Resizing a working partition

Booting, installing, newbie
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
LNSmith
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu 28 Mar 2013, 14:24
Location: A little north fr. Sydney, AU

Resizing a working partition

#1 Post by LNSmith »

G'day all,

I have a small (280GiB) rotating disk drive.
This is now my main working drive. Recently re-formatted to 280GiB/ext4.
While I consider this my "main" working drive, it is NOT my home drive - that is a smaller, separate drive.
The partition I want to shrink is the first partition on the drive.

The second partition on the drive is VFAT32 80MiB - M not G. Tiny.
I want to shrink the first partition to 200GiB and increase the second partition from 80MiB to 80GiB.

I will use GParted.
The process appears to be vy simple.
The first partition uses about 15GiB - the rest is free space.
My "Q": Are there any "gotchas" if I do this?

Thank you.

Leslie

User avatar
8Geee
Posts: 2181
Joined: Mon 12 May 2008, 11:29
Location: N.E. USA

#2 Post by 8Geee »

Data on the partitions will be erased.
Make backups.
Linux user #498913 "Some people need to reimagine their thinking."
"Zuckerberg: a large city inhabited by mentally challenged people."

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#3 Post by rcrsn51 »

8Geee wrote:Data on the partitions will be erased.
Evidence please.

User avatar
bigpup
Posts: 13886
Joined: Sun 11 Oct 2009, 18:15
Location: S.C. USA

#4 Post by bigpup »

The second partition on the drive is VFAT32 80MiB - M not G. Tiny.
I want to shrink the first partition to 200GiB and increase the second partition from 80MiB to 80GiB.
If you keep the format, the same as it already is, on each partition. Data should be good.

What is actually on the very small second partition?
Are you sure it is not being used as the location of the boot loader and it's needed files used to boot the computer?
If it has boot loader files on it. Keep it the way it is.
If not the boot loader partition.
Is anything on it really needed?
If no.
I would delete the second very small partition.
Resize the first partition.
Make a second partition out of the still unallocated space.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected :shock:
YaPI(any iso installer)

dancytron
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed 18 Jul 2012, 19:20

#5 Post by dancytron »

I'd done similar things a number of times.

It takes a very long time. Many hours. Any kind of crash or power outage would probably be disastrous.

If here are errors on the disk, it will abort. Usually, you end up back where you started from, but once I lost data.

Back up anything important, do a fsck and if you have windows on it, do a chkdsk too, and plan on it taking several hours.

User avatar
8Geee
Posts: 2181
Joined: Mon 12 May 2008, 11:29
Location: N.E. USA

#6 Post by 8Geee »

I was/am preparing the OP for the worst, by presuming it will happen.

We do not know if there is an OS with boot sector on that disk until the OP responds.

I have done this with Windows, and it is a long process, IIRC longer than defragging the disk (20Gb was 6+ hours to defrag)

I am crossing my fingers that the OP has an Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS device... mains backup) and that ext4 has enough of the numerous bugs worked out in the kernel. Nothing worse than a corrupted OS without a CD/DVD as backup.

Regards
8Geee
Linux user #498913 "Some people need to reimagine their thinking."
"Zuckerberg: a large city inhabited by mentally challenged people."

User avatar
Burn_IT
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sat 12 Aug 2006, 19:25
Location: Tamworth UK

#7 Post by Burn_IT »

Providing you defragment the first part, moving data to the front, nothing should be lost.
The only time this will take a very long time is if there is data in sectors that need resizing which I believe is no the case here.
"Just think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush" - T Pratchett

oui

Re: Resizing a working partition

#8 Post by oui »

Hi Leslie
LNSmith wrote: I have a small (280GiB) rotating disk drive.
This is now my main working drive. Recently re-formatted to 280GiB/ext4.
While I consider this my "main" working drive, it is NOT my home drive - that is a smaller, separate drive.
The partition I want to shrink is the first partition on the drive.

The second partition on the drive is VFAT32 80MiB - M not G. Tiny.
I want to shrink the first partition to 200GiB and increase the second partition from 80MiB to 80GiB.

