Which Linux flavour is best for running alongside Windows XP. I really want to install Linux, but don't want to remove Windows XP...

run it in vmware then

Well, VMWARE doesn't work with Linux because it can't find the hard drive...

Anyway, I have got Fedora Core 5 now, and I plan to install it on a separate partition of my first hard disk (about 20gb in size)...I will make the partition in PartitionMagic...Does anyone have any idea where I go from here?

LINUX runs perfectly fine in a VM. I have 2 virtual servers running right now. Just have it install to an IDE drive and you will be fine.

Easiest way.

Jim

The Linux distro is a personal preference. I would recommend reviewing one of the various DualBoot HOWTOs on the web, a good place to start is the Linux Documentation Project. Another good refs is Ed's Software Guide on Linux

I've had much better luck building the system linux w/room for my Windows install. If I remember correctly you install linux w/free disk space for your windows install starting w/in the first 8.5GB. Then install Windows on the free space. When I'm done w/the base install I add a line in grub for Windows and edit the boot.ini. If it's working, I continue loading the rest of my apps and tweaks. Last time I did this it only took a few hours to get both OS's up and running. The HOWTOs out there are very helpful.

I dual boot XP and Ubuntu. They worked together without a hitch until I re-installed XP, and the installer 'accidently' killed the boot loader.

There is no best linux to run alongside windows, it entirely depends on what you want the system for and how competant you are using it. Seeing as you sound fairly noobie when it comes to linux u should try one of the more popular and easier to get to grips with. perhaps ones like Ubuntu, fedora, linspire, mandrake.

back to topic, as someone already said, it depends on your preference.

for me ubuntu dapper

try virtual pc 2004

i have XandrOS and DSL on it

I use Fedora/Core 5 and it multiboots fine alongside Windows XP.
The GRUB bootloader it uses for a boot menu is annoying, I haven't found out how to get rid of it e.g. if I wanted to remove Fedora.

Oh yeah, and I can't use windows or linux in VMware either.
It works in Virtual PC though.

to get rid of it just replace the boot record where GRUB resides.

i.e. if it's on your MBR just stick a default bootrecord back on.

as far as which distro goes....try a few different ones and see what you like. ubuntu is very nice, and i also like MEPIS

FINALLY... A person with common sense about the linux/windows debate!

:hugs you:

I like Xandros, JDS now dead, and SUSE 10 for their ease of use. I like Slackware but if you are new to Linux it may not be the best choice.

I may have Fedora Core 5 and Knoppix, as well as XP.

I cook my own

@WeirdEars about the hard drive problem with linux
make sure you use IDE hard drives not the SCSI its wil give you problems

fav linux
arr thats hard i got 3
CentOs 4.2 ( 32 bit) and FC4 ... both from RedHat
Xandros desktop OS ver 3

i havet used it in ages but it was nice and easy
if i can remember right:)

In what order should I install? I mean I want to triple boot, XP Pro sp2, XP Pro x64, and Ubuntu.

1. xp pro sp2 (c: fat32)
2. xp pro 64 (d: ntfs)
3. ubuntu (e: ext3, reiser... whatever)

with additional software you'll be able to access all drives from c: and d: (depends on e: filesystem).

from e: you'll have r/w access to c: and possibly d: (total read, experimental write).
plus you can use wine to run programs from c:

SiMoNsAyS:
Is it ok to change the fat32 on xp sp2 to ntfs?

is ok as long as you don't need write support from ubuntu (as i said write support is experimental)

Although not a 100% solution, progress is being made: NTFS-3G: Full Read-Write Open Source Linux NTFS Driver

Hi there.
Sounds like the right place to ask my question, if you'll excuse my reviving this old thread. So, here it goes:

I would like to install (as a multiboot) Win98SE, WinServer2003 and Linux (K/Ubuntu, openSUSE or similar) all on a 160GB HDD which is already split into 4 FAT32 + 1 Linux partitions. The BIOS (AWARD 6.00PG on a Jetway630CF board) would only "see" 137GB out of 160, due to bad (or no) implementation of 48bit LBA, chipset incompatibility or whatever else, and it's not gonna be fixed by the manufacturer (I already contacted them months ago), but that's not a problem - I can live with a few GB missing. For easy recovery/interaction between partitions, I would like to keep the Server2003 partition as FAT32.

If anyone could offer a simple but thorough guide to accomplish such task, I would very much appreciate. Thank you.

I’m not sure of the long term stability of using just part of the drive Drugwash. There is the option of getting an add-in controller card. The other thing is a Dynamic Drive Overlay (translation software in the MBR) that can compensate for your motherboard, but I would advise against this if you want to multiboot. Besides, if you want Win98 on there then you would need to fix its 137gig limitation so it could run without problems on a 160gig drive. I would say your best option would be to get a smaller hard drive.

If you want to go ahead then probably best to use the Linux bootmanager. So, install Win98 first to a primary. Then 2003, also to a primary, making sure it does not set up the ntldr as a bootmanager by putting it inside Win98. Do this by making the 2003 partition the Active one on the hard drive before you start the install, (by booting the computer from the 2003 DVD). Then install Linux to any partition/s you like and during setup if you get a choice make sure it puts the bootmanager, probably Grub, to the MBR of the hard drive. That should setup the multiboot for you.

You can’t make a logical partition the Active one on the hard drive, so if want to install 2003 to a logical you can only do it by allowing it to put the boot files on a separate primary, which will be inside your Win98 install, which will make the whole multiboot thing with Linux much more messy.

Are you sure your 2003 will use a FAT partition? http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/evaluati...ysreqs/2003.asp
You can create a separate logical data partition in FAT that all the OSes can use.

there are several programs I recently googled to fix the 137 gig issue with my dual boot on a 250 gig. I forgot wehich one I used but I know they are out there. the instruction previously stated sound find, I used ranish to setup my partitions and it went quite well. I've got win98se, winxp and server 2003 as well as ubuntu linux on my 250 with 10 partitions.
try this site :
http://www.largeharddrivesupport.windowsre...l.com/winxp.htm
my bios says my hd is only 65 gig but dos and windows and linux all see the various partitions and I don't have any problems...

Unless you've fixed Win98's 137gig limitation Mike, then don't let is use any part of the drive over that figure. It may seem to be fine, but you will get data corruption. It was no doubt a DDO you used - perhaps MaxBlast or EZ-Drive. Just be aware it is on your hard drive and of possible problems it could cause if you ever alter your configuration.