If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
On Thu, 27 May 2010 13:11:31 -0700, Andrew
wrote: While browsing the Partition Magic installation CD-ROM, I found extra utilities on it. One of them was the ptedit32.exe, i.e., Partition Table Editor v1.1 of 2002. The nice thing about this editor is that it is still downloadable from the Internet and its interface is in plain English. I used it to change my 0Bs to 0Cs, but I failed. To be more precise, I was able to make such changes with this utility and save them (they even were in place after rebooting the computer), but everything returned to the previous situation, as soon, as I opened Partition Magic. A simple test here might show whether we're on the right track. Use Partition Magic to make your Win98 system partition active and then use ptedit.exe (I assume you boot using a DOS floppy to use ptedit) to change the partition types from 0B to 0C. Then you could start Win98 and see if it can see the partitions properly and also that you have no phantom drives in Explorer. Phantom drives have a drive letter but if you try to view them in Explorer it will tell you the volume isn't formatted. If the partitions don't appear then the problem is elsewhere. Although your reasoning about my logical partitions seems to be OK, there is probably another limitation or maybe a deficiency of Partition Magic, which doesn't allow it. By the way, I found on the Internet an another example of the similar situation with 2 logical 0B partitions within the ExtenedX partition (cf. www.goodells.net.multiboot.ptedit.htm). The partition type code issue is a bit muddled due to historical factors. Type 0x0B is FAT32 with CHS access and type 0x0C is FAT32 with LBA access. I believe that Win98 respects this. But all versions of Win NT always use LBA access. So XP doesn't care whether your partitions are 0x0B or 0x0C; it always uses LBA. If I create a FAT32 volume in XP it always gets the 0x0B code even when it's past the 1024 cylinder boundary. So if Partition Magic does the same I wouldn't call it a bug or even a deficiency. But it can cause problems with Win98 IO.SYS so it seems a bit silly to me. So please try the ptedit test above and tell me if it helps. I think a better long-term solution would be to make your system multiboot with the Win98 system partition as the active partition. Then you could select which O/S you want at boot time and not have to play with changing the partition table. I think this can be done without mucking up the drive letters in either O/S. Does this approach appeal to you ? Cheers, -- Steven |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
1. I always use Partition Magic for DOS (on rescue disks) to make the Win98se
partition active. This version doesn't have all options of the Windows version. In order to complete the changes made to my hard drive(s), I have to reboot to Win98se. 2. No, I never used ptedit.exe, which is the DOS version of this editor, but ptedit32.exe, running it either from Win98 or from WinXP. Under such circumstances, I never had phantom drives in Explorer. 3. Is use of the ptedit.exe (from DOS) essential for the suggested by you test? 4. MS approach to multibooting has documented disadvantages, especially in case you decide to get rid of Win98 at a later time. A better solution would be multibooting approach of Partition Magic. My approach separating completely both OSs isn't perfect either, but fortunately, I'm not switching too often to Win98 and believe to abandon it anyway within a year or so. Regards, Andrew "Steven Saunderson" wrote: On Thu, 27 May 2010 13:11:31 -0700, Andrew wrote: While browsing the Partition Magic installation CD-ROM, I found extra utilities on it. One of them was the ptedit32.exe, i.e., Partition Table Editor v1.1 of 2002. The nice thing about this editor is that it is still downloadable from the Internet and its interface is in plain English. I used it to change my 0Bs to 0Cs, but I failed. To be more precise, I was able to make such changes with this utility and save them (they even were in place after rebooting the computer), but everything returned to the previous situation, as soon, as I opened Partition Magic. A simple test here might show whether we're on the right track. Use Partition Magic to make your Win98 system partition active and then use ptedit.exe (I assume you boot using a DOS floppy to use ptedit) to change the partition types from 0B to 0C. Then you could start Win98 and see if it can see the partitions properly and also that you have no phantom drives in Explorer. Phantom drives have a drive letter but if you try to view them in Explorer it will tell you the volume isn't formatted. If the partitions don't appear then the problem is elsewhere. Although your reasoning about my logical partitions seems to be OK, there is probably another limitation or maybe a deficiency of Partition Magic, which doesn't allow it. By the way, I found on the Internet an another example of the similar situation with 2 logical 0B partitions within the ExtenedX partition (cf. www.goodells.net.multiboot.ptedit.htm). The partition type code issue is a bit muddled due to historical factors. Type 0x0B is FAT32 with CHS access