I will use GParted.
The process appears to be vy simple.
The first partition uses about 15GiB - the rest is free space.
My "Q": Are there any "gotchas" if I do this
see above answer!

now, an approach of solution:

I assume you are using a Puppy, (about) each one!

I assume a boot loader is preinstalled on your disk (you say nothing about all those details and wish to be help :roll: !).

2 ways:

first way

you have a CD/DVD drive

burn a Puppy on CD and restart from CD drive

second way

you don't have some CD or CD drive / don't want to use some CD

- download from you now active Puppy (I did assume that!) -about- each Puppy you want into your home drive
- hit on the file using rox
- a "virtual" directory opens and you can look into the file and see the components
- create a new dir in your home drive, for ex. "Zpuppy"
- copy the files vmlinuz, initrd.gz (probably!) and all the files ending in *.sfs from the virtal dir into the new Zpuppy dir
- add a starting item in your boot loader configuration's file
- restart and select the new Puppy entry

for both way:

you are now at the same point! Puppy runs RAM only - no partitions is open (*1!

start gparted and modify your partitions like youn want :wink:

and enjoy as easy all those manipulations are easy in Puppy,,,

(*1 the most usual situation after Puppy start (depending of course of the Puppy version) - if you yet use a save file / dir in Puppy, do that with a fully different version not recognizing your save system :P (use of save file is absurd! do better remaster!)

User avatar
mikeslr
Posts: 3890
Joined: Mon 16 Jun 2008, 21:20
Location: 500 seconds from Sol

#9 Post by mikeslr »

Qui has almost got it. But I think LNSmith has left out too much vital information.

What's on the 2nd 80 Mb vfat partition? Is it only a small SaveFile -- just large enough to hold setting and configurations which would cause Puppy to see it as the HOME Partition? 80 Mbs is too small to hold all the file-systems required for even a frugal install of almost all Puppies. Does it hold Grub2 as boot-loader?

Is there another Operating System on the 280 Gb first Partition? Obviously not Windows as it formatted Linux Ext4. Is Puppy on the first Partition with its SaveFile for some reason on the 2nd?

To avoid any misunderstanding, the terms drive and partition are not inter-changeable. A drive is a physical object. A partition is the product of a program which instructs the computer to treat different sections of a drive as entirely separate from one another.

To figure out how to get to your final destination, we first have to know where you are.

And while an answer to these questions may prove to be unnecessary, to avoid further delay:

How are you now booting Puppy?
Can you burn a Puppy to a CD?
Can you 'burn' a Puppy to a USB-Key and then use that to boot the computer?
When you boot into Puppy, is the first drive automatically mounted? If so, can it be unmounted? gparted can not work with mounted partitions.

User avatar
LNSmith
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu 28 Mar 2013, 14:24
Location: A little north fr. Sydney, AU

Resizing a working partition

#10 Post by LNSmith »

To all: Thanks for responses to date.

To MikeSLR
Q1. How are you now booting Puppy?
Q2. Can you burn a Puppy to a CD?
Q3. Can you 'burn' a Puppy to a USB-Key and then use that to boot the computer?
Q4. When you boot into Puppy, is the first drive automatically mounted? If so, can it be unmounted? gparted can not work with mounted partitions.
Ans_#1) I boot Tahr-Pup 6.0.6 from a CD I burnt some time ago.
The "real" files sit on a different drive (sdb2) in the second partition (making the sdb2 my "home" directory). This is a smaller drive, partitioned into two equal parts. I can (and have) a second USB key that will boot. This is 5.7.1 not Tahr. I can (and have) booted Tahr without the save file many times. (Quietly, portability and the ability to boot "cold-turkey" is one of the great assets of Puppy.)
Ans #2) Yes, I burnt several "sons" of Puppy to CD - Tahr, 5.7.1, Stretch etc.
Ans #3) Yes, I can (and have) booted THIS box (and others) using 5.7.1 (This is the version of Puppy with the darker background to the desk-top. I suspect it's a favorite place for Barry's pup. It looks like a doggy-place to me.
Ans #4) No. sdb2 is my "home" directory - the boot directory. sda1 is the 280GiB directory that I will re-size. I must mount that drive before I use it.

