WUBI and Kubuntu

[Juan Wei]

I had previously installed Ubuntu in a directory of my Windows 8 laptop
using wubi as contained on the DVD.

When I attempted to do a similar thing with Kubuntu on my Win 7 desktop,
I ran into a screen of choices, the default being:

Guided - resize SCSI7 (0,0,0), partition #1 (sdb) and use freed space.

(The others all said "use entire disk".)

This doesn't sound like "install into a Windows directory". Do I have
the wrong distribution, or is Kubuntu not capable of the kind of
installation I want?

Thank you.

[Juan Wei]

Never mind.

Juan Wei has written on 3/6/2013 9:42 PM:

[J G Miller]

On Friday, March 8th, 2013, at 16:15:27h -0500, Juan Wei advised:

> Never mind.


Ever get that feeling of "deja-vu"?


Subject: Re: PCLOS
From: Juan Wei <juan...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:00:19 -0500
Message-ID: <kg5qqt$8o4$1...@dont-email.me>
References: <kg5niu$jkv$1...@dont-email.me> <kg5on0$rpp$1...@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 1103
Lines: 1
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Path:
news.vo.lu!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx05.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:59:42 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="dafd1c1dde38372cb92c542d9f47ca01"; logging-data="8964";
mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19yHEskG2E2Fb7pdkJ+NSlT"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215
Thunderbird/17.0.3
In-Reply-To: <kg5on0$rpp$1...@dont-email.me>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/O+X7qkDWm0vI71kwJBUaMV0HLs=
Xref: vo.lu comp.os.linux.misc:621811
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Never mind.

[Juan Wei]

What goes around... :-)

J G Miller has written on 3/8/2013 5:04 PM:

[J G Miller]

On Friday, March 8thm 2013, at 17:28:35h -0500, Juan Wei explained:

> What goes around... :-)

Great response ;) ;) ;)

Glad you got your problem resolved, but remember it is better
to install GNU/Linux as a separate installation, available
via boot options with GRUB, and not as Wubi.

<http://blog.asgaard.co.UK/2012/10/24/wubi-is-not-a-great-experience-slow>

[Juan Wei]

J G Miller has written on 3/9/2013 12:02 PM:

Wubi is fine for what I want -- demonstrating Linux to old people with
old computers.

I don't want to have to repartition my desktop HD as it already has 3
data partitions and I'm concerned about losing data.

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, March 9th, 2013, 12:43:38h -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> I don't want to have to repartition my desktop HD as it already has 3
> data partitions and I'm concerned about losing data.

Well you do have to be very careful, but it could be done.

Regardless, here is another suggestion, if you can afford an
external USB disk..

Install GNU/Linux on that (or even several different versions)
and boot off that if your desktop PC is capable of booting from
a USB device.

If your desktop PC BIOS does not support booting from a USB
device, then install the Plop Boot Manager which will allow
you to do just that.

<http://www.plop.AT/en/bootmanagers.html>

Of course if your desktop PC has an e-SATA connection then
you could use any suitable SATA disk in an e-SATA enclosure
and get maximum speed performance and your BIOS will see it
as "just another disk".

You could then install a number of different GNU/Linux distributions
on the external device and try them out for yourself and give
demonstrations to young people with old computers and old people
with new computers as well.

[Juan Wei]

J G Miller has written on 3/9/2013 2:58 PM:

> On Saturday, March 9th, 2013, 12:43:38h -0500, Juan Wei wrote:
>
>> I don't want to have to repartition my desktop HD as it already has 3
>> data partitions and I'm concerned about losing data.
>
> Well you do have to be very careful, but it could be done.
>
> Regardless, here is another suggestion, if you can afford an
> external USB disk..
>
> Install GNU/Linux on that (or even several different versions)
> and boot off that if your desktop PC is capable of booting from
> a USB device.

Would that HD have to be devoted to Linux? I.e., after booting to
Windows, could I then plug it in and use it as an ordinary HD?

> If your desktop PC BIOS does not support booting from a USB
> device, then install the Plop Boot Manager which will allow
> you to do just that.
>
> <http://www.plop.AT/en/bootmanagers.html>
>
> Of course if your desktop PC has an e-SATA connection then
> you could use any suitable SATA disk in an e-SATA enclosure
> and get maximum speed performance and your BIOS will see it
> as "just another disk".

I wonder if my laptop has that connection.

