A Windows 98 & ME forum. Win98banter

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.

Go Back   Home » Win98banter forum » Windows 98 » General
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Formatting a FAT32 disk



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 8th 16, 12:24 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
Kerr Mudd-John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Formatting a FAT32 disk

On Fri, 07 Oct 2016 15:57:49 +0100, gargoyle60
wrote:

On Thu, 6 Oct 2016 16:26:24 -0000 (UTC), "Auric__"
wrote:

4 GB I'd toss without a
second thought.


I'm only keeping them as a novelty.
One 4GB drive will hold Windows 98, the other 4GB drive will serve as an
extra Linux swap-space.


a) 4G! that's a lot more than my XT's 10M!
b) you can't get SD cards that small these days.

My how things have changed.

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug
  #12  
Old October 8th 16, 03:40 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
gargoyle60
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default Formatting a FAT32 disk

On Fri, 7 Oct 2016 23:05:49 +0700, JJ wrote:

That HDD is dying since bad cluster is detected. Most probably worn out,
assuming that it's an old HDD.


Circa 1999. It's been well used so I don't mind junking it.
  #13  
Old October 15th 16, 05:57 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
Hot-text
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 1,026
Default Formatting a FAT32 disk

"gargoyle60" wrote in message
...
I have an old desktop PC in which I have been swapping HDDs.
Previously one of the drives, a 4.1GB, was used with Linux, which now I
want to reload Windows 98.
I have since used a GParted LiveCD to delete/recreate the partition table
and have created a single
Fat32 primary partition for the entire 4.1GB.


Now I have used an old Windows98 startup floppy disk and run:
format c: /u
It shows:
Formatting 4.102.5M
Trying to recover allocation unit 69,656



C:FORMAT C: /s

CAUTION: All data on non-removable disk
drive C: will be lost!
Proceed with Format (Y/N)?

Yes
It will DOS Systems On C:


This has been running now for about 3 hours. It's an old desktop PC,
Pentium II, 350MHz, 750MB RAM.
The machine is slow so I expected it to take a while.


No FORMAT C: /U Commands

/U parameter performs an UNCONDITIONAL format,
which DESTROYS every byte of data on a disk
by overwriting it with with blank spaces

About a hour Or More "Per - GB"

In A list of available Commands

There isn't a "u"
but there is a "v"
which is for label

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/95964-45-format

Can anybody suggest how much longer this might take to complete
formatting?
Thanks



Windows98 startup On
Pentium II, 750MB RAM To Big Win98
Go With 64 to 250MB RAM

After Windows 98 startup
Then Go Back To 750MB RAM



--
Send No Money
The Reason Why

I Am a Non-Party
Candidate

Write in The Ballot
Not In Check Book

. And Vote for:
Billy Ray 0808
USA. Vice - President

Or
Billy Ray Ferrell
For:
USA. Vice - President


The Art Of Writing
It at the End


  #14  
Old October 15th 16, 06:09 AM posted to 24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
Hot-text
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 1,026
Default Formatting a FAT32 disk

"gargoyle60" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016 01:23:58 -0700 (PDT), Lee wrote:

I was told (yonks ago) that the /U option is an undocumented very
low-level format and can be slow.


/u Is A Lie

I aborted the forrmat and tried MS FDISK which said everything was already
correctly partitioned.
I did a "format c: /S" and it ran okay without any bad blocks being
reported. I shall avoid using /U
in future.
Now Windows98 has installed and starts just fine.


gargoyle60
You did a "format c: /S
That Is 100% Right

Good Job

All Dives For PC, Pentium II, 350MHz
Are Out There

http://www.tmeeco.eu/9X4EVER/GOODIES/
http://www.majorgeeks.com/
http://www.oldversion.com/


--
Send No Money
The Reason Why

I Am a Non-Party
Candidate

Write in The Ballot
Not In Check Book

. And Vote for:
Billy Ray 0808
USA. Vice - President

Or
Billy Ray Ferrell
For:
USA. Vice - President


The Art Of Writing
It at the End


  #15  
Old October 21st 16, 09:31 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
Lee
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 196
Default Formatting a FAT32 disk

On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 11:09:40 PM UTC-6, Hot-Text wrote:

/u Is A Lie


Not quite accurate, but neither is telling the user that it will show up with /? switch applied to format command. The truth is that /U is the new /C.. For whatever reason they decided /C was more better, but at the same time left the /U switch working for /C switch for those of us used to using /U.. Same, same is the result only now /U is an undocumented switch. Description of /C is lacking as well but then so was /U description back when it did show up in earlier versions of DOS.