Now to more general comments. The answers given have been most useful.
Here is the plan I have formed. I have several spare rotating drives lying around the place. I will back-up the files from this working partition to one of these spare drives. (Here the dd command (disk duplicate) command will come in handy. BTW - I am aware of the warnings associated with "dd")

After that, just before I go to bed I will begin the re-sizing exercise. gParted will do that task. I will report the result here (although I can't say how long the exercise took bec. I will be sleeping).
Since I have a back-up and since I am working with a drive I partitioned only 2 weeks ago the chance of disaster is vanishingly small. Not impossible - just vanishingly small.

Thanks to all. 'dd' is most useful.

Leslie

User avatar
bigpup
Posts: 13886
Joined: Sun 11 Oct 2009, 18:15
Location: S.C. USA

#11 Post by bigpup »

Gparted time to do the resizing is all about how much is on the partition and how much of it is free space.
The more data that is on it, the longer it will take.
If most of the partition is still free space.
That takes very little time to resize.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected :shock:
YaPI(any iso installer)

User avatar
LNSmith
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu 28 Mar 2013, 14:24
Location: A little north fr. Sydney, AU

Resizing a working partition

#12 Post by LNSmith »

The situation: I had a (rotating) disk drive that I accidentally partitioned as:

Partition #1 | Partition #2
ext4/280GiB VFAT32/ a few MiB (I wanted a few GiB, not Megs)

Using Gparted, the partition editor, I resized the 280GiB (sda1) to 192GiB.
Files in this (fairly new) partition: About 15GiB
Time to shrink: about one minute.
Result: Success. I have the report if anyone wants to see it.

Then: MY BAD. GParted told me (after I tried to re-size sda2 to about 94GiB) "I'm sorry, but I can't let you do that dave!" Ummm. Windows has an artificial limit on VFAT32 of 32GiB. I think that's what HAL (or Gparted) wanted me to understand. So ... I erased the complete partition and re-formatted it to 32GiB, leaving space between sda1 and the VFAT partition.

Reformatted VFAT32 and after that made a third partition (sda3) - ext4.
So - I got a third partition (that I didn't really want).

The report, after checking all 3 partitions using gParted and fsck (or e2fsck) was "success". Good file system structure.

The moral: Don't try to create a VFAT file system larger than 32GiB using gParted. The other moral: Always backup your drive before resizing.

Always backup your drive, rain hail or shine.

Leslie

User avatar
bigpup
Posts: 13886
Joined: Sun 11 Oct 2009, 18:15
Location: S.C. USA

#13 Post by bigpup »

Why do you want a fat32 format?
You are using Linux!
If it is something for Windows to be able to use.
ntfs format does not have size issues.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected :shock:
YaPI(any iso installer)

User avatar
LNSmith
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu 28 Mar 2013, 14:24
Location: A little north fr. Sydney, AU

Resizing a working partition

#14 Post by LNSmith »

Hello Big-dog!
Why do you want a fat32 format?
You are using Linux!
If it is something for Windows to be able to use.
ntfs format does not have size issues.
My intention: Make a small partition available for working with Windows.
In the past I used Windows often and gradually 'slid into' Puppy Linux - using the Windows file systems. Now I'm using Linux but it's convenient to be able to visit the past. Windows doesn't speak ext4.

On a parallel topic: whether Linux or Windows - System maintenance is more easily done when the boot disk (whatever system) is on a separate physical device, not just a different partition, from the working directories. If the OS falls over, I still have my work. If I want to back up my work, I don't have to worry about the OS. I always separate 'work' and 'OS'.

All the best.

Note: I have directories, not folders.
I have storage, not memory.
I have Linux, not Windows (mostly).

oui

#15 Post by oui »

Hi Leslie
I am sorry
LNSmith wrote:The moral: Don't try to create a VFAT file system larger than 32GiB using gParted. The other moral: Always backup your drive before resizing.
the moral is that you use a old Puppy (and old Ubuntu) Version!

gparted, the actual one, is a really brave helper for all his users and never does complications without reasons, and it works pretty!

more!

gparted show you how to do that what it does in CLI (commando line) and reading the man pages of the proposed commands, you can extend your actions :roll: . those app's learning how to do more, are very rare (look what it does on vfat or, perhaps today, ntfs partitions: you see the command and, if you are yet an expert Windows user, can perhaps understand what is the matter better as a linuxer as I :wink: !)

