Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #36854 > unrolled thread

Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com - 2023-01-31 21:42 +0000
    Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2023-02-01 08:03 +0100
      Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com - 2023-02-01 17:19 +0000
    Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2023-02-01 10:35 -0800
      Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com - 2023-02-03 21:45 +0000
        Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2023-02-03 18:39 -0500
          Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2023-02-04 14:34 +0200
            Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2023-02-04 18:06 -0500
              Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2023-02-04 20:34 -0800
                Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2023-02-05 21:10 -0500
              Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-05 08:34 +0000
                Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2023-02-05 21:12 -0500
                  Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-02-06 04:34 +0000
                    Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE "26C.Z968" <26C.Z968@noaada.net> - 2023-02-06 01:19 -0500
                      Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-02-06 18:18 +0000
                        Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE "26C.Z968" <26C.Z968@noaada.net> - 2023-02-07 00:13 -0500
                    Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2023-02-09 00:18 -0500
                      Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2023-02-09 17:06 +1000
                        Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2023-02-09 10:08 -0500
                      Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-09 11:31 +0000
                        Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2023-02-09 10:10 -0500
                      Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE "26C.Z968" <26C.Z968@noaada.net> - 2023-02-11 02:39 -0500
    Re: Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2023-02-06 14:00 -0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#36854 — Gparted - Vostro Legacy/UEFI/IDE

It seems all three of my problems may be from this setting

I made all 500GB (HD) into an NTFS partition
(GParted was too fast in formatting - worried)
bash fsck instead of fdisk worked fine - no errors
the check disk in gparted menu didn't complain either

But trying to install XP finds some CHKDSK error
(tells me to chkdsk - gives me four hex numbers)
But Windows Setup loads all the drivers and
only blows when trying to start Windows itself

Setting back from Legacy to UEFI gives "check media[failed]"

This problem showed up when I moved the Win7 partiton
(hopefully now gone - deleted partitions, reformatted)

Also Knoppix (Quantian) can't find the filesystem
knoppix home=/dev/sda1/knoppix.img won't work either



One wierd possibility - I burned the ISOs on DVDs
Maybe they should be CD?

I know - my flawed memory (of doing this a decade ago) is confusing me

-- 
	 Vasos Panagiotopoulos  panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm
  ---{Nothing herein constitutes advice.  Everything fully disclaimed.}---

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#36857

Am 31.01.2023 um 21:42:39 Uhr schrieb
vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com:

> But trying to install XP finds some CHKDSK error
> (tells me to chkdsk - gives me four hex numbers)
> But Windows Setup loads all the drivers and
> only blows when trying to start Windows itself

Use badblocks in Linux to completely check the entire drive for defect
sectors.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36861

In <trd2rb$7oqe$2@dont-email.me> by Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> on Wed, 01 Feb 2023 02:03:07 we perused:
 81#81*+-Am 31.01.2023 um 21:42:39 Uhr schrieb
*+-vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com:

*+-> But trying to install XP finds some CHKDSK error
*+-> (tells me to chkdsk - gives me four hex numbers)
*+-> But Windows Setup loads all the drivers and
*+-> only blows when trying to start Windows itself

*+-Use badblocks in Linux to completely check the entire drive for defect
*+-sectors.

THanks. THe only OS that can currently run is the bash under gparted
which thankflully seems rather complete.


-- 
	 Vasos Panagiotopoulos  panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm
  ---{Nothing herein constitutes advice.  Everything fully disclaimed.}---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36863

On 1/31/23 13:42, vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:
> It seems all three of my problems may be from this setting
> 
> I made all 500GB (HD) into an NTFS partition
> (GParted was too fast in formatting - worried)
> bash fsck instead of fdisk worked fine - no errors
> the check disk in gparted menu didn't complain either
> 
> But trying to install XP finds some CHKDSK error
> (tells me to chkdsk - gives me four hex numbers)
> But Windows Setup loads all the drivers and
> only blows when trying to start Windows itself
> 
> Setting back from Legacy to UEFI gives "check media[failed]"
> 
> This problem showed up when I moved the Win7 partiton
> (hopefully now gone - deleted partitions, reformatted)
> 
> Also Knoppix (Quantian) can't find the filesystem
> knoppix home=/dev/sda1/knoppix.img won't work either

	Of course it cannot find the file system but if you run GPartEd from 
Knoppix it will be able to create a file system which Knoppix can
find.  That is an ext4 or other Linux Filesystem.

