Formating Drive For W7 And Mint10

[bangkokburning]

How shoud I set up my drives if I wish to run the following:

Mint10 (about 12.5gb) primary os

W7 (about 200gb)

Scratch (about 12.5gb) -WHAT FORMATING? Will be used for W7 DL and fle transf to Mint

*What format is good for externals that I can swap between OS's??

I want to use Mint10 for daily use and W7 for iTunes, utilities and things I can't do in Unix.

I understand to install W7 first but how should I set up the drives? I want to use First block of partitions

The plan in my melon:

In GParted -

Allocate three areas of space, unformatted

Allocate first 20gb to Mint

Second block to W7

Last block for use both in W7/Mint (formatting)

I am aware I get four primary parts.

Just the basics would be great. Not finding what I'm looking for on theInternetS.

Thanks

[dave_boo]

First suggestion I would have is to make four partitions so that your /home can be migrated easily.

If you're planning on sharing a partition between Linux Mint and Win7 than the only option you really have is NTFS. Granted Linux can create a FAT32 partition large enough, but do you want to trust your data on such a filesystem?

I would recommend looking a QEMU or VMware though; you just create a virtual machine and then Win7 will run on top of Mint. Granted you won't be playing games on it, and it's problematic if you're reinstalling an OEM version of Win7, but it's something to consider.

Also of concern is the fact that if you do in fact use Win7 on a partition you should consider that disks are fastest closest to the edge. So whatever partitions you want the most speed out of should be the first ones. Also I wouldn't recommend more than about 30 GB for Win7's primary partition. You can always reroute your 'My Documents' folder to the shared partition.

[thaimite]

I agree with all of the above except I find Virtualbox much better than VMware.

I have the luxury of having a CVMware professional working alongside me, but despite his help I still found I got on much better with Virtualbox.

Tip instalit direct from the VirtualBox web site and not the respository as some features are not available in the repository version.. It is still free.

I am not an Itunes fan (not an ianything fan), but I believe there are several Linux programs that let you transfer files to and from these devices

[Cloggie]

Install Windows 7 on one partition / your whole hard drive using NTFS.

Download and install Virtualbox from www.virtualbox.org for Windows.

In Virtualbox create 'PC's' so you can play around with Mint / Ubuntu and other Linux versions.

Later when you are more experienced with Linux you can do it the other way around (install Windows in Virtualbox under Linux) OR in case you don't like Linux, uninstall Virtualbox and you still have a Windows PC left without all kind of partitions.

If you run Linux (Mint, Ubuntu whatever) in Virtualbox, you can still access Windows 7 using Guest Additions (is part of Virtualbox).

Have fun as it is fun to work with Mint, my best experience ever with software.

[thaimite]

The only problem with the above good advice is that I had all sorts of problems getting the latest Ubuntu Natty with the Unity Interface to play well in Virtual box.

Granted it was in Beta at the time and these issues maybe sorted. However Ubuntu with KDE or Gnome 2 Interface works well

For me Ubuntu is my prime OS and I do it the other way round, All options are available, but a virtual machine is much easier unless you want to play games on it, and I am sure that will come soon.

[colinscarr]

You asked about formatting.

Start with NTFS on the whole drive, Install Windows 7

Using Gparted or similar, format a partition in EXT4 format for Mint. Add more EXT4 partitions if you also want to install further versions of Linux.

Store files you want to access from both Linux and Windows on an NTFS partition, because Windows can't 'see' EXT4 and reports your drive as being smaller than it really is.

Have fun.

[Supernova]

I have a 160GB hard drive partitioned as follows:

Primary Partition #1 (30 GB)

- NTFS

- Windows 7

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

--- EXTENDED ---

Logical Partition #1 (1 GB)

- Linux Swap

Logical Partition #2 (103 GB)

- NTFS

* shared partition Win7/Mint

[bangkokburning]

Wow, thanks for so much support so quickly.

I can always change it up later. This is my first (second) Mint/Linux install and my first dual boot install (and on a netbook no less).

VM might be a way to go but that's not for me now, especially in Linux environment.

Colin, that is a bit exotic for me at the moment. I'd rather not have - and I'd rather that Windows can see and calculate. Once the computer is stable (relatively), I can do some serious reading. That does make sense and ifor me a whole new way of partitioning.

