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 » Disk Drives
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Drive F: not accessible in 98. Ok in XP



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 3rd 06, 07:22 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
Labrat
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 14
Default Drive F: not accessible in 98. Ok in XP

I'm running a Dual-boot 98SE/WinXp Pro setup. Two HDs. A 200G Maxtor
with an 80G WD. The 80G used to hold my 98 Then I purchased the 200G,
partitioned (4) and cloned 98 to the first partition, installed XP Home
to the second and voila. I had a functioning dual-boot rig. After big
problems caused by windows update in XP and other hardware changes I lost
my validation and XP shut down. Still had 98 tho. Managed to get a
student version of XP Pro and installed it in place of XP Home. No
validation required. Back to a working dual-boot rig. Now I have
C:Win98SE and G:XP Pro. D:used to be XP Home, now is the 80G. E: and F:
are for storage. If I try to go to F: in 98 I just get "F:\ is not
accessible. A device attached to the system is not functioning."

In XP it's just fine.

Not critical but annoying none the less.

Partition info doesn't show F:\ at all in 98 and gives the error
message..

"Warning: EPBR partition starting at 334810665 is without logical
partition.:

Any ideas?

TIA.

Later......

LabRat...... |:^{)




  #2  
Old December 3rd 06, 10:19 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
Mikhail Zhilin
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 21
Default Drive F: not accessible in 98. Ok in XP

Then I purchased the 200G, partitioned (4) and cloned 98 to the first partition

Win98 does not natively support 48-bit LBA drives larger than 137 GB. You will
have the tons of problems (including the data loss of the *whole* 200GB drive)
if do so, and It does not matter you installed Win98 to the first 80GB
(i.e. 137GB) partition.

See http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm

--
Михаил Жилин
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
http://www.aha.ru/~mwz
Remove "x.REMOVEx." from my e-mail address
======

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 06:22:13 GMT, LabRat wrote:

I'm running a Dual-boot 98SE/WinXp Pro setup. Two HDs. A 200G Maxtor
with an 80G WD. The 80G used to hold my 98 Then I purchased the 200G,
partitioned (4) and cloned 98 to the first partition, installed XP Home
to the second and voila. I had a functioning dual-boot rig. After big
problems caused by windows update in XP and other hardware changes I lost
my validation and XP shut down. Still had 98 tho. Managed to get a
student version of XP Pro and installed it in place of XP Home. No
validation required. Back to a working dual-boot rig. Now I have
C:Win98SE and G:XP Pro. D:used to be XP Home, now is the 80G. E: and F:
are for storage. If I try to go to F: in 98 I just get "F:\ is not
accessible. A device attached to the system is not functioning."

In XP it's just fine.

Not critical but annoying none the less.

Partition info doesn't show F:\ at all in 98 and gives the error
message..

"Warning: EPBR partition starting at 334810665 is without logical
partition.:

Any ideas?

TIA.

Later......

LabRat...... |:^{)




  #3  
Old December 3rd 06, 08:21 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
Labrat
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 14
Default Drive F: not accessible in 98. Ok in XP

Mikhail Zhilin voiced his/her/it's humble opinion in
microsoft.public.win98.disks.general on Sun 03 Dec 2006 01:19:21a:

Then I purchased the 200G, partitioned (4) and cloned 98 to the first
partition


Win98 does not natively support 48-bit LBA drives larger than 137 GB.
You will have the tons of problems (including the data loss of the
*whole* 200GB drive) if do so, and It does not matter you installed
Win98 to the first 80GB (i.e. 137GB) partition.

See http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm

--
Михаил Жилин
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
http://www.aha.ru/~mwz
Remove "x.REMOVEx." from my e-mail address
======



I checked out the site and it seems that it refers to problems when the
drive is formatted to full capacity. I used Partition Magic to do the
original partitioning and formating. Both operating systems are on primary
drives with the E: and F: partions in an extended partition of 110 Gig.
Under 98 the F: drive is shown as "Unallocated". Under XP Partition Magic
shows it as AOK.

I think perhaps it be time to burn a few DVDs and maybe merge the two into
one 110 Gig extended drive. It's been like this for over a month now and
I'm not having problems with data loss or file corruption. I replaced the
motherboard at the same time with a PCChips K8 Socket 754 64bit running an
AMD Sempron 2800+ with a VIA K8M800/8237 Chipset.

Thanks for your input.


