LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-12-2007, 10:33 PM   #16
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 59

With my boot manager bootitng:
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/bootitng.html
 
Old 05-12-2007, 11:00 PM   #17
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: LFS-Version SVN-20091202, Arch 2009.08
Posts: 1,485

Rep: Reputation: 66
Im thinking that it uses something like a drive overlay to acomplish that.
 
Old 05-13-2007, 03:08 AM   #18
saikee
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Distribution: Any free distro.
Posts: 3,398
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 112Reputation: 112
The PC standard as we know has a partition table of 64 bytes for 4 primary partition each 16 bytes. It is part of the MBR positions at the 447th to 510th bytes.

If more partition is needed one of the 4 primaries must be changed to an extended partition by having a different Type number. The extended partition has the same format as a primary except between the start and finish points of the hard disk addresses the number of logical partition is unknown in a one-pass read.

The logical partition works in a way that each one carries the address of the next one down the line and the one that does not do this automatically the last one. Since the extended partition has the starting point so an OS can go to address in the hard disk to read the 1st logical partition table and find the address of the 2nd one and so on. The logical partitions are spread out in the rest of the hard disk.

The above standard was established in Dos era. One can have a hard disk any number of partitions as one please but when a bios, from every mobo, reads the MBR it also assume the 4 primaries are between the designated 447th to 510th bytes. Changing that standard will result new PC systems no longer compatible with the existing ones.

Linux when designed decided to have 256 raw devices for Pata and SCSI disks. Since it is standard in a mobo to have 2 IDE ports each manage a master and slave so a maximum of 4 Pata or IDE devices (hda, hdb, hdc & hdd) are available physically. This allow each Pata disk a maximum of 64 devices (e.f. hda, hda1, hda2....hda63) Therefore a Linux user can have 63 partition in one Pata disk.

SCSI disks can be daisy chained up to 16 disks and so each can only have 16 devices names. Linux uses SCSI alocation for Sata disks and USB devices too as they all need drivers to read them. Thus a Sata, less a device name for the disk, can have a maximum of 15 partitions, in the form of sda, sda1, sda2, sda3....sda14 and sda15.

Any arrangement to have more than the above is outside the PC standard followed by Dos, MS Winodws, Linux, BSD, Solaris systems and all the mobo manufacturers. The above works reasonably well. MS Windows assigns an alphabet for each drive and so cannot cope with Linux 63 partitions. However as MS systems do not support other systems they don't mount the partitions automatically and so no conflict. If a Linux user try to mount more than 26 Linux partitions in a MS Windows (using Extifs program for example) he/she will be stopped when the alphabets run out.

One can design a system to have say 1000 partitions to replace the current extended partition convention but the data will not be understood by the existing PC systems unless a proprietary software is installed.

Last edited by saikee; 05-13-2007 at 03:13 AM.
 
Old 08-31-2007, 10:04 AM   #19
polytropos
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Posts: 13

Rep: Reputation: 0
Will use partition magic to do this

I will take a dig at this and post the result in a day or two. This info doesnt seem to be available elsewhere on the net too.
 
Old 08-31-2007, 11:04 AM   #20
pixellany
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Annapolis, MD
Distribution: Arch/XFCE
Posts: 17,802

Rep: Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728
Skimming this thread, I don't see one little detail: WHY?? Why would you need to move Windows to the end of the drive? All of the Linuxes (and *nixes, I assume) are very happy anywhere on the disk--primary, logical, etc. Why not just let Windows have its #1 spot?
 
Old 08-31-2007, 04:11 PM   #21
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: LFS-Version SVN-20091202, Arch 2009.08
Posts: 1,485

Rep: Reputation: 66
Maybe he considers windows not a priority system or wishes to shrink down the space that it currently occupies. example is a drive allocated for 20gb and its mostly unused free space maybe you just have windows there for playing games etc etc. Moving it to the end of the drive would allow you to shrink the partition and setup a new drive at the end or possibly other things. Ive had to move mine before because of this reason I had used up all the primary partitions that I could have on the drive and shrinking in place would not allow me to allocate the space as it looked like this


Code:
 
Windows|Linux|home|swap|==FREESPACE==

windows had alot of freespace and moving it to the end would be the only way to make an extended parttion and reallocate the unused space.