I'm going to do something like what Supernova had suggested Iguess I am OK with W7 in the first part even though I will be presumably using it least.

Primary Partition #1 (30 GB)

- NTFS

- Windows 7

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

--- EXTENDED ---

Logical Partition #1 (1 GB)

- Linux Swap

Logical Partition #2 (103 GB)

- NTFS

* shared partition Win7/Mint

>>>Is this just a regular NTFS part or do I need do anything to share it out?

**If the primary use of Logical Part#2 is for Mp3 files, used in Windows. How might this change this if at all?

What would be good to use for labels on the Linux partitions?

What should additional external drives be formatted as, presumably NTFS/Logical?

BTW - What formatting should USB keys be in to use in Windows/Linux? I made a few in FAT32 - seemed to work fine. IE > W7 boot key, Mint boot key in FAT32

Thanks!

[dave_boo]

Wow, thanks for so much support so quickly.

I can always change it up later. This is my first (second) Mint/Linux install and my first dual boot install (and on a netbook no less).

VM might be a way to go but that's not for me now, especially in Linux environment.

Colin, that is a bit exotic for me at the moment. I'd rather not have - and I'd rather that Windows can see and calculate. Once the computer is stable (relatively), I can do some serious reading. That does make sense and ifor me a whole new way of partitioning.

I'm going to do something like what Supernova had suggested Iguess I am OK with W7 in the first part even though I will be presumably using it least.

Primary Partition #1 (30 GB)

- NTFS

- Windows 7

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

--- EXTENDED ---

Logical Partition #1 (1 GB)

- Linux Swap

Logical Partition #2 (103 GB)

- NTFS

* shared partition Win7/Mint

>>>Is this just a regular NTFS part or do I need do anything to share it out?

**If the primary use of Logical Part#2 is for Mp3 files, used in Windows. How might this change this if at all?

What would be good to use for labels on the Linux partitions?

What should additional external drives be formatted as, presumably NTFS/Logical?

BTW - What formatting should USB keys be in to use in Windows/Linux? I made a few in FAT32 - seemed to work fine. IE > W7 boot key, Mint boot key in FAT32

Thanks!

I always install grub to the MBR...why would you want it on a Windows partition?

And yes, you will have to install Windows first. Well actually I don't know if that's a requirement for Win7, but all the old Windows would ignore all other installed non-Windows OS and write its own MBR thus screwing the pooch if you already had BeOS or Linux or whatever...

And I was serious about installing your /home to a seperate partition. When you upgrade to a real distro (SuSE at least and Slackware if you feel like really using Linux) it's much easier to keep all the stuff you've downloaded, saved, transcoded, etc.

I might catch some crap for this suggestion, but since you're installing on such a small hdd, why not cut down the size of your /swap partition. If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

I would also recommend going to a set swapfile size for Win7 on your shared partition. Yes it would be faster on /dev/sda1, but you don't want to be running out of room on that one do you?

You will not have to format the /dev/sda5 (your shared partition) in any special way. However when you're install in Mint 10 make sure that you mount it to something along the lines of /shared. If you want to have the Win7 partition setup for easy access mount that to say /windows.

FAT32 is the preferred filesystem for thumbdrives since it is so portable. However you're not going to keep important data on a thumbdrive (I hope!) so if the filesystem croaks you won't be out much (unless you're flashing your bios at the time --don't ask and I won't tell).

[thaimite]

Partition names can be whatever you like. It is only useful in the file explorer.

I call mine things like Natty_Root and Natty_Home just so as I can identify them if I install another OS.

I have some external drives as FAT32 and others as NTFS. Both work fine I tend to use FAT32 for thumb drives less than about 10GB and NTFS for bigger ones. I would not recommend EXT formats on a thumb drive as it cannot be used on a windows machine

[bangkokburning]

dave - think some misunderstanding becasue glancing quickly, i agree with most if not all of what you initialy had to state.

I always install grub to the MBR...why would you want it on a Windows partition?

I don't. maybe confusion about installing windows first or the first partition or maybe statement that it can be done. no i dont - hence the post

And yes, you will have to install Windows first. Well actually I don't know if that's a requirement for Win7, but all the old Windows would ignore all other installed non-Windows OS and write its own MBR thus screwing the pooch if you already had BeOS or Linux or whatever...

