Installing Ubuntu on a REALLY old computer
in [Chips]
|
Prev: M766LRT MB with PIII600E Slot 1
Next: AWD64GB
From: Rod Speed on 13 Jul 2006 00:18 Unruh <unruh-spam(a)physics.ubc.ca> wrote > Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> writes >> Yousuf Khan <bbbl67(a)yahoo.com> wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>> Richard Steiner <rsteiner(a)visi.com> wrote >>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote >>>>>>> In the days of Windows 95, very few systems could boot from CD, >>>>>> Thats overstating it, quite a few could. >>>>> In 1995-1996, bootable CD support in the BIOS was quite rare. >>>> That particular Pavillion can tho and THATS what matters. >>> But how specifically did that particular Pavillion do it? >> Just the usual way that became universal. >>> That also matters. Was there a boot-CD standard available at that time, >> Yes. > As far as I know the boot standard was simply the floppy boot > standard. Ie, the cdrom was/is just treated as if it were a floppy > drive and the first sectors of the disk read off and jumped to. Its a little more complicated than that, most obviously with the driver thats needed to boot a CD, but thats the general idea. > All this required was that the bios be able > to read raw sectors from the device. Its more complicated than that with what it does with the raw sector it first reads tho. >>> or were they some kind of proprietary boot loaders, >>> only recognized by one particular manufacturer or model? >> Nope, if that was what was done, the HP site would have said that. > Why would they have said that? Because there would have been plenty of questions about why you couldnt boot a distribution CD. > Noone else who has a proprietary way of doing things makes a > big deal of the fact that they are incompatible with everyone else. The HP FAQ system is a bit more than most bother with.
From: Rod Speed on 13 Jul 2006 00:37 John B <jbngspam(a)yahoo.com> wrote > Rod Speed wrote >> bbbl67 <yjkhan(a)gmail.com> wrote >>> I just upgraded my brother's computer from Win XP to >>> Ubuntu 5.10. It was an unbelievable success! It surprised >>> even me how smoothly it went -- didn't need to go into the >>> command-line even once. Linux has arrived, it seems. >> Nope, now try accessing NTFS formatted partitions on that. > Hmm, ntfs read is easy as. Not sure if its out of the box but I think it is. Fraid not with ubuntu 6.06 > I even managed to delete files from an ntfs partition then resize the partition down to > a smaller size so I could make a new linux partition. That was using ntfsprogs however, > not so easy as just mounting a ntfs partition in RO mode. And not without the use of the command line that he was clearly claiming. > And this was on ubuntu 5.10 >> Or even just FAT32 partitions. > Read/write at will Not without the use of the command line with ubuntu 6.06 That was ALL I meant, I was JUST commenting on that command line use. Like I said, its obviously trivial, even knoppix manages to do it without any need to use the command line.
From: John B on 13 Jul 2006 03:00 Rod Speed wrote: > John B <jbngspam(a)yahoo.com> wrote >> Rod Speed wrote >>> bbbl67 <yjkhan(a)gmail.com> wrote > >>>> I just upgraded my brother's computer from Win XP to >>>> Ubuntu 5.10. It was an unbelievable success! It surprised >>>> even me how smoothly it went -- didn't need to go into the >>>> command-line even once. Linux has arrived, it seems. > >>> Nope, now try accessing NTFS formatted partitions on that. > >> Hmm, ntfs read is easy as. Not sure if its out of the box but I think it is. > > Fraid not with ubuntu 6.06 > Yeah, when I think about it that would make sense with canonical/ubuntu's stance on proprietary/edge case legal stuff such as reverse engineered ntfs drivers. >> I even managed to delete files from an ntfs partition then resize the partition down to >> a smaller size so I could make a new linux partition. That was using ntfsprogs however, >> not so easy as just mounting a ntfs partition in RO mode. > > And not without the use of the command line that he was clearly claiming. > Correct, command line is a must. <...> JB
From: Rod Speed on 13 Jul 2006 03:40 John B <jbngspam(a)yahoo.com> wrote > Rod Speed wrote >> John B <jbngspam(a)yahoo.com> wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>> bbbl67 <yjkhan(a)gmail.com> wrote >>>>> I just upgraded my brother's computer from Win XP to >>>>> Ubuntu 5.10. It was an unbelievable success! It surprised >>>>> even me how smoothly it went -- didn't need to go into the >>>>> command-line even once. Linux has arrived, it seems. >>>> Nope, now try accessing NTFS formatted partitions on that. >>> Hmm, ntfs read is easy as. Not sure if its out of the box but I think it is. >> Fraid not with ubuntu 6.06 > Yeah, when I think about it that would make sense with > canonical/ubuntu's stance on proprietary/edge case legal stuff such as reverse > engineered ntfs drivers. Clearly those who did knoppix dont see it that way. And I bet ubuntu fixes it sometime too. >>> I even managed to delete files from an ntfs partition then resize >>> the partition down to a smaller size so I could make a new linux >>> partition. That was using ntfsprogs however, not so easy as just >>> mounting a ntfs partition in RO mode. >> And not without the use of the command line that he was clearly claiming. > Correct, command line is a must. So Yousuf's original was clearly just plain wrong.
From: George Macdonald on 13 Jul 2006 08:51
On 12 Jul 2006 22:32:29 GMT, Unruh <unruh-spam(a)physics.ubc.ca> wrote: >"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> writes: > >>Yousuf Khan <bbbl67(a)yahoo.com> wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>> Richard Steiner <rsteiner(a)visi.com> wrote >>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote > >>>>>>> In the days of Windows 95, very few systems could boot from CD, > >>>>>> Thats overstating it, quite a few could. > >>>>> In 1995-1996, bootable CD support in the BIOS was quite rare. > >>>> That particular Pavillion can tho and THATS what matters. > >>> But how specifically did that particular Pavillion do it? > >>Just the usual way that became universal. > >>> That also matters. Was there a boot-CD standard available at that time, > >>Yes. > >As far as I know the boot standard was simply the floppy boot standard. >Ie, the cdrom was/is just treated as if it were a floppy drive and the >first sectors of the disk read off and jumped to. All this required was >that the bios be able to read raw sectors from the device. There were/are two ways of booting under the El Torito standard - one was floppy emulation, the other was more like a HDD emulation. It wasn't uncommon in the early days for a BIOS to not handle one of them. -- Rgds, George Macdonald |