and type 0x0C is FAT32 with LBA access. I believe that Win98 respects this. But all versions of Win NT always use LBA access. So XP doesn't care whether your partitions are 0x0B or 0x0C; it always uses LBA. If I create a FAT32 volume in XP it always gets the 0x0B code even when it's past the 1024 cylinder boundary. So if Partition Magic does the same I wouldn't call it a bug or even a deficiency. But it can cause problems with Win98 IO.SYS so it seems a bit silly to me. So please try the ptedit test above and tell me if it helps. I think a better long-term solution would be to make your system multiboot with the Win98 system partition as the active partition. Then you could select which O/S you want at boot time and not have to play with changing the partition table. I think this can be done without mucking up the drive letters in either O/S. Does this approach appeal to you ? Cheers, -- Steven . |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
1. I always use Partition Magic for DOS (on rescue disks) to make the Win98se
partition active. This version doesn't have all options of the Windows version. In order to complete the changes made to my hard drive(s), I have to reboot to Win98se. 2. No, I never used ptedit.exe, which is the DOS version of this editor, but ptedit32.exe, running it either from Win98 or from WinXP. Under such circumstances, I never had phantom drives in Explorer. 3. Is use of the ptedit.exe (from DOS) essential for the suggested by you test? 4. MS approach to multibooting has documented disadvantages, especially in case you decide to get rid of Win98 at a later time. A better solution would be multibooting approach of Partition Magic. My approach separating completely both OSs isn't perfect either, but fortunately, I'm not switching too often to Win98 and believe to abandon it anyway within a year or so. Regards, Andrew "Steven Saunderson" wrote: On Thu, 27 May 2010 13:11:31 -0700, Andrew wrote: While browsing the Partition Magic installation CD-ROM, I found extra utilities on it. One of them was the ptedit32.exe, i.e., Partition Table Editor v1.1 of 2002. The nice thing about this editor is that it is still downloadable from the Internet and its interface is in plain English. I used it to change my 0Bs to 0Cs, but I failed. To be more precise, I was able to make such changes with this utility and save them (they even were in place after rebooting the computer), but everything returned to the previous situation, as soon, as I opened Partition Magic. A simple test here might show whether we're on the right track. Use Partition Magic to make your Win98 system partition active and then use ptedit.exe (I assume you boot using a DOS floppy to use ptedit) to change the partition types from 0B to 0C. Then you could start Win98 and see if it can see the partitions properly and also that you have no phantom drives in Explorer. Phantom drives have a drive letter but if you try to view them in Explorer it will tell you the volume isn't formatted. If the partitions don't appear then the problem is elsewhere. Although your reasoning about my logical partitions seems to be OK, there is probably another limitation or maybe a deficiency of Partition Magic, which doesn't allow it. By the way, I found on the Internet an another example of the similar situation with 2 logical 0B partitions within the ExtenedX partition (cf. www.goodells.net.multiboot.ptedit.htm). The partition type code issue is a bit muddled due to historical factors. Type 0x0B is FAT32 with CHS access and type 0x0C is FAT32 with LBA access. I believe that Win98 respects this. But all versions of Win NT always use LBA access. So XP doesn't care whether your partitions are 0x0B or 0x0C; it always uses LBA. If I create a FAT32 volume in XP it always gets the 0x0B code even when it's past the 1024 cylinder boundary. So if Partition Magic does the same I wouldn't call it a bug or even a deficiency. But it can cause problems with Win98 IO.SYS so it seems a bit silly to me. So please try the ptedit test above and tell me if it helps. I think a better long-term solution would be to make your system multiboot with the Win98 system partition as the active partition. Then you could select which O/S you want at boot time and not have to play with changing the partition table. I think this can be done without mucking up the drive letters in either O/S. Does this approach appeal to you ? Cheers, -- Steven . |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
On Fri, 28 May 2010 15:29:01 -0700, Andrew
wrote: 3. Is use of the ptedit.exe (from DOS) essential for the suggested by you test? No, you could use any suitable program. But it might be safer to do the changes outside of Win98 (e.g. DOS) because you are seeing the problem when running Win98. Also you mentioned the difference after a reboot which suggests that some of the effects of the change are only detected when Win98 is starting. 4. MS approach to multibooting has documented disadvantages, especially in case you decide to get rid of Win98 at a later time. Yup, nothing's perfect. For instance NTLDR has a limitation of 10 entries in the BOOT.INI file. Of course, only silly people like me will ever hit this limit so it's not really a problem. Cheers, -- Steven |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