> 
> 
> 
> One wierd possibility - I burned the ISOs on DVDs
> Maybe they should be CD?
> 
> I know - my flawed memory (of doing this a decade ago) is confusing me
> 
	Currently best usage is a late live iso file burned to a Flash Drive of 
adequate size.  If you burn Knoppix iso file to a Flash Drive
of 8 GB you should as well be able to create a persistent space of about
3.6 GB in which you can store notes and changes.

bliss - on the ever-faithful Dell Latitude E7450, PCLinuxOS 2022
KDE Plasma 5.26.5 Kernel:  6.1.8-pclos1 (64-bit)
KDE Frameworks  5.102.0 - Qt Version: 5.15.6
Graphics : X11 - Mesa Intel® HD Graphics 5500
15.5 GiB of RAM - CPU 4 × Intel® Core™ i7-5600U CPU @ 2.60GHz
Actually 2 real cores and 2 virtual cores.

-- 
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36893

THanks, does this link add any info?

https://superuser.com/questions/122316/how-to-install-windows-xp-over-windows-7

-- 
	 Vasos Panagiotopoulos  panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm
  ---{Nothing herein constitutes advice.  Everything fully disclaimed.}---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36894

On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 21:45:59 -0000 (UTC), vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:
>
> THanks, does this link add any info?
>
> https://superuser.com/questions/122316/how-to-install-windows-xp-over-windows-7

Umm, how about the other way around?

Have some problems getting a VM running on Linux and thought to instead
install Windows 10 (I have an image somewhere).

Currently it looks like

NAME   MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda      8:0    0 298.1G  0 disk
├─sda1   8:1    0   512M  0 part /boot/efi
├─sda2   8:2    0 195.3G  0 part /
└─sda3   8:3    0   7.8G  0 part [SWAP]

here. There is some not allocated space of may be 80 GB I'd use for
Windows. Thus Windows won't be on the first partition.

Is it a problem to install Windows after Linux?
-- 
Andreas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36902

Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:

> Is it a problem to install Windows after Linux?

I don't think so. I'd make an image of the Linux partition just in case
and a copy of the partition table too.

In the bad old days Windows would overwrite your boot loader and so
you'd need some way of reinstalling it. In these UEFI days you should
be able to boot Linux from the UEFI boot menu even if that happens.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36909

On Sat, 04 Feb 2023 14:34:37 +0200, Anssi Saari wrote:
>
> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>
>> Is it a problem to install Windows after Linux?
>
> I don't think so. I'd make an image of the Linux partition just in case
> and a copy of the partition table too.
>
> In the bad old days Windows would overwrite your boot loader and so
> you'd need some way of reinstalling it. In these UEFI days you should
> be able to boot Linux from the UEFI boot menu even if that happens.

Thanks.

Am just worried the Windows installation might be similar dumb as Chrome
OS Flex, to not let the user choose a partition to be installed at.

Well, not planned any time soon anyway, so I keep looking for info.
-- 
Andreas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36915

On 2/4/23 15:06, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Feb 2023 14:34:37 +0200, Anssi Saari wrote:
>>
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>>
>>> Is it a problem to install Windows after Linux?
>>
>> I don't think so. I'd make an image of the Linux partition just in case
>> and a copy of the partition table too.
>>
>> In the bad old days Windows would overwrite your boot loader and so
>> you'd need some way of reinstalling it. In these UEFI days you should
>> be able to boot Linux from the UEFI boot menu even if that happens.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Am just worried the Windows installation might be similar dumb as Chrome
> OS Flex, to not let the user choose a partition to be installed at.
> 
> Well, not planned any time soon anyway, so I keep looking for info.

	Well when Windows does a kernel update it has to rewrite the Windows 
boot loader which will require a boot re-install if you have
Linux on the same disk.

bliss - “Nearly any fool can use a GNU/Linux computer. Many do.”
After all here I am...	

-- 
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36921

On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 20:34:05 -0800, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>
> On 2/4/23 15:06, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
>> Am just worried the Windows installation might be similar dumb as
>> Chrome
>> OS Flex, to not let the user choose a partition to be installed at.
>> Well, not planned any time soon anyway, so I keep looking for info.
>
> 	Well when Windows does a kernel update it has to rewrite the
> 	Windows boot loader which will require a boot re-install if
> 	you have
> Linux on the same disk.

