big trouble.
Reggit
Windows will not run. He told me that the partition (windows) had not
been formatted..
I would format the whole hard-drive and re-install everything so that it
will run well, is just that there were some things in the Windows
partition that I would have liked to save (pictures and the like)..
I tried everything I could think of, really. I went into /mnt, and tried
mounting windows, and it says
mount: fs type 199 not supported by kernel
I installed Linux again, (not touching the Windows partition that was
already there).. And checked to have selected hda1 when prompted to boot
Windows, and still it doesn't work..
Could somebody please suggest anything else?
Thanks for your time..
Peter T. Breuer
> My son decided to install Linux in our computer. Now, for some reason,
> Windows will not run. He told me that the partition (windows) had not
Of course it will.
> been formatted..
That's a prerequisite.
> I would format the whole hard-drive and re-install everything so that it
Why? Find out what's wrong and fix it.
> will run well, is just that there were some things in the Windows
> partition that I would have liked to save (pictures and the like)..
> I tried everything I could think of, really. I went into /mnt, and tried
> mounting windows, and it says
> mount: fs type 199 not supported by kernel
There you are. You really ought to look at the partition table! A label
of 199 indicates that that's the first thing you want to fix!
Look at the partition and fix it up with dosfsck or something like that
(I hope it's fat32).
> I installed Linux again, (not touching the Windows partition that was
> already there).. And checked to have selected hda1 when prompted to boot
> Windows, and still it doesn't work..
> Could somebody please suggest anything else?
What have you done? The above doesn't relate any attempt to locate
what's wrong or to fix it!
Since you don't mention it, I guess that windows won't boot, not that
it won't run. I would imagine that you don't have a boot entry for it
in your boot loader. Is that true?
Anyway, list the parition table here, and the configuration of your
boot loader. That's enough for a start at a diagnosis.
Peter
Jos Herni
> My son decided to install Linux in our computer. Now, for some reason,
> Windows will not run. He told me that the partition (windows) had not
> been formatted..
> Could somebody please suggest anything else?
Get yourself another son? ;-)
Vwake Viv
Very funny.
Reggit
<p...@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote:
Okay.. I'll rephrase.
Windows 2000 won't -boot-. As for partition tables.. Well I really don't
know how to look at these.
I'd have a look at fdisk and play around with that, but I can't even get
a prompt at startup.
It's really not always as easy as finding out what it wrong and fixing
it.
My guess would be running a windows startup disk would help start Windows
up..
I don't know though.
I do have a windows entry in the boot loader..
This is what it looks like:
title linux
kernel (hd0,4)/boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/hda5 devfs=mount
title failsave
kernel (hd0,4)/boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/hda5 devfs=mount failsafe
title windows
root (hd0,0)
makeactive
chainloader +1
I really don't see what is wrong there..
hhmm.. It does say this, that I don't quiet understand:
timeout 5 (that's fine)
color black/cyan yellow/cyan (that's okay)
i18n (hd0,4)/boot/us.klt
altconfigfile (hd0,4)/boot/grub/menu.once (don't know what this line does)
default 0
But well, I don't know at where to look at..
I really hope someone could help..
Thanks,
Jen.
Reggit
I did have a look at cfdisk under #, and this is what it shows:
hda1 Boot Primary Linux 5831.73 (This is supposed to be
my win2000 partition
hda5 Boot Logical Linux ext2 2508.72
hda6 Boot Logical Linux swap 563.93
Wild Wizard
> I did have a look at cfdisk under #, and this is what it shows:
>
> hda1 Boot Primary Linux 5831.73 (This is supposed to be
> my win2000 partition
>
> hda5 Boot Logical Linux ext2 2508.72
>
> hda6 Boot Logical Linux swap 563.93
i have 1 suggestion
go out and buy a baseball bat and use it on your son
--
Don't believe everything you hear or anything you say.
Peter T. Breuer
> Reggit wrote:
Please use fdisk -l /dev/hda. The data you show are for prinjty
printing. We need numerical data.
>> I did have a look at cfdisk under #, and this is what it shows:
>>
>> hda1 Boot Primary Linux 5831.73 (This is supposed to be my win2000 partition
Well, you have a problem there. hda1 is labelled wrongly. What's in it?