On Fri, 28 May 2010 15:29:01 -0700, Andrew
wrote: 3. Is use of the ptedit.exe (from DOS) essential for the suggested by you test? No, you could use any suitable program. But it might be safer to do the changes outside of Win98 (e.g. DOS) because you are seeing the problem when running Win98. Also you mentioned the difference after a reboot which suggests that some of the effects of the change are only detected when Win98 is starting. 4. MS approach to multibooting has documented disadvantages, especially in case you decide to get rid of Win98 at a later time. Yup, nothing's perfect. For instance NTLDR has a limitation of 10 entries in the BOOT.INI file. Of course, only silly people like me will ever hit this limit so it's not really a problem. Cheers, -- Steven |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
1. To be precise, I was able to make the 0B-0C changes with (pedit32.exe)
and save them (either in Win98 or WinXP). They were in place after rebooting the computer. However, these changes disappeared, after opening of Partition Magic (either in DOS or in Windows). It seems, Partition Magic didn't accept the changes, for some reason. 2. Just to be on a safe side, I performed the suggested by you test. This time, I restarted the computer from Win98 to DOS and then ran pedit.exe from a floppy). The results were the same as before. 3. To check, if my E: partitions (of only 7.5GB) wasn't a culprit, I used Partition Magic from DOS (rescue disks) to enlarge it by 1 GB and then repeated the test, but the results were the same, as before. 4. Some data listed in the Boot Record Table for the partition E: in ptedit.exe seem to me strange, namely - Hidden Sectors: 117852903 - First Cluster of Root: 141346 These are rather big numbers, whereas for D: they a 63 and 2, respectively. 5. Finally, in my Extended Partition Table, there are 2 non-zero entries in the Type column: 0B describing my D: partition (I corrected it to 0C) and 05, which describes an Extended Partition and not the ExtendedX one, which should have 0F entry, as in the Partition Table at sector 0. I don't understand this either and I didn't correct it. Regards, Andrew "Steven Saunderson" wrote: On Fri, 28 May 2010 15:29:01 -0700, Andrew wrote: 3. Is use of the ptedit.exe (from DOS) essential for the suggested by you test? No, you could use any suitable program. But it might be safer to do the changes outside of Win98 (e.g. DOS) because you are seeing the problem when running Win98. Also you mentioned the difference after a reboot which suggests that some of the effects of the change are only detected when Win98 is starting. 4. MS approach to multibooting has documented disadvantages, especially in case you decide to get rid of Win98 at a later time. Yup, nothing's perfect. For instance NTLDR has a limitation of 10 entries in the BOOT.INI file. Of course, only silly people like me will ever hit this limit so it's not really a problem. Cheers, -- Steven . |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
1. To be precise, I was able to make the 0B-0C changes with (pedit32.exe)
and save them (either in Win98 or WinXP). They were in place after rebooting the computer. However, these changes disappeared, after opening of Partition Magic (either in DOS or in Windows). It seems, Partition Magic didn't accept the changes, for some reason. 2. Just to be on a safe side, I performed the suggested by you test. This time, I restarted the computer from Win98 to DOS and then ran pedit.exe from a floppy). The results were the same as before. 3. To check, if my E: partitions (of only 7.5GB) wasn't a culprit, I used Partition Magic from DOS (rescue disks) to enlarge it by 1 GB and then repeated the test, but the results were the same, as before. 4. Some data listed in the Boot Record Table for the partition E: in ptedit.exe seem to me strange, namely - Hidden Sectors: 117852903 - First Cluster of Root: 141346 These are rather big numbers, whereas for D: they a 63 and 2, respectively. 5. Finally, in my Extended Partition Table, there are 2 non-zero entries in the Type column: 0B describing my D: partition (I corrected it to 0C) and 05, which describes an Extended Partition and not the ExtendedX one, which should have 0F entry, as in the Partition Table at sector 0. I don't understand this either and I didn't correct it. Regards, Andrew "Steven Saunderson" wrote: On Fri, 28 May 2010 15:29:01 -0700, Andrew wrote: 3. Is use of the ptedit.exe (from DOS) essential for the suggested by you test? No, you could use any suitable program. But it might be safer to do the changes outside of Win98 (e.g. DOS) because you are seeing the problem when running Win98. Also you mentioned the difference after a reboot which suggests that some of the effects of the change are only detected when Win98 is starting. 4. MS approach to multibooting has documented disadvantages, especially in case you decide to get rid of Win98 at a later time. Yup, nothing's perfect. For instance NTLDR has a limitation of 10 entries in the BOOT.INI file. Of course, only silly people like me will ever hit this limit so it's not really a problem. Cheers, -- Steven . |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:23:01 -0700, Andrew
