Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Ubuntu Linux on a ThinkPad

 
 
Tom Rutherford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-25-2010, 02:05 AM
Hi, All.

Eventually, I plan to put some distro of Linux, probably Ubuntu, on my R51
series. The computer now has an 80GB hard drive with 40GB dedicated to
WinXP, and 40GB of freespace in which I plan to stick Linux. I want Windows
to do the booting (no LILO or GRUB in the MBR), and I want to preserve the
Access IBM and the hidden partition, copied from the original 30GB drive
when I cloned it to the 80.

There's an article by Life Is Adventure, who did this on his T60, I believe,
and he refers to several links. The links to the O'Reiley article on doing
this to laptops in general do work, but the links to the articles
specifically relating to ThinkPads don't work anymore, so I may be missing
some details.

What I thought I'd do is do the ThinkPad procedures on my desktop, because I
don't want GRUB as the main bootloader here, either. It works, but it's
ugly, and if it farkles the Access IBM button and so on, I don't want it on
my laptop, either. Anyway, according to the Life Is Adventure article, I'm
supposed to install Linux on the hard drive or partition I want to run it
from (a 640GB drive, in my case), and make it bootable, and install GRUB on
it. I did that, or at least, I think so. :-) Not sure about GRUB, because
the binary file that Windows' boot.ini refers to is nothing but zeroes. I
make that file by copying the first 512 blocks of the Linux boot drive to a
file called ubuntu.bin, by doing the following from a running Linux system:

dd if=/dev/sdb1 of=ubuntu.bin bs=512 count=1

where /dev/sdb1 is the boot partition of my second hard drive, and
ubuntu.bin is supposed to show up in the /home directory of the functional
Linux system I'm doing this from. I then take that file and copy or move it
to the root directory of C:, and reference boot.ini to it by adding a line
to the file refering to the .bin file. The boot.ini business works, but
with the ubuntu.bin file being all zeroes, Windows lets me choose the Ubuntu
Linux selection, then drops me into a screen with nothing but a blinking
cursor.

What I plan to do later today is to switch drives, make sure that Linux is
the first OS seen, and if it boots, then I'm back to square one. If it
doesn't, then I plan to install Linux on it one more time, and if it boots
then, I'll switch drives back, do the make-file and copy routine (I have an
installation of Linux on a flash drive, but it's slower than I like), and
see if everything's kosher. If not, then I'm still back at the prime
polygon.

Has anyone here on these newsgroups done this, and what am I missing? TIA!

(Later...) I did disconnect the Windows drive, and Linux booted right up.
Linux *still* wanted to boot when I reconnected the Windows drive! I had to
do some fancy footwork to get things back to normal. I did another copy of
the first block of data from the Linux partition, btw, and put the file in
the Windows boot partition. Still no joy, though it wasn't all zeroes this
time. I wound up putting brackets [] around the Linux instruction in
Windows' boot.ini, and that essentially took it out of the loop. When I
figure out what's going on, I'll take those out so I can get the multi-boot
menu.

--
-- 73 DE Tom Rutherford, N8EUJ, Burton, MI
"She said it was either her or the ham radio. Over."





 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tom Rutherford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-26-2010, 08:11 PM

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:05:39 -0400, in
> <i2g69p$ic0$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Eventually, I plan to put some distro of Linux, probably Ubuntu, on my R51
>>series. The computer now has an 80GB hard drive with 40GB dedicated to
>>WinXP, and 40GB of freespace in which I plan to stick Linux. I want
>>Windows
>>to do the booting (no LILO or GRUB in the MBR), and I want to preserve the
>>Access IBM and the hidden partition, copied from the original 30GB drive
>>when I cloned it to the 80.

>
> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.


I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use WUBI
to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.

--
-- 73 DE Tom Rutherford, N8EUJ, Burton, MI
"She said it was either her or the ham radio. Over."



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tom Rutherford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-26-2010, 08:11 PM

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:05:39 -0400, in
> <i2g69p$ic0$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Eventually, I plan to put some distro of Linux, probably Ubuntu, on my R51
>>series. The computer now has an 80GB hard drive with 40GB dedicated to
>>WinXP, and 40GB of freespace in which I plan to stick Linux. I want
>>Windows
>>to do the booting (no LILO or GRUB in the MBR), and I want to preserve the
>>Access IBM and the hidden partition, copied from the original 30GB drive
>>when I cloned it to the 80.