Please use fdisk -l /dev/hda. Show the output here.
>>
>> hda5 Boot Logical Linux ext2 2508.72
>>
>> hda6 Boot Logical Linux swap 563.93
> i have 1 suggestion
> go out and buy a baseball bat and use it on your son
Indeed ... it looks slightly like he's written over your windows
partition. Need data to confirm or deny.
Peter
Tony
> My son decided to install Linux in our computer. Now, for some reason,
> Windows will not run. He told me that the partition (windows) had not
> been formatted..
<snip>
Don't reformat yet!
Looks like the Win partition is still there if you
can get to it. You did not mention trying the
obvious first step. Try to boot Win using a
Windows boot floppy first. You may get
a) Windows, Yea!!!
b) A command prompt. Set paths for c:\win.... etc. etc.
Try to run win, load up to Windows, Yea!
c) Command prompt only. DOS around, backing up everything
you want to save. At least you do not lose everything.
Plan 2 - and this is a real fix. Run lilo/grub or lisa or drakex
or what you have to make sure your startup system has an entry
for windows.
No luck? Post a follow up with what happened and more detailed
info. Many of us have trashed dual-boot systems in more ways
than are possible and are getting pretty good at getting them
sorted out again.
Cheers,
Tony.
Reggit
<p...@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote:
Here's what it looks like:
# fdisk -l /dev/hda
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 1 709 5695011 c7 Syrinx
/dev/hda2 710 1027 2554335 5 Extended
/dev/hda5 710 1014 2449881 83 Linux
/dev/hda6 1015 1027 104391 82 Linux swap
Hope this can tell you something..
I tried reinstalling Linux again.. (took about an hour).. When
partitioning my hard drive, was I supposed to choose WinNT or
Fat32-win98?
Could this be the reason why it isn't booting? I chose WinNT (Running
Win2000, and this wasn't an option)..
Maybe I should reinstall Linux and change this to 98..
Ryan
news:pan.2003.04.11....@ditweg.tiscali.nl:
One fix is if you don't want linux installed at all....put in a win98
boot disk and when you get a prompt type fdisk /mbr
then type restart
then take the disk out and let it boot up. This should boot windows
right up. I had the same problem with redhat 7.3 on a windows 2000 box.
It kept defaulting to the wrong partition to boot windows 2000 and would
not allow me to select the correct one. Redhat 9 worked though, so you
could get windows backup and then install Redhat 9.
Ryan
Disclaimer: If any of my advise is follow, it is at your own risk. If
it breaks something....well sorry bout that.
Peter T. Breuer
> # fdisk -l /dev/hda
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/hda1 1 709 5695011 c7 Syrinx
Well, that's the mess. Change it back to whatever it should have been.
Some windows type (I'm not an expert on windows types - choose one at
random until it works). And mark it active.
> /dev/hda2 710 1027 2554335 5 Extended
> /dev/hda5 710 1014 2449881 83 Linux
> /dev/hda6 1015 1027 104391 82 Linux swap
> I tried reinstalling Linux again.. (took about an hour).. When
WHY? Please don't do such things!!!!
> partitioning my hard drive, was I supposed to choose WinNT or
Eh? What do you mean? You don't want to do anything with windows
partitions.
> Fat32-win98?
> Could this be the reason why it isn't booting? I chose WinNT (Running
> Win2000, and this wasn't an option)..
I don't uderstand what you mean. I choose blue bells. Do you know what
I mean? No. Then ask me what I chose them FOR, what were the other
options, and why I was doing such a thing. Now answer those yourself. I
have no idea what you are talking about!
> Maybe I should reinstall Linux and change this to 98..
NOOOOOOOO NOOOO NOOOOO!! What are you DOING?
If you want to change the partition label on hda1, go ahead! That's
what we are telling you to do. But do not reinstall anything! Just
change the label. It's a 4.35s operation. Why did you change it away
from the original in the first place? What are you doing?
Peter
Mohamad I. Al-Saqer
Did you inistall the linux boot loader in the MBR or in the first sector
in the boot partition?
If you have chosed the later, then this is your problem. GRUB wants to
be in the MBR! Solving it is not so easy. I have an idea how to work
this out!
ivan
Just an idea I guess, nothing else seemed to be working.
