From owner-freebsd-questions  Wed Nov  1 12:56:03 1995
Return-Path: owner-questions
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA27701
          for questions-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 12:56:03 -0800
Received: from blanco.sadeya.cesca.es ([192.94.163.146])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA27695
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 12:55:59 -0800
Received: (from amengual@localhost) by blanco.sadeya.cesca.es (8.6.11/8.7.0) id VAA16492; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 21:58:33 GMT
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 21:58:32 +0000 ()
From: Carlos Amengual <amengual@sadeya.cesca.es>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
cc: a.mondini@agora.stm.it, questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBsd 2.0.5 installation with Windows 95
In-Reply-To: <199511011810.LAA15647@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.951101214620.16458A-100000@blanco.sadeya.cesca.es>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 1 Nov 1995, Terry Lambert wrote:

> Installing FreeBSD onto an empty partition of a drive containing a
> Win95 partition as well works fine.  Windows95 does not use a different
> partition ID from DOS, and so it is as safe as installing FreeBSD
> in the same situation with a DOS instead of a Win95 partition.

Independently of this problem with the boot manager, do Win95 partitions
allow to be mounted as dos filesystems under FreeBSD ?  It looks like 
not, as its FAT is the new VFAT, and knowing it for sure would help me
to decide whether to install it on my home PC or not.