[Qemu-devel] Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Qemu-devel] Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Garth Dahlstrom]

I'm thinking of trying to roll an image of the OE development
toolchain (for Zaurus), to do so I'll need to create a linux system
with approximately 6GB of space...

Reading through the readme that comes with QEMU for Windows 0.60, it
suggests that an image can be a max of 2GB...

Assuming this limitation is valid, I'm guessing my best bet is to soft
raid0?/jbod?/lvm? of 3 x 2GB image files together for hda, hdb & hdc
...

I'm looking for feed back and suggestions on whether: I'm crazy/there
is an easier way/a better overall approach...

Cheers,

-Garth

-- 
Northern.CA ===--
http://www.northern.ca/
Canada's Search Engine

[Qemu-devel] Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Ronald]

Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a écrit :

> I'm thinking of trying to roll an image of the OE development toolchain
> (for Zaurus), to do so I'll need to create a linux system with
> approximately 6GB of space...
> 
> Reading through the readme that comes with QEMU for Windows 0.60, it
> suggests that an image can be a max of 2GB...
> 
> Assuming this limitation is valid, I'm guessing my best bet is to soft
> raid0?/jbod?/lvm? of 3 x 2GB image files together for hda, hdb & hdc ...
> 
> I'm looking for feed back and suggestions on whether: I'm crazy/there is
> an easier way/a better overall approach...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -Garth

This is the mkqemuimage utility that is limited to 2G image creation.
The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat
with an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs.
Hope this help in some way.
Oh! and what about the file name QemuMenu.bat (8+3) for your previously
posted batch file.  

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Ross Kendall Axe]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ronald wrote:
| Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a écrit :
|

| The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat
| with an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs.

2GB actually on FAT32, regardless of Windows version. If the OP is using
a 'doze version that's so old as to not support FAT32, he's screwed
anyway really. I believe NTFS can do better, at least in recent versions.

Ross

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBDV2L9bR4xmappRARAuqtAKChN8xmh+wYEEBm3rYowvVkwAInaQCgsJ+4
S3+L1Z9F90Q2VuBtxS8ayHM=
=60C4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Joe Menola]

On Sun August 1 2004 4:15 pm, Ross Kendall Axe wrote:
> Ronald wrote:
> | Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a écrit :
> |
> |
> | The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat
> | with an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs.
>
> 2GB actually on FAT32, regardless of Windows version. If the OP is using
> a 'doze version that's so old as to not support FAT32, he's screwed
> anyway really. I believe NTFS can do better, at least in recent versions.
>
> Ross

2GB on fat16, not sure about fat32's limit, but it's well above 2gb. NTFS, I 
believe is only limitted to actual disk space.

-jm

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Jim C. Brown]

On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:24:27PM -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
> On Sun August 1 2004 4:15 pm, Ross Kendall Axe wrote:
> > Ronald wrote:
> > | Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a ?crit :
> > |
> > |
> > | The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat
> > | with an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs.
> >
> > 2GB actually on FAT32, regardless of Windows version. If the OP is using
> > a 'doze version that's so old as to not support FAT32, he's screwed
> > anyway really. I believe NTFS can do better, at least in recent versions.
> >
> > Ross
> 
> 2GB on fat16, not sure about fat32's limit, but it's well above 2gb. NTFS, I 
> believe is only limitted to actual disk space.
> 
> -jm
> 

Not clear on what this thread was about ...

For filesystem size limits:

fat16 is limited to 4GB. fat32's is theoretically 2TB (yes thats terabytes) but
most versions of windows can only read up to 32GB (Windows XP can only make a
new FAT32 partition up to 32GB but I'm not clear on whether or not it can
read a larger pre-exising one). Maximum file size for NTFS is not stated.

File size limits:

fat16 is 2GB, fat32 is only 4GB tho. NTFS is theoretically unlimited.

> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qemu-devel mailing list
> Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
> 

-- 
Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty.
Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Jernej Simončič]

On Monday, August 2, 2004, 0:28:33, Jim C. Brown wrote:

> fat16 is limited to 4GB. fat32's is theoretically 2TB (yes thats terabytes) but
> most versions of windows can only read up to 32GB (Windows XP can only make a
> new FAT32 partition up to 32GB but I'm not clear on whether or not it can
> read a larger pre-exising one). Maximum file size for NTFS is not stated.

Actually, FAT16 is limited to 2GB under DOS and Windows 9x/ME. FAT32 can go
up to 2 TB, however you need 3rd party utilities to create volumes larger
than 32 GB on Windows 2000 and newer (NT 4 doesn't support FAT32; there are
no problems accessing FAT32 volumes larger than 32 GB on 2000 and newer, you
just can't create them).

-- 
< Jernej Simoncic ><><><><>< http://deepthought.ena.si/ >

A memorandum is written not to inform the reader but to protect the writer.
       -- Acheson's Rule of the Bureaucracy

[Qemu-devel] Re: Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Ronald]

Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:15:57 +0100, Ross Kendall Axe a écrit :

> 
> Ronald wrote:
> | Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a écrit :
> |
> |
> | The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat with
> | an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs.
> 
> 2GB actually on FAT32, regardless of Windows version. If the OP is using a
> 'doze version that's so old as to not support FAT32, he's screwed anyway
> really. I believe NTFS can do better, at least in recent versions.
> 

I think that the 2Gb limitation is true only with linux vfat drivers and
win can write files =< 4Gb on fat32. 

This is what is said here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/default.asp?url=/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Jim C. Brown]

On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 11:30:11PM +0200, Ronald wrote:
> Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:15:57 +0100, Ross Kendall Axe a ?crit?:
> 
> > 
> > Ronald wrote:
> > | Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a ?crit :
> > |
> > |
> > | The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat with
> > | an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs.
> > 
> > 2GB actually on FAT32, regardless of Windows version. If the OP is using a
> > 'doze version that's so old as to not support FAT32, he's screwed anyway
> > really. I believe NTFS can do better, at least in recent versions.
> > 
> 
> I think that the 2Gb limitation is true only with linux vfat drivers and
> win can write files =< 4Gb on fat32. 

2GB limit does exist, but its only for fat16.

Last I checked, Linux vfat has a limit of 2GB. But this is because Linux driver
hasn't been updated for new largefile api, and is not a limitation of the
filesystem itself. (Linux/x86 used to have file size limit of 2GB regardless
of filesystem but that has changed with 2.4)

> 
> This is what is said here:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/default.asp?url=/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp

That didn't work for me. This did:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp

(BTW that web page doesn't mention linux at all.)

> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qemu-devel mailing list
> Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
> 

-- 
Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty.
Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Re: Best way to get 6GB = 3 x 2GB + soft raid?

[Ross Kendall Axe]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim C. Brown wrote:
| On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 11:30:11PM +0200, Ronald wrote:
|
|>Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:15:57 +0100, Ross Kendall Axe a ?crit?:
|>
|>
|>>Ronald wrote:
|>>| Le Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:17:22 -0400, Garth Dahlstrom a ?crit :
|>>|
|>>|
|>>| The next limitation could be your file system if you are using fat with
|>>| an old windows that is 4G, don't know about ntfs.
|>>
|>>2GB actually on FAT32, regardless of Windows version. If the OP is
using a
|>>'doze version that's so old as to not support FAT32, he's screwed anyway
|>>really. I believe NTFS can do better, at least in recent versions.
|>>
|>
|>I think that the 2Gb limitation is true only with linux vfat drivers and
|>win can write files =< 4Gb on fat32.
|

Yes, Windows 2000 and Linux 2.6.3 both seem to be able to write >2GB
files on FAT32. Apologies for the miscorrection.

Ross

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBDc7W9bR4xmappRARAmTPAJ9k+zhwYW88MMNKxSf1neqFdu5sKgCg3RHa
qXX150fbvRV0e9BjfPXjQ2U=
=iJZo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----