Here's what it says when I try booting Windows:
Booting 'Windows'
root (hd0,0)
file system unknown, partition type 0xc7
makeactive
chainloader +1
My main concern was that when I did install Linux again, when selecting
a partition type for Windows I chose NT (considering that 2000 wasn't an
option), (this is when installing linux, selecting parts of the
hard-drive to install the OS)..
and it read:
NT corrupted ntfs volume/stripe set Syrinx boot
If I chose Win98, it just didn't even install..
I really don't know how to use this very well. My knowledge is extremly
limited.
All I have is the manuals which take a long time to read through..
That's why I suppose I'm making all these mistakes, or.. Most of them,
anyway. Pure lack of knowledge..
I guess it's why I'm here, right?
I'm not sure how to change the lebels for hda1.. I don't even know what
Sprinx is.. I went into cfdisk and checked if I could change it to some
sort of Windows, but there's nothing there.. The closest is a FAT16
system, and I'm just not sure that'll do..
Thanks again, for all who are helping..
Peter T. Breuer
> "Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>> Reggit <ero...@telstra.com> wrote:
>> > # fdisk -l /dev/hda
>>
>> > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
>> > /dev/hda1 1 709 5695011 c7 Syrinx
>>
>> Well, that's the mess. Change it back to whatever it should have been.
>> Some windows type (I'm not an expert on windows types - choose one at
>> random until it works). And mark it active.
> Just an idea I guess, nothing else seemed to be working.
What do you mean? Just do as you ar easked, please!
> Here's what it says when I try booting Windows:
> Booting 'Windows'
> root (hd0,0)
> file system unknown, partition type 0xc7
Yes, as I SAID! Why do you ignore it? Just change it back to something
normal.
> I'm not sure how to change the lebels for hda1.. I don't even know what
Ah! But what's the problem? Open up fdisk and use it. You make it sound
hard!
Peter
Bill Unruh
]Reggit wrote:
]> My son decided to install Linux in our computer. Now, for some reason,
]> Windows will not run. He told me that the partition (windows) had not
]> been formatted..
]> I would format the whole hard-drive and re-install everything so that it
]> will run well, is just that there were some things in the Windows
]> partition that I would have liked to save (pictures and the like)..
]> I tried everything I could think of, really. I went into /mnt, and tried
]> mounting windows, and it says
]> mount: fs type 199 not supported by kernel
]> I installed Linux again, (not touching the Windows partition that was
]> already there).. And checked to have selected hda1 when prompted to boot
]> Windows, and still it doesn't work..
]>
]> Could somebody please suggest anything else?
If we are to help you, we need more information.
What is the output of
fdisk -l /dev/hda
(assuming that /dev/hda is the disk (Master on the first IDE bus)).
What version of Windows is it?
fs type 199 sounds a bit like there was some partition corruption that
occured somewhere along the line. (It seems to be the Syrinx partition type, and
I have no idea what that is.)
Did you do something weird when you installed Windows?
Bill Unruh
Peter Brewer is reasonably knowledgable, with the bedside manners of a
cockroach. So, the best thing to do is to ignore the invective and try
to glean the wheat out of the post. It looks to me like your system did
the job of changing it to Syrinx for you, and I have no idea what syrinx
is.
I have just looked at my machine which has Win 2000 on it, and its
partition type is c(hex)= (12)(decimal) You need to try changing it back
to that.
cfdisk /dev/hda
Use the up down arrow key to choose your partition with Win98 on it,
Use the tab key to select the Type and then change the type of
the partition to type c (Win 95 LBA assuming yuor drive is LBA)
and then save the partition table to the disk, and try mounting that
file system
mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/windows
]I'm not sure how to change the lebels for hda1.. I don't even know what
]Sprinx is.. I went into cfdisk and checked if I could change it to some
]sort of Windows, but there's nothing there.. The closest is a FAT16
]system, and I'm just not sure that'll do..
Yes, windows uses either FAT or NTFS. Win 2000 if my machine is typical
uses the type c (or 0C)
]Thanks again, for all who are helping..
Davorin Vlahovic
that it's on your first partition (you can check with cfdisk program as
root)
1) Login as root.
2) type:
umount /mnt/win
3) if you've got win95/98/me with fat16/fat32, write this
mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/win -t vfat
it should mount.
if you've got NT/2k/XP there is (probably) NTFS. Type:
modprobe ntfs
mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/win -t ntfs
Now you've got your win partition mounted on /mnt/win.
