*BSD News Article 6650


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!rutgers!uwvax!uchinews!machine!chinet!randy
From: randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: DOS and 386BSD (and NT and OS2)
Message-ID: <Bw7tHz.EI@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 16 Oct 92 13:01:09 GMT
References: <92288.123610K390670@ALIJKU11.BITNET> <1992Oct15.025722.15943@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Lines: 28

In article <1992Oct15.025722.15943@fcom.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes:
>I was hoping to avoid the level of detail required to install two OS's on an
>IDE drive by shooting at the two most likely suspects... sorry this didn't
>work for you.
>
>386BSD isn't going to be able to recognize your drive as both translated and
>untranslated.  If you don't turn off translation, you will have to use the
>entire disk for 386BSD, or you will have to do some math to find a location
>where the cylinder boundries are the same translated and untranslated, and
>start the 386bsd partition table there.  

	I really don't understand any of this.  I have installed a primary
	dos partition with the rest 386bsd on 4 completely different
	IDE systems with NO problems.  2 were laptops and 2 were desktop
	systems.  They used IDE drivers ranging from a pair of 40 meg
	Seagates to Maxtor 213 meg units to a Fuji 425 meg units.
	The laptops have unknown 80 meg drives.  I did no translation
	mods (no way that I can see how to do it anyway).  Just partitioned
	the drives with ~30 meg dos, and left the other partition for
	386bsd to fill up.
	I can't see where this translation/no-translation means anything.
	There are too many other completely different UNIX's out there
	running fast and happy on IDE drives.
-- 
	I am created Shiva the Destroyer; Death, the shatterer of worlds!
	Who is this dog meat who stands before me now?
	That's the biz, sweetheart.
Randy Suess					 randy@chinet.chi.il.us