Hard Drive/Partition not detected?

Can you tell me if you are using a desktop or a laptop??

I'm using a desktop - I even tried with a second HD in my machine but that wasn't detected in any way either.

Can you please provide the output of:

sudo fdisk -l

Did you MD5 check the ISO you downloaded? Did you run the CD verifier once initially booted to? Have you scanned your RAM for errors.

You could try disabling unnecessary hardware in BIOS like LAN, sound, wifi etc (there may be more) to make the system bog basic.

If all else fails hit F6 on the first boot screen and choose some boot options. This can help. You may need an extra module to get your drive controllers working but it will depend on the controllers use in the system.

Try those first and see how you go. We can go lower but its good to cover the basics first.

Hmm, this problem happened to someone else yesterday too. I've not heard of it happening before tho? This often seems to be the way with this problems, so i guess we'll see a few more people with this during the week and then the problem will vanish again?

In the previous case "fdisk" gave the right answers but gparted couldn't see the partitions at all.

sudo fdisk? is that a command prompt thing? I did MD5 check the ISO and run the verifier!

Yes, try going up to the top taskbar and click on

Applications - Accessories - Terminal

and type into the terminal/command window/console

sudo fdisk -l

note that you can get quick help cheat-sheets on commands by typing " -h" or " --help" after the command. For example try

sudo -h

fdisk -h

to see what these commands do before following the advice to use them ;)
Good luck and regards from
Tom :)

Good that you checked the ISO. Many dont then wonder why they get issues. Well done :)

A lot of good advice there but I think i'm ok now.

Hitting F6 and adding some boot options seemed to make Ubuntu recognise my HD (thanks actionparsnip) doesn't make sense to me - but it's the only thing that's made any difference.

Now I just need to figure out partitions.

I'm thinking one for xp, one for ubuntu, one for ubuntu swap and one fat32 to share between the two os's?

is this a common way to go about things?? the setting which partitions to do what part seems a bit tricky also but i'm assuming that will be well covered in docs for newbies.

It makes absolute sense. The default options for the kernel do not suit your system. That is why that functionality exists. It is synonymous with the fact that there are modules for drivers for various hardware, you can add and remove these modules to add and remove functionality. In your case, some ACPI or DMA functionality is conflicting with the communication with your drives so you need to take it out so the installer can put the data onto the disk.

If you are dualboting, install XP first but do not use 100% of the disk for XP as this will save you having to resize the partition later.

Yes automatic partitioning for Ubuntu but the dual boot is made MUCH easier by installing Windows first, The default coice for windows is (retardedly) using the entire disk for one big partition. If you select the size you want to set the windows partition to then Ubuntu will see the remaining space and offer to use it. This is the easiest way to setup a dual boot rig.

If you are only installing ubuntu on the system then what Tom suggested sounds great, my / partition is only 4Gb in size with the rest as swap and /home but my system use is only browsing and chatting so I maximise my space for user data.

Lol, Ok, Ap seems to have been confused about what i'm suggesting so to clarify my proposal.

1. Boot up LiveCd of Ubuntu or any other gnu/linux distro
2. Sort out the way partitions are layed out & formatted
3. Install Windows to sda2
4. Install Ubuntu

In step 4 i'm suggesting using "Manual Partitioning" (which you'd also have to do if you followed AP's advice). This option is usually the bottom of 3 options and is easily missed because the top 2 options "Automatic" & "Guided" (or some-such choices, maybe the first one is called "Entire" now) have a nice graphic but the bottom choice "Manual" doesn't. When you choose "Manual" it has to rescan the drive which was scary for a moment but then it shows how you've laid out your partitions. This is when you can edit the linux partitions so that the "Mount Point" of sda3 is set to "/" which might also be called "Root". Then edit sda5 to have a "Mount Point" called "/home".

Alternatively - install Windows to fill the entire drive, then use "Guided Partitioning" and see how that goes.

Either of those 2 ways of installing are good but AP's suggestion of installing Windows to only fill half the drive will then mean that "Guided Partitioning" will ignore the empty half and will instead just take half the space you gave to Windows! lol

I've done a lot of Windows installs and a fair few dual-boot installs but i think AP doesn't have Windows on his system at all <shrugs> Admirable and good for getting linux-only advice from, especially given his extensive in-depth experience of linux.

Anyway, it's your choice and whatever you do it should be fairly easy to adapt things after install or sometime later, if you're not completely happy with it. Remember that linux offers such a huge variety of options that each of us can get quite heated about what "the right way" is but ultimately there's only 1 right way and that's your own (or in my case my neighbours way - until i try his and he tries mine at which point i realise that my way had been best ;) lol). Linux offers freedom OF choice. Windows gives freedom FROM choice.

Good luck and regards from
Tom :)

Thats way more convoluted than it needs to be

1. Boot XP CD and create the XP partition but do not use the whole disk, configure XP (Drivers apps etc0
2. Boot to Ubuntu CD and tell it to use the largest contiguous space (The space you did not use earlier). Use automaitic partitioning if you wish.