> You could then install a number of different GNU/Linux distributions
> on the external device and try them out for yourself and give
> demonstrations to young people with old computers and old people
> with new computers as well.

:-) I live in an over-55 community.

[Aragorn]

On Sunday 10 March 2013 03:54, Juan Wei conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.setup...

> J G Miller has written on 3/9/2013 2:58 PM:
>

>> Regardless, here is another suggestion, if you can afford an
>> external USB disk..
>>
>> Install GNU/Linux on that (or even several different versions)
>> and boot off that if your desktop PC is capable of booting from
>> a USB device.
>
> Would that HD have to be devoted to Linux?

That is up to you.

> I.e., after booting to Windows, could I then plug it in and use it as
> an ordinary HD?

That depends on how you partition the device. Windows does not
recognize UNIX-style filesystems, so you would have to create a
partition on the device with a filesystem that Windows does recognize -
e.g. NTFS or FAT32 - and then this partition can be used in Windows as
well.

--
= Aragorn =

http://www.linuxcounter.net - registrant #223157

[Aragorn]

On Sunday 10 March 2013 04:03, Aragorn conveyed the following to

comp.os.linux.setup...

> On Sunday 10 March 2013 03:54, Juan Wei conveyed the following to
> comp.os.linux.setup...
>
>> J G Miller has written on 3/9/2013 2:58 PM:
>>
>>> Regardless, here is another suggestion, if you can afford an
>>> external USB disk..
>>>
>>> Install GNU/Linux on that (or even several different versions)
>>> and boot off that if your desktop PC is capable of booting from
>>> a USB device.
>>
>> Would that HD have to be devoted to Linux?
>
> That is up to you.
>
>> I.e., after booting to Windows, could I then plug it in and use it as
>> an ordinary HD?
>
> That depends on how you partition the device. Windows does not
> recognize UNIX-style filesystems, so you would have to create a
> partition on the device with a filesystem that Windows does recognize
> - e.g. NTFS or FAT32 - and then this partition can be used in Windows
> as well.

Just to rule out ambiguity in the above paragraph, let me rephrase
that...

Next to creating one or multiple GNU/Linux partitions on the device,
you would _also_ have to create a partition on it with a filesystem
which Windows can read and write to, such as NTFS or vfat (FAT32).

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, March 9th, 2013, at 21:54:05h -0500, Juan Wei asked:

> Would that HD have to be devoted to Linux? I.e., after booting to
> Windows, could I then plug it in and use it as an ordinary HD?

The term "ordinary HD" is meaningless.

Let me explain.

1) You have an HD.

2) As you see fit, you then create partitions on the hard disk.
Under the Windoze scheme, partitions on hard disks are named
C:, D:, E:, F: etc. Under GNU/Linux they are named as
hd{LETTER}{number} where each hard disk has a different letter,
eg hda for the first, hdb for the second, and each partition
has a number, 0 for the first primary, 1 for the second primary,
5 for the first logical, 6 for the second logical.

3) On any primary or logical partition you can then create a
file system. So for Windoze system you can have ancient FAT16,
newer FAT32, or NTFS, For GNU/Linux systems, the usual choice
of file system is now ext4, but other alternatives exist eg xfs.

4) When you boot into windows, it can by default only see FAT16,
FAT32, NTFS file systems. (You can install some software which
will allow Windoze to see ext4 file systems, but only safely
as read only.)

So depending on how you carve up an external hard disk, and if
you create an NTFS file system on one of the partitions on that
hard disk, you can use it just as another regular file system
on Windoze.

An example would be, you buy an external 2 GB disk. You create
a first partition of say 1 GB and create an NTFS file system.
You can then use that file system just as an "ordinary HD".
The remaining 1 GB could then be carved up into various partitions
on which you install Mint, Fedora, whatever, according to your
preferences, test schedule or whatever.

How you use the space on the HD is entirely up to you and
what you need to use it for ;)

> I wonder if my laptop has that connection.

Aha, now you say laptop as opposed to desktop PC.
I may be mistaken, but I do not think that laptops
usually have eSATA (e as in external) connections,
just USB.

If you are considering buying an external USB disk,
consider getting a v3 if your system supports it,
or you will be buying or using it with a new system
which will support v3 in the not too distant future.

[Juan Wei]

J G Miller has written on 3/9/2013 2:58 PM:

Why wouldn't I just use a live CD of the distro that I want to demonstrate?

