[ubuntu-in] Ubuntu and Archlinux Dual boot

[Ritesh Sinha]

2010/4/25 Mallikarjun <mallik.v.arjun at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 6:30 PM, NARENDRA DIWATE <narendra.diwate at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I have been using Linux for the past 5 years, Opensuse initially, then
>> ubuntu, both dual boot with WinXP. I moved permanently to Ubuntu about 1.5
>> years ago. I like to keep my System upto date and hence that has involved
>> upgrading the OS every 6 months.
>>
>> I would like to put an end to this 6 monthly upgrade madness by moving to
>> a rolling release, i.e Arch initially dual booting with Ubuntu.
>>
>> Now pl help with these few Q's:
>> 1. Is this a good Idea at all for a guy not very comfortable with command
>> line (but can live with it if needed) inspite of a 5 year linux Exp?

IMHO, this is OT and would be better answered on the arch mailing
list. Here are my thoughts. I use Arch a bit too. It does require some
command line work. However, the stuff you need to do via the  command
line is fairly well documented on the wiki. In fact, you start with a
barebones installation and go on to install the desktop environment of
your choice all via the command line (with a rudimentary ncurses based
installation wizard)

>
> If you are comfortable with Ubuntu then, any GNU/Linux distro should be
> fine. There a no gimics done by Ubuntu excepts a polish and regular
> upgrades...
> Infact, Upgrades have lot of cons than pros mainly waste of time. (Purely my
> opinion)
>
>>
>> 2. Though Arch is considered the best Rolling release, is it the best
>> choice for a guy like me? Are there any beginner friendly oned out there?
>> Chakra is still Alpha so not so comfortable. Frankly the Arch Documentation
>> and Wiki are the most comprehensive and well thought out i have seen in the
>> recent past.
>
Arch is the best (well documented) rolling release. No other beginner
friendly ones that I am aware of. But you can look at it this way,
once you've spent the effort in setting it up the first time you don't
really have to do much to keep it running. You should also be aware
that you will usually have bleeding edge software and compatibility
might break from time to time (this is anecdotal of course, YMMV).

> I dont have any experience in Arch, I would appreciate to know your
> experience with Arch till now.
>
>>
>> 3. If I can go ahead which should be installed first? Remember dual
>> booting with WinXP, XP is always installed first. Ubuntu comes with GRUB2,
>> Arch with GRUB Old. Naturally the Rolling release will stay, while the other
>> OS might change.

XP first, Ubuntu next, Arch after that. Skip "installing the
bootloader" bit in the arch install. Run "sudo update-grub" from
Ubuntu, this will locate your Arch install and add it automatically.
If that doesn't work, you might need to add a separate config file

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1195275


> Install XP first --> No grub
> Install Arch next --> since it has a rolling release so no change to grub
> Install Ubuntu next --> Actually Ubuntu detects more OS's on HDD than any
> other which I have tried. So I suggest Ubuntu to be last in the list...
>
>>
>> 4. All my Data with live in separate partitions not along with any OS. So
>> Which FS type is better - EXT3 or EXT4. No WinXP, so no need of NTFS. In
>> addition it is backed up to a USB Hard Disk.

EXT3 is good enough, nothing wrong with it. There were recent talks
about performance regressions in EXT4 performance on 2.6.30+ kernels
(you should find it on phoronix.com), not sure if they've been
resolved yet.
>
> Depends on your use, AFAIK EXT4 has better performance with large files and
> many more pros than EXT3, but EXT3 is well tested since it lives longer.
> If you are a normal used, go ahead with EXT4.
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Narendra Diwate
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ubuntu-in mailing list
>> ubuntu-in at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
>>
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-in mailing list
> ubuntu-in at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
>
>



-- 
Sent using the magic of the interwebs.
http://ritesh.posterous.com