>
> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.


I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use WUBI
to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.

--
-- 73 DE Tom Rutherford, N8EUJ, Burton, MI
"She said it was either her or the ham radio. Over."



 
Reply With Quote
 
Tom Rutherford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2010, 09:46 PM

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:11:22 -0400, in
> <i2n0mb$qaj$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..

>
>>> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
>>> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
>>> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.

>>
>>I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use WUBI
>>to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
>>"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
>>bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.

>
> Windows 7 boots pretty fast.
> But multi-boot is certainly a reasonable option.


XP gets to the desktop pretty fast, but it takes a while for it to get its
poop in a group. My attitude toward the Redmond Menace may change in the
next 4 years, and I may give 7 a shot. I'm sure it won't be free, though,
and I won't be able to install it on as many machines as I want without even
filling out a registration form, let alone dealing with product activation,
etc.

--
-- 73 DE Tom Rutherford, N8EUJ, Burton, MI
"She said it was either her or the ham radio. Over."



 
Reply With Quote
 
Tom Rutherford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-28-2010, 09:46 PM

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:11:22 -0400, in
> <i2n0mb$qaj$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..

>
>>> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
>>> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
>>> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.

>>
>>I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use WUBI
>>to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
>>"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
>>bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.

>
> Windows 7 boots pretty fast.
> But multi-boot is certainly a reasonable option.


XP gets to the desktop pretty fast, but it takes a while for it to get its
poop in a group. My attitude toward the Redmond Menace may change in the
next 4 years, and I may give 7 a shot. I'm sure it won't be free, though,
and I won't be able to install it on as many machines as I want without even
filling out a registration form, let alone dealing with product activation,
etc.

--
-- 73 DE Tom Rutherford, N8EUJ, Burton, MI
"She said it was either her or the ham radio. Over."



 
Reply With Quote
 
John Navas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-29-2010, 02:30 PM
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:46:38 -0400, in
<i2ru7h$b56$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:11:22 -0400, in
>> <i2n0mb$qaj$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) ...

>>
>>>> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
>>>> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
>>>> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.
>>>
>>>I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use WUBI
>>>to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
>>>"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
>>>bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.

>>
>> Windows 7 boots pretty fast.
>> But multi-boot is certainly a reasonable option.

>
>XP gets to the desktop pretty fast, but it takes a while for it to get its
>poop in a group.


True. Windows 7 is significantly faster, both on desktop appearing and
on ready to go to work.

A big problem for Windows is that many people (not saying you) tend to
blame it for the boot time of all the crap that's been added (implicitly
or explicitly) to their systems -- there's often a great deal of
difference versus the boot time of a naked Windows system, part of why
I use multi-boot and virtual machines for things I don't do all the
time.

>My attitude toward the Redmond Menace may change in the
>next 4 years, and I may give 7 a shot. I'm sure it won't be free, though,
>and I won't be able to install it on as many machines as I want without even
>filling out a registration form, let alone dealing with product activation,
>etc.


True. But I personally value my time, am willing to pay for things that
save me enough time to justify the cost, and Windows 7 easily meets that
test for me. Free (as in the case of Linux) often isn't enough to tip
the scale.

Today I'll be using Linux to work on a new RADIUS back-end system for a
client, but still mostly using Windows for other work, so I'll probably
be running Linux in a guest virtual machine hosted on Windows.
(I recommended BSD, but the client wants Linux. [sigh])

--
John You are cordially invited to participate in the
official ThinkPad group news:comp.sys.laptops.thinkpad
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Navas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-29-2010, 02:30 PM
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:46:38 -0400, in
<i2ru7h$b56$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:11:22 -0400, in
>> <i2n0mb$qaj$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) ...

>>
>>>> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
>>>> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
>>>> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.
>>>
>>>I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use WUBI
>>>to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
>>>"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
>>>bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.

>>
>> Windows 7 boots pretty fast.
>> But multi-boot is certainly a reasonable option.