concerning major security app's and gparted is certainly one of them, I would always use the most fresh one awaiting that the most problems are erased and the compatibility is maximal :roll: (I would only take the next precedent one in case of evident difficulty! So can you preserve the most higher security through the mos recent level of the utility version! you can check the utility version for ex. in distrowatch.com!)

why are you using an old version? look at the titel of the internet page of the forum, look for the link Puppy HOME page (ok, tahr pup is on it at the last position, not for nothing - it is the last actual version made out Ubuntu bin's),

in new versions developers did spend a lot of hours or days to eliminate precedent difficulties in all main app's. and you are REFUSING to use the ameliorations and wine in the forum?

i don't understand it!

User avatar
mikeslr
Posts: 3890
Joined: Mon 16 Jun 2008, 21:20
Location: 500 seconds from Sol

#16 Post by mikeslr »

Now I can completely agree with Qui.

Tahrpup, Slacko 5.7, even Xenialpup64 were good Puppies in their day. I still occasionally use* --and you may know I've published remasters of-- the first two. Until recently Xenialpup64 has been my primary OS which I remastered for personal use. But there's no reason to publish it.

The recent crop of Puppies are just as good, more up-to-date, more secure. Security concerns is why I haven't published my remastered Xenialpup64. The openssl Xenialpup64 --and any older 32-bit or 64-bit-- Puppy uses will very shortly reach End of Life. Upgrading it will require newer glibc libraries. An OS can only have one set of glibc libraries. We've maintained Web-browser security by building those glibc libraries into the browsers and configuring the browsers to use their own rather than the operating system's version. But at some point work-arounds just are more trouble than 'biting the bullet' and switching to a new Puppy.

Not even limited RAM justifies using an older Puppy. James Bond has posted about how to run dpup-stretch, and others, even with limited RAM. I don't recall that post employing the technique I've used to reduce RAM demands: Swap kernels to one of Rockedge's Real-Time Kernels. You'll find here, http://rockedge.org/kernels/ even a nopae kernel for those few 15 +/- year old or older computers unable to accept the 'forcepae' boot argument.

I started using Puppies woofed from Ubuntu and debian as soon as they began to appear. I 'feel more at home' with them than the Slackos and can't comment on the variety of applications available to newer Slacko-puppies. But, I don't know of anything the older 'Ubuntus' and 'debians' can do which the newer ones can't. Nor do they do it using significantly more RAM; [with the exception of some Media Creators whose newest versions require Qt libraries. But fortunately older versions can still be used].

Only Web-browsers are the real RAM-hogs. And that's the case regardless of which operating system uses them.

Since you're planning a major change, you might as well change to a Puppy which will provide you several years of secure usage.

* You may wonder why I still use 'them'; well, actually only my remaster of Slacko 5.7. So do I. :roll: I get attached to things. :shock: But remember I removed the Automatic-Save, and by now have no reason to ever execute a manual Save. Each new boot-up is as pristine as the first. So I can risk running an insecure operating system for non-essential tasks. And it's not the Puppy I use to even read my email.

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#17 Post by Mike Walsh »

@ oui:-
oui wrote:why are you using an old version? look at the titel of the internet page of the forum, look for the link Puppy HOME page (ok, tahr pup is on it at the last position, not for nothing - it is the last actual version made out Ubuntu bin's),

in new versions developers did spend a lot of hours or days to eliminate precedent difficulties in all main app's. and you are REFUSING to use the ameliorations and wine in the forum?

i don't understand it!
Oh, for the love of Pete....

Do us a favour, would you, oui? Climb down off that 'high horse' you're precariously perched on, there's a good lad.....and join the 'real' world.

This isn't a bunch of kindergarten tots you're 'preaching' to here, y'know? Our community is mainly composed of mature adults, who are perfectly capable of making up their own minds as to what they want to do. I'm quite certain Leslie has his reasons; I mean, I'm still pretty 'attached' to Tahrpup myself. After all, it was the very first Puppy that just worked on all my hardware, and is in large part responsible for my own Puppy 'journey' getting under way.

