prepping hd for dual boot (partitioning)

hello again, suselords

I’ve successfully got my netbook to dualboot win7 and opensuse. The only problem I’m having is how to setup my network settings. I read somewhere here that I need to learn how to configure ifap.

Anyway what I really wanted to ask was about my partitioning choices. The hd was 350gb so I partitioned it this way:

sda1 - 40gb - ntfs - windows
sda2 - 40gb - ex4 - opensuse
sda3 - 3gb - linux-swap - the swap thing
sda4 - ???gb - fat32 - backup

The fat32 part was what I wasn’t sure of. I’ve been reading around all day that linux can’t read/write on ntfs and so I caved in and set it to fat 32. Is it all right? Can I leave those setting as it is?

It certainly can, check out ntfs-3g.
The default setup usually allows only reading, but that is related to access permissions, and not the actual ability of the OS to read or write (or execute) on ntfs.
I have my windows installed on partitions (with ntfs) that I mount normally and I can read and write files to/from them.

It’s the default installation settings (at least on the KDE live CD I used).

Reki Kuramori wrote:
> hello again, suselords
>
> I’ve successfully got my netbook to dualboot win7 and opensuse. The
> only problem I’m having is how to setup my network settings. I read
> somewhere here that I need to learn how to configure ifap.

You’re probably thinking of ifup, but I believe Network Manager might be
a better choice for your case.

> Anyway what I really wanted to ask was about my partitioning choices.
> The hd was 350gb so I partitioned it this way:
>
> sda1 - 40gb - ntfs - windows
> sda2 - 40gb - ex4 - opensuse
> sda3 - 3gb - linux-swap - the swap thing
> sda4 - ???gb - fat32 - backup
>
> The fat32 part was what I wasn’t sure of. I’ve been reading around all
> day that linux can’t read/write on ntfs and so I caved in and set it to
> fat 32. Is it all right? Can I leave those setting as it is?

It’s usable but I wouldn’t recommend using a fat32 partition to backup a
Linux system. Nor would I use NTFS for backing up Linux. It’s better to
use a native Linux filesystem that understands all the permissions and
other features that Linux uses.

Of course, it all depends how you are going to back up both your Linux
and your Windows systems. And where will you keep the data that needs to
be backed-up? Does it need to be shared between the two systems?

I do not know where you want to use that sda4 for. Some sort of backup it seems, but backup of what. When you wan to backup Linux things then you should not use a non-Linux file system. First, why go for a non-Limux file system when you want Linux usage? Second, a non Linux file system misses a lot of the features that are normaly used by Unix/Linux and copying files to them will loose those things (like owner/group/permissions). On restore that is an extra burden.

Linux can use non-Linux file systems but that is only done to make it possible to exchange data with non-Linux systems. Not as an one-to-one replacement of Linux file systems

Also, I do not know why you decided to use this partition. Normaly a seperate partition for /home is recommended (and it is the installers default). This makes it much more easy at (re)installation of the system (new versions) to keep your users data unharmed.

And to begin with, you talk about “prepping hd for dual boot (partitioning)”. In fact you should not “prepp” your disk. You should prepp yourself in a way that you know what you want when the installer runs. When your Windows is in that one partition and the rest of the disk is unused (no partitions there at all), it will be easy for the installer to offer you a nice partitioning. Most probably it will propose to create an extended partition, with three logical partitions in it: one for Swap, one for / and one for /home. If you then rather want a smaller for /home and one for other things (backup), you only have to go to expert mode and change there.

When on the contrary you fill up your disk with all sorts of partitions you think are usefull for the installer, the installer will come to the conclusion that there is no free space on the disk. Of course you can then go into expert mode and tell what you want to be done, but many beginners here have torn their hair out while runninng in circles because they did not understand that partitions allready made are not free space anymore.

ohhh **** oh ****. now I get it

>Does it need to be shared between the two systems?
I seriously thought it would be that convenient. I got the idea from someone’s post here to make 4 drives with the 4th to become backup. I realized just now why he labeled that drive “/home”. I just assumed that’s what he generally labels his backup drive; I didn’t realize it was intended to be completely just house linux output and stuff.

>And to begin with, you talk about “prepping hd for dual boot (partitioning)”. In fact you should not “prepp” your disk.
Oh ****, I knew something was up when the suse installer was proposing partitions for me. Now this time I didn’t realize it would be that convenient.

brb I’ll try it again. thanks, susebros.

Moment of enlightenment :slight_smile:

Do not hesitate to ask here if you are in doubt!

On 2012-09-21 13:06, Reki Kuramori wrote:
> The fat32 part was what I wasn’t sure of. I’ve been reading around all
> day that linux can’t read/write on ntfs

It certainly can write, since several years ago. You have been reading too old stuff.

> I seriously thought it would be that convenient. I got the idea from
> someone’s post here to make 4 drives with the 4th to become backup. I
> realized just now why he labeled that drive “/home”. I just assumed
> that’s what he generally labels his backup drive; I didn’t realize it
> was intended to be completely just house linux output and stuff.

/home is /home, not backup.


Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)