Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Ok, I'm trying to install Red Hat 9.0. Mainly plan to use it for development and goofing around. Problem is, I can't install more than like 1.6 1.7 gigs of it before I hit bad blocks and it borks. (cd activity stops, just sits there, have to reboot...)
I tried running fsck -c from knoppix. Even tried fsck -c -f -y. Didn't say anything about the bad blocks except that it was looking for them. (but the installer detected them...then quit and wouldn't let me install instead of isolating them like a good little installer...)
So, is there another way to isolate them?
Anywho, I don't know if my bad blocks are isolated to the early portion of my drive, and I have a big portion left of that space...perhaps I could take 20gigs of it and turn it to ext3. (if possible) How would I go about shaving the end part of that large ntfs partition without messing it up?
Also, how would I turn those problem partitions I mentioned back to fat32?
Finally, since I'm considering just buying a new HD altogether, does RedHat 9.0 support external USB hard drives? If so, what would the device name be?
I could imagine that, at least if you upgrade your kernel, you get support for usb-HDs. RH9 quite surely supports too, but the newer the kernel, the better...
also, did I understand you were trying to install linux on ntfs? I hope I read wrong...reading ntfs works somehow, but writing to that is another matter (a bad one). fat isn't much better...I'd say take some space and make it ext2 or ext3 or something, then install your linux on that. it's quite easy to take it from the end of the partition, I guess, if you don't want to repartition the whole thing. I haven't done it myself, but search google, it helps...
Turning the end 20gb of my 100+ gb ntfs partition into ext3. Never deleted a single file on that huge partition, ever, so I'd imagine all data would be right at the beginning? (meaning the last 20gb would be safe for plucking...)
After that, I want to turn the two partitions I tried to install Linux on (both Linux formats!) back into fat32. I plan on installing another version of win on them sometime, lol. But win doesn't seem to realize those partitions exist...
I have no clue how to make Disk Druid make another partition either...currently my big HD is split into four...little HD is filled up, don't want to mess with it.
BTW, what is the device name for the USB hd? Like hda = master, hdb = slave...