pmacdonald

So here's how my HDD is going to be set up:

• Windows Primary Partition
• Linux Swap Partition
• Another primary partition for all the rest of the space (this leaves room for one more primary partition but it won't be used...unless you guys think it should)
• In the last primary partition I will include a logical partion for each of the following: Windows/Linux shared files, Linux distro 1 (Ubuntu), and Linux distro 2 (to be determined).

How's that look? And should Linux have its own primary partition?

i92guboj

I already explained what I would do in your case on #15:

http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/712251-post15.html

Only windows requires a primary partition. So, for the sake of simplicity, I would create *one* primary partition for Windows. The rest would go to an extended one, and inside that extended one, just create as much logical drives as you need, one for each distro you want to use and one for swap, that all your distros will share.

Linux, as said previously, doesn't care if you use a primary partition or a logical drive.

computerophil

I think that would be good.
Sure there are various possibilities and sure Ubuntu as one of the modernest Linuxes can handle also other structures. But what happens if you decide in one month that you want to do all different to go back to the roots.
The maximum of primary partitions are 4.

1. One you should have for windows
2. One you need for the extended in there you can have as many virtual (logical) partitions as you want.

   • At least one for data (ntfs to have access from windows too
   • and at least one per each Linux-distribution you want.
   • You decide if you want to let the rest unpartitioned or to partition and format it thinking of changing them maybe later again.

3. One I recommend for Swap (even if some in the forum are not my opinion)

Even if you don't use 4 Primary partitions don't wonder the virtual ones allways start with (hda5,...)

Just because you seem to like discussion. Linux itself doesn't care but some distributions still care where there is the swap.
That Windows requires a primary partition is also not totally correct. (Only if it has the function of boot-partition which normally is the case)
But I do have computers with various windows (e.g w2k + XP + XP in another language + various Linux) and there I have only one windows (usually the oldest one) in a primary Partition as a Bootpartition all the others are in logical ones.

__________________
computerophil.at

HROAdmin26

Given that swap is purely a kernel function (as mentioned previously), I am curious as to what distro's care about swap being on a logical partition?

Googling, I see going back to *at least* 2001, swap space did not matter if it was on a primary or logical partition.

Segfault

Swap. This has nothing to do with distro.
I was building OpenOffice from source and my rather small swap partition started to fill up. I managed to create a swap file and turn it on before compilation crashed. Most people even do not need swap partition. For instance with 2 GB of RAM your swap partition will never be used - unless you do something extraordinary.

i92guboj

That was my whole point. I don't buy the "some distros don't support it" thing.

Please, everyone, and specially computerophil, understand that I have no interest in starting a fight. I just want to clarify the issue, nothing else I can be wrong in many things, but in this one I really doubt that. It's been years since I used a primary partition for linux, either swap or any other purpose. Since I don't even use windows, I just make a big extended partition, and then just create logical drives inside it, it's just easier. In all this time, I've always had a swap partition or two when needed, and they always were logical drives (because simply I have no primary partition, so there's no chance for a confusion on my side).

I test distros from time to time, none ever refused or failed to swapon on a logical drive, none, absolutely.

This can be easily checked, just try to run "swapon /dev/sda5" (or whatever partition you want, that's above 4), and then tell us what's that doesn't work. Easy as that and we can stop the discussion.

The swap is managed by the kernel, whatever your distro can or can't do doesn't matter here. That is, unless you are referring to some odd GUI that you have to edit fstab and that is bugged and doesn't show swap partitions that are not primary. Maybe you are referring to the installers or something like that, well, it's possible that installers are bugged enough not to support the selection of such partition, but that doesn't mean your distro can't use them.

HROAdmin26

@ i92guboj
@ Segfault

I agree with you both, which is why I asked for an example of a distro that cares where swap is.

MikeTbob

This is the way I would partition it also, one primary for Windows and the rest is Extended, it just makes things simple.

__________________
I do not respond to private messages asking for help.
Please keep it on the forums only.

pmacdonald

Here's some examples I've come across:

/dev/sda1 ~30GB NTFS - Vista Ultimate
/dev/sda3 200MB ext3 /boot -- will be used to store a boot directory for linux
/dev/sda4 Rest of drive logical partition -- this is a "container" that will hold all your other partitions
/dev/sda5 ~20GB ext3 / of 1st linux distro
/dev/sda6 ~20GB ext3 / or 2nd linux distro
/dev/sda7 rest of drive NTFS or FAT32 for sharing files between all your installs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/dev/hda1 Windows OS
/dev/hda2 Windows my documents
/dev/hda4 Extended
/dev/hda5 Linux swap
/dev/hda6 Linux / (root) for first Linux (this is where the OS goes)
/dev/hda7 Linux /home for first Linux
/dev/hda8 Linux / (root) for second Linux
/dev/hda9 Linux /home for second Linux
/dev/hda10 Linux /whatever for sharing data between the different Linux versions

• In the first example: Do I need a primary partition for the Linux boot direcotry?
• In the second example: Would I need a primary partition for my Windows my documents?
• In the second example: Would I need a root logical partition and a seperate home partition?
• Involves both examples: Should I have a logical partition for sharing data between all OS's or should I have on for windows and one for the Linux distros (like in example two)
• General question: If I want to access some of my program files in Windows through my Linux OS would this be possible?

I'm backing up my info tonight and should be ready to install Linux tomorrow.

i92guboj

No. You don't even need a separate partition for /boot if you don't want.

Nope. And if both partitions are in the same disk, like in this case, you probably don't want it to be a primary partition. As far as I remember, windows can only see one primary partition at a given time on each disk. That would mean that if you are booting from the first primary partition you are not going to be able to see the second one since there's already one primary partition active. However, this is old info and I might be completely wrong. I advice you to wait for another opinion on this one.

In any case, there's absolutely no reason to use more than one primary partition. And using a single primary+extended you can't go wrong, so that's the absolutely safe way, create a primary partition for the Windows OS, and then create all the rest inside an extended partition.

You don't need a separate /home partition either, however it is really convenient to have one when you want to reinstall. Kind of like having a separate partition for My Documents in Windows. If you go for a separate home partition, you could use the same /home for both installations of linux, instead of a different /home for each installation.

However, I recommend creating two different users, for that purpose, just make sure that your user name in each distro is -at least slightly- different. That way, you make sure that different versions of programs in one and another distro won't provoke some collision amongst the config files living in your user's directory. Both users can live happily in a single /home partition, but you shouldn't share users between two different distros unless you know what you are doing. It can be really tricky.

You can have such a partition, or use a pendrive or whatever you want. Linux can write efficiently both ntfs and vfat with very little effort. So those formats are preferred for a shared partition between the two OSes. Writing from windows to ext3 is surely possible but I really have no experience with that. I know that there are drivers to write to ext3 fs's under Windows. Support for other linux fs's might be completely inexistent.

Yes. But, for what purpose? You have to be very careful because linux will not stop you if you screw something in there. Of course, you can choose a more restrictive permission scheme when mounting an vfat or ntfs drive, or just mount it read only if you want.

In any case, backup, always backups what you value.