  #16  
Old November 24th 16, 10:11 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
Hot-text
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 1,026
Default Formatting a FAT32 disk

"Lee" wrote in message
...
On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 11:09:40 PM UTC-6, Hot-Text wrote:
/u Is A Lie


Not quite accurate,
but neither is telling the user that it will show up with /
? switch applied to format command.

The truth is that /U is the new /C.
For whatever reason they decided /C was more better,
but at the same time left the /U switch working
for /C switch for those of us used to using /U.
Same, same is the result only now /U
is an undocumented switch.
Description of /C is lacking as well
but then so was /U description back when it
did show up in earlier versions of DOS.


Well I Nether Did Like IBM Too:

God Lee

That was News To Me /u
Made Me Look it Up to

Ok You Right We Round It Off
Just Like You Said And I Quote

You won't get any bad sector/cluster
report with format except on floppies.

Switch /U is not undocumented,
type format /?
and read about all the switches.

What /U does is ignore
the bad sector list
and attempt to format all sectors.

The reason it takes time is
because you have a bad drive.

Any other format simply adds
bad sectors found
at that time to
the existing (and growing)
bad sector list

without telling you about
any part of that.

On Friday, November 24, 2016, Hot-Text Undeleted:
gargoyle60
You did a "format c: /S
That Is 100% Right

Good Job
All Dives For PC, Pentium II, 350MHz
Are Out There
http://www.tmeeco.eu/9X4EVER/GOODIES/
http://www.majorgeeks.com/
http://www.oldversion.com/


--
Green Go

I Am a Non-Party
Candidate For 2018
Lieutenant Governor Texas

Billy Ray Ferrell
&
Candidate For 2020
USA. Vice - President

And For That Vote For Me 2016
Thanks From Yours Truly
Hot-Text

The Art Of Writing
It at the End


  #17  
Old November 26th 16, 02:47 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
Kerr Mudd-John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Formatting a FAT32 disk

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 21:11:23 -0000, Hot-Text wrote:

"Lee" wrote in message
...
On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 11:09:40 PM UTC-6, Hot-Text wrote:
/u Is A Lie


Not quite accurate,
but neither is telling the user that it will show up with /
? switch applied to format command.

The truth is that /U is the new /C.
For whatever reason they decided /C was more better,
but at the same time left the /U switch working
for /C switch for those of us used to using /U.
Same, same is the result only now /U
is an undocumented switch.
Description of /C is lacking as well
but then so was /U description back when it
did show up in earlier versions of DOS.


Well I Nether Did Like IBM Too:

God Lee

That was News To Me /u
Made Me Look it Up to

Ok You Right We Round It Off
Just Like You Said And I Quote

You won't get any bad sector/cluster
report with format except on floppies.

Switch /U is not undocumented,
type format /?
and read about all the switches.

What /U does is ignore
the bad sector list
and attempt to format all sectors.

The reason it takes time is
because you have a bad drive.

Any other format simply adds
bad sectors found
at that time to
the existing (and growing)
bad sector list

without telling you about
any part of that.


2/10. It doesn't rhyme at all.



On Friday, November 24, 2016, Hot-Text Undeleted:
gargoyle60
You did a "format c: /S
That Is 100% Right

Good Job
All Dives For PC, Pentium II, 350MHz
Are Out There
http://www.tmeeco.eu/9X4EVER/GOODIES/
http://www.majorgeeks.com/
http://www.oldversion.com/




--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To FAT32 or not to FAT32??......that is my Question............ Dave Software & Applications 2 October 5th 08 07:37 PM
FAT32 disk is much faster but I can't see why [email protected] Disk Drives 3 March 15th 07 12:07 AM
Disk restoration from image after formatting Levlg Disk Drives 2 December 4th 06 09:17 PM
fat32 neilfrusrated General 14 July 1st 04 09:41 AM
Formatting hard disk albertloo Disk Drives 1 May 26th 04 12:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 Win98banter.
The comments are property of their posters.