YUP.

And I was serious about installing your /home to a seperate partition. When you upgrade to a real distro (SuSE at least and Slackware if you feel like really using Linux) it's much easier to keep all the stuff you've downloaded, saved, transcoded, etc.

so mint is not a "real" distro?? lots of buzz about it on the internets. are you just saying the user base is small or is the os reall no that developed. should i be looking at slackware?

I might catch some crap for this suggestion, but since you're installing on such a small hdd, why not cut down the size of your /swap partition. If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

I wanted 500mb for the boot partition

2.5 i think recall for swap

10gb for home

I would also recommend going to a set swapfile size for Win7 on your shared partition. Yes it would be faster on /dev/sda1, but you don't want to be running out of room on that one do you?

like supernova outlined:

Primary Partition #1 (30 GB)

- NTFS

- Windows 7

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

--- EXTENDED ---

Logical Partition #1 (1 GB)

- Linux Swap

Logical Partition #2 (103 GB)

- NTFS

* shared partition Win7/Mint

You will not have to format the /dev/sda5 (your shared partition) in any special way. However when you're install in Mint 10 make sure that you mount it to something along the lines of /shared. If you want to have the Win7 partition setup for easy access mount that to say /windows.

so, ext4 ntfs is ok?

FAT32 is the preferred filesystem for thumbdrives since it is so portable. However you're not going to keep important data on a thumbdrive (I hope!) so if the filesystem croaks you won't be out much (unless you're flashing your bios at the time --don't ask and I won't tell).

no, just boot disks and drivers.

thanks thaimite

[bangkokburning]

dave - think some misunderstanding becasue glancing quickly, i agree with most if not all of what you initialy had to state.

I always install grub to the MBR...why would you want it on a Windows partition?

I don't. maybe confusion about installing windows first or the first partition or maybe statement that it can be done. no i dont - hence the post

And yes, you will have to install Windows first. Well actually I don't know if that's a requirement for Win7, but all the old Windows would ignore all other installed non-Windows OS and write its own MBR thus screwing the pooch if you already had BeOS or Linux or whatever...

YUP.

And I was serious about installing your /home to a seperate partition. When you upgrade to a real distro (SuSE at least and Slackware if you feel like really using Linux) it's much easier to keep all the stuff you've downloaded, saved, transcoded, etc.

so mint is not a "real" distro?? lots of buzz about it on the internets. are you just saying the user base is small or is the os reall no that developed. should i be looking at slackware?

I might catch some crap for this suggestion, but since you're installing on such a small hdd, why not cut down the size of your /swap partition. If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

I wanted 500mb for the boot partition

2.5 i think recall for swap

10gb for home

I would also recommend going to a set swapfile size for Win7 on your shared partition. Yes it would be faster on /dev/sda1, but you don't want to be running out of room on that one do you?

like supernova outlined:

Primary Partition #1 (30 GB)

- NTFS

- Windows 7

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

--- EXTENDED ---

Logical Partition #1 (1 GB)

- Linux Swap

Logical Partition #2 (103 GB)

- NTFS

* shared partition Win7/Mint

You will not have to format the /dev/sda5 (your shared partition) in any special way. However when you're install in Mint 10 make sure that you mount it to something along the lines of /shared. If you want to have the Win7 partition setup for easy access mount that to say /windows.

so, ext4 ntfs is ok?

FAT32 is the preferred filesystem for thumbdrives since it is so portable. However you're not going to keep important data on a thumbdrive (I hope!) so if the filesystem croaks you won't be out much (unless you're flashing your bios at the time --don't ask and I won't tell).

no, just boot disks and drivers.

[bangkokburning]

dave - think some misunderstanding becasue glancing quickly, i agree with most if not all of what you initialy had to state.

I always install grub to the MBR...why would you want it on a Windows partition?

I don't. maybe confusion about installing windows first or the first partition or maybe statement that it can be done. no i dont - hence the post

And yes, you will have to install Windows first. Well actually I don't know if that's a requirement for Win7, but all the old Windows would ignore all other installed non-Windows OS and write its own MBR thus screwing the pooch if you already had BeOS or Linux or whatever...

YUP.