Now, I presume you don't want to reinstall windows, so you can make a
dual-boot system. Go into /etc directory (type "cd /etc") and edit
lilo.conf file. I don't know which editor you'll use, but I recommend
mcedit or jed for beginners. Of course, you do not use your mouse, but
F-keys and ALT+something (ie ALT+F).
Then at the end of the file add
others=/dev/hda1
label=Win
Save the file and exit. When done, type "lilo" and reboot your computer.
You can get the boot menu if you press TAB when "LILO (insert version
number)" appears when booting.
Hope this helps. C ya.
--
The man who runs may fight again.
-- Menander
Davorin Vlahovic
> Reggit <ero...@telstra.com> wrote:
>> My son decided to install Linux in our computer. Now, for some reason,
>> Windows will not run. He told me that the partition (windows) had not
>
> Of course it will.
>
>> been formatted..
>
> That's a prerequisite.
>
>> I would format the whole hard-drive and re-install everything so that it
>
> Why? Find out what's wrong and fix it.
>
>> will run well, is just that there were some things in the Windows
>> partition that I would have liked to save (pictures and the like)..
>> I tried everything I could think of, really. I went into /mnt, and tried
>> mounting windows, and it says
>> mount: fs type 199 not supported by kernel
>
> There you are. You really ought to look at the partition table! A label
> of 199 indicates that that's the first thing you want to fix!
It's not the file-system that's wrong. It's the partition table. It is
possible that his kid messed up the partitions.
> Look at the partition and fix it up with dosfsck or something like that
> (I hope it's fat32).
If the partitions are really messed up, it's of no use.
Davorin Vlahovic
> In article <a0567b...@news.it.uc3m.es>, "Peter T. Breuer"
>
> Windows 2000 won't -boot-. As for partition tables.. Well I really don't
> know how to look at these.
As root run cfdisk or fdisk.
> I'd have a look at fdisk and play around with that, but I can't even get
> a prompt at startup.
Wait, you can't boot linux anymore? Bummer. In that case strip the
disk naked (delete all the partitions), and place new ones, and
reinstall.
> It's really not always as easy as finding out what it wrong and fixing
> it.
> My guess would be running a windows startup disk would help start Windows
> up..
> I don't know though.
I just got an idea. Boot the system with Win2k boot cd, and enter the
repair mode. Once there, type "fixmbr" or something alike. Check help.
Davorin Vlahovic
>
> I did have a look at cfdisk under #, and this is what it shows:
>
> hda1 Boot Primary Linux 5831.73 (This is supposed to be
> my win2000 partition
>
> hda5 Boot Logical Linux ext2 2508.72
>
> hda6 Boot Logical Linux swap 563.93
Oh, okay, I see number of things wrong here. But none causes your
problem.
First of all, tell your son he needs at best 256MB of swap ;)
Second of all, remove the boot flag from hda5&6. No way in
hell do you need them there.
Do me a favour, go into fdisk ("fdisk /dev/hda"), and press type
"p"<ENTER>. Send us the printout. I'd like to check if he created an
overlapped partition.
P.S. I've heard of NTFS 5.0 auto-defragmentation, but is there a defrag
tool for NTFS 5.0 (FS in win2k&xp). Because, if there is such a thing,
your son should have used it before resizing the partition. If there is
a defragmenter and he didn't use it you have a one helluva corrupted fs
:)
Davorin Vlahovic
>
> # fdisk -l /dev/hda
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/hda1 1 709 5695011 c7 Syrinx
> /dev/hda2 710 1027 2554335 5 Extended
> /dev/hda5 710 1014 2449881 83 Linux
> /dev/hda6 1015 1027 104391 82 Linux swap
>
Sybren Stuvel
> Change the partition id to NTFS. See cfdisk/type.
Or FAT32
Sybren
--
| Somebody ought to cross ball point pens with coat hangers so that |
| the pens will multiply instead of disappear. |
\-------------------------------------------------------------------/
If you have to use Outlook, fix it: http://jump.to/oe-quotefix
Reggit
Hi; I tried doing what you suggested and got an error message back,
saying:
# mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/windows -t ntfs
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hda1
or two many mounted file systems
I did edit lilo though, (I was previously using grub) and thought lilo
would be a better option (done this with VI), the Windows entry looks
pretty much what you wrote there..