Done

Your method ivolves booting to Live CD, then XP, then back to Ubuntu. What a faff.

AP
Try your way and see what happens. Clearly you haven't tried it.

Also i don't see what's so complicated about

"Alternatively - install Windows to fill the entire drive, then use "Guided Partitioning" and see how that goes."

Its worked in all the linux's I have used since Mandrake 7. You just have to tell the XP installer to not use all of the drive which is the default. I know users like to just hammer enter to move things along but if you partition wisely this method works great.

Why do you think you can resize an NTFS partition to make space for linux, this is exactly synonymous with initially setting the right size from the start rather than setting the NTFS partition to take 100% space in the XP installer.

Please watch this from 3 minutes onwards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3t8Js_STEs

I think you'll fid this video highlights exactly what I am saying.

Interesting. It started being useful from about 5 minutes into the 2nd YouTube video at which point he used "Manual Partitioning" lol, exactly what i have been saying :) So all the useful stuff is crammed into the last 4 minutes. lol

His understanding of what the linux-swap is for was wrong except that he also does say that it's the equivalent of "pagefile.sys" in Windows. His idea about the way linux-swap is used is interesting but ...
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SwapFaq
Linux-swap needs to be between 1 x Ram and 2 x Ram. Having it as 2 x Ram means that you might well not need to change it if you add more ram sometime later. If you have plenty of drive space then losing even as much as 1 or 2 Gb to linux-swap isn't going to hurt but does make things hugely easier if you do end up getting more ram. With Windows on the system the chances are that you'll find a need for more ram later because Windows is really bad at efficiently using this type of computer resource, so why not plan ahead?

The video doesn't show us how the Windows Partitioner has laid out the partitions. It just shows us the Windows "lets make this easy for the stupid user" style and the videos don't then show us how this looks to a linux partitioner. My experience of doing this is that it makes the 1st partition a Primary one but then stuffs all the rest into an Extended partition which can give a slight decrease in performance for anything that isn't on that 1st partition. On newer machines and decent hard-drives it's less of an issue but at best it's very inelegant.

Also he doesn't take into account the different read/write speeds that most hard-drives suffer from across the surface of the drive and fails to use that to advantage. Given that read/write speed at the end of the drive can be half that of the read/write speed at the beginning of the drive i think this is a surprising 'detail' to leave out. He rushes through the complexity i clearly laid out but i guess that because he wasn't clear about what he was doing and gabbled it that somehow makes it easier.

The camera work shows us a good silhouette of the guy in a bedroom(!?) When the camera does manage to focus on the screen we see Windows talking about 3 drives but as the camera is more interested in showing the guys pillow rather than the machine we have only his monotonous voice telling us that it's only one drive - there's no footage showing just 1 physical hard-drive inside the case. If 'his sister' had used a tripod (or 2) and shot from where the bed was then we might have had a much more professional, informative video with much better lighting.

Apart from that it's a good video showing exactly what i have been saying, either
1. Tailor partitions, install Windows & then install Ubuntu using "Manual Partitioning"
2. Install Windows to fill drive & then install Ubuntu using either "Guided" or "Manual" partitioning. Not an elegant end-result but good enough.

I haven't seen anything to suggest that AP is right about installing Windows to half the drive and then using "Guided". In my experience this will lead to a large chunk of the drive being empty but feel free to try it and report back.

Good luck and regards from
Tom :)

Thanks everyone for your help - I have installed Ubuntu successfully now (but to be honest I'm not sure why i'd switch from XP) But I thought it was time I at LEAST had a look.

There's nothing wrong with Ubuntu I just can't see the advantage of starting all over again, finding equivalent programs etc.

I don't know - I'll keep the dual boot for a while and see if I dig it. I mean, running this wine thing to run windows apps? May aswell run them in windows!?!

Great forum this though and AMAZING support from the users here - one clear advantage over the support available from MS products.

Lol, thanks & congrats :))

I would definitely avoid running any Windows stuff in linux. Why bother with it when native linux apps tend to be so much better anyway?
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SwitchingToUbuntu/FromWindows

To get almost all your multimedia working in one go it's worth running through the Medibuntu worksheet
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Medibuntu
I tend to go with non-free components and haven't had to pay anything so far. Depending on which country you're in perhaps you should pay someone for the rights to use certain codecs and things. I'm still waiting to be asked and will then look into the validity of the claim made - perhaps while simultaneously switching over to completely OpenSource to really free myself.

I find the best way to add any extra functionality i require is to go up to the top taskbar and click on

System - Administration - Synaptic Package Manager

and then use the search button to do some vague search. If i do know the name of a particular package then i still tend to use the search button even though it's main advantage is that it searches in package descriptions as well as in package titles. There are other package managers (for example, Applications - Add/Remove Applications) and they all read the same lists, databases, repos and everything but i prefer the way synaptic gives me more detail. Sometimes it just adds a library or codec to make an application i use all the time just gain the extra functionality, sometimes it suggests installing a whole new app :)

The idea of continuing to think in Windows terms and then trying to translate that into linux terms doesn't appeal. Each is good in their own world. I agree that Xp is an excellent OS now - in the linux world we would say the beta testing stage has finally produced something that's just about secure enough and Xp seems ready for full release. It's just a shame that microsquish has made so much money from selling people something that wasn't really ready and is beginning to withdraw support for it now that Xp is at last ready! lol

Oh here's one good reason for going with linux
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Antivirus

I see no reason to wipe my Xp side or my linux sides. They both work so i'm keeping both <shrugs> Not a big issue for me :)
Good luck and welcome to linux-land, especially the Ubuntu corner of it :)
Regards from
Tom :))

So Tom - If you were dual booting both what would make you choose XP over
Linux at the boot screen and vice versa?