Eeeeks!

I had Windows until Windows 2000, but it never messed with MBR back then
when there was an update.

If Windows 10 (I have an ISO) really does this I won't install it next to
Linux. Game over, Windows!
-- 
Andreas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36917

On 04/02/2023 23:06, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Feb 2023 14:34:37 +0200, Anssi Saari wrote:
>>
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>>
>>> Is it a problem to install Windows after Linux?
>>
>> I don't think so. I'd make an image of the Linux partition just in case
>> and a copy of the partition table too.
>>
>> In the bad old days Windows would overwrite your boot loader and so
>> you'd need some way of reinstalling it. In these UEFI days you should
>> be able to boot Linux from the UEFI boot menu even if that happens.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Am just worried the Windows installation might be similar dumb as Chrome
> OS Flex, to not let the user choose a partition to be installed at.
> 
> Well, not planned any time soon anyway, so I keep looking for info.

In general Windows does not see the need to parallel install, but Linux 
does, ergo its usually safer to install windows first and let Linux sort 
out the mess.
But really its far easier to use virtual box if you have spare RAM


-- 
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich 
people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason 
they are poor.

Peter Thompson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36922

On Sun, 5 Feb 2023 08:34:20 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On 04/02/2023 23:06, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>> Am just worried the Windows installation might be similar dumb as
>> Chrome
>> OS Flex, to not let the user choose a partition to be installed at.
>> Well, not planned any time soon anyway, so I keep looking for info.
>
> In general Windows does not see the need to parallel install, but
> Linux does, ergo its usually safer to install windows first and let
> Linux sort out the mess.

I put a lot of effort into Linux already, so won't reinstall it only to
have Windows.

> But really its far easier to use virtual box if you have spare RAM

Only 8 GB here. Also had trouble trying to get Qemu working (some errors
with devices it couldn't find on initial launch).

May be I'll try VirtualBox at some point.
-- 
Andreas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36927

On 2023-02-06, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Feb 2023 08:34:20 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> In general Windows does not see the need to parallel install, but
>> Linux does, ergo its usually safer to install windows first and let
>> Linux sort out the mess.

I'd reword that to: Windows sees the need to not parallel install.
Gotta keep that monopoly going somehow.

> I put a lot of effort into Linux already, so won't reinstall it only to
> have Windows.
>
>> But really its far easier to use virtual box if you have spare RAM
>
> Only 8 GB here. Also had trouble trying to get Qemu working (some errors
> with devices it couldn't find on initial launch).
>
> May be I'll try VirtualBox at some point.

If you don't have to be bleeding-edge, try my solution:
I run XP under VirtualBox, and it runs fine with 512MB of memory.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  Apple is a cult.
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  Linux is anarchy.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  Pick your poison.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36934

On 2/5/23 11:34 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-02-06, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 5 Feb 2023 08:34:20 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> In general Windows does not see the need to parallel install, but
>>> Linux does, ergo its usually safer to install windows first and let
>>> Linux sort out the mess.
> 
> I'd reword that to: Windows sees the need to not parallel install.
> Gotta keep that monopoly going somehow.


   Absolutely correct. M$ is fully, totally, sociopathically,
   IN IT FOR THE MONEY.

   Won't be long before it does a SCAN for "alternate OS's"
   on boot - and freezes the machine if if finds anything.
   I'll bet Win-12. Oh, and you'll have to scrap yer gen8
   boxes too so M$ can get a chunk of all the REQUIRED gen12+
   boxes. Nobody says anything, nobody does anything, no big
   lawsuits or anti-trust actions ...........


>> I put a lot of effort into Linux already, so won't reinstall it only to
>> have Windows.

   I don't use Winders for anything. Haven't for many years.

   But not everybody has that option.

>>> But really its far easier to use virtual box if you have spare RAM
>>
>> Only 8 GB here. Also had trouble trying to get Qemu working (some errors
>> with devices it couldn't find on initial launch).
>>
>> May be I'll try VirtualBox at some point.
> 
> If you don't have to be bleeding-edge, try my solution:
> I run XP under VirtualBox, and it runs fine with 512MB of memory.

