• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

poll question for dual-booters

poll question for dual-booters

  • Windows boot NTFS partition

    Votes: 3 20.0%
  • Linux boot ext2/3 partition

    Votes: 4 26.7%
  • Separate NTFS partition

    Votes: 3 20.0%
  • Separate FAT32 partition

    Votes: 5 33.3%
  • Separate ext2 partition

    Votes: 5 33.3%

  • Total voters
    15

carangil

Experienced Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
285
Location
Oakland, CA
Hi here's a question for all of you that dual boot. Where do you keep all your media files, like music and photos? Linux seems to read/write NTFS safely, and with the right drivers, Windows reads/writes ext2/3. What's everyone's preferences?
 

Ole Juul

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
3,982
Location
Coalmont, BC, Canada
Most people I know that dual boot run various versions of Linux like stable and testing. :p

Nitpicking aside, :) Regarding file storage, are you asking about OS preference or file system preference?
 

carangil

Experienced Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
285
Location
Oakland, CA
Well, I spend about the same amount of time in both Windows and Linux. I used to use both the My Documents/Music/Pictures folders of Windows, and the similar spots in the linux Home directory. Half my stuff was on one partition or the other, depending on whichever OS I was running at the time I wanted to save something. A few years ago NTFS support in Linux wasn't very solid, (and ext2 windows extenstions were readonly). I was OK with each OS treating the other's files as readonly.

For about a year or so I've been writing NTFS in linux, and writing ext2 in Windows, and nothing has gotten corrupted. So now I'd like all my photos in one place, all my music in one place, etc.

I'm just curious which filesystem people trust more.
 

Ole Juul

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
3,982
Location
Coalmont, BC, Canada
I think setting up a separate partition, or drive, is always best for data. Putting it on the same partition is just asking for trouble. I always recommend a separate /home in Linux. It makes upgrades and OS changes safer and easier. Besides the root partition needs less than 20GB and more is a waste. I'm sure the same concepts would hold up in MS-Windows.

I haven't done it yet, but the best way is probably to actually put the /home in the root partition, then use /home/~/media etc and then use symlinks - but that is another discussion. :)

Regarding file systems, if one uses a lot of MS-Windows then NTFS is probably a better choice just to make things easier on that side. Both NTFS and ext3 are journalling, so not much difference there. However, ext3 will have more rubust security and will fragment less. Not just the likelihood of fragmentation, but the fact that it is proprietary is also a negative for NTFS in my opinion. So ... the winner is ... ext3!

PS: Speed normally isn't a problem, but I believe reiserfs has the same good points as ext3, and is faster.
 

Bobthearch

Experienced Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
226
Location
Raton, New Mexico
I've never really kept large amounts of files stored on a computer. And I generally limit an operating system from accessing another OSes' partition(s).

However, there are times when I'd need to move files from one OS to another. In that case, I'd utilize a small FAT32 partition for transferring files between operating systems. Never had a problem with reliability, and it seems that most OSes can read/write FAT32 natively (BeOS, Linux, QNX, Windows...).
 

pontus

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
698
Location
Uppsala, Sweden
I actually keep my data on a ext3 partition which is mounted like an ext2 partition in windows. Which means I need to fsck each time I've written something in windows. I don't do that very often so it is not a problem. For my limited use it has worked reliably
 

linuxlove

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
1,018
Location
Auburn, AL
my dual-booting is not really dual-booting in the sense of two or more operating systems on one hard drive. i install various OSs on whatever hard drive i have laying around and if i want to use something, i put the hard drive in with something on it and use it. if i want to go back to whatever, i put in the hard drive with whatever on it.
 

PhotoJim

Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
45
Location
Regina, SK, CA
I use a server - running Linux, using NFS or Samba as the case may be. That way no matter what machine I'm on, my data is easily available. I have a VPN set up in case I'm not at home, and if I'm worried about having connectivity I just throw files I need onto a flash drive or onto the local hard drive (on the partition of the OS that I want to use at the time).
 

barythrin

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
6,256
Location
Texas
Traditionally when I used to do that I found ntfs support under linux to be flaky and I usually used Windows for my general BSing around (which was most of the time) so I had things on a fat32 partition since it's widely implemented for r/w access under lots of OS's.