I'm afraid your 'logic' completely escapes me. Just because a newer version of Puppy exists, there is nothing on this earth that says to me, 'Oh, but you HAVE to use it! If you don't, you're saying that our developers are wasting their time...'

Huh?? Where do you get off by making statements like that, eh?

Some folks (like me, obviously! :roll: ), just happen to be daft buggers (by your logic) and actually enjoy still using older Puppies......just for the hell of it, y'know?

In my case, I use a broad selection of Puppies, ranging from Puppy 431, all the way up to and including Bionicpup 8.0. They all have their charms.....and all have distinct 'personalities', I tell you! For the last few weeks, I've been spending more time in Racy 5.5.1 than anywhere else. I probably only practise very 'basic' security - I certainly don't spend my time worrying about it, that's for sure - and in over 5 years of being 'all-Puppy' exclusively, I've never caught a single 'nasty'.

I'm more than willing to give the latest Puppy (whatever it happens to be at any given point in time) a look, and try it out....but I'm definitely not one of these folks who religiously switch to the very latest 'shiny toy' the instant it 'hits the shelves', and immediately throw the rest of my toys out of the pram.....

(I'm a 'naughty' Puppian.....who doesn't 'toe the line' just because he's told to. So sue me.....)

I'm in Slacko 560 at this very moment. One of my favourite Pups, everything just 'works' to my satisfaction, and does exactly what I want it to. I have never, ever understood this near-paranoia many folks seem to develop concerning computer 'security'; it's only a pile of plastic & electronic junk, when all's said & done. I'm not going to worry myself into an early grave over it, that's for sure.... :shock: :roll:

(I didn't buy my first CD player until 2001, at which time such things had been on the market for almost 20 years, and the prediction of them becoming obsolete was already being bandied about. I like to let tech 'prove' itself, before I invest in it..! :lol: )

We all have different agendas when it comes to our 'Puppy time'. I'm sure there's thousands of other Puppians just like me....

Call me a 'prat', if you want to. From your viewpoint, and by your 'logic', I probably am. :lol: :lol:

I couldn't care less. :D


Mike. :wink:

oui

#18 Post by oui »

Normally, I do not let my voice messages translate by machine. But since I'm being operated on Monday, and I do not know what's coming after, and I'm in time trouble, I'm doing it exceptionally today because my English is bumpier. Below is the original text in German (because the machine translation is better than from French, my native language):

Your horse is not exactly low, but, what is it ... In everyday life, I use (very) old Puppy's constantly. In the last 12 months 6 with Slacko 5.33 (32 bits) and the last 6 with Quirky Wary64-6.99 (64 bits).

Why?

Because I'm a consequent minimalist, and I want to constantly convince myself that with extremely little (both have barely more than 100 MB in size), probably the 2 worlds smallest fully operational operating systems ever, with such a wide selection of applications for all really Wary has an old browser but also a hidden built-in video support with Flash or similar, which you are looking for the same! For some purposes more than full, better though old, than some new ones. Barry knew, as always, exactly what he does and gives us (thanks Barry)! Slacko64-5.33 never came, otherwise I probably would have preferred this as the innovative version Wary64-6.99, start version of a new series, which, unfortunately , not so narrow!

But

I test (almost) all new (main) versions of Puppy! So one to two weeks long. Because it's important to realize what the current best state of our movement is, and also what bugs have been fixed, not only by our Puppy developers but also by the developers of the main components our Puppy is built from ! Gparted, xorg, Mozilla, Abi and gnumeric, etc., these ingredients are always in the lead. And sometimes discover something new in the section "Multimedia" etc., where there is more fluctuation.

And that I recommend with a clear conscience newcomers! Why? Because they do not even find the old legacy of bugs at first!

If I know then, and I am aware of what the current Puppy can afford, I can then see if I can find the right minimalist version of it for me to endure old: If any errors occur then I know that is due to the age of Version - at that time there were still problems! At that time there were still concepts that have meanwhile evolved enormously and were capable of development, but they have not been yet. I do not have to cry about it at the Puppy forum because it was my decision to choose something older: The Puppy developers, the developers of the main and other applications had been working a lot and successfully, and then I am the one who put this on the line!