   But for how much longer ? Oh, and how long will the
   bosses put up with "obsolete" OS's they've been told
   are "insecure"/"inadequate" ??? They REALLY don't know
   any better but DO control the paycheck$.

   VirtualBox is good - and KVM/VMware can do most of
   what VB does. "WINE" just announced a major new
   upgrade ... haven't checked yet if it can run Win-11
   stuff decently.

   Oh well, I'm old enough to retire at any time. Not all
   of you are in that position however ........

   My only satisfaction ... I started with PDP-11's and
   punch cards and can do electronics/embedded. I don't
   see much of any "new me's" as practical replacements.
   I suspect a Giant Flushing Sound one the me's leave
   the scene  :-)

   Well ... note my other thread on ChatGPT and what M$
   is merging into it ... there may BE NO "programmers"
   anymore, we finally outsmarted ourselves ........

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36936

On 2023-02-06, 26C.Z968 <26C.Z968@noaada.net> wrote:

> On 2/5/23 11:34 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2023-02-06, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, 5 Feb 2023 08:34:20 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> In general Windows does not see the need to parallel install, but
>>>> Linux does, ergo its usually safer to install windows first and let
>>>> Linux sort out the mess.
>> 
>> I'd reword that to: Windows sees the need to not parallel install.
>> Gotta keep that monopoly going somehow.
>
>    Absolutely correct. M$ is fully, totally, sociopathically,
>    IN IT FOR THE MONEY.
>
>    Won't be long before it does a SCAN for "alternate OS's"
>    on boot - and freezes the machine if if finds anything.
>    I'll bet Win-12. Oh, and you'll have to scrap yer gen8
>    boxes too so M$ can get a chunk of all the REQUIRED gen12+
>    boxes. Nobody says anything, nobody does anything, no big
>    lawsuits or anti-trust actions ...........

Stuff like this has been going on since the Windows 95 Registration
Troj^H^H^H^HWizard, which someone discovered was scanning your machine
for over 200 different software packages (most of them from other
vendors) and reporting the results back to the mother ship.

Then there was UEFI, which for all its good intentions was turned
into an attempt to make it impossible to boot anything but Windows
on what is laughingly referred to as "your" computer.

>> If you don't have to be bleeding-edge, try my solution:
>> I run XP under VirtualBox, and it runs fine with 512MB of memory.
>
>    But for how much longer ? Oh, and how long will the
>    bosses put up with "obsolete" OS's they've been told
>    are "insecure"/"inadequate" ??? They REALLY don't know
>    any better but DO control the paycheck$.

I'm in a good position - I work for a small outfit and can
use XP to compile and test my stuff, which I've designed to
run on anything from 95 to the latest version.  (Plus Linux -
we're starting to get some customers who want some freedom
themselves.)

>    Oh well, I'm old enough to retire at any time. Not all
>    of you are in that position however ........

I am, but I still get satisfaction from my work.  And the
money really helps in these inflated times...

>    My only satisfaction ... I started with PDP-11's and
>    punch cards and can do electronics/embedded. I don't
>    see much of any "new me's" as practical replacements.
>    I suspect a Giant Flushing Sound one the me's leave
>    the scene  :-)

I'm with you there.  I started on small mainframes - where
"small" meant that 32K of memory was lots of room.

>    Well ... note my other thread on ChatGPT and what M$
>    is merging into it ... there may BE NO "programmers"
>    anymore, we finally outsmarted ourselves ........

Time to go underground.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  Apple is a cult.
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  Linux is anarchy.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  Pick your poison.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36943