It's good as long as you don't need a file larger than 4GB on the file system.
 

hmbrew

Experienced Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
98
Location
Western NY State
I usually keep my files in my linux partition (ubuntu!) since I only use windows once or twice a week anyway for CAD stuff. (For an engineering class) When I have a file that needs to be accessed by both OS's, I store it on my SD card which I keep permanently plugged in.

I have not experienced any problems reading my windows XP partition from ubuntu. (for going on 2 years) I'm a complete addict! :p

Edit: and the SD card uses the windows format, so it is readable by both without any special software.
 
Last edited:

creepingnet

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
1,051
Location
Sparks, NV
I keep my files on 3 separate partitions according to what I'm doing. I usually have one for software that I may need to re-load someday, another for games, and another for music/video both recording and playback. They are usually FAT-32 or NTFS depending upon how I feel that day.

The reason for this setup is that when I need to back up my files I usually have a place to put them, and then I can reinstall my operating system without issues of missing data and whatnot. This is starting to look to be more useful for me again since changing to XP a year ago. Win2K never had to get the r&r treatment.
 

sbrown

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
37
For the machines dual-booting Debian & a *BSD variant it's easier to write ext2/3 then UFS.

It's far simpler to just mount a share over samba, or grab a couple files via scp. Quieter too; a bunch of blinkenlights on SCSI drives make look pretty but most of them are screaming loud compared to a modern SATA drive. Of course, I say this while looking at said pretty blinkenlights.

The SCSI drives will probably outlast the SATA ones.
 

Bungo Pony

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
616
Location
Winnipeg
Mine sit on my Linux partition. I use Linux 98% of the time and it just avoids that little extra click to mount the NTFS drive :D

I also keep my /home directory in a seperate partition. It just makes sense.
 

carangil

Experienced Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
285
Location
Oakland, CA
Thanks everyone. Currently I'm running windows 7 rc and fedora 9. Planning to install a 'real' copy of win7 and a fresh install of the latest fedora. I'll definately create a separate partition for media and documents. I'm still tempted to use fat32... Most os deal with it well.
 

Anonymous Freak

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
762
Location
Cascadia
Well, depends on which machine. At present, I have three "multi-boot" machines.

One is my MacBook Pro with OS X Snow Leopard on the main partition, and Windows Vista Home Premium on the second. Apple's "Boot Camp" drivers include an HFS+ driver for Windows, so I leave my core files on my HFS+ OS X partition. (I also store photos, music, and movies on external HFS+ hard drives; and have a network share, whose file system is irrelevant.)

One is my PC, which dual boots Windows Vista Ultimate and Windows 7 Ultimate. Win7 is on a two-drive RAID-0; Vista is on a 100 GB partition on a 1 TB drive. I store my data files on the 900 GB partition of the 1 TB drive. (I even have the "Public" folder re-mapped to be on that partition for both OSes, and have some applications installed to that partition for both OSes, so I don't need duplicates of such things.)

The third is my netbook, which is in a really funky state at the moment. I have XP Home on one partition, and Win 7 Pro on a second, on the internal 16 GB SSD. Needless to say, it's a heck of a squeeze. I have Microsoft Office installed in both OSes, but it's residing solely on the XP partition. (Oh, and each OSes swap file is on the other OSes drive; which I auto-delete the other's on boot in each OS.) Data files are split between the two, because I'm lazy, and don't really have much need to share data there. I also have an internal USB flash drive with Moblin Linux installed. And when I get around to it, I'm going to figure out how to install HP's custom "Mi" Linux onto an SD card; so it'll be quad-boot. (Heck, if I can figure out how to "dual-boot" HP's Mi Linux from a single physical drive, I'll throw both it and OS X on the SD card. By default, HP's Mi will ONLY install to the primary internal drive, and will *NOT* dual-boot.)
 
Top