Knoppix does not want to use the reiserfs partition

Hi everyone

I seem to have hit a wall with giving Knoppix what it wants for it to play nicely.

It's requirements is a linux reiser fs and a 1GB linux-swap.
It takes the linux swap that I made but it does not take the reiserfs partition made using gparted.

I have tried many different configurations.
[ntfs][unpartitioned][linux-swap]
# I wanted Knoppix and its automatic partitioner to make a partition in the specified unpartitioned location. That didn't work.

[unpartitioned][ntfs][linux-swap]
# this didn't work either

[reiserfs][linux-swap]
# no bacon

There are many more combinations of partition locale's that I tried; they are not all listed.

The only way for Knoppix to install is by giving its automatic program the go-ahead to format the entire drive (which hinders me from the ease of installing Knoppix to a drive with existing operation systems).

I believe the answer to my problem lies in the format of the reiserfs that gparted creates. Why, I do not know the technical details about (and it doesn't make sense for it not to work- reiserfs is reiserfs).

I read somewhere (i'll try to find the link again) that you can use an ext3 fs. It did not work with a ext3 partitioned fs.

The last option that I haven't done is using the v4 of reiser; reiser4.

If anyone else has found a solution or can lead me to manually installing Knoppix, that would be great. Even though the man states that Knoppix is not a recommended desktop linux distro, I personally find it to be wonderful and it suits me perfectly (so why not make it my desktop linux distro).

Your help will be greatly appreciated!

Thanks
-Eric

yeah, that's what I'm running into as well.

As far as "not intended for HD install" it IS one of the best HD distros running...

Once you actuallyget it to run.

The 5.x distros at least had a configuration editor in the knoppix-installer.

Maybe knoppix-installer from 5.1 would actually work with it.

symlink it from my already installed 5.1

The worst it could do is give me an error message or maybe start a series of wildfires that would consume the entire world or something similarly benign.

I'm going to quit for a few hours and do something more conducive to remaining sane and rational.

Then I'll try that option, and if I report back yea or nay you will at least know that I didn't destroy my computer with it.

My take on why Knoppix is not intended for HD install is because it is not a part of Red Hat.
It is not recommended to use Knoppix on a large scale other than for simple diagnostic, because the "structure" (for the lack of a better term) of Knoppix differs from Red Hat distributions.

Windows 2000, Window XP, and Windows Vista can work together nicely (all Red Hat distributions work together nicely as well).
I have a feeling this may be wrong, but Knoppix would be like using Win 3.0, which wouldn't play nicely with other version of Windows.

If anything, the point I was trying to make is: commands and functions in Knoppix are different from Red Hat distributions. You would end up running into issues if you tried using the same commands in Knoppix in a Red Hat distribution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by naisanza

My take on why Knoppix is not intended for HD install is because it is not a part of Red Hat.

---

Well, that statement is so misleading that I have to join the conversation. The suitability or unsuitability of Knoppix for install to hard disk has nothing to do with Red Hat.

There are many different Linux Distros. Red Hat is one of them, and pretty popular although they have pretty much turned their back on the individual user and gone after commercial users and even have said some negative things about desktop Linux. But there are many other distros of Linux too, such as Ubuntu, Mandriva (previously mandrake), S;lackware, and, of course, Debian. The number of distributions runs well above 100. Unfortunately this has cause a lot of problems for Linux, as many different distros go off and build different install systems. So Red Hat RPM files can't simply install into a Debian system and Debian apt-get from a Debian server doesn't work on Red Hat. This is also a nightmare for developers who want to write for Linux, they end up looking at supporting dozens of different install environments (and usually just figure it isn't worth it). And this is far from the only reason that many people complain that Linux isn't ready for the desktop for the great unwashed masses.

But the reason that Knoppix isn't suitable for hard disk install is much different. It is because Knoppix was designed and intended for booting off of a CD, and a lot of design choices were made and continue to be made based on that primary goal. It is a mix of parts that have been tested and work OK together when running from CD, but Knoppix often tends to break when installed to hard disk. It also breaks when people try to install additional software (something that wasn't allowed for at all on the original CD versions but became a try-at-your-own-risk thing when the RAM disk was merged with the hard disk). In general, although some people claim to have made Knoppix installs work and are happy with them, the average user is cautioned that they would likely be much better of installing a system that is intended for hard disk install without breaking.

If you want to install Red Hat then go ahead and install Red Hat. Knoppix is based on Debian, so if you want a Linux similar to Knoppix, and one that can use the apt-get system that Debian based distros use, then consider installing Debian (I suggest the testing version). If you have some other reason for wanting to try some other distro, then go ahead and try that. But the caution to not install Knoppix has nothing to do with Red Hat, it has to do with choices that were made about the design of Knoppix not being for hard disk use and hard disk hacks only being thrown in later for very limited purposes (such as class room use where you may want to replace a hard disk image from a CD between every class).

I have used four other versions of Knoppix, and it is a good distro. Why didn't they just leave the HD install off of 6.1, or simply tell users the limitations ( mainly, use entire disk)? Probably would have saved a lot of us a lot of time and effort.