[Bobbie Sellers]

Then you will merely be operating, unless you have adequate memory, at
the speed the DVD can load the parts of the OS. Even with
adequate memory the system can appear to operate at less than Windows
speeds. So for a real demonstration you need a hard disk install
and even over a USB link it will be faster than the live-CD/DVD.

I hope that you have backed up your data partitions on
your present machine. You said you are afraid of losing data
and I immediately wondered why you are not backing up your data
to an external hard drive.

bliss

[Juan Wei]

Bobbie Sellers has written on 3/10/2013 5:45 PM:

> On 03/10/2013 02:35 PM, Juan Wei wrote:
>> Why wouldn't I just use a live CD of the distro that I want to demonstrate?
>
> Then you will merely be operating, unless you have adequate memory, at
> the speed the DVD can load the parts of the OS. Even with
> adequate memory the system can appear to operate at less than Windows
> speeds. So for a real demonstration you need a hard disk install
> and even over a USB link it will be faster than the live-CD/DVD.

I don't need a real demonstration for old people. :-)

> I hope that you have backed up your data partitions on
> your present machine. You said you are afraid of losing data
> and I immediately wondered why you are not backing up your data
> to an external hard drive.

I should have said that I was concerned about the amount of time it
would take to restore my computer to its previous state if I somehow
screwed up the partitions. :-) Yes, I have backups.

Question: if I do an image backup and write it to a different drive
before I start screwing with partitions, can I restore my original
partitions from the image?

[Aragorn]

On Sunday 10 March 2013 19:34, J G Miller conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.setup...

> 2) As you see fit, you then create partitions on the hard disk.
> Under the Windoze scheme, partitions on hard disks are named
> C:, D:, E:, F: etc. Under GNU/Linux they are named as
> hd{LETTER}{number} where each hard disk has a different letter,
> eg hda for the first, hdb for the second, and each partition
> has a number, 0 for the first primary, 1 for the second primary,
> 5 for the first logical, 6 for the second logical.

I apologize for engage in pedantry here, but the above is not entirely
correct, and mixes up different aspects of how the Linux kernel handles
multiple filesystems with how the GRUB bootloader does that. GRUB2 is
inconsistent in this for that matter, so I won't be getting into the
details of that now, but for the sake of the OP, I'm going to be a
little more elaborate on this subject...

In Microsoft Windows, one does indeed have the concept of drive letters,
which dates back to the time when microcomputers used floppy disks and
did not have hard disk support. Often, such machines only had a single
floppy drive, and drive letters thus facilitated the copying of files
from one floppy disk to another using only a single floppy drive.
Insofar as I know, CP/M - upon which MS-DOS was based - was the first
operating system to feature drive letters, and this practice then
propagated through DOS itself, and via OS/2 into Windows.

These drive letters are assigned so that C: is always assigned to the
active primary partition - i.e. the primary partition marked as bootable
in the MBR - on the first hard disk, and if there are multiple hard
disks in or attached to the machine, then the alphabetic sequence
continues with the active primary partitions (if present) on each of the
other hard disks, and only then (or if none were found) with the logical
partitions in the extended partition container on the first hard disk
again, then the logical partitions in an extended partition container on
any additional hard disks, and then onto removable devices - except for
floppy disks, which have drive letters A: and B: - and finally, network
storage volumes. The NT-based Windows versions - i.e. Windows NT
proper, Windows 2000, Windows XP and all later versions of Windows -
allow one to change that order.

Now, GNU/Linux has different ways of dealing with hard disks and
partitions. From the user's point of view, GNU/Linux - in being a UNIX
clone - does not present disk storage by way of distinct volumes, but
rather by way of a uniform directory hierarchy in which the different
storage volumes are transparently mounted onto existing directories.
Several of the directories may have their contents physically living on
other partitions than the root filesystem, whether it's on the same hard
disk drive, on partitions of another hard disk drive, or even somewhere
on a filesystem exported by another computer over the network, but the
main directory tree will always be the same to the user.

From the system's own point of view however, there are of course
different locations for these filesystems, represented to userspace by
the Linux kernel via an abstraction layer. This abstraction layer is
the /dev directory, which contains so-called "device special files",
each of which represents certain aspects of the hardware: disk drives,
disk partitions, input/output terminals, pointing devices, serial ports,
et al. Some of these devices are called character devices, and others
are block devices, depending on how they handle the data. In UNIX
systems like GNU/Linux, literally everything is treated by the system
itself as being a stream of data, and every such stream of data is
presented to userspace - i.e. to the user and to applications - as being
"a file". That's what /dev is for. ;-)

Disks and filesystems are all represented as block devices under /dev.
The disks themselves have traditionally always been called /dev/hda,
/dev/hdb, et al, for PATA-style devices (including optical drives and
ZIP drives) and /dev/sda, /dev/sdb, et al, for SATA, SCSI, SAS, USB and
other hard disks.

