Is there any reason that Windows 2000 could not be dual booted with Windows 2000 ? In other words, 2 Win2k installations rather than Win 98 on the other boot.
That way one could have NTFS read by both boots and also have the benefits of Dual booting.
Over at this thread,
Ghost Threadl
the poor guy has gone nearly crazy trying to get Ghost to image a Win2K FAT 32 partition. Seems that Ghost will not image the swap file under any circumstances - at least in Fat 32. 'Possible that Ghost will create a pagefile.sys, even an empty one, so that he could get the Ghosted Win2K image to permit launching the OS.
Having Win98 on one of the boot partitions rules out reading NTFS on the Win2K partition. WinXP is not presently licensed for one of the partitions.
BUT if 2 Win2K?s are dual booted, then cross NTFS reading is ok and possibly Ghost has a chance of successfully imaging the page file off of an NTFS partition, but not a Fat32 partition.
This got me to thinkin? and thus this post.
That way one could have NTFS read by both boots and also have the benefits of Dual booting.
Over at this thread,
Ghost Threadl
the poor guy has gone nearly crazy trying to get Ghost to image a Win2K FAT 32 partition. Seems that Ghost will not image the swap file under any circumstances - at least in Fat 32. 'Possible that Ghost will create a pagefile.sys, even an empty one, so that he could get the Ghosted Win2K image to permit launching the OS.
Having Win98 on one of the boot partitions rules out reading NTFS on the Win2K partition. WinXP is not presently licensed for one of the partitions.
BUT if 2 Win2K?s are dual booted, then cross NTFS reading is ok and possibly Ghost has a chance of successfully imaging the page file off of an NTFS partition, but not a Fat32 partition.
This got me to thinkin? and thus this post.
Facebook
Twitter