And I was serious about installing your /home to a seperate partition. When you upgrade to a real distro (SuSE at least and Slackware if you feel like really using Linux) it's much easier to keep all the stuff you've downloaded, saved, transcoded, etc.

so mint is not a "real" distro?? lots of buzz about it on the internets. are you just saying the user base is small or is the os reall no that developed. should i be looking at slackware?

I might catch some crap for this suggestion, but since you're installing on such a small hdd, why not cut down the size of your /swap partition. If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

I wanted 500mb for the boot partition

2.5 i think recall for swap

10gb for home

I would also recommend going to a set swapfile size for Win7 on your shared partition. Yes it would be faster on /dev/sda1, but you don't want to be running out of room on that one do you?

like supernova outlined:

Primary Partition #1 (30 GB)

- NTFS

- Windows 7

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

--- EXTENDED ---

Logical Partition #1 (1 GB)

- Linux Swap

Logical Partition #2 (103 GB)

- NTFS

* shared partition Win7/Mint

You will not have to format the /dev/sda5 (your shared partition) in any special way. However when you're install in Mint 10 make sure that you mount it to something along the lines of /shared. If you want to have the Win7 partition setup for easy access mount that to say /windows.

so, ext4 ntfs is ok?

FAT32 is the preferred filesystem for thumbdrives since it is so portable. However you're not going to keep important data on a thumbdrive (I hope!) so if the filesystem croaks you won't be out much (unless you're flashing your bios at the time --don't ask and I won't tell).

no, just boot disks and drivers.

[Supernova]

I would also recommend going to a set swapfile size for Win7 on your shared partition.

There's no benefit in moving the pagefile to a different partition on the same hard disk as your operating system. If anything, it'll degrade overall performance. Let Windows manage the pagefile if working with a single hard disk.

If you have another physical hard disk available besides the primary hard disk and it is just a fast, consider splitting the pagefile over both hard disks. For optimal performance, put the pagefile on the first primary partition of the second hard disk. In this scenario, you'd want to create a semi-permanent pagefile, where it has an initial fixed size but can grow if needed...

For example:

As you can see from the screenshot, minimum size satisfies the common memory load and maximum size satisfies extreme memory load. Set the pagefile size to 1.5 times total physical memory; if you have 2GB RAM, allocate 3GB (2048 * 1.5) to the pagefile.

Note: If working with IDE hard disks, connecting a second hard disk as a "slave" unit on the same IDE cable as the primary disk will slowdown disk-access for both disks. Make sure the disks are on different channels!

[Supernova]

If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

Time to add more physical RAM.

[dave_boo]

dave - think some misunderstanding becasue glancing quickly, i agree with most if not all of what you initialy had to state.

I always install grub to the MBR...why would you want it on a Windows partition?

I don't. maybe confusion about installing windows first or the first partition or maybe statement that it can be done. no i dont - hence the post

And yes, you will have to install Windows first. Well actually I don't know if that's a requirement for Win7, but all the old Windows would ignore all other installed non-Windows OS and write its own MBR thus screwing the pooch if you already had BeOS or Linux or whatever...

YUP.

And I was serious about installing your /home to a seperate partition. When you upgrade to a real distro (SuSE at least and Slackware if you feel like really using Linux) it's much easier to keep all the stuff you've downloaded, saved, transcoded, etc.

so mint is not a "real" distro?? lots of buzz about it on the internets. are you just saying the user base is small or is the os reall no that developed. should i be looking at slackware?

I might catch some crap for this suggestion, but since you're installing on such a small hdd, why not cut down the size of your /swap partition. If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

I wanted 500mb for the boot partition

2.5 i think recall for swap

10gb for home

I would also recommend going to a set swapfile size for Win7 on your shared partition. Yes it would be faster on /dev/sda1, but you don't want to be running out of room on that one do you?

like supernova outlined:

Primary Partition #1 (30 GB)

- NTFS

- Windows 7

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

--- EXTENDED ---

Logical Partition #1 (1 GB)

- Linux Swap

Logical Partition #2 (103 GB)

- NTFS

* shared partition Win7/Mint

You will not have to format the /dev/sda5 (your shared partition) in any special way. However when you're install in Mint 10 make sure that you mount it to something along the lines of /shared. If you want to have the Win7 partition setup for easy access mount that to say /windows.

so, ext4 ntfs is ok?