wrote: 2. Just to be on a safe side, I performed the suggested by you test. This time, I restarted the computer from Win98 to DOS and then ran pedit.exe from a floppy). The results were the same as before. Thanks for trying. 4. Some data listed in the Boot Record Table for the partition E: in ptedit.exe seem to me strange, namely - Hidden Sectors: 117852903 - First Cluster of Root: 141346 These are rather big numbers, whereas for D: they a 63 and 2, respectively. These are strange values. The hidden sectors value suggests that the data is nowhere near the boot record. This could indicate how Partition Magic moves data when you resize a partition. 5. Finally, in my Extended Partition Table, there are 2 non-zero entries in the Type column: 0B describing my D: partition (I corrected it to 0C) and 05, which describes an Extended Partition and not the ExtendedX one, which should have 0F entry, as in the Partition Table at sector 0. I don't understand this either and I didn't correct it. The 0x05 is correct. The continuation entries are always 0x05 even when the extended partition starts with a 0x0F code. I'm rather lost here because I don't know anything about Partition Magic. Assume that originally your disk had two primary partitions and then your extended one with two volumes. When you increased the size of the second primary partition perhaps PM made space by moving the D: volume to after the E: volume and changing the links in the extended partition to suit. It would be easier to move 11GB than 30GB. As far as I know each partition has to be contiguous but the volumes in the extended partition can have spare areas between them and don't have to be in ascending order by disk address. It's a double-edged sword. PM is very clever in that it can resize partitions but it might be producing layouts that confuse things like Win98. It should be possible to determine your disk layout by using something like Ranish Partition Manager but changing things to help Win98 might cause problems when you later use PM to resize a partition or select the other O/S. Hopefully someone with ideas or knowledge of PM will chip in here. I'm hesitant to suggest further changes due to the risk of wrecking your setup. It is possible to have Win98 and XP on a disk and select the one you want by changing the boot flag using something like FDISK. This used to be common in the old days and I still do it on some PCs. Cheers, -- Steven |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:23:01 -0700, Andrew
wrote: 2. Just to be on a safe side, I performed the suggested by you test. This time, I restarted the computer from Win98 to DOS and then ran pedit.exe from a floppy). The results were the same as before. Thanks for trying. 4. Some data listed in the Boot Record Table for the partition E: in ptedit.exe seem to me strange, namely - Hidden Sectors: 117852903 - First Cluster of Root: 141346 These are rather big numbers, whereas for D: they a 63 and 2, respectively. These are strange values. The hidden sectors value suggests that the data is nowhere near the boot record. This could indicate how Partition Magic moves data when you resize a partition. 5. Finally, in my Extended Partition Table, there are 2 non-zero entries in the Type column: 0B describing my D: partition (I corrected it to 0C) and 05, which describes an Extended Partition and not the ExtendedX one, which should have 0F entry, as in the Partition Table at sector 0. I don't understand this either and I didn't correct it. The 0x05 is correct. The continuation entries are always 0x05 even when the extended partition starts with a 0x0F code. I'm rather lost here because I don't know anything about Partition Magic. Assume that originally your disk had two primary partitions and then your extended one with two volumes. When you increased the size of the second primary partition perhaps PM made space by moving the D: volume to after the E: volume and changing the links in the extended partition to suit. It would be easier to move 11GB than 30GB. As far as I know each partition has to be contiguous but the volumes in the extended partition can have spare areas between them and don't have to be in ascending order by disk address. It's a double-edged sword. PM is very clever in that it can resize partitions but it might be producing layouts that confuse things like Win98. It should be possible to determine your disk layout by using something like Ranish Partition Manager but changing things to help Win98 might cause problems when you later use PM to resize a partition or select the other O/S. Hopefully someone with ideas or knowledge of PM will chip in here. I'm hesitant to suggest further changes due to the risk of wrecking your setup. It is possible to have Win98 and XP on a disk and select the one you want by changing the boot flag using something like FDISK. This used to be common in the old days and I still do it on some PCs. Cheers, -- Steven |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Problem with accessing a partition
Thanks a lot for your interesting comments and helpful ideas.