I'm not attacking the old Puppy's, I'm a user of it, just advocating getting to know and appreciate the Linux innovations, and using it as a benchmark before crying on the forum, especially when you start. No one would think today to start with Windows 3.1 or even IBM-Dos in today's Windows world!

Normalerweise lasse ich meine Wortmeldungen nicht maschinell übersetzen. Da ich aber am Montag operiert werde, und nicht weiss, was danach kommt, tue ich es ausnahmsweise heute, weil mein Englisch holperiger ist. Nachstehend der Originaltext in Deutsch (weil die maschinelle Übersetzung besser ist als aus Französisch, meine Muttersprache):

Ihr Pferd ist auch nicht gerade niedrig, aber, was soll es... Im Alltag benutze ich (sehr) alte Puppy's dauernd. In den letzten 12 monaten 6 davon mit Slacko 5.33 (32 bits) und die letzten 6 mit Quirky Wary64-6.99 (64 bits).

Warum?

Weil ich ein engagierter Minimalist bin, und mich laufend überzeugen will, dass man mit extrem wenig (beide haben kaum mehr als 100 MB size), wahrscheinlich die 2 weltweit kleinsten voll einsatzfähigen Betriebssysteme überhaupt, die mit so einem breiten Auswahl von Applikationen für alle wirklich alltäglichen Lebenslagen verbreitet werden (restrictions: Slacko kommt ohne vollwertigen Browser! Wary hat zwar einen alten Browser aber auch eine versteckt eingebauten Videounterstützung mit Flash oder ähnlich, die ihr gleiches sucht! Für manche Zwecke mehr als vollwertig, besser obwohl alt, als manche neue... Barry wusste, wie immer, exakt, was er tut und uns schenkt (danke Barry)! Slacko64-5.33 kam nie, sonst hätte ich vermutlich auch dieses vorgezogen als die innovative Version Wary64-6.99, Startversion einer neuen Reihe, die, leider, nicht so schmal geblieben ist!

Aber

ich teste (fast) alle neuen (Haupt-)Versionen von Puppy! So ein bis zwei Wochen lang. Denn es ist wichtig, um mir klar zu werden, was der aktuelle beste Stand in unserer Bewegung ist, und auch welche Fehler eventuell beseitigt wurden, nicht nur von unseren Puppy-Entwicklern sondern auch von den Entwicklern von den Hauptbestandteilen aus welchen unser Puppy gebaut wird! Gparted, xorg, Mozilla, Abi und gnumeric usw., diese Bestandteile die unbeirrbar immer dabei sind. Und entdecke manchmal neues im Abteil "Multimedia" usw., wo es mehr Fluktuation gibt.

Und das empfehle ich mit gutem Gewissen Neulingen! Warum? Weil sie dabei den alten Nachlass an Programmierfehler (bugs) zuerst erst gar nicht antreffen!

Wen ich dann weiß, und mir bewußt bin, was das AKTUELLE Puppy leisten kann, kann ich dann gucken, ob ich die für mich passende minimalistische Version davon um alten Bestand finden kann: Wenn Fehler dann auftreten, weiß ich, das liegt am Alter der Version - es gab damals noch Probleme! Es gab damals noch Konzepte, die inzwischen riesig inzwischen weiterentwickelt wurden und entwicklungsfähig waren, aber es noch nicht gewesen sind. Ich brauche dann nicht auf dem Puppy-Forum darüber zu weinen, denn es war meine Entscheidung, mich für etwas älteres zu entscheiden: Die Puppy-Entwickler, die Entwickler der Haupt- und anderen Applikation hatten inzwischen viel und erfolgereich gearbeitet, und ich bin dann derjenige welcher, der das auf's Spiel gesetzt hat!

Ich greife die alten Puppy's nicht an, ich bin ein User davon, sondern plädiere nur darum, die Linux-Neuerungen kennen und schätzen zu lernen, und als Bewertungsmaßstab zu grunde zu legen, bevor man auf dem Forum weint, speziell wenn man anfängt. Keiner käme heute auf die Idee, mit Windows 3.1 oder gar IBM-Dos in der heutigen Windows-Welt anfangen zu wollen!

Post Reply