However, while the kernel does still feature support for the old ATA
code which worked this way, the newer kernels all use the libata2 code,
which designates all hard disks via the /dev/sd? block devices - optical
drives (and drives which identify themselves as such) will be /dev/sr? -
and partitions on such drives with /dev/sd1n, where "n" is a number
starting at 1. So /dev/sda is the first hard disk found in the system,
and /dev/sda1 is the first primary partition found on that hard disk.

On account of partition numbering, there are currently two mainstream
approaches. The first one is the legacy BIOS MBR partition table, and
in that case, partition numbers 1 through 4 are reserved for primary
partitions, while logical partitions in an extended partition container
- which itself is one of those four primary partitions - will always
start with number 5.

However, due to the limitations of a BIOS MBR partition table in
combination with libata2, one cannot *use* more than 15 partition
numbers per drive (including the one for the extended partition
container itself), even if more partitions exist on the same storage
device. This is why GUID partition tables (abbreviated to GPT) were
created.

GPT does away with the legacy BIOS MBR partition tables, and supports up
to 128 partitions per physical storage device, without requiring the
distinction between primary and logical partitions. The Linux kernel
does have full support for GPT, and partitioning tools such as gparted
also have support for creating such partitions.

Now, on account of the GRUB bootloader, the designation for drives and
partitions is different, because GRUB wasn't to work with GNU/Linux
specifically, but with lots of other operating systems as well.
Therefore, GRUB uses its own notation, and in GRUB speak, "(hd0)" is the
notation for the first hard disk, and "(hd0,0)" for the first primary
partition on the first hard disk. GRUB2 deviates from that by starting
the partition numbering at 1 instead of 0 (as the Linux kernel does),
but not the actual drive numbering, which still starts at 0.

As I wrote higher up already, UNIX operating systems use a uniform
directory hierarchy, without any distinction _towards the user_ between
volumes. This is because at system boot time, the various block devices
representing storage are /mounted/ into the tree. Not everything is
mounted automatically, because not everything may actually contain a
usable storage device, e.g. your optical drives, or removable storage
devices attached via USB.

The syntax is always to mount a block device _on_ a directory. Once
mounted, whatever was in that directory before the mounting is no longer
visible, and what resides on the block device - read: filesystem -
appears to be /in/ the directory it is mounted on.

As an example, say that you have created a separate partition for your
user files - documents, downloads, etc. - and that this separate
partition has the block device special file /dev/sd8. Upon boot, the
system will read the file /etc/fstab, which is a simple plain text
database of block devices and where and how they are to be mounted.
Records which have "noauto" in their mount options will be not be
mounted automatically at boot, but can be mounted into the tree at some
later point.

Not all of the directories in the root directory contain any actual
files which exist on disk. For instance, /proc and /sys are mountpoints
for two special virtual filesystems which are needed by the system, and
their contents may look like files when you look at them, but they are
virtual, i.e. they exist only in RAM, and they are interfaces with the
kernel. The contents of /tmp on the other hand may live either on the
physical root filesystem, or on another partition, or even in virtual
memory - which means that it exists in RAM but it can be swapped out -
if /tmp is set up as a mountpoint for a tmpfs filesystem.

/dev is another such filesystem. In older UNIX versions, /dev was just
a directory on the root filesystem, and the device special files were
created in there. In GNU/Linux however, starting with the Linux 2.6
kernel generation, /dev as a directory still exists on the root
filesystem - it is a mountpoint - but its contents now exist in virtual
memory, and are managed by a userspace daemon called udev. udev creates
and deletes device special files on the fly as needed by the system when
new hardware is being plugged in or removed, and it is easier and more
efficient then that these device special files are not created on or
deleted from a physical hard disk, but instead in virtual memory. This
is why the population of the /dev directory in modern GNU/Linux systems
lives in virtual memory, on a tmpfs filesystem, albeit that in even more
recent kernels, this is now a special version of a tmpfs, called
devtmpfs, which gets created by the kernel itself as the machine boots.

If you use your computer as a multi-boot machine with both GNU/Linux and
Microsoft Windows, then your Windows partition(s) will often be mounted
into the tree at /mnt/windows, /mnt/win_c, or something of the likes, so
that you have access to those files from within GNU/Linux. Likewise,
removable media are typically mounted to /media/cdrom, /media/thumb, and
similar directories.

However, as neither Microsoft Windows nor any of its supported
filesystems support UNIX/POSIX file permissions and file ownerships, the
permissions and ownerships you see on the files and directories on a
mounted Windows filesystem when looking at it from within GNU/Linux, are
in fact faked during the mounting and cannot be altered while said
Windows filesystem is mounted, nor will these permissions be saved on
the actual physical filesystem. This is because GNU/Linux is a UNIX-
family operating system, which demands the existence of such permissions
and ownerships - it is after all a genuine multi-user operating system
by design - and so it needs to have a set of permissions and ownerships
to work with, even on such non-UNIX filesystems. Ergo, it assigns fake
- or perhaps more correctly worded, "virtual" - permissions to the
contents of such a non-UNIX filesystem.

The virtual permissions and ownerships are thus applied as an overlay
onto the physical Windows volume in the virtual filesystem layer of the
Linux kernel when the volume is mounted, and /etc/fstab is one of the
places where the fake permissions and ownerships for such a Windows
volume can be defined. UNIX/POSIX-style filesystems do not require this
of course - and the mount commands for these do not even support virtual
permissions - because they have on-disk permissions and ownerships,
stored in what is called "the inode", i.e. the information node for a
filesystem entry such as a file, a device special file, a directory, a
symbolic link, a named pipe, et al.

All of the above may sound very technical and is not even complete, but
I felt it necessary to elaborate somewhat on this subject - as an
addendum to all other advice which has already been given to the OP -
because some of the information given was incorrect or misleading.

[Aragorn]

On Sunday 10 March 2013 23:21, Aragorn conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.setup...

> Disks and filesystems are all represented as block devices under /dev.
> The disks themselves have traditionally always been called /dev/hda,
> /dev/hdb, et al, for PATA-style devices (including optical drives and
> ZIP drives) and /dev/sda, /dev/sdb, et al, for SATA, SCSI, SAS, USB
> and other hard disks.
>
> However, while the kernel does still feature support for the old ATA
> code which worked this way, the newer kernels all use the libata2
> code, which designates all hard disks via the /dev/sd? block devices -
> optical drives (and drives which identify themselves as such) will be
> /dev/sr? - and partitions on such drives with /dev/sd1n, where "n" is

^^^^
That should read "/dev/sda1", where "a" is the order of the disk itself,
and 1 is the order of the partition on the disk.

My apologies; I was distracted by a long-distance communication while I
was typing up this post.

[Aragorn]

On Sunday 10 March 2013 23:21, Aragorn conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.setup...

> The syntax is always to mount a block device _on_ a directory. Once
> mounted, whatever was in that directory before the mounting is no
> longer visible, and what resides on the block device - read:
> filesystem - appears to be /in/ the directory it is mounted on.
>
> As an example, say that you have created a separate partition for your
> user files - documents, downloads, etc. - and that this separate
> partition has the block device special file /dev/sd8. Upon boot, the
> system will read the file /etc/fstab, which is a simple plain text
> database of block devices and where and how they are to be mounted.
> Records which have "noauto" in their mount options will be not be
> mounted automatically at boot, but can be mounted into the tree at
> some later point.

Adding a missing sentence here:

As such, upon boot, the system will read /etc/fstab and will
see that you have a record there for mounting /dev/sda8 onto
/home. The system will then execute this mount, and from then
on, your own personal files can be found under /home/yourname.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 10/03/13 22:21, Aragorn wrote:

> Insofar as I know, CP/M - upon which MS-DOS was based - was the first
> operating system to feature drive letters, and this practice then
> propagated through DOS itself, and via OS/2 into Windows.
>

< I think it goes back further than that: Intel had an 8080 development
kit with floppies..and CP/M was a sort of version of that.

> As I wrote higher up already, UNIX operating systems use a uniform
> directory hierarchy, without any distinction _towards the user_ between
> volumes. This is because at system boot time, the various block devices
> representing storage are /mounted/ into the tree. Not everything is
> mounted automatically, because not everything may actually contain a
> usable storage device, e.g. your optical drives, or removable storage
> devices attached via USB.

There is a user level distinction. Hard links cannot span volumes

Also NFS does not span volumes via symbolic links..

So unfortunately the hardware reality is not completely hidden in user
space.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

[Aragorn]

On Monday 11 March 2013 00:17, The Natural Philosopher conveyed the
following to comp.os.linux.setup...

> On 10/03/13 22:21, Aragorn wrote:
>
>> Insofar as I know, CP/M - upon which MS-DOS was based - was the first
>> operating system to feature drive letters, and this practice then
>> propagated through DOS itself, and via OS/2 into Windows.
>
> I think it goes back further than that: Intel had an 8080
> development kit with floppies..and CP/M was a sort of version of that.

Ah, okay. I didn't know about that. As far as I myself knew, CP/M was
the first operating system to actually use drive letters. ;-)

>> As I wrote higher up already, UNIX operating systems use a uniform
>> directory hierarchy, without any distinction _towards the user_
>> between volumes. This is because at system boot time, the various
>> block devices representing storage are /mounted/ into the tree. Not
>> everything is mounted automatically, because not everything may
>> actually contain a usable storage device, e.g. your optical drives,
>> or removable storage devices attached via USB.
>
> There is a user level distinction. Hard links cannot span volumes

That is true. However, while hard links are very useful - and I hope
they will not be abandoned - there is a general tendency among most
GNU/Linux distributions to promote the use of symbolic links only these
days.

> Also NFS does not span volumes via symbolic links..

True again.

> So unfortunately the hardware reality is not completely hidden in user
> space.

Not completely hidden, no. But one /could/ say "for all intents and
purposes". ;-)

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 10/03/13 23:27, Aragorn wrote:
> On Monday 11 March 2013 00:17, The Natural Philosopher conveyed the
> following to comp.os.linux.setup...
>
>> On 10/03/13 22:21, Aragorn wrote:
>>
>>> Insofar as I know, CP/M - upon which MS-DOS was based - was the first
>>> operating system to feature drive letters, and this practice then
>>> propagated through DOS itself, and via OS/2 into Windows.
>>
>> I think it goes back further than that: Intel had an 8080
>> development kit with floppies..and CP/M was a sort of version of that.
>
> Ah, okay. I didn't know about that. As far as I myself knew, CP/M was
> the first operating system to actually use drive letters. ;-)
>

I was only half right. According to Wiki teh drive letter goes back to
IBM CMS operating system. the intel MDS80 had :XX: specifying disks.

I cant remember what VMS had.

>>> As I wrote higher up already, UNIX operating systems use a uniform
>>> directory hierarchy, without any distinction _towards the user_
>>> between volumes. This is because at system boot time, the various
>>> block devices representing storage are /mounted/ into the tree. Not
>>> everything is mounted automatically, because not everything may
>>> actually contain a usable storage device, e.g. your optical drives,
>>> or removable storage devices attached via USB.
>>
>> There is a user level distinction. Hard links cannot span volumes
>
> That is true. However, while hard links are very useful - and I hope
> they will not be abandoned - there is a general tendency among most
> GNU/Linux distributions to promote the use of symbolic links only these
> days.
>
>> Also NFS does not span volumes via symbolic links..
>
> True again.
>
>> So unfortunately the hardware reality is not completely hidden in user
>> space.
>
> Not completely hidden, no. But one /could/ say "for all intents and
> purposes". ;-)
>

well that depends on the intent and the purpose...

[J G Miller]

On Sunday, March 10th, 2013, at 18:34:42h +0000, J G Miller wrote:

> and each partition has a number, 0 for the first primary,
> 1 for the second primary,

That should of course have been 1 for the first, 2 for the second,
eg

/dev/sda1 /dev/sda2 <--- two primary partitions
/dev/sdb1 /dev/sdb5 /dev/sdb6 <--- one primary and two logical

[J G Miller]

On Sunday, March 10th, 2013, at 18:04:33h -0400, Juan Wei advised:

> I don't need a real demonstration for old people. :-)

But with a slow DVD booting to the desktop, some of them
will have fallen asleep by the time the desktop appears ;)

[Juan Wei]

J G Miller has written on 3/11/2013 11:24 AM:

Maybe even died! ;-)

[The Natural Philosopher]

Took me the best part of an hour to boot Linux Mint on my laptop from
DVD :-)

Now it's installed it's a couple of minutes. I admit it now has more RAM
....