I'll see what I can do while using fdisk..
Thank you..
Reggit
Hhmm.. I installed Windows a few years ago, don't think I did anything
weird..
Here's what fdisk -l /dev/hda looks like:
Device Boot Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 1 743 5968116 c7 Syrinx
/dev/hda2 744 1027 2281230 5 Extended
/dev/hda5 744 979 1895638+ 83 Linux
/dev/hda6 980 1027 285528+ 82 Linux swap
(they all used to be marked as boot, but I've already changed that..)
I'm using Windows 2000Pro.
I will look at fdisk and try to change from Syrinx to something else..
Robert Newson
...
> Hi; I tried doing what you suggested and got an error message back,
> saying:
>
> # mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/windows -t ntfs
> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hda1
> or two many mounted file systems
>
> I did edit lilo though, (I was previously using grub) and thought lilo
> would be a better option (done this with VI), the Windows entry looks
> pretty much what you wrote there..
>
> I'll see what I can do while using fdisk..
You should do/get something like this:
# fdisk /dev/hda
...
Command (m for help): p
Device Boot Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 1 743 5968116 c7 Syrinx
/dev/hda2 744 1027 2281230 5 Extended
/dev/hda5 744 979 1895638+ 83 Linux
/dev/hda6 980 1027 285528+ 82 Linux swap
Command (m for help): t
Partition number (1-6): 1
Hex code (type L to list codes): L
0 Empty 17 Hidden HPFS/NTF 5c Priam Edisk a6 OpenBSD
...
7 HPFS/NTFS 40 Venix 80286 80 Old Minix c7 Syrinx
...
b Win95 FAT32 4e QNX4.x 2nd part 84 OS/2 hidden C: e4 SpeedStor
c Win95 FAT32 (LB 4f QNX4.x 3rd part 85 Linux extended eb BeOS fs
e Win95 FAT16 (LB 50 OnTrack DM 86 NTFS volume set f1 SpeedStor
f Win95 Ext'd (LB 51 OnTrack DM6 Aux 87 NTFS volume set f4 SpeedStor
...
Hex code (type L to list codes): b
Changed system type of partition 1 to b (Win95 FAT32)
Command (m for help): w
The partition table has been altered!
...
#
I've got Win 98 FAT32 partitions of 15M that work quite happily as type b;
you may need type c for Win2K vfat partitions; or possibly 86 or 87 if it
was NTFS.
Jos Herni
>>> Could somebody please suggest anything else?
>>
>> Get yourself another son? ;-)
>
> Very funny.
I have my moments :-)
Chris Share
un...@string.physics.ubc.ca says...
>cfdisk /dev/hda
>Use the up down arrow key to choose your partition with Win98 on it,
>Use the tab key to select the Type and then change the type of
>the partition to type c (Win 95 LBA assuming yuor drive is LBA)
Or to 7 if it's NTFS.
>and then save the partition table to the disk, and try mounting that
>file system
>mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/windows
You'll probably need a reboot in there
>Yes, windows uses either FAT or NTFS. Win 2000 if my machine is typical
>uses the type c (or 0C)
Your win2k is bloody weird, and not particularly secure - usually uses
NTFS (7) instead of FAT32(C).
chris
Chris Share
says...
>One fix is if you don't want linux installed at all....put in a win98
>boot disk and when you get a prompt type fdisk /mbr
>then type restart
>then take the disk out and let it boot up. This should boot windows
>right up. I had the same problem with redhat 7.3 on a windows 2000 box.
>It kept defaulting to the wrong partition to boot windows 2000 and would
>not allow me to select the correct one. Redhat 9 worked though, so you
>could get windows backup and then install Redhat 9.
>
>Ryan
That's for a completely different problem.
It takes LILO or GRUB out of the MBR and puts the windows bootloader in
its place.
The OP's problem is a bad partition table, not MBR...
chris
Chris Share
Reap...@uk.co.fsnet.bullet3 says...
>I've got Win 98 FAT32 partitions of 15M that work quite happily as type b;
>
>you may need type c for Win2K vfat partitions; or possibly 86 or 87 if it
>was NTFS.