FAT32 is the preferred filesystem for thumbdrives since it is so portable. However you're not going to keep important data on a thumbdrive (I hope!) so if the filesystem croaks you won't be out much (unless you're flashing your bios at the time --don't ask and I won't tell).

no, just boot disks and drivers.

No worries mate. The comment on the Grub is due to the fact you can actually do that. It's apparent that you know the distinction so I'll leave it at that.

The comment on Mint was due to the fact that it is Ubuntu based (which is Debian based) and a big hand holder of new users. Which in and of itself is not a bad thing^®. However, the other distros that I mentioned are much less frustrating to use when you get more time under your belt and they are configured more 'logically'...least ways to those who have been using Linux for a long time.

[dave_boo]

I would also recommend going to a set swapfile size for Win7 on your shared partition.

There's no benefit in moving the pagefile to a different partition on the same hard disk as your operating system. If anything, it'll degrade overall performance. Let Windows manage the pagefile if working with a single hard disk.

If you have another physical hard disk available besides the primary hard disk and it is just a fast, consider splitting the pagefile over both hard disks. For optimal performance, put the pagefile on the first primary partition of the second hard disk. In this scenario, you'd want to create a semi-permanent pagefile, where it has an initial fixed size but can grow if needed...

For example:

As you can see from the screenshot, minimum size satisfies the common memory load and maximum size satisfies extreme memory load. Set the pagefile size to 1.5 times total physical memory; if you have 2GB RAM, allocate 3GB (2048 * 1.5) to the pagefile.

Note: If working with IDE hard disks, connecting a second hard disk as a "slave" unit on the same IDE cable as the primary disk will slowdown disk-access for both disks. Make sure the disks are on different channels!

With respect Supernova, I doubt that the OP will notice the 'swappiness' of the difference whether the pagefile is on sda1 or sda5 if he's dealing with a netbook. The added benefit that I have witnessed is decreased fragmentation of the Windows partition which IMHO outweighs the ~9ms of random access time that the drive takes to flip over to the other partition.

FWIW I understand about the whole 'nother disk usage; I have 10K SCSI disk that is used just for /swp and a Windows pagefile..unfortunately with 12 GB of RAM it doesn't get much usage.

If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

Time to add more physical RAM.

Into a netbook?

[Supernova]

I doubt that the OP will notice the 'swappiness' of the difference whether the pagefile is on sda1 or sda5 if he's dealing with a netbook.

Whether or not the OP notices the 'swappiness' I can't say... However, one thing is for certain: Moving the page file to a different partition on the same hard disk (as the host operating system) will degrade performance. This results in a lot more seeking by the head, as the drive juggles back and forth between the page file and Windows partitions.

With this being the case, the OP would be better off leaving it on drive C. To decrease fragmentation, one can always create a permanent page file (with fixed min/max sizes). BTW, netbook or desktop computer -- what difference does it make? Both operate under the same basic rules.

The added benefit that I have witnessed is decreased fragmentation of the Windows partition which IMHO outweighs the ~9ms of random access time that the drive takes to flip over to the other partition.

While the first part of this statement may hold true, losing the I/O performance outweighs any and all gains. It's better to have maximum I/O performance by keeping the pagefile where it is with a single hard disk.

FWIW I understand about the whole 'nother disk usage; I have 10K SCSI disk that is used just for /swp and a Windows pagefile..unfortunately with 12 GB of RAM it doesn't get much usage.

You're in the minority...

Not everyone has a 10K SCSI disk, much less 12GB of RAM at their disposal.

[Supernova]

If you get to the point that you're filling up 512 MB of swap it's time to start looking at htop and kill -9 some programmes.

Time to add more physical RAM.

Into a netbook?

Why not? According to this article it can be done.

[bangkokburning]

Ok, I have 2gb RAM already. Gave the 1gb stick to the girlfriend + 1 @ Fortune = 2gb for her now as well. Anyway, I increase the swap in Windows to 1.5x RAM on initial install always but i have a real crap problem.

I have W7 on 1

Can only create a boot part that the installer recognizes in the installer, not GParted.

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

Is this a 15gb formatted to /boot in installer?

