Wait HECK the reason why that circa 2000 ISO software for like Windows ME or whatever was named "Nero" is because it burns discs. It is burning ROM. I only just now figured that out. This is so upsetting
Okay I think for first attempt getting Linux running I'm just going to sigh and install Ubuntu 23.04. If it works ok and I establish a /home on the other drive I'll consider pop!_os later as an experiment in learning (or living without) kernel signing.
My goals:
Fit on 37 GB spare partition
Get Vulkan running and execute one webgpu program in Rust
(win condition) Successfully support a sound card with 16 channels of IO
I guess I'm going with GNOME rather than KDE based on looking at the current state of both on Google Image Search (possibly not an accurate source) and feeling less repulsion when I look at GNOME. I don't understand why the titlebar and the "dock" with the launcher icons are 2 different things in GNOME now. Couldnt u just put the launcher icons in the titlebar I only ever run 3 apps anyway
Last time I ran desktop linux was 2016, I tried to use a late beta of KDE Plasma and it never worked right
OK so based on replies and reading up on this, turns out that only certain Linux kernels have the special Microsoft signing, and that signing evaporates if you, as Pop!OS has done, add the NVidia binary blobs to the kernel (or else it's something about the way in which Pop did it). So u… have to choose between official video card drivers and secure boot? Now thinking of all the ppl who assured me after my blog post last month that Linux no longer has problems with modern video card drivers **
Because the space Dracula's castle occupies is psychogeographic rather than material, it is entirely reasonable to posit that the "out of bounds" areas in the Sega Saturn version of Symphony of the Night are canonically, diegetically "real". In this one hour and 23 minute YouTube video I will
This is the boot screen of the GParted self-booting USB stick install. I wonder if this screen has ever been presented to a person who doesn't know what those colorful circles are
I got a new M.1 drive to replace my SATA drive. It is the same size or nearly so, so I want to clone the old drive to the new drive. The only OS I have installed is Windows and it's an NTFS partition.
What should I use to clone the drive? Tom's Guide and PCMag both recommend "Macrium Reflect Free…
@jernej__s the gap is a little bigger than the MSR partition. Diskpart refused to let me create a partition that was at offset 0 and stretched until right before the MSR partition. I think the actual reason was there needed to be a 1kb blank area at the start of the drive (to store the gpt?) At any rate when I said offset=1 size=512 it allowed that (and created it not at offset 1MB as I expected but rather offset 1kb. Everything's baffling)
@Paxxi I wonder if you looked in the disk partitioner if you'd find you also have a 90mb unused stub partition corresponding to your old, origina/smaller EFI partition.
I did all these steps with the Linux toolchain instead of the win32 toolchain because I believed this was the toolchain for adults that is known to actually work and instead I get "FAT32 is too hard. Wouldn't you rather format your EFI partition as ext3?". Wish I'd created a Windows tools USB key before this D:
Anyway whatever I guess I'll just re-image the disk from the original, again, and my EFI partition will simply not be larger than 100 MB even though there's a fat wad of free space there
So I have a 450mb junk (old recovery) partition at the start followed by a 99mb EFI partition. Everybody says I want a bigger EFI partition. I wonder how hard it would be to move the EFI partitionbackward. Do I like… dd nvme0n1p2 to nvme0n1p1 then grow p1 back outward? Can GParted do this by itself?
Several people in the replies told me that the way to get Windows to switch from ignoring Drive 0 and booting off Drive 1, to ignoring Drive 1 and booting off Drive 0, was to temporarily unplug Drive 1 and reboot so that Drive 0 gained the blessed "Real Hard Drive" status. I did not believe this. It was too silly. It worked. It totally worked
Fascinating discovery: GParted CANNOT resize FAT32 partitions if they are less than 250 MB in size to start with. It prints a cryptic message ending with "We're working on it!" (Not true, see screenshot from bug first filed in 2017)
Well, that's fine right? How often do you encounter small FAT partitions?
How about BASICALLY EVERY EFI PARTITION IN THE WORLD?
This would have been great to know about BEFORE I blew away my boot partition believing GParted would fix it after. I'm now unbootable
Very nonobvious and was not mentioned in the help command.
Is there likely to be some kind of downside to having the blank space at the beginning be so low? Should I go back and recreate it one more time (I want all partition screwing to be over before I wipe my old drive which currently is a serviceable backup drive)
when diskpart says "kilobytes" and "megabytes", does it mean SI kilobytes/megabytes (1000 and 10001000 bytes) or does it mean conventional kilobytes/SI kibibytes (1024 bytes and 10241024 bytes)?
I guess the lesson here, which I should have known (as it's been repeatedly explained to me over the last 10 years), is that you can't install Windows EFI stuff into an existing EFI partition, Windows has to create the EFI partition and set everything up from scratch the fussy way it likes it and after Windows has created a Windows-recognized EFI partition then you can install your linux stuff or whatever afterward. I had the hubris to believe I could cheat the system. I could not.
So after a bunch of struggling with trying to get gparted to make a working EFI partition, I gave up, wiped the EFI partition again, booted into the terminal on the Windows recovery partition, and ran "diskpart"/"bcdedit" from an online tutorial. After creating the EFI partition from Windows, it worked on the first try. My system now boots fine and I seem to have succeeded fully at everything I set out to do but the progression of the final steps were so confusing I at some level do not trust it