>
>XP gets to the desktop pretty fast, but it takes a while for it to get its
>poop in a group.


True. Windows 7 is significantly faster, both on desktop appearing and
on ready to go to work.

A big problem for Windows is that many people (not saying you) tend to
blame it for the boot time of all the crap that's been added (implicitly
or explicitly) to their systems -- there's often a great deal of
difference versus the boot time of a naked Windows system, part of why
I use multi-boot and virtual machines for things I don't do all the
time.

>My attitude toward the Redmond Menace may change in the
>next 4 years, and I may give 7 a shot. I'm sure it won't be free, though,
>and I won't be able to install it on as many machines as I want without even
>filling out a registration form, let alone dealing with product activation,
>etc.


True. But I personally value my time, am willing to pay for things that
save me enough time to justify the cost, and Windows 7 easily meets that
test for me. Free (as in the case of Linux) often isn't enough to tip
the scale.

Today I'll be using Linux to work on a new RADIUS back-end system for a
client, but still mostly using Windows for other work, so I'll probably
be running Linux in a guest virtual machine hosted on Windows.
(I recommended BSD, but the client wants Linux. [sigh])

--
John You are cordially invited to participate in the
official ThinkPad group news:comp.sys.laptops.thinkpad
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tom Rutherford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2010, 07:13 PM

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:46:38 -0400, in
> <i2ru7h$b56$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:11:22 -0400, in
>>> <i2n0mb$qaj$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
>>>
>>>>> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
>>>>> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
>>>>> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.
>>>>
>>>>I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use
>>>>WUBI
>>>>to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
>>>>"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
>>>>bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.
>>>
>>> Windows 7 boots pretty fast.
>>> But multi-boot is certainly a reasonable option.

>>
>>XP gets to the desktop pretty fast, but it takes a while for it to get its
>>poop in a group.

>
> True. Windows 7 is significantly faster, both on desktop appearing and
> on ready to go to work.


Peachy.

> A big problem for Windows is that many people (not saying you) tend to
> blame it for the boot time of all the crap that's been added (implicitly
> or explicitly) to their systems -- there's often a great deal of
> difference versus the boot time of a naked Windows system, part of why
> I use multi-boot and virtual machines for things I don't do all the
> time.


Oh, yeah, but even when the icons quit straggling into the notification
area, XP is still not ready. Of course, there is the Microsoft stuff that's
necessary, over and above the naked OS, to make some things work. I have a
talking clock on my XP installaion, which required .NET Framework 2.0 before
it would even install. Then, since Microsoft Sam sounds so down in the
dumps all the time, I had to go out and get Mike and Mary. Mary is now my
default system voice, but I wonder if Mike and Sam are in the mix. I think
..NET added at least a couple minutes to the time it takes for XP to get
ready.

>>My attitude toward the Redmond Menace may change in the
>>next 4 years, and I may give 7 a shot. I'm sure it won't be free, though,
>>and I won't be able to install it on as many machines as I want without
>>even
>>filling out a registration form, let alone dealing with product
>>activation,
>>etc.

>
> True. But I personally value my time, am willing to pay for things that
> save me enough time to justify the cost, and Windows 7 easily meets that
> test for me. Free (as in the case of Linux) often isn't enough to tip
> the scale.


That's true, too. I tend to have more free time than disposable income,
though, so I usually take the least time-consuming "free". OTOH, as with
the latest project of mine, I've learned quite a bit, trying to get a free
OS installed. :-)

> Today I'll be using Linux to work on a new RADIUS back-end system for a
> client, but still mostly using Windows for other work, so I'll probably
> be running Linux in a guest virtual machine hosted on Windows.
> (I recommended BSD, but the client wants Linux. [sigh])


Which distribution? They all have their advantages and disadvantages.

--
-- 73 DE Tom Rutherford, N8EUJ, Burton, MI
"She said it was either her or the ham radio. Over."