On 2/6/23 1:18 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-02-06, 26C.Z968 <26C.Z968@noaada.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/5/23 11:34 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-02-06, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 5 Feb 2023 08:34:20 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In general Windows does not see the need to parallel install, but
>>>>> Linux does, ergo its usually safer to install windows first and let
>>>>> Linux sort out the mess.
>>>
>>> I'd reword that to: Windows sees the need to not parallel install.
>>> Gotta keep that monopoly going somehow.
>>
>>     Absolutely correct. M$ is fully, totally, sociopathically,
>>     IN IT FOR THE MONEY.
>>
>>     Won't be long before it does a SCAN for "alternate OS's"
>>     on boot - and freezes the machine if if finds anything.
>>     I'll bet Win-12. Oh, and you'll have to scrap yer gen8
>>     boxes too so M$ can get a chunk of all the REQUIRED gen12+
>>     boxes. Nobody says anything, nobody does anything, no big
>>     lawsuits or anti-trust actions ...........
> 
> Stuff like this has been going on since the Windows 95 Registration
> Troj^H^H^H^HWizard, which someone discovered was scanning your machine
> for over 200 different software packages (most of them from other
> vendors) and reporting the results back to the mother ship.
> 
> Then there was UEFI, which for all its good intentions was turned
> into an attempt to make it impossible to boot anything but Windows
> on what is laughingly referred to as "your" computer.
> 
>>> If you don't have to be bleeding-edge, try my solution:
>>> I run XP under VirtualBox, and it runs fine with 512MB of memory.
>>
>>     But for how much longer ? Oh, and how long will the
>>     bosses put up with "obsolete" OS's they've been told
>>     are "insecure"/"inadequate" ??? They REALLY don't know
>>     any better but DO control the paycheck$.
> 
> I'm in a good position - I work for a small outfit and can
> use XP to compile and test my stuff, which I've designed to
> run on anything from 95 to the latest version.  (Plus Linux -
> we're starting to get some customers who want some freedom
> themselves.)
> 
>>     Oh well, I'm old enough to retire at any time. Not all
>>     of you are in that position however ........
> 
> I am, but I still get satisfaction from my work.  And the
> money really helps in these inflated times...

   I'd like to stretch the paychecks & insurance plan
   at least another year ... but I dunno .....

>>     My only satisfaction ... I started with PDP-11's and
>>     punch cards and can do electronics/embedded. I don't
>>     see much of any "new me's" as practical replacements.
>>     I suspect a Giant Flushing Sound one the me's leave
>>     the scene  :-)
> 
> I'm with you there.  I started on small mainframes - where
> "small" meant that 32K of memory was lots of room.

   The bastards with the PDP-11 did have terminals, but
   we low-lives were expected to punch cards just like
   THEY had to do   :-)

   Surprised they didn't give us drum drives and mercury-
   delay "ram"  .......

>>     Well ... note my other thread on ChatGPT and what M$
>>     is merging into it ... there may BE NO "programmers"
>>     anymore, we finally outsmarted ourselves ........
> 
> Time to go underground.

   It'll work for awhile, but the "AI"s and their
   inefficient but CHEAP approach to software WILL
   win in the end unless the Giant Solar Flare
   happens.

   Oh well, I kinda remember how to make radios
   with vacuum tubes .......

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36969

On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 04:34:50 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
> On 2023-02-06, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>
>> Only 8 GB here. Also had trouble trying to get Qemu working (some errors
>> with devices it couldn't find on initial launch).
>>
>> May be I'll try VirtualBox at some point.

May the I have not activated the VM option in the BIOS (I didn't even
know something like this exists). Will have to check next time I reboot.

Or can it be checked on a running Linux? May be with inxi?

> If you don't have to be bleeding-edge, try my solution:
> I run XP under VirtualBox, and it runs fine with 512MB of memory.

The program I want to run is a game which needs at least Windows 8.
-- 
Andreas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36970

Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
> 
>> If you don't have to be bleeding-edge, try my solution:
>> I run XP under VirtualBox, and it runs fine with 512MB of memory.
> 
> The program I want to run is a game which needs at least Windows 8.

Maybe check whether it works in Wine as well? Note that you have to
install 32bit libs if your Linux installation is 64bit for Wine to
work (or at least I did, but I'm running 32bit Windows XP
programs).

https://appdb.winehq.org/

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36974

On 9 Feb 2023 17:06:08 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>
> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> If you don't have to be bleeding-edge, try my solution:
>>> I run XP under VirtualBox, and it runs fine with 512MB of memory.
>> 
>> The program I want to run is a game which needs at least Windows 8.
>
> Maybe check whether it works in Wine as well? Note that you have to
> install 32bit libs if your Linux installation is 64bit for Wine to
> work (or at least I did, but I'm running 32bit Windows XP
> programs).
>
> https://appdb.winehq.org/

Thanks. Will try Wine at some point. Have it already for VPinball and it
works great.
-- 
Andreas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36973

On 09/02/2023 05:18, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> The program I want to run is a game which needs at least Windows 8.

Does it require fast graphics? That is the one thing that is not great 
on virtual machines..

-- 
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web