I've been looking through the archives all day that led me to theOther than the one assertion apparently made by Paul, I have found noBillW50 said:In glee typed:Paul did talk about that. But he also talked about this from the get-go:snip
I already read and responded to the comment you related being made by
Paul.... he was referring in that comment to modified specialized Live
CDs like Kaspersky's rescue CD, which as I already stated is NOT a
standard Linux Live CD.
[Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:48 PM]
The only practice I don't approve on, from the Linux community,
is "scanning" of drives as part of the startup sequence. Some
LiveCD distros, are known to "search" for a copy of the image
you're booting from. Presumably the purpose, is to do a
loopback mount of the image, as a replacement for accessing the
CD itself. But I still don't approve of monkey-business. A
LiveCD should just mind its own business. ~ Paul
I note that while you give a quote you say is from Paul, I have not
found that post online... do you have a link to his actual full post
in an archive such as Google Groups?
Under Google News, it led me here. It's the second from the end.
documented evidence that any *standard* Linux Live CD tries to run from
the ISO image if found on the hard drive. Ping Paul and ask him to
provide evidence of this.
Yes, that link shows the quote you've been using. Again, there is no
evidence given. Paul is a very smart guy, but his claim that by using
the Linux 'top' command he is somehow showing that the Windows page file
is being used by the Live CD is an incorrect assumption on his part. The
'top' command shows CPU processes, kind of like a task manager. Paul
stated he used 'top' to see how much swap was evident (it does NOT show
where the swap file is), and compared it in size to the existing page
file(s) on the Windows and other partitions.... and found similar sizes.
That is in no way evidence that the Linux Live CD is using the Windows
page file. It shows that the Linux Live CD, running on a system with X
amount of RAM, will allocate a certain swap size, similar in size to
what Windows allocates on the same system.
The fact is, a Live CD allocates a virtual swap file in RAM.... that is
what he is seeing with the 'top' command. The Live CD boot divides the
RAM into segments, and creates a virtual swap file in RAM from one
segment. The another segment created from RAM is used as "storage" like
a virtual hard drive, the remaining RAM is used like standard RAM for
loading programs, etc. Those Live CDs (Gentoo included) use squashfs to
Windows swapfile. Paul wasn't the first who mentioned it. I did find
some posts of this problem from 2009 which I said then that restoring
the registry with ERUNT also corrected the problem. I didn't recall that
part until I read it today.
Anyway the post that I am looking for was by some Linux guru from 2009 I
believe that knew tons about Linux and he stated he thought Ubuntu
creating a swapfile on the Windows drive was the problem. I just haven't
found his post so far. But I'll keep looking.