| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 22.10.99 00:19l 195 Lines 6965 Bytes #-9711 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_264B
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/264B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<OE5XBL<OE3XSR<OK0PBX<OK0PHL<OK0PBB<OK0PAB<HA5OB<
HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991021/1844Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:9464 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_264
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA21761 ; Thu, 21 Oct 99 18:22:22 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016496 ; Thu, 21 Oct 99 18:18:25 MET
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 99 18:16:28 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_264B>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/264B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> itself in a FAT filesystem. Poor guys, you would think that they could
> have spend some of their millions of dollars to write a decent installer...
>
> Of course, now I have removed all those stupid partitions and installed
> Windows 95 and NT workstation in virtual machines running under Linux.
>
Ah -- you loaded Linux first and then run Windows under it -- good idea.
It is when you do the reverse that the fun begans.
>
> Rob
> --
> +----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
> | Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWWhome: http://www.pe1chl.demon.nl/ |
> | AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
> +----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1999 06:16:14 GMT
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au>
Subject: Linux crashes Windows - was Re: The BBS network and tcp/ip
The Owner <agiroux@cvn.net> wrote:
> Of course it is -- your statements below show it. WIndows cannot learn new
> configurations
> to the hardware without Plug & Play or through the WIndows interfaces.
Re-partitioning your hard drive is not a change to your hardware
configuration.
Hamish
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 08:51:26 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Linux crashes Windows - was Re: The BBS network and tcp/ip
The Owner <agiroux@cvn.net> wrote:
>Rob Janssen wrote:
>> Tony Giroux <agiroux@cvn.net> wrote:
>> >The problem is FIPS does not tell the Windows OS that it is removing 1
>> >gig of drive space and that it will be reformatted so that Windows can
>> >not read it.
>> This is simply not true!
>Of course it is -- your statements below show it. WIndows cannot learn new
>configurations
>to the hardware without Plug & Play or through the WIndows interfaces.
What do you know about that? Not much, it seems...
A change in partition size involves a change in the partition table and
a change in the filesystem superblock (in the case if FAT, this resides
in the partition bootsector).
FIPS makes these modifications and Windows learns about them when it
boots.
>> >Worse, Windows didn't know that the Boot track was
>> >re-written with a foreign boot process.
>> And that doesn't matter at all.
>This is one of the reasons some commercial vendors switched to Power Qwests
>Boot Magic
>software to use instead of Lilo.
I said it does not matter. I don't care about commercial vendors adding a
bootmanager that looks more appealing to the customer, it is their right
to do so. But there is NO technical reason for it.
>Ah -- you loaded Linux first and then run Windows under it -- good idea.
>It is when you do the reverse that the fun begans.
I described how the fun begins when you install NT on a system that already
has Windows95. There is no such problem when installing Linux.
In fact, installation and re-installation of Windows XX on systems with
existing partitions is riddled with problems, because Bill's crummy
installation programs try to find out what you want and block you from
doing it. This even happens when you are using only a single M$ OS: for
example, try to re-install NT on a system that has a D: drive spanning
multiple disks. You only want to re-install NT on C: because it was
somehow fucked up, or simply because you want to move the server to
another domain (you cannot do that without re-installation, boooo).
Now try to do that without touching the D: partitions. It won't let you.
So your only option is to restore D: from a backup after installation is
completed. This adds extra risk and lots of time.
Under Linux you always get the opportunity to look at the exact partition
table entries, and select the partition and location YOU want. And it
won't touch partitions that are not involved, but later you can still add
them to the filesystem (e.g. mounting a Windows partition).
Of course, there is always a class of users (you are in it) who do not
understand enough of basic disk partitioning and filesystem layouts to
perform these tasks. For those, Linux distributions also include "wizard"
like partitioners, that cope with standard situations like "use entire disk
for Linux" or "shrink Windows partition to make room for Linux".
Rob
--
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWWhome: http://www.pe1chl.demon.nl/ |
| AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 08:57:32 -0400
From: "Bob Lewis" <aa4pb@erols.com>
Subject: PACTOR or AMTOR
> It doesn't cost money to manufacture a specification on a per-unit
basis.
>
True, but unless you are doing it as a hobby it does cost money
(salaries if nothing else) and you've got to recoop your investment
somehow. My only point here is that I don't consider these guys
immoral because they want to charge a fee for use of something they
developed. I too would personally rather see an open standard. It
would be nice if *all* software used in amateur radio were supplied
with source code so it could be modified and expanded upon rather
than re-inventing the wheel every time. It's probably not going to
happen though.
> Historically, open standards live and closed standards die.
Can't argue that point.
>.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1999 06:14:14 GMT
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au>
Subject: PACTOR or AMTOR
Bob Lewis <aa4pb@erols.com> wrote:
> developed. I too would personally rather see an open standard. It
> would be nice if *all* software used in amateur radio were supplied
> with source code so it could be modified and expanded upon rather
> than re-inventing the wheel every time. It's probably not going to
> happen though.
No, not all software.. but enough to give us a reasonable toolbox
I think. Already there is a lot of packet/network support. There's some
digital mode stuff too, like QSSTV for slow-scan and PSK31LX for PSK31.
There's some rig control stuff for Kenwood and ICOM at least.
http://radio.linux.org.au has a nice database.
Hamish
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 11:07:18 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Prospective Project
Matt Donohoe <killer00@ihug.com.au> wrote:
>Dean,
>I'm thinking that you did not read the part about a 'transverter' which is a
To be continued in digest: hd_99_264C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