Do I then go out to GPart and create the extended and /swap and ntfs?

Even if I create this in installer and exit, I dont see /boot in GP to complete the partitionIm lost...

I can't get an install going...

BTW - how does Linux know where the swap part is located? Do I have to point to it?

I still have this problem in Firefox, cursor jumping all around - like when TV does a refresh or something. Beyond annoying.

[dave_boo]

I doubt that the OP will notice the 'swappiness' of the difference whether the pagefile is on sda1 or sda5 if he's dealing with a netbook.

Whether or not the OP notices the 'swappiness' I can't say... However, one thing is for certain: Moving the page file to a different partition on the same hard disk (as the host operating system) will degrade performance. This results in a lot more seeking by the head, as the drive juggles back and forth between the page file and Windows partitions.

With this being the case, the OP would be better off leaving it on drive C. To decrease fragmentation, one can always create a permanent page file (with fixed min/max sizes). BTW, netbook or desktop computer -- what difference does it make? Both operate under the same basic rules.

The added benefit that I have witnessed is decreased fragmentation of the Windows partition which IMHO outweighs the ~9ms of random access time that the drive takes to flip over to the other partition.

While the first part of this statement may hold true, losing the I/O performance outweighs any and all gains. It's better to have maximum I/O performance by keeping the pagefile where it is with a single hard disk.

FWIW I understand about the whole 'nother disk usage; I have 10K SCSI disk that is used just for /swp and a Windows pagefile..unfortunately with 12 GB of RAM it doesn't get much usage.

You're in the minority...

Not everyone has a 10K SCSI disk, much less 12GB of RAM at their disposal.

If you're running so many programmes (or a lot of flash filled tabs in FF ), than yes I can see a point where more memory is nice. However, is the max memory for Atom processors not 2GB excepting the 945GC and perhaps ION? Not much space for much of anything IMHO; and I would like to think that my point still stands; if you have a run-away process that would eat up that much RAM (and I don't believe in going 1,5x the RAM amount on a pagefile--sorry if it won't fit into 512 MB above and beyond installed RAM I need to be notified right away and kill the process) it's ridiculous.

While your suggestion of a fixed size pagefile is good in theory, does Windows actually ensure continuity of that file? I honestly don't know. If it is treated as any other file on the system, wouldn't its fragmentation over time actually cause the same thing that you're talking about...thrashing as it seeks the next block?

The netbook comment was in regards to the overall slowness of the drives usually installed in such devices. A decent 3,5" drive will be exhibiting the problems much more than a slow 2,5" drive simply because the usual seek times on a larger faster drives amplify the waiting for seeks on a fragmented drive. Think of it this way: if you're constantly riding on a tuk-tuk and there's an extra minute added to your daily commute, you probably wouldn't notice. On the other hand if you're riding in a Michael Shumacher class car and there's an extra minute added to your 'daily commute' it's extremely noticeable.

Don't know why people don't have 12 GB of RAM...with the exception of older 'puters and notebooks of course (except of course my laptop has 8..still not as nice as my desktop though). It's not terribly expensive especially now, and actually wasn't that bad when it was installed back in '06. Yep, that was a dual Opty 265 build that is still running. And quite well actually. Granted I'm lusting after some Sandy Bridge dual procs for transcoding alone, but even going with Nehalem and shopping around you could today build a machine that would smoke most everything out there in 'real' tasks and keep up for quite some time for 60 000 THB (that's buying outside of LOS of course).

[Supernova]

I have W7 on 1

Can only create a boot part that the installer recognizes in the installer, not GParted.

Primary Partition #2 (15 GB)

- Ext4 /

- Mint debian

* GRUB is installed here

Is this a 15gb formatted to /boot in installer?

That's the root / partition where Mint is installed to.

I don't have a separate /boot partition. My Mint root / is set as the 'active' primary partition -- which is why I have GRUB installed there as well. This may not be the most optimal setup, but that's my configuration for the time being... Most importantly, everything works as it should.

Prior to installing Mint, I create all the necessary partitions through GParted. These include:

linux swap

/

/home

Do you need a /home partition? Well, that depends on YOU, the same goes for /boot /var /usr /tmp... For me, I've done away with a separate /home partition a long time ago since I found it to be rather useless. I tend to think of /home as the equivalent to "Documents and Settings" or "My Documents" in Windows. I leave /home on the root partition.