Without moving this would not have been possible to do.


Anyway I am not sure that the OP is having this particular issue but it shows an example of why one would want to move it. Anyway when I did it i tried doing it the easy way and ended up making windows unbootable.

Use Gparted or a Gparted live CD if you wanna be safe.

NOTE: Gparted live will take a very long time to move windows and its not guaranteed to work right off the bat you may need to fix windows which may be out of your technical knowledge.
 
Old 08-31-2007, 04:16 PM   #22
pixellany
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Annapolis, MD
Distribution: Arch/XFCE
Posts: 17,802

Rep: Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728Reputation: 728
If the partition is at the front, you can still shrink it to free up space. I'm guessing that shrinking AND moving is more difficult than just shrinking, but I have no proof of this.
 
Old 08-31-2007, 05:16 PM   #23
saikee
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Distribution: Any free distro.
Posts: 3,398
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 112Reputation: 112
XP or Linux or BSD or any reasonable size operating system always records which disk and which partition it was installed. Moving it around doesn't work for XP or Unix-like systems but Linux is OK if you are prepared to edit a couple of system files.

A hard disk can only have 4 primaries. Space after the 4 primaries created dead and cannot be used, unless it is absorbed into the adjacent primary. If more partitions is needed one of the primary must be given up to convert into a set of logical partitions. Therefore in exvor's case described in Post #21 it would have been a simple task to delete the swap in 4th partition and use all the space for extended partition. The swap can be re-created but it would be in the 5th partition (or the first logical partition) and so the Linux has to be informed.

Dead space in a hard disk can be used as long as the hard disk convention is understood.
 
Old 09-02-2007, 01:15 PM   #24
polytropos
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Posts: 13

Rep: Reputation: 0
Talking

pixellany, reason is psychological I think. i)Windows not as primary system and ii)just for fun.

I did that and dont know the result! While PM was doing it, I shut the flap for a second and when I opened it the work was stopped with some undecipherable error message. After that not only will XP not boot, the XP installation disk wouldnt even recognize the presence of a hard disk in the system! (freeBSD installation disk did find it, also the compaq recovery disk found it, didnt try any linux) So my experiment was a failure, only that it restates the obvious point that it is dangerous.
 
Old 09-05-2007, 07:19 PM   #25
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: LFS-Version SVN-20091202, Arch 2009.08
Posts: 1,485

Rep: Reputation: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by saikee View Post
XP or Linux or BSD or any reasonable size operating system always records which disk and which partition it was installed. Moving it around doesn't work for XP or Unix-like systems but Linux is OK if you are prepared to edit a couple of system files.

A hard disk can only have 4 primaries. Space after the 4 primaries created dead and cannot be used, unless it is absorbed into the adjacent primary. If more partitions is needed one of the primary must be given up to convert into a set of logical partitions. Therefore in exvor's case described in Post #21 it would have been a simple task to delete the swap in 4th partition and use all the space for extended partition. The swap can be re-created but it would be in the 5th partition (or the first logical partition) and so the Linux has to be informed.

Dead space in a hard disk can be used as long as the hard disk convention is understood.


No that would not have worked. if you shrunk the windows partition it would then look like this.


windows|==FREESPACE==|Linux|home|swap|==FREESPACE==


in this situation you would have to move Linux and home in order to merge the 2 freespace areas into one partition. This is what I was attempting to demonstrate but it may not have been clear. Moving windows would cause the least bit of effort to accomplish this. Also it may not be possible to expand Linux and then shrink it as the partition may be full.