This is win2k... NTFS volume sets are an NT 4 thing, was replaced by
dynamic disks in 2k. With 2k it will be either FAT32 LBA - C, or more
likely HPFS/NTFS - 7.
chris
Jos Herni
> My son decided to install Linux in our computer. Now, for some reason,
> Windows will not run. He told me that the partition (windows) had not
> been formatted..
> I would format the whole hard-drive and re-install everything so that it
> will run well, is just that there were some things in the Windows
> partition that I would have liked to save (pictures and the like)..
> I tried everything I could think of, really. I went into /mnt, and tried
> mounting windows, and it says
> mount: fs type 199 not supported by kernel
> I installed Linux again, (not touching the Windows partition that was
> already there).. And checked to have selected hda1 when prompted to boot
> Windows, and still it doesn't work..
>
Blue Cat
this:
1. Boot your computer into Windows using an emergency Windows boot floppy.
2. If the Windows partition isn't corrupted, you can access your files that
way.
3. Copy those files that you deem valuable onto floppies. If the CD-RW still
works, use that instead.
"Jos Herni" <he...@ditweg.tiscali.nl> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.04.11....@ditweg.tiscali.nl...
Blue Cat
partitions. You can attack the problem two ways:
1. Install a later version of Linux. Red Hat 7.2 supports FAT32, with the
designation "vfat"
2. Download and install a later version of the kernel.
"Jos Herni" <he...@ditweg.tiscali.nl> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.04.11....@ditweg.tiscali.nl...
+Cibao+
Hash: SHA1
Blue Cat tempted the fates in alt.os.linux
by rushing in here and proclaiming the following to be true:
> Another thought came to me. Earlier versions of Linux do not support FAT32
> partitions.
This is incorrect. The Linux kernel has been able to handle FAT32 ever
since the spec first came out. I know for a fact that Slackware 3.0/.9/4.0
can handle FAT32 partitions just fine, and those came out quite some time
ago.
If you're going to offer advice, you should at least hold off until
you're sure of what you're talking about. Posting advice to *nix
users, using MSOE isn't exactly going to bolster anyone's confidence
in what you have to offer.
Here's some helpful hints to make your posts more useful in the future:
1.) Stop top-posting
Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
What do you mean "my reply is upside-down"?
http://www.i-hate-computers.demon.co.uk/
Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting?
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
2.) Trim your posts
How do I quote correctly in Usenet? - Quoting and Answering
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html
RFC 1855
Netiquette Guidelines
http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html
HTH
- --
Cibao Cu' Ali G. Colibri | Cannot find REALITY.SYS...Universe Halted.
GnuPG Pub Key EC9F1D51 -o) |
Linux Kernel 2.4.20 /\\ |
Slackware 8.1 *w00t* _\_v |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.3.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+nYrSJ+aEAOyfHVERAkDgAJ9OLc0IA68fqWzw5U+YU9Ey6XSMfQCfdUsy
ceIwHMzp8lsGNhUNKQEk6rY=
=MlxI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Blue Cat
"+Cibao+" <Ci...@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:slrnb9r2mi...@raven.home...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Blue Cat tempted the fates in alt.os.linux
> by rushing in here and proclaiming the following to be true:
>
> > Another thought came to me. Earlier versions of Linux do not support
FAT32
> > partitions.
>
> This is incorrect. The Linux kernel has been able to handle FAT32 ever
> since the spec first came out. I know for a fact that Slackware 3.0/.9/4.0
> can handle FAT32 partitions just fine, and those came out quite some time
> ago.
What I said came from my personal experience. When I had Red Hat 7.0, I
could not read FAT32 partitions from Linux.
>
> If you're going to offer advice, you should at least hold off until
> you're sure of what you're talking about. Posting advice to *nix
> users, using MSOE isn't exactly going to bolster anyone's confidence
> in what you have to offer.
>
I have used both MSOE and Mozilla for email. I don't see how that matters.
> Here's some helpful hints to make your posts more useful in the future:
>
> 1.) Stop top-posting
>
> Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
>
> What do you mean "my reply is upside-down"?
> http://www.i-hate-computers.demon.co.uk/
>
> Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting?
