DSL on USB enclosed HDDForum: HD Install Topic: DSL on USB enclosed HDD started by: MUTU Posted by MUTU on Dec. 12 2006,14:24
Hi,I have an 80GB laptop hard disk. I want to install DSL on it, but I want it to be used via a USB enclosure. I do have a laptop that would allow me to connect the hard disk to it and install to hard drive, but then I'd need to change the initrd so as to boot from USB. This will be my first Linux installation, so bear in mind that if you're giving me instructions they need to be spoonfed. I know it's irritating, but please help me... I've seriously spent over 30 hours in total trying to do this, and I am really depressed about it. Please help me! Also, don't suggest USB ZIP please. I tried it already... I need a proper installation. This will not be a portable OS, but it will be used as the only OS on a thin client that I have (which doesn't allow you to connect hard disk except by USB). I would be extremely grateful to anyone who can help me do this! Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Dec. 12 2006,15:11
This should be under USB booting I should think...Try USB-HDD? Assuming your laptop supports that. Posted by MUTU on Dec. 12 2006,15:14
No, I don't want either USB HDD or USB ZIP. I want a full installation.
Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Dec. 12 2006,15:35
What do you mean by "full"?All installations provide complete solutions, unless you specifically remaster the image. Unless you mean "debian-style traditional (etc) hd-install"....? Posted by MUTU on Dec. 12 2006,15:59
The USB ZIP option did not work well for me. It just wouldn't remember the settings. Also I understand that it works differently to an HD install.
Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Dec. 12 2006,16:50
Aha, so it did work, but not the way you expected?If so, maybe a reading of the local startup doc thats pops up first under dillo will be helpful. All installations are the same (variations on frugal installations) with the exception of the option mentioned in my previous post. Usually the only difference is how its booted. Posted by MUTU on Dec. 12 2006,16:55
So you're saying that a USB ZIP install would work completely identical to an HD install with a remade initrd to boot from USB?The hardware it will be used on has 56MB of RAM and 800MHz processor. The interface will be USB 1.1 as well... so I want to have as much performance as I can possibly get. Posted by MUTU on Dec. 12 2006,16:58
I did that, but I still couldn't figure it out. Anyway it says that by default it backs up everything. And when I did manage to open the file, it listed the paths I needed to backup. But it wasn't working. Also, I don't want the whole OS to load up in memory. I want it to work just like a HD install because I'm sure it would be much more efficient. Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Dec. 12 2006,17:06
I'm saying a frugal installation works the same either way - you haven't stated exactly what your problem is though.
Posted by MUTU on Dec. 12 2006,17:10
There is no problem. I want to have as much performance as I can with my hardware setup.Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the HD install with rewritten initrd would outperform the USB ZIP installation. Also, can the USB ZIP option use ext3? Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Dec. 12 2006,17:55
I'm going to assume by "HD install" you mean the 'traditional' debian-style way since you still haven't indicated which - then yes, you would have a slightly lower memory consumption, but i think the shorter startup time would be the only noticeable thing.No idea if ext3 can be used with usb zip (i don't use this anyways) but DSL only has support for ext2, so ext3 partitions would be mounted as such. I'd suggest that your current setup right now is optimal, unless you plan on doing something heavy (maybe add a swap?). Posted by MUTU on Dec. 12 2006,18:13
Hmm... it will be used for browsing the web and for torrent downloading. It won't be switched off, so startup time is unimportant.
Posted by MUTU on Dec. 13 2006,00:25
So is the general consensus that I should go for USB ZIP?
|