It really depends on how much work you want to perform and what the geometry of the drive is and where the data is located on each drive.


NOTE: It is not impossible to move windows to another area on the drive but it is not easy.
 
Old 09-05-2007, 10:34 PM   #26
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by exvor View Post
No that would not have worked.
Au contraire mon ami --> (Wrong!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by exvor View Post
Also it may not be possible to expand Linux and then shrink it as the partition may be full.
Using Gparted, you could slide the Linux and Home partition by expanding them to take up the free space left after the Windows partition and Linux respectively and resize back to original size to move the free space from the beginning side to the end side of each partition till the free space is moved to the end side of home. You could then delete the swap and create an extended partition as saikee mentioned, then re-create the swap in a logical partition, then you have all your free space at the end of the drive where you can create more logical partitions for whatever.
And Gparted can also resize your Windows partition, meaning, one tool can do most of the work from a GUI interface.
How can the Linux root partition get filled after expanding when your still working off the Gparted live CD and Linux hasn't been booted and used?
I disagree completely with your perspective -->"Moving windows would cause the least bit of effort to accomplish this.". When you can use Gparted to do most of the work. Sure, you'll have to do some editing in Linux due to the change in the swap partition, but moving Windows to the end will require some fancy footwork also.
Keep in mind, you can have Windows installed in a logical partition if the boot files are in a primary partition, any primary, not necessarily the first.
I can also see an advantage to moving Windows to the end if it's not your primary operating system. Because hard drives maintain a constant RPM and there are many more sectors at the beginning of the drive due to zone bit recording, making your first partition the fastest partition. If one wanted to optimize their computing environment to a higher level, this would be advantageous. But for most home computer users, it is not significant enough to bother, unless you want knowledge that could be gained from such endeavors.
Due to the laws of probability, one should never! say never!.
 
Old 09-07-2007, 03:26 PM   #27
lcc00123
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Distribution: FreeBSD 6-STABLE
Posts: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Question

I'm asking because when I try to install FreeBSD with Windows at the front of a disk, it complains about not enough disk space.
 
Old 09-07-2007, 05:05 PM   #28
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: LFS-Version SVN-20091202, Arch 2009.08
Posts: 1,485

Rep: Reputation: 66
Quote:
Moving windows would cause the least bit of effort to accomplish this. Also it may not be possible to expand Linux and then shrink it as the partition may be full.

It really depends on how much work you want to perform and what the geometry of the drive is and where the data is located on each drive.
This does not say that its impossible just that it would require more work.


And yes it is possible not to be able to just adjust the beginning and end of a partition because of where the data is on the drive. There are many many ways that you could move things around so that they work for you that is the beauty of the tools. Im not saying its impossible in any way shape or form.



Quote:
How can the Linux root partition get filled after expanding when your still working off the Gparted live CD and Linux hasn't been booted and used?
because you cannot expand before the partition into the new space and even if you could it would not move the existing data to the new area thus you would not be able to shrink it at the end of the partition.

Gparted is excellent for doing this sorta stuff as it does everything for you in this case moving things around really require no effort. If you were limited to the command tools to move partitions tho it is sometimes easier and faster to do it other ways is all I was attempting to say. Anyway its not for us to ask why the OP wants to this as they have there reasons.
 
  


Reply

Tags
move, ntfs, ntfsresize, resize, windows, winxp


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Linux Distributor Interactive Ideas To Deliver Xandros' End-to-End Windows Alternatives To UK LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-16-2006 12:33 PM
I have quite a few badblocks at the end of the disk. Is it OK? kornerr Linux - General 1 08-12-2005 01:46 PM
Partition begins after end-of-disk cornleader Linux - Hardware 3 04-15-2005 09:45 AM
Partition ends after end-of-disk. lhto Linux - Hardware 1 06-19-2004 07:20 AM
Ran out of disk space at the end of chapter 6!! DarkDrive Linux From Scratch 4 08-22-2003 04:15 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:18 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration