Sooo...as its only partly related to Arch Linux, i decided to write it here.
I wana try the hexxeh build of chromium os .. but not from an usb stick, but from a HDD drive.
As far as i remember it uses some odd partitioning scheme with lot of partitions. I have spare 10gb space at the end of my HDD. The partitioning scheme of my hdd looks like this:
sda1 - Arch /boot
sda2 - Arch /
sda3 - windows
sda4 - extended with partitions 5-7
sda5 - swap
sda6 - Data(NTFS)
sda7 - Free 10gb space.
The question If it would be possible to write the hexxeh (4 gb i think) image on sda7 and then chainload from /dev/sda grub menu the /dev/sda7 partition which would contain all the chromium OS stuff which would just need some bootloader and /etc/fstab changes ? I'm asking this not trying myself as i don't want to loose all my data if it is even theoreticaly impossible.
I have never even looked at the chromium OS, but what you are proposing sounds reasonable. Depending on the Chromium OS, it might not even be required that you chainload. it might be you can boot the kernel in the grub partition and specify sda7 as the root partition.
I've done this with Linux (Gentoo, BSD and LFS) on spare partitions, and have chainloaded Windows
Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
You assume people are rational and influenced by evidence. You must not work with the public much. -- Trilby
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way
As far I know ChomeOS use GPT and they unique Code for /usr (0057?) /boot (0058?) / (0059?) and the traditional for /home (0085 If I remmember correctly) and not use Grub, instead use another Bootloader.....
Gpareted not support the /usr /boot...blah,blah identifier but gpart support them
the problem is the Exen use a script that if i rennenber correclty again is the same that a dd w siglyt..so lees diferences for the space for home...and the partition use stranges 1M separation non-partitioned in / and /home /usr and other partitions
Well, I suppose that this is somekind of signature, no?