The only real benefit from having a separate /home partition is being able to keep your files and settings intact in the event of a reinstall. But then again, personal data can be saved elsewhere, so not really an issue. As for application settings, well, I'll just have to redo them.

BTW - how does Linux know where the swap part is located? Do I have to point to it?

Just create a partition and format as Linux Swap.

[Supernova]

if you have a run-away process that would eat up that much RAM (and I don't believe in going 1,5x the RAM amount on a pagefile--sorry if it won't fit into 512 MB above and beyond installed RAM I need to be notified right away and kill the process) it's ridiculous.

My reason for using 1.5 * physical memory is based on Microsoft's recommended setting, and even that has its limits (see below). At the end of the day, set to whatever works best for you.

> Here's an interesting question to which there's no clear answer:

How big should the page file be on computers with lots of physical memory?

Take your own system with 12GB of RAM, for example. Now if one were to strictly abide by the 1.5 rule, that would put the paging file at a whopping 18GB! Personally, I wouldn't set the page file to anything beyond 4GB, but that's just my own self-imposed limit. Others may think differently or have other ideas, all of which is fine. Again, do what works best for you.

While your suggestion of a fixed size pagefile is good in theory, does Windows actually ensure continuity of that file? I honestly don't know.

I don't know for certain either, but I will assume it's continuous since it's created one time and does not expand nor shrink in size.

If it is treated as any other file on the system, wouldn't its fragmentation over time actually cause the same thing that you're talking about...thrashing as it seeks the next block?

Fragmented or not, you will experience thrashing anyway if data is being swapped to/from disk. Even more so with the page file off on its own partition.

[BugJackBaron]

I have 1GB ram and 500 MB swap ..it was the default recommended by Fedora.Linux

It works very well.

The old 1.5x rule was true when computers had by default

128MB ram say 10 years ago but is not really valid with more than 1GB

ram - which all modern machines have.

As for Virtual box - it is better than VmWare if you are running linux OS as guest.

VmWare guest linux support is clumsy in my opinion and you have to run through hoops

to get it optimized.

I would certainly try the virtual machine route if you have 2GB ram or more and are not a gamer.

It is a much more efficient use of resources.

Or, if you JUST need to run a few windows programs like microsoft office - do it in Wine and see

if the results are satisfactory(I run utorrent and MS OFFice this way). If not then use a virtual machine.

[bangkokburning]

I would like to thank everyone for their help. I have decided to just go with W7 install. If/when I get another machine to toy with - that will be a new game. But right now, I needed to get on with my life and this install is just aggro.

Everyone has been super helpful. I can't thank you all enough.

BTW - the only thing that fixed the cursor thing was DL TouchFreeze-1.0.2. Issue was also in Linux. All my drivers are updated to no avail.

[Cloggie]

The only problem with the above good advice is that I had all sorts of problems getting the latest Ubuntu Natty with the Unity Interface to play well in Virtual box.

Granted it was in Beta at the time and these issues maybe sorted. However Ubuntu with KDE or Gnome 2 Interface works well

For me Ubuntu is my prime OS and I do it the other way round, All options are available, but a virtual machine is much easier unless you want to play games on it, and I am sure that will come soon.

On my PC Unity works fine in a VM, in the settings of your VM, go to Display and mark "Enable 3D acceleration",

[thaimite]

The only problem with the above good advice is that I had all sorts of problems getting the latest Ubuntu Natty with the Unity Interface to play well in Virtual box.

Granted it was in Beta at the time and these issues maybe sorted. However Ubuntu with KDE or Gnome 2 Interface works well

For me Ubuntu is my prime OS and I do it the other way round, All options are available, but a virtual machine is much easier unless you want to play games on it, and I am sure that will come soon.

On my PC Unity works fine in a VM, in the settings of your VM, go to Display and mark "Enable 3D acceleration",

As stated, my testing was done at the time that Ubuntu Natty was in Beta and both they and Virtualbox were changing and upgrading, 3D support at the time was a bit hit and miss

Now I am running Natty as my main OS, and it works well. I have done quite a bit of tweakn to get it to a stage I like and so that my most used options are easily available with a minimum of searching and clicking