> http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
>
> 2.) Trim your posts
>
> How do I quote correctly in Usenet? - Quoting and Answering
> http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html
>
> RFC 1855
> Netiquette Guidelines
> http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html
>
> HTH
I was trying to help out the person with the problem. Flaming me does not
address the problem at hand.
Sybren Stuvel
> What I said came from my personal experience. When I had Red Hat 7.0, I
> could not read FAT32 partitions from Linux.
Weird. I've been using RH5.x, 6.x and 7.x which all supported FAT32.
> I have used both MSOE and Mozilla for email. I don't see how that matters.
Some people tend to read your words in a different way, when you use
MSOE to post to usenet.
> I was trying to help out the person with the problem. Flaming me does not
> address the problem at hand.
He wasn't flaming at all. He merely tried to tell you a bit on how to
write a post in such a way that it is as pleasantly readable as
possible. It's rather simple to remove unneeded text, so why aren't you?
+Cibao+
Hash: SHA1
Blue Cat tempted the fates in alt.os.linux
by rushing in here and proclaiming the following to be true:
> What I said came from my personal experience.
Then you should have done a bit of research first to verify your claims,
instead of furthering incorrect assumtpions about what "Linux cannot do".
A simple google search would have shown that you are in error.
> When I had Red Hat 7.0, I could not read FAT32 partitions from Linux.
That's the key point here: _YOU_ couldn't do it. Not Linux.
The kernel has had support for FAT32 since it came out, or at least,
shortly thereafter.
> I have used both MSOE and Mozilla for email.
Both are sucky newsclients.
slrn ownz j00.
> I don't see how that matters.
If you are going to post to a *nix forum, at least be using *nix to do so.
It's much along the same lines of (say) going to a Harley-Davidson club
riding a Honda moped. At best your going to be laughed at. At worst it
could get *very* ugly, *very* quickly.
> I was trying to help out the person with the problem.
You didn't. You failed in answering the question correctly, and potentially
had/have him believeing that "older Linuxes" cannot mount a FAT32
partition. Posting from a windows machine, no less.
That's not "help", that's FUD.
> Flaming me does not address the problem at hand.
1.) You weren't flamed - and still aren't. If I flame you, I make sure
there's no uncertainty that I'm calling your intelligence into question.
2.) You already fucked-up by answering the OP incorrectly.
If you don't know the answer, the _correct_ answer, STFU.
3.) Trim your fucking posts. Read the links I gave you. Do it. Now.
- --
Cibao Cu' Ali G. Colibri | Q: What's a JAP's (Jewish American
GnuPG Pub Key EC9F1D51 -o) | Princess) dream house? A: Fourteen rooms in
Linux Kernel 2.4.20 /\\ | Scarsdale, no kitchen, no bedroom.
Slackware 8.1 *w00t* _\_v |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.3.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+nzTLJ+aEAOyfHVERAlFjAJ49b1/SNe4zASfNusbMHVjUI60CswCfUDV3
JbZK0OXkfWWM7f+YghE8NBc=
=NyPq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bill Unruh
]"+Cibao+" <Ci...@softhome.net> wrote in message
He is just someone who got rejected when he applied for a job withe the
police and is now trying to become an internet cop. There is no rule re
"top/bottom/sideways/greek/" posting, except what a few malcontents seem
to want to impose. I hate bottom posting-- haveing to wade through tons
of old garbage to see the new posting which is usually not worth the
effort. I would much rather read the new post and if I am interested I
can go on to read the old post beneath it.
( and yes, this is an example of what and why I hate)
+Cibao+
Hash: SHA1
Bill Unruh tempted the fates in alt.os.linux
by rushing in here and proclaiming the following to be true:
> He is just someone who got rejected when he applied for a job withe the
> police and is now trying to become an internet cop.
Nice try, Bill. Get an original line.
Usenet "Nettiquette" guidelines exist for the "comfort" of everyone - and
not just the selfish, greedy, self-indulgent preferences of the few.
When you POST, it is for OTHERS to read - NOT _you_, so it's only logical
to make your messages as easily read as possible. Simple enough logic.
You trim your posts to reduce clutter, to make your posts much more readily
readable, and to reduce their size since MANY folks still pay for their
connection "by the byte" or per-minute.
You use the _correct_ established protocols for your message contents, so
that every standards-compliant newsreader can, and will handle the messages
correctly, displaying them in a way that the reader prefers.
