virtual machine regardless of what OS
    >> supports the virtual machine?

    >
    > It wouldn't be a virtual machine if it ran natively.
    > There may be some code saving if the host OS is the same as the
    > virtual OS but that would mean making some rash assumptions by
    > the coder which will bite someone so I doubt if anyone does it.



    Do you have any info on running Linux and Windows on a
    Windows virtual box versus running Linux and Windows on a
    Linux virtual box?

    *TimDaniels*



  11. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?



    "Timothy Daniels" wrote in message
    news:47b42bcf$0$6130$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...


    > Do you have any info on running Linux and Windows on a
    > Windows virtual box versus running Linux and Windows on a
    > Linux virtual box?


    No.. I have run Ubuntu in VPC on Vista (you need to do some command line
    chants to install it but it works OK) but not windows on linux.


  12. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    Moog writes:

    > Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >
    >> <...>
    >>> Are you a Brit?

    >>
    >> To a degree, yes.

    >
    > What does that mean?


    It means a mixture. Family from here there and everywhere. Born in
    UK. Not living there for years. Although why we are discussing that I
    don't know .... :-; Aha yes, "Pee" and "Piss".

  13. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    "Timothy Daniels" writes:

    > "Moog" wrote:
    >> Timothy Daniels illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Yeah, I was just trying to avoid having to use special drivers for one
    >>> brand of OS to access the files of the other brand of OS. BTW, there's
    >>> a short article on sharing files between Windows and Linux in March's
    >>> PC Magazine (p. 116). It mentions NTFS-3G, Samba, and NTFS for
    >>> Linux as solutions.

    >>
    >> Tim, I think somebody else has mentioned your indentation.
    >> It's making your postings hard to follow for me.
    >>
    >> Anyway. Samba is a networking solution. This is only achievable
    >> if both OS's are running. Obviously, you cannot do this in a
    >> dual boot environment.
    >>
    >> From what I've garnered from this thread so far, simply make
    >> an extra data partition in either ntfs (ubuntu will read and write
    >> using ntfs-3g) or FAT seems to be your ideal solution.
    >>
    >> NTFS for linux? Isn't that paragon's "paid for" solution. I'd steer
    >> clear of that. Simply because what you want to do is perfectly
    >> achievable and readily available without cost.
    >>
    >> Alternatively, if you want both running at once, then virtualisation
    >> is the only way.
    >> My preferred virtualisation software is
    >> www.virtualbox.org
    >> Then configure samba or smbfs within the virtual machine.

    >
    >
    > I suspect that my indentation's "ugliness" is due to your Linux
    > news client. It looks perfectly beautiful in my Outlook Express,
    > but since this is a Linux NG, I'll quit the indentation.


    No, the ugliness is because its non standard and screws up quoting.

  14. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    "dennis@home" writes:

    > "Timothy Daniels" wrote in message
    > news:47b42bcf$0$6130$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
    >
    >
    >> Do you have any info on running Linux and Windows on a
    >> Windows virtual box versus running Linux and Windows on a
    >> Linux virtual box?

    >
    > No.. I have run Ubuntu in VPC on Vista (you need to do some command
    > line chants to install it but it works OK) but not windows on linux.
    >



    That's it. He's trolling. Why would he ask you. Google is 1 second away.

  15. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > Moog writes:
    >
    >> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>
    >>> <...>
    >>>> Are you a Brit?
    >>>
    >>> To a degree, yes.

    >>
    >> What does that mean?

    >
    > It means a mixture. Family from here there and everywhere. Born in
    > UK. Not living there for years. Although why we are discussing that I
    > don't know .... :-; Aha yes, "Pee" and "Piss".


    Gotcha. Sorry, I was just being nosey. It's really none of my business.

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  16. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    Timothy Daniels illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > "Moog" wrote:
    >> Timothy Daniels illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Yeah, I was just trying to avoid having to use special drivers for one
    >>> brand of OS to access the files of the other brand of OS. BTW, there's
    >>> a short article on sharing files between Windows and Linux in March's
    >>> PC Magazine (p. 116). It mentions NTFS-3G, Samba, and NTFS for
    >>> Linux as solutions.

    >>
    >> Tim, I think somebody else has mentioned your indentation.
    >> It's making your postings hard to follow for me.
    >>
    >> Anyway. Samba is a networking solution. This is only achievable
    >> if both OS's are running. Obviously, you cannot do this in a
    >> dual boot environment.
    >>
    >> From what I've garnered from this thread so far, simply make
    >> an extra data partition in either ntfs (ubuntu will read and write
    >> using ntfs-3g) or FAT seems to be your ideal solution.
    >>
    >> NTFS for linux? Isn't that paragon's "paid for" solution. I'd steer
    >> clear of that. Simply because what you want to do is perfectly
    >> achievable and readily available without cost.
    >>
    >> Alternatively, if you want both running at once, then virtualisation
    >> is the only way.
    >> My preferred virtualisation software is
    >> www.virtualbox.org
    >> Then configure samba or smbfs within the virtual machine.

    >
    >
    > I suspect that my indentation's "ugliness" is due to your Linux
    > news client. It looks perfectly beautiful in my Outlook Express,
    > but since this is a Linux NG, I'll quit the indentation.


    No Tim. Your indentation makes the quoted text look awful. It's
    nothing to do with "Linux News Clients". It would look just as bad in
    *any* news client.

    > NTFS For Linux costs $30 as a full-featured product, but for
    > read-only Linux access to NTFS files its a free download.
    > For my limited purposes, though, access by both Windows
    > and Linux to the same data files isn't a necessity, so I'll just do
    > without it.


    I understnad that. I was just trying to tell you that you can have
    full read/write access from within linux to an ntfs partition for no
    cost by using ntfs-3g

    > And there's no need for more than one OS to be
    > running at one time..... unless..... I use a Windows-based client
    > to access a Linux-based server..... hmmmm. I see there is a
    > VirtualBox for Gutsy Gibbon hosts... Do you know if a Linux
    > app runs natively with VirtualBox when the host OS is Linux?


    Yes. You can run as many Virtual Machines as your ram alllows. They
    can be any comibnation of VM's from Windows (All flavours), Linux,
    Solaris, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Netware, DOS, OS/2 Warp, Solaris and
    something called L4, as well as anything else you can install as an OS
    onto a computer.

    You will need your host to be Windows or Linux based though.

    > Or does Linux run on the virtual machine regardless of what OS
    > supports the virtual machine?


    The Host OS does nothing with the virtual OS. Virtualbox handles all
    calls between the two and can set up NAT connection, Bridged
    Connections, or share the hosts connection. The host doesn't get
    involved with what is going on in the Guest.

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  17. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    Moog wrote:

    > NoStop illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >> Moog wrote:
    >>
    >>> NoStop illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>>
    >>>> Each o/s can access the filesystems of the other operating systems with
    >>>> the proper drivers installed. That isn't the same thing as trying to
    >>>> install Linux on an NTFS partition. :-)
    >>>
    >>> "wubi" springs to mind
    >>>

    >> Yeh, well the best that could happen with that thing is that it springs
    >> out of mind.

    >
    > Heh. Quite.
    >
    > However, It does offer a quick solution for the curious windows user.
    > Can this be a bad thing for people wanted to "try out" before fully
    > committing?
    >

    Sort of like the already existing liveCD you mean?

    Cheers.

    --
    The world can't afford the rich.

  18. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    NoStop wrote:

    > Never mind want to, you can't. NTFS doesn't handle file permissions as
    > required by Linux.


    Most likely, it also can't represent device nodes, socket nodes etc.

    --
    These are my personal views and not those of Fujitsu Siemens Computers!
    Josef MŲllers (Pinguinpfleger bei FSC)
    If failure had no penalty success would not be a prize (T. Pratchett)
    Company Details: http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/imprint.html

  19. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    * Hadron wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:

    > "Timothy Daniels" writes:
    >
    >> "Mark Warner" answered:
    >>> Timothy Daniels wrote:
    >>>> Gutsy Gibbon is described as having improved NTFS
    >>>> capability. Does that mean that Ubuntu can now be
    >>>> *installed* into an NTFS partition?
    >>>
    >>> No.

    >>
    >>
    >> "No"? What is it about "No" that you mean? :-))
    >>
    >> *TimDaniels*

    >
    > Huh? he means no you can not install Linux on NTFS. At least not if you
    > want it to work.
    >
    > And please stop shifting your replies right - it's not standard and
    > looks ugly. Of course its your choice, but expect to find less readers
    > if you post in a non standard format. Left justified is the norm.
    >


    So let me get this straight, it's OK to ****can/disregard/ignore posts
    for shifting to the right but not if they come from google groups?

    There isnt enough space to tell you hom stupid that sounds, even coming
    from you.

    What a tool you are, and by tool I mean as unuseable as a left handed
    smoke shifter.

    --
    David

  20. Re: install Ubuntu into NTFS partition?

    On 14 Feb 2008 13:48:41 GMT, Moog
    wrote:

    >> NTFS For Linux costs $30 as a full-featured product, but for
    >> read-only Linux access to NTFS files its a free download.
    >> For my limited purposes, though, access by both Windows
    >> and Linux to the same data files isn't a necessity, so I'll just do
    >> without it.

    >
    >I understnad that. I was just trying to tell you that you can have
    >full read/write access from within linux to an ntfs partition for no
    >cost by using ntfs-3g


    Yes, as has already been said to the same poster in other
    threads by me and others. It seems nothing sinks in unless
    it's repeated many times. I suspect it's trolling, I don't
    believe any non-troll is so immune to clue acqisition.


    --
    John Bean

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast