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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
When Windows assigns drive letters it looks for all primary partitions
first. If it finds a primary partition available it will assign a drive letter ahead of any secondary partition. So the "D" drive is not getting skipped, but rather it is getting included (with zero size) when it doesn't (apparently) exist. It's not a question of overlooking a drive letter, it's a question of including an extra partition that doesn't match the physical drive setup that you believe to be the logical lettering for your system. You stated that "Strange things happened: the d: disk was shown in Win98, however without a disk connected (size is 0) and the 3 GB disk was shown as drive e: " where I now realize that the reference to no disk connected was your description of the result, not the cause. The same considerations apply - Do FDISK /Status for each drive in turn to confirm the exact partitioning that the system sees for that drive in the configuration that causes the problem. Double check that BIOS is properly responding to drives that it examines, and that it adjusts (or is manually adjusted) to any changed configuration. Delete IDE devices in Device manager and allow Windows to re-detect them. I believe you are going to find some unusual partitioning on one of the drives which for some reason is detect differently between the two configurations. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) "RobH" wrote in message ... Well, I hink that you are missing some of the info I gave: With no drives connected to the Promise I had: c: 2.5GB, Standard Primary Master d: 3GB, Standard Primary Slave e: DVD RW, Standard Secondary Master f: DVD Rom, Standard Secondary Slave When I reconnected 2 drives to the Promise I got: c: 2.5GB, Standard Primary Master d: 0 e: 3GB, Standard Primary Slave f: 80GB, Promise Primary Master g: 12.5GB, Promise Primary Slave h: DVD RW, Standard Secondary Master i: DVD Rom, Standard Secondary Slave So, with the same disk connected in the same way and no additional changes, the letter d: was skipped in exactly the same set-up. And my question is why this letter is skipped, what may cause this phenomenon. (When you got confused in my original setup the RW was on the Master and not on the slave as I istakely wrote in my original posting, but that does not change anything) |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks, I will try these suggestions out this weekend. Will report back on
Monday! (Sorry If I had you unintendedly on the wrong leg... :-( I am just Dutch, explains maybe a lot) ==== "Jeff Richards" wrote: When Windows assigns drive letters it looks for all primary partitions first. If it finds a primary partition available it will assign a drive letter ahead of any secondary partition. So the "D" drive is not getting skipped, but rather it is getting included (with zero size) when it doesn't (apparently) exist. It's not a question of overlooking a drive letter, it's a question of including an extra partition that doesn't match the physical drive setup that you believe to be the logical lettering for your system. You stated that "Strange things happened: the d: disk was shown in Win98, however without a disk connected (size is 0) and the 3 GB disk was shown as drive e: " where I now realize that the reference to no disk connected was your description of the result, not the cause. The same considerations apply - Do FDISK /Status for each drive in turn to confirm the exact partitioning that the system sees for that drive in the configuration that causes the problem. Double check that BIOS is properly responding to drives that it examines, and that it adjusts (or is manually adjusted) to any changed configuration. Delete IDE devices in Device manager and allow Windows to re-detect them. I believe you are going to find some unusual partitioning on one of the drives which for some reason is detect differently between the two configurations. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) "RobH" wrote in message ... Well, I hink that you are missing some of the info I gave: With no drives connected to the Promise I had: c: 2.5GB, Standard Primary Master d: 3GB, Standard Primary Slave e: DVD RW, Standard Secondary Master f: DVD Rom, Standard Secondary Slave When I reconnected 2 drives to the Promise I got: c: 2.5GB, Standard Primary Master d: 0 e: 3GB, Standard Primary Slave f: 80GB, Promise Primary Master g: 12.5GB, Promise Primary Slave h: DVD RW, Standard Secondary Master i: DVD Rom, Standard Secondary Slave So, with the same disk connected in the same way and no additional changes, the letter d: was skipped in exactly the same set-up. And my question is why this letter is skipped, what may cause this phenomenon. (When you got confused in my original setup the RW was on the Master and not on the slave as I istakely wrote in my original posting, but that does not change anything) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
As I said I have tried some of the suggestions out, and here are the results
so far. First I reinstalled the 3GB disk and made sure that BIOS has the correct settings. FDISK did show the disk, however with an "unknown" file system. The RAMDISK that I installed with starting in DOS mode was installed with the same letter (D) as the 3GB disk... Under DOS the disk apparently was not detected (maybe NTFS, although I am certain that I completely formatted it as a FAT32.... but maybe there was some hidden partition) Fdisk also told me that there was only one partition present. So, since the content of the disk had already been backed up, primary partition (having the volume name of the ramdisk...). Then I reinstalled a primary partition on the disk with largest size. So far so good. Next I completely formatted the disk, now it definitely has FAT32 as filesystem. Restarted the PC with Win98 and all disks are OK, correct letters and sizes. Since I wanted to use the D: drive for "My Documents" I re-copied tis directory from the back-up. Still everything OK. Modified two files in My Documents, copied them also to the backup drive. Now comes the (again) puzzling part: my E:-drive became a zero-sized disk, I could open it and see all content, however when I used "Properties" the size of the disk was zero and the volume name was empty. All other drives were OK. Refreshing the explorer did not change anything, restarting the computer restored the original condition. To be save I removed the the device driver from the Device manager and restarted the computer. The same device driver seems to be installed (Disk type 46). For now I leave the 3GB disk in place, however, I am still worried about the fact that the drive may be defective or having some hidden structure on it that DOS, fdisk nor Windows is able to detect. For your info: the disk is a Quantum Fireball ST, 3240AT that originally was delivered with a DELL system. When I started using it it was known to have a defective bootsector, so I figured I could still use it as a secondary drive.... Since I still do not have the feeling that the problem has completely been solved: To be continued. For now thanks for all your help and if you still have additional suggestions: please drop them! "RobH" schreef: Thanks, I will try these suggestions out this weekend. Will report back on Monday! (Sorry If I had you unintendedly on the wrong leg... :-( I am just Dutch, explains maybe a lot) ==== |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
The zero drive E may have been due to not re-booting after making changes.
I usually do this sort of disk management from DOS, with a fresh boot after each change. I can't quite tell from your description whether this may have something to do with it. If the bootsector is damaged then it's possible that the system may be having a problem reading the partition data from the disk - it depends on just where the damage is and what effect it has on the boot procedure. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) "RobH" wrote in message news As I said I have tried some of the suggestions out, and here are the results so far. First I reinstalled the 3GB disk and made sure that BIOS has the correct settings. FDISK did show the disk, however with an "unknown" file system. The RAMDISK that I installed with starting in DOS mode was installed with the same letter (D) as the 3GB disk... Under DOS the disk apparently was not detected (maybe NTFS, although I am certain that I completely formatted it as a FAT32.... but maybe there was some hidden partition) Fdisk also told me that there was only one partition present. So, since the content of the disk had already been backed up, primary partition (having the volume name of the ramdisk...). Then I reinstalled a primary partition on the disk with largest size. So far so good. Next I completely formatted the disk, now it definitely has FAT32 as filesystem. Restarted the PC with Win98 and all disks are OK, correct letters and sizes. Since I wanted to use the D: drive for "My Documents" I re-copied tis directory from the back-up. Still everything OK. Modified two files in My Documents, copied them also to the backup drive. Now comes the (again) puzzling part: my E:-drive became a zero-sized disk, I could open it and see all content, however when I used "Properties" the size of the disk was zero and the volume name was empty. All other drives were OK. Refreshing the explorer did not change anything, restarting the computer restored the original condition. To be save I removed the the device driver from the Device manager and restarted the computer. The same device driver seems to be installed (Disk type 46). For now I leave the 3GB disk in place, however, I am still worried about the fact that the drive may be defective or having some hidden structure on it that DOS, fdisk nor Windows is able to detect. For your info: the disk is a Quantum Fireball ST, 3240AT that originally was delivered with a DELL system. When I started using it it was known to have a defective bootsector, so I figured I could still use it as a secondary drive.... Since I still do not have the feeling that the problem has completely been solved: To be continued. For now thanks for all your help and if you still have additional suggestions: please drop them! |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
As far as I can recollect I did the reboot (I usually do as well) after the
change, however after changing something in BIOS I must reboot. Changes on DOS level I do by starting the PC in DOS (using the Rescue disk of Win98) and not by opening a DOS wiondow in Win98, so also there I had to restart anyway. Still Windows seems to play tricks with this 3GB disk. As far as the FAT is concerned: you may be right, however I have been using this disk for more than half a year without noticing problems. On the other hand the 1.5 GB disk that I replaced gave me occasional "not there" problems, the reason that I wanted to replace it in the first place. Just occurred to me that I had this 3GB disk installed as last physical drive immediately followed by two optical drives and four flash drives (due to a card reader I have connected to the USB), maybe the problem has been in the past but has been hidden because no physical disks were affected when the next drive was unreadable.... (does this make sense, I am not sure, just looking for an explanation) Still, after installation of the 3GB disk, I worked for several hours without any problem. I am still keeping the 1.5GB disk on standby just in case. Coming evening I will find out... Anyway: thanks Jeff for your support. "Jeff Richards" wrote: The zero drive E may have been due to not re-booting after making changes. I usually do this sort of disk management from DOS, with a fresh boot after each change. I can't quite tell from your description whether this may have something to do with it. If the bootsector is damaged then it's possible that the system may be having a problem reading the partition data from the disk - it depends on just where the damage is and what effect it has on the boot procedure. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) "RobH" wrote in message news As I said I have tried some of the suggestions out, and here are the results so far. First I reinstalled the 3GB disk and made sure that BIOS has the correct settings. FDISK did show the disk, however with an "unknown" file system. The RAMDISK that I installed with starting in DOS mode was installed with the same letter (D) as the 3GB disk... Under DOS the disk apparently was not detected (maybe NTFS, although I am certain that I completely formatted it as a FAT32.... but maybe there was some hidden partition) Fdisk also told me that there was only one partition present. So, since the content of the disk had already been backed up, primary partition (having the volume name of the ramdisk...). Then I reinstalled a primary partition on the disk with largest size. So far so good. Next I completely formatted the disk, now it definitely has FAT32 as filesystem. Restarted the PC with Win98 and all disks are OK, correct letters and sizes. Since I wanted to use the D: drive for "My Documents" I re-copied tis directory from the back-up. Still everything OK. Modified two files in My Documents, copied them also to the backup drive. Now comes the (again) puzzling part: my E:-drive became a zero-sized disk, I could open it and see all content, however when I used "Properties" the size of the disk was zero and the volume name was empty. All other drives were OK. Refreshing the explorer did not change anything, restarting the computer restored the original condition. To be save I removed the the device driver from the Device manager and restarted the computer. The same device driver seems to be installed (Disk type 46). For now I leave the 3GB disk in place, however, I am still worried about the fact that the drive may be defective or having some hidden structure on it that DOS, fdisk nor Windows is able to detect. For your info: the disk is a Quantum Fireball ST, 3240AT that originally was delivered with a DELL system. When I started using it it was known to have a defective bootsector, so I figured I could still use it as a secondary drive.... Since I still do not have the feeling that the problem has completely been solved: To be continued. For now thanks for all your help and if you still have additional suggestions: please drop them! |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Glad to have been of some help. Fingers crossed it keeps running properly.
It would be nice to know exactly what the problem was all about, but sometimes that's just not possible. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) "RobH" wrote in message ... As far as I can recollect I did the reboot (I usually do as well) after the change, however after changing something in BIOS I must reboot. Changes on DOS level I do by starting the PC in DOS (using the Rescue disk of Win98) and not by opening a DOS wiondow in Win98, so also there I had to restart anyway. Still Windows seems to play tricks with this 3GB disk. As far as the FAT is concerned: you may be right, however I have been using this disk for more than half a year without noticing problems. On the other hand the 1.5 GB disk that I replaced gave me occasional "not there" problems, the reason that I wanted to replace it in the first place. Just occurred to me that I had this 3GB disk installed as last physical drive immediately followed by two optical drives and four flash drives (due to a card reader I have connected to the USB), maybe the problem has been in the past but has been hidden because no physical disks were affected when the next drive was unreadable.... (does this make sense, I am not sure, just looking for an explanation) Still, after installation of the 3GB disk, I worked for several hours without any problem. I am still keeping the 1.5GB disk on standby just in case. Coming evening I will find out... Anyway: thanks Jeff for your support. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Yesterday evening I decided to replace my 3GB drive by the 7GB drive. The
system has been working without any problem ever since the 13th, so the solution implemented at that moment was the ultimate workaround. (I only had shutdown delays I could not get rid of). On replacing the disks I noticed the following behaviour: As long as the 7GB drive was connected to the Promise IDE Controller it was recognized as being FAT32 formatted. I connected it to the primary IDE controller (as slave) and corrected the BIOS as appropriate. Started up in DOS mode (using the Win98 rescue disk, not from Windows). The RAMDrive got a wrong drive letter, the harddisks on C:, D:, E: and F:, RAMDrive got letter F: as well!. I started FDisk and checked: all drives recognized, only drive D: (the 7GB drive) was not recognized as FAT32! I did not take any risk, so I removed the primary partition (the only one) from the 7GB disk and reinstalled a primary DOS partition. Rerstarted the PC in DOS mode and now the RAMDisk got the letter G: as expected. Reformatted the 7GB disk and checked with FDisk that the disk is recognized as FAT32 again. All works fine now. Also I do no longer experience shutdown delays. Conclusion: when formatting a disk (connected to the Promise controller) from DOS the Promise 100TX2 card is not installing a real FAT32 but something else that is translated into FAT32 on accessing it from Windows or DOS. Case Closed as far as I am concerned. "RobH" wrote: I got a curious problem that puzzles me. I have a PI 200MHz system with the following drive setup (2 drives and DVD's with the standard IDE controller, 4 drives via a Promise ata100 TX2): - c: 2.5 GB standard IDE primary master - d: 1.5 GB standard IDE primary slave - e: 7 GB Promise IDE primary master - f: 12.5 GB Promise IDE primary slave - g: 80 GB Promise IDE secondary master - h: 3 GB Promise IDE secondary slave - i: DVD Rom standard IDE secondary master - j: DVD RW standard IDE secondary slave This works well with Win98 SE. Now I wanted to replace the 1.5GB d: drive with the 3GB I currently have as h: drive. Strange things happened: the d: disk was shown in Win98, however without a disk connected (size is 0) and the 3 GB disk was shown as drive e: ... So I disconnected all drives from the Promise card and now the 3GB drive shows as drive d: ... Reconnecting the drives to the Promise card and again d: was skipped but still shown in the list... I then replaced the original 1.5GB drive as primary slave and all was fine again... The only thing I can imagine is that some drive information is stored by the Promise card, however, without any additional drives connected to the Promise card (still installed in the system) the 3 GB drive is correctly recognized as d: so this is contradictionary. Since I still want to replcae the 1.5GB drive (I use it for My Documents) I was wondering if anyone knows the cause of this problem? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
The issue is with the partitioning, not the formatting.
If you partition a drive using one controller, you cannot assume that the partitioning will be correctly recognised when you move it to a different controller - often it is, but sometimes it isn't. As a general rule you should always prepare a disk when it is connected to the controller that you intend to use it with. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) "RobH" wrote in message ... Yesterday evening I decided to replace my 3GB drive by the 7GB drive. The system has been working without any problem ever since the 13th, so the solution implemented at that moment was the ultimate workaround. (I only had shutdown delays I could not get rid of). On replacing the disks I noticed the following behaviour: As long as the 7GB drive was connected to the Promise IDE Controller it was recognized as being FAT32 formatted. I connected it to the primary IDE controller (as slave) and corrected the BIOS as appropriate. Started up in DOS mode (using the Win98 rescue disk, not from Windows). The RAMDrive got a wrong drive letter, the harddisks on C:, D:, E: and F:, RAMDrive got letter F: as well!. I started FDisk and checked: all drives recognized, only drive D: (the 7GB drive) was not recognized as FAT32! I did not take any risk, so I removed the primary partition (the only one) from the 7GB disk and reinstalled a primary DOS partition. Rerstarted the PC in DOS mode and now the RAMDisk got the letter G: as expected. Reformatted the 7GB disk and checked with FDisk that the disk is recognized as FAT32 again. All works fine now. Also I do no longer experience shutdown delays. Conclusion: when formatting a disk (connected to the Promise controller) from DOS the Promise 100TX2 card is not installing a real FAT32 but something else that is translated into FAT32 on accessing it from Windows or DOS. Case Closed as far as I am concerned. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Which makes me worried. This would mean that upgrading a motherboard does not
guarantee that the content of a disk with real content (not programs but the actual user stuff) is readable. Although making regular backups is a must, you would expect that a disk, once partitioned and formatted, need not be re-partitioned and re-formatted when the IDE controller changes due to a configuration change. This would enforce upgrading only with compatible chip-sets! Does this make sense or am I talking nonsense? "Jeff Richards" wrote: The issue is with the partitioning, not the formatting. If you partition a drive using one controller, you cannot assume that the partitioning will be correctly recognised when you move it to a different controller - often it is, but sometimes it isn't. As a general rule you should always prepare a disk when it is connected to the controller that you intend to use it with. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
That's just what it means. However, it's not the chipset that determines the
compatibility, but the BIOS. The problem is most likely when the systems implement enhanced functionality through BIOS functions. A configuration change in the controller, such as LARGE to LBA, will invariably require re-partitioning and re-formatting. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User) "RobH" wrote in message ... Which makes me worried. This would mean that upgrading a motherboard does not guarantee that the content of a disk with real content (not programs but the actual user stuff) is readable. Although making regular backups is a must, you would expect that a disk, once partitioned and formatted, need not be re-partitioned and re-formatted when the IDE controller changes due to a configuration change. This would enforce upgrading only with compatible chip-sets! Does this make sense or am I talking nonsense? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
BAD BAT | Pebble | General | 41 | December 2nd 04 09:51 PM |
Error - "CD Rom drive is not accessible; the device is not ready." | J Eklund J.D. | Multimedia | 0 | July 14th 04 07:21 AM |
Error - "CD Rom drive is not accessible; the device is not ready." | J Eklund J.D. | Multimedia | 0 | July 14th 04 07:21 AM |
deleted explorer.exe | Anida | Software & Applications | 20 | June 16th 04 06:21 AM |
Zero-byte D: drive should not show, C: missing from Device Manager | *Vanguard* | General | 8 | June 12th 04 04:19 AM |