9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [9fans] non-standard installs
@ 2002-03-21 16:33 Russ Cox
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Russ Cox @ 2002-03-21 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

> 	I'm sure I'm just unlucky, but given my (recent) experience
> of installing Plan 9 for the first time, I'd stay well away from your
> "production" machine, even if it did have a clean partition.
> 
> I found (repeatedly) that trying to put Plan 9 into a clean
> secondary partition corrupted the size of the enclosing primary
> partition. I was able to put it back, but thankfully the whole 40Gb
> was brand new at the time, and so this wasn't necessary (except as a
> vain attempt to keep the other partitions as the shop had left them).
> Thus, I eventually scrapped the whole partition table, and put Plan 9
> into a primary partition.
> Since then it's all gone fine.....

There were some serious bugs in the handling of secondary
partitions.  They're fixed in the fdisk on the current boot disk,
as of January 13, 2002.  As someone else mentioned, Plan 9 has to be in a 
primary partition, so that bootstrap loaders can find it
(unlike, say, Linux swap, which has no right to be in a 
valuable primary partition, but I digress).

Russ


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] non-standard installs
@ 2002-03-21 19:46 Richard Miller
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Richard Miller @ 2002-03-21 19:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 241 bytes --]

> ... As someone else mentioned, Plan 9 has to be in a 
> primary partition, so that bootstrap loaders can find it

No longer true - as of the 26 April 2001 update, 9load can find
plan 9 in an extended partition.

-- Richard Miller


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2472 bytes --]

From: "Russ Cox" <rsc@plan9.bell-labs.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] non-standard installs
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:33:08 -0500
Message-ID: <d80755a8eef4aa1f2bebc11b3c4dfe34@plan9.bell-labs.com>

> 	I'm sure I'm just unlucky, but given my (recent) experience
> of installing Plan 9 for the first time, I'd stay well away from your
> "production" machine, even if it did have a clean partition.
> 
> I found (repeatedly) that trying to put Plan 9 into a clean
> secondary partition corrupted the size of the enclosing primary
> partition. I was able to put it back, but thankfully the whole 40Gb
> was brand new at the time, and so this wasn't necessary (except as a
> vain attempt to keep the other partitions as the shop had left them).
> Thus, I eventually scrapped the whole partition table, and put Plan 9
> into a primary partition.
> Since then it's all gone fine.....

There were some serious bugs in the handling of secondary
partitions.  They're fixed in the fdisk on the current boot disk,
as of January 13, 2002.  As someone else mentioned, Plan 9 has to be in a 
primary partition, so that bootstrap loaders can find it
(unlike, say, Linux swap, which has no right to be in a 
valuable primary partition, but I digress).

Russ

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] non-standard installs
@ 2002-03-21  8:36 forsyth
  2002-03-21 13:34 ` Martin C.Atkins
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: forsyth @ 2002-03-21  8:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

>>I found (repeatedly) that trying to put Plan 9 into a clean
>>secondary partition corrupted the size of the enclosing primary
>>partition. I was able to put it back, but thankfully the whole 40Gb

i don't understand how it got that far.  it normally refuses to
install into anything other than unused space not claimed by anything else,
that is space not in any partition, and
certainly not space inside another partition.  (i didn't know it was
even possible to set such a configuration on a PC using Windows fdisk
or partdisk [or is it diskpart?].)



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [9fans] non-standard installs
@ 2002-03-20  9:43 Andrew
  2002-03-21  7:31 ` Martin C.Atkins
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew @ 2002-03-20  9:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

Hi everybody,
I'd really like to get some hands-on experience with Plan9,
the thing that stops me is some hardware resource shortage...
I got a linux box with some spare disk space, but no "unpartitioned" and
it's not to be played with as it's used for everyday routine work.
I also got a pretty ancient 486sx with 40Mb ram, but <sigh> 150Mb disk. 
(don't laugh please)
If I read install instructions correctly I have to have 300Mb minimum to be 
able to install.

My real question: is there a way around, so that I can install plan9 on 486 
with so little disk but use nfs(or something else) to share storage with 
linux box? (oh yes, I'm free to run any service I want on that linux box,
but cannot spare any partitions)

Thank you!
-- 
DISCLAIMER: <DEFAULT DISCLAIMER>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-03-21 19:46 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-03-21 16:33 [9fans] non-standard installs Russ Cox
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-21 19:46 Richard Miller
2002-03-21  8:36 forsyth
2002-03-21 13:34 ` Martin C.Atkins
2002-03-20  9:43 Andrew
2002-03-21  7:31 ` Martin C.Atkins

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).