I'm sorry to bother you again with my questions, hopefully last time, but this might lead to a breakthrough. 1. These are strange values. The hidden sector values suggest that the data is nowhere near the boot record. This could indicate how Partition Magic moves data when you resize a partition. My logical partitions D: and E: are not system partitions. They are so to say chained within my Extended partition. Can these strange values mean that the boot record for E: is located just before the beginning of E: and that these values reflect their relative distance from the beginning of the Extended partition? Is such a description used for logical partitions? 2. As far as I know each partition has to be contiguous but the volumes in the extended partition can have spare areas between them and don't have to be in ascending order by disk address. This is a very important info that I was unaware of. Let me return here to the PM resizing procedure. To resize my WinXP(* partition located in the following sequence of partitions: [C: Win98, (* WinXP, D:, E:, Unallocated] by 7GB, PM had to go through 5 'elementary' steps in the order displayed below: a. Resize Extended (* by 7GB (taken from Unallocated) b. Move E: up by 7GB c. Move D: up by 7GB d. Resize Extended (* down by 7GB e. Resize WinXP (* by 7GB Are these details somehow useful for confirmation of your idea about these strange values? 3. It is possible to have Win98 and XP on a disk and select the one you want by changing the boot flag using something like FDISK. You're completely right. One can easily do it, e.g. in the ptedit32.exe, by changing the flags. 'Boot flags' 00 and 80 stand for not bootable and bootable, and 'type flags' 0C and 1C stand for FAT32X and Hidden Fat32X partitions, respectively. PM has also 2 additional utilities (BootDisk) for activation and/or deactivation of a primary partition. One can easily change them. Regards, Andrew "Steven Saunderson" wrote: On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:23:01 -0700, Andrew wrote: 2. Just to be on a safe side, I performed the suggested by you test. This time, I restarted the computer from Win98 to DOS and then ran pedit.exe from a floppy). The results were the same as before. Thanks for trying. 4. Some data listed in the Boot Record Table for the partition E: in ptedit.exe seem to me strange, namely - Hidden Sectors: 117852903 - First Cluster of Root: 141346 These are rather big numbers, whereas for D: they a 63 and 2, respectively. These are strange values. The hidden sectors value suggests that the data is nowhere near the boot record. This could indicate how Partition Magic moves data when you resize a partition. 5. Finally, in my Extended Partition Table, there are 2 non-zero entries in the Type column: 0B describing my D: partition (I corrected it to 0C) and 05, which describes an Extended Partition and not the ExtendedX one, which should have 0F entry, as in the Partition Table at sector 0. I don't understand this either and I didn't correct it. The 0x05 is correct. The continuation entries are always 0x05 even when the extended partition starts with a 0x0F code. I'm rather lost here because I don't know anything about Partition Magic. Assume that originally your disk had two primary partitions and then your extended one with two volumes. When you increased the size of the second primary partition perhaps PM made space by moving the D: volume to after the E: volume and changing the links in the extended partition to suit. It would be easier to move 11GB than 30GB. As far as I know each partition has to be contiguous but the volumes in the extended partition can have spare areas between them and don't have to be in ascending order by disk address. It's a double-edged sword. PM is very clever in that it can resize partitions but it might be producing layouts that confuse things like Win98. It should be possible to determine your disk layout by using something like Ranish Partition Manager but changing things to help Win98 might cause problems when you later use PM to resize a partition or select the other O/S. Hopefully someone with ideas or knowledge of PM will chip in here. I'm hesitant to suggest further changes due to the risk of wrecking your setup. It is possible to have Win98 and XP on a disk and select the one you want by changing the boot flag using something like FDISK. This used to be common in the old days and I still do it on some PCs. Cheers, -- Steven . |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
problem accessing Ms-Dos | oer | General | 2 | May 15th 06 08:21 PM |
Problem w/Win 98 client accessing WIn 2003 domain | [email protected] | Networking | 0 | April 7th 06 01:27 AM |
Problem accessing https secure sites since Saturday | Lil' Dave | General | 1 | October 12th 04 12:28 PM |
Problem accessing Websites over a secure connection | Jim | Internet | 0 | October 3rd 04 05:45 PM |
Problem accessing XP printer | Craig Patton | Printing | 1 | July 20th 04 06:33 PM |