Example #1:
You should be using use the '>' symbol as your quoted material marker,
and NOT this ']', which is not the standard, and may potentially confuse
newsreaders into displaying a message incorrectly.
You BOTTOM-quote to retain the logical procession of a conversation, to do
otherwise puts the response *before* the original comment, which is
ass-backwards and is completely in-compatible with 'normal' human speech,
which this textual environment is supposed to symbolically represent.
Example #2:
A: Becuase it disrupts the flow of conversation.
Q: Why should you not top-post on usenet?
> There is no rule re "top/bottom/sideways/greek/" posting, except what a
> few malcontents seem to want to impose.
Bill - can I call you Bill? - Get a fucking clue, you nimrod.
The standards for communicating on Usenet were *developed*, with
open-input, over YEARS, to REDUCE congestion/misunderstandings. The VAST
majority of those who use usenet regularly adhere to the informal standards
(known as the RFC's) so that everyone can, and wil be speaking the same
"language" as it were. It's much along the same lines as to why the
"scientific names" to things are in latin - regardless of what the native
language of the scientist may be. One language. Pure communication. Only
pseudo-intellectuals, like yourself, attempt to twist that into the (very
fucking tired) "Battle Cry" of "their trying to censor me!", when the exact
opposite is the _real_ truth. The RFC's are about opening the lines of
cumminication, and reducing common bottlenecks. Not inducing them.
> I hate bottom posting-- haveing to wade through tons
> of old garbage to see the new posting which is usually not worth the
> effort.
Well, Gee, Bill. If you didn't spend so much time trolling the Win.*
groups, where 99% of the posters are as ignorant as yourself, you wouldn't
have that problem, now would you? Anyone with an IQ of 12 or higher can use
Google Groups to see that the majority of users post according to the
RFC's, and the ones that don't are either:
A.) Selfish, immature, repulsive fuckwits - like you.
B.) Un-educated. (this is where we come in, to teach the newbies the
correct way to post their messages to be more effectively understood by a
vast group of readers)
C.) Trolls. Like you.
The RFC's make communicating via a textual interface *easier*, more
efficent, and..somtimes..even fun. Until some fuckwit like you opens their
maw to regurgitate their stupidity al over the virtual landscape again.
> I would much rather read the new post
That's called "sorting".
Scorefiles can do that for you.
> and if I am interested I can go on to read the old post beneath it.
If a post is properly trimmed, they'll only be two lines apart.
> ( and yes, this is an example of what and why I hate)
That's becuase you didn't follow the RFC's by trimming away everything that
wasn't relevant to youyr reply. Just like the RFC's tell you to.
Nice try, Bill.
STFU until you GAFC.
- --
Cibao Cu' Ali G. Colibri | Fortune's real live weird band names #563:
GnuPG Pub Key EC9F1D51 -o) | Radical Vulvetomy
Linux Kernel 2.4.20 /\\ |
Slackware 8.1 *w00t* _\_v |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.3.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+n3YWJ+aEAOyfHVERAkHbAJ9MaUS3v75pDcvM2reMQUHeI2LseQCePRfa
Fd3qKhdu0QhYDU3P8Mw+iSk=
=XeNA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Chris Share
> He is just someone who got rejected when he applied for a job withe the
> police and is now trying to become an internet cop. There is no rule re
> "top/bottom/sideways/greek/" posting, except what a few malcontents seem
> to want to impose. I hate bottom posting-- haveing to wade through tons
> of old garbage to see the new posting which is usually not worth the
> effort. I would much rather read the new post and if I am interested I
> can go on to read the old post beneath it.
English is read from top to bottom, thus it makes sense to put new text
under the old one.
e.g.
>>What do you call a man with a spade on his head?
>I don't know, what?
Doug.
makes much more sense than:
Big holes all over australia.
>I don't know, what?
>>What do you get if you cross a kangaroo with an elephant?
And you don't have to wade though anything - bottom
posting with no snipping is just as bad as top posting.
There are conventions that bottom posting is best, with proper snipping,
because over the last 25 years of usenet, that's what's been found to be
easiest to read.
chris
Sybren Stuvel
> And you don't have to wade though anything - bottom posting with no
> snipping is just as bad as top posting.
So true...