 
Reply With Quote
 
Tom Rutherford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2010, 07:13 PM

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:46:38 -0400, in
> <i2ru7h$b56$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:11:22 -0400, in
>>> <i2n0mb$qaj$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
>>>
>>>>> An option worth considering is running Linux in a virtual machine with
>>>>> Windows as the host. I use Windows 7 as my host, with Windows XP and
>>>>> Linux as guests. More details available if you're interested.
>>>>
>>>>I want to eventually get away from Windows, though. I could also use
>>>>WUBI
>>>>to access Linux in Windows folders, too, but either option strikes me as
>>>>"cheating". I want to boot to Linux, not wait for Windows to get its
>>>>bloatware loaded and get out of the way before I can run Linux.
>>>
>>> Windows 7 boots pretty fast.
>>> But multi-boot is certainly a reasonable option.

>>
>>XP gets to the desktop pretty fast, but it takes a while for it to get its
>>poop in a group.

>
> True. Windows 7 is significantly faster, both on desktop appearing and
> on ready to go to work.


Peachy.

> A big problem for Windows is that many people (not saying you) tend to
> blame it for the boot time of all the crap that's been added (implicitly
> or explicitly) to their systems -- there's often a great deal of
> difference versus the boot time of a naked Windows system, part of why
> I use multi-boot and virtual machines for things I don't do all the
> time.


Oh, yeah, but even when the icons quit straggling into the notification
area, XP is still not ready. Of course, there is the Microsoft stuff that's
necessary, over and above the naked OS, to make some things work. I have a
talking clock on my XP installaion, which required .NET Framework 2.0 before
it would even install. Then, since Microsoft Sam sounds so down in the
dumps all the time, I had to go out and get Mike and Mary. Mary is now my
default system voice, but I wonder if Mike and Sam are in the mix. I think
..NET added at least a couple minutes to the time it takes for XP to get
ready.

>>My attitude toward the Redmond Menace may change in the
>>next 4 years, and I may give 7 a shot. I'm sure it won't be free, though,
>>and I won't be able to install it on as many machines as I want without
>>even
>>filling out a registration form, let alone dealing with product
>>activation,
>>etc.

>
> True. But I personally value my time, am willing to pay for things that
> save me enough time to justify the cost, and Windows 7 easily meets that
> test for me. Free (as in the case of Linux) often isn't enough to tip
> the scale.


That's true, too. I tend to have more free time than disposable income,
though, so I usually take the least time-consuming "free". OTOH, as with
the latest project of mine, I've learned quite a bit, trying to get a free
OS installed. :-)

> Today I'll be using Linux to work on a new RADIUS back-end system for a
> client, but still mostly using Windows for other work, so I'll probably
> be running Linux in a guest virtual machine hosted on Windows.
> (I recommended BSD, but the client wants Linux. [sigh])


Which distribution? They all have their advantages and disadvantages.

--
-- 73 DE Tom Rutherford, N8EUJ, Burton, MI
"She said it was either her or the ham radio. Over."



 
Reply With Quote
 
John Navas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-31-2010, 02:47 PM
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:13:16 -0400, in
<i3153g$7gj$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, "Tom Rutherford"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .


>> Today I'll be using Linux to work on a new RADIUS back-end system for a
>> client, but still mostly using Windows for other work, so I'll probably
>> be running Linux in a guest virtual machine hosted on Windows.
>> (I recommended BSD, but the client wants Linux. [sigh])

>
>Which distribution? They all have their advantages and disadvantages.


Ubuntu, because it's arguably easiest for my client, plus it has
convenient tools for USB flash and Windows environments.

--
John You are cordially invited to participate in the
official ThinkPad group news:comp.sys.laptops.thinkpad
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ubuntu Linux on a ThinkPad Tom Rutherford IBM Thinkpad 0 07-25-2010 02:05 AM
ubuntu or dam small linux Zack Acer 0 10-17-2006 04:45 PM
installing ubuntu linux on the laptop slake Laptops 5 12-14-2005 08:39 PM
Ubuntu Linux on Gateway 7510GZ Frank Hahn Laptops 6 08-12-2005 12:58 AM
Old PC - ASUS P5A-B - Will not boot Linux (Ubuntu) mark4asp Asus 15 11-06-2004 06:52 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:11 PM.


Welcome!
Welcome to Motherboard Point
 

Advertisment