I did like the general speed of the OS and the fact that firefox was already
there and i had to do ZERO setup to get online (with xp I need to add
DNS/set IP's etc)

I'd be inclined to use ubuntu for mail/browsing etc but not sure what else??
 (I like open office 3, but it's available on XP too)

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Tom
<email address hidden>wrote:

> Your question #77535 on Ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/77535
>
> Tom posted a new comment:
> Lol, thanks & congrats :))
>
> I would definitely avoid running any Windows stuff in linux. Why bother
> with it when native linux apps tend to be so much better anyway?
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SwitchingToUbuntu/FromWindows
>
> To get almost all your multimedia working in one go it's worth running
> through the Medibuntu worksheet
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Medibuntu
> I tend to go with non-free components and haven't had to pay anything so
> far. Depending on which country you're in perhaps you should pay someone
> for the rights to use certain codecs and things. I'm still waiting to be
> asked and will then look into the validity of the claim made - perhaps while
> simultaneously switching over to completely OpenSource to really free
> myself.
>
> I find the best way to add any extra functionality i require is to go up
> to the top taskbar and click on
>
> System - Administration - Synaptic Package Manager
>
> and then use the search button to do some vague search. If i do know
> the name of a particular package then i still tend to use the search
> button even though it's main advantage is that it searches in package
> descriptions as well as in package titles. There are other package
> managers (for example, Applications - Add/Remove Applications) and they
> all read the same lists, databases, repos and everything but i prefer
> the way synaptic gives me more detail. Sometimes it just adds a library
> or codec to make an application i use all the time just gain the extra
> functionality, sometimes it suggests installing a whole new app :)
>
> The idea of continuing to think in Windows terms and then trying to
> translate that into linux terms doesn't appeal. Each is good in their
> own world. I agree that Xp is an excellent OS now - in the linux world
> we would say the beta testing stage has finally produced something
> that's just about secure enough and Xp seems ready for full release.
> It's just a shame that microsquish has made so much money from selling
> people something that wasn't really ready and is beginning to withdraw
> support for it now that Xp is at last ready! lol
>
> Oh here's one good reason for going with linux
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Antivirus
>
> I see no reason to wipe my Xp side or my linux sides. They both work so
> i'm keeping both <shrugs> Not a big issue for me :)
> Good luck and welcome to linux-land, especially the Ubuntu corner of it :)
> Regards from
> Tom :))
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are a direct
> subscriber of the question.
>

What would the XP install be for?

Well, it was a bit of a classic case really - you'll probably hear this one a lot. To start with i almost exclusively booted into Windows but started to boot into gnu&linux out of fascination and to do web-browsing more safely. I found out how to set the default boot to go into Windows. Then i found that running antivirus scans and the subsequent repair work work was better and easier from linux. That made me realise i could read Windows data and so i started using OpenOffice to write stuff. Odd diagrams and pictures were easier in gimp, in Windows i hadn't got past "Paint" and Photoshop scared me but somehow Gimp was easy enough, even though it's a lot like Photoshop to look at. That gave me most of what i needed for tech support to a few clients by email, so i didn't need to go round to visit them so much. Oh and screenshots are easier too, just press the "Print Screen" key, if you press "Alt" at the same time no-one could tell that i wasn't in Windows ;)

Then i had a bit more free time and got my neighbour to sort multimedia for me. Then i found a couple of games "Wesnoth" and "Glest" which are a little bit like "World of Warcraft" which i hadn't played since Playstation1 - both quite different twists on WoW though. "Glest" is beautiful.

Err that's about when i realised that somehow in 6 months i had gradually weaned myself off Windows without really trying. Occasional hassles with one thing or other would send me back into Windows but now i only go back to get screenshots or check up on something, perhaps check where things are in menus or something and perhaps do a quick defrag while there! lol. It's main function is as a backup OS in case something happens to stop me booting into Ubuntu & also some things like games and stuff do work better in Windows at first so if i need them it wont be a nightmare of trying to reinstall and reinstate Windows :) So about then is when i changed the default to boot into Ubuntu <shrugs>

Ok, for a lot of people the migration to linux is a huge hassle and there's desperate desire to free themselves from Windows within a certain time-frame, or against a deadline. Take that stress out of it and feel free to go back and forth and it's all quite easy really. I do really like Windows tho. It breaks down so often and has such a load of problems that people are always needing someone to fix things for them :)

Anyway, good luck and regards from
Tom :)