*BSD News Article 89093


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!news.gmi.edu!news.flint.umich.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!panix!news.panix.com!mrw
From: awnbreel@panix.com (Michael R Weholt)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Dual booting between FreeBSDand Win95
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 97 20:14:55 GMT
Organization: Rookery Prawl
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <5e2h53$ke2@news1.panix.com>
References: <3301699f.14161936@nntp.sirius.com> <5e0ksu$d23@uuneo.neosoft.com> <5e1l73$fj4@news1.panix.com> <5e1t1j$itm@ui-gate.utell.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mrw.dialup.access.net
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0
X-No-Archive: Yes
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:35431

In article <5e1t1j$itm@ui-gate.utell.co.uk>, 
    brian@ui-gate.utell.co.uk (Brian Somers) wrote:
>Michael R Weholt (awnbreel@panix.com) wrote:
>: Q1:  Can I install FreeBSD on the second partition on Drive #1?  
>: Should I?  Or, should I put it on the first partition on Drive #2?  
>: Or, no difference?
>A very slight difference, if you install on the second disk, make sure
>that you install a boot manager (the default FreeBSD one is ok).  You'll
>be asked to press F5 followed by F1 (probably) if it's on disk 2.

        Right.  So there's no real disadvantage either way?  Whatever 
I feel like doing?  I mean, to use Win95 and FreeBSD, I'd have to 
install and use the boot manager anyway, right?

Michael R Weholt
 http://www.panix.com/~mrw/