--
Later......

LabRat...... |:^{)




  #4  
Old December 3rd 06, 10:25 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
Mikhail Zhilin
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 21
Default Drive F: not accessible in 98. Ok in XP

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 19:21:08 GMT, LabRat wrote:

Mikhail Zhilin voiced his/her/it's humble opinion in
microsoft.public.win98.disks.general on Sun 03 Dec 2006 01:19:21a:

...
Win98 does not natively support 48-bit LBA drives larger than 137 GB.

...
See http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm

...

I checked out the site and it seems that it refers to problems when the
drive is formatted to full capacity.


No: 137GB for Win98 it is not a problem of the partition(s) size(s), but the
problem of the full drive capacity.

Win98 wraps all the addresses above 137 gigabytes to the addresses based on
zero, so when you think you write to the 138th GB of the _full_drive_capacity_
(does not matter, is it the first partition that is greater than 137GB, or,
say, the second partition 80 GB when the first partition is 100 GB), then
actually you writes to the beginning of the first partition, and lose all the
partitioning information of the drive.

In the mild case you lose (destroy) the files, that are on the first, and the
beginning of the second partition. What wee see in your case.

In Internet you can find the non-MS EIDE-driver (MS does not support Win98
more; if I recall correct, the link to this driver is at the mentioned
http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm ), that allows to work in Win98 with the
large drives -- but you can use it at your own risk only.

I used Partition Magic to do the
original partitioning and formating.


It is not a good idea to use PM. The practice (not mine -- but I spend a lot
of time in the newsgroups, and see that) says, that there are too many
problems after it -- even when it is using not for the repartitioning, but for
the initial partitioning of the drives.

--
Mikhail Zhilin
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
http://www.aha.ru/~mwz
Sorry, no technical support by e-mail.
Please reply to the newsgroups only.
======
Both operating systems are on primary
drives with the E: and F: partions in an extended partition of 110 Gig.
Under 98 the F: drive is shown as "Unallocated". Under XP Partition Magic
shows it as AOK.

I think perhaps it be time to burn a few DVDs and maybe merge the two into
one 110 Gig extended drive. It's been like this for over a month now and
I'm not having problems with data loss or file corruption. I replaced the
motherboard at the same time with a PCChips K8 Socket 754 64bit running an
AMD Sempron 2800+ with a VIA K8M800/8237 Chipset.

Thanks for your input.


  #5  
Old December 4th 06, 05:21 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
James
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 28
Default Drive F: not accessible in 98. Ok in XP

Mikhail Zhilin wrote:
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 19:21:08 GMT, LabRat wrote:

Mikhail Zhilin voiced his/her/it's humble opinion in
microsoft.public.win98.disks.general on Sun 03 Dec 2006 01:19:21a:

...
Win98 does not natively support 48-bit LBA drives larger than 137 GB.

...
See http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm

...

I checked out the site and it seems that it refers to problems when the
drive is formatted to full capacity.


No: 137GB for Win98 it is not a problem of the partition(s) size(s), but the
problem of the full drive capacity.

Win98 wraps all the addresses above 137 gigabytes to the addresses based on
zero, so when you think you write to the 138th GB of the _full_drive_capacity_
(does not matter, is it the first partition that is greater than 137GB, or,
say, the second partition 80 GB when the first partition is 100 GB), then
actually you writes to the beginning of the first partition, and lose all the
partitioning information of the drive.

In the mild case you lose (destroy) the files, that are on the first, and the
beginning of the second partition. What wee see in your case.

In Internet you can find the non-MS EIDE-driver (MS does not support Win98
more; if I recall correct, the link to this driver is at the mentioned
http://www.48bitlba.com/win98.htm ), that allows to work in Win98 with the
large drives -- but you can use it at your own risk only.

I used Partition Magic to do the
original partitioning and formating.


It is not a good idea to use PM. The practice (not mine -- but I spend a lot
of time in the newsgroups, and see that) says, that there are too many
problems after it -- even when it is using not for the repartitioning, but for
the initial partitioning of the drives.

--
Mikhail Zhilin
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
http://www.aha.ru/~mwz
Sorry, no technical support by e-mail.
Please reply to the newsgroups only.
======
Both operating systems are on primary
drives with the E: and F: partions in an extended partition of 110 Gig.
Under 98 the F: drive is shown as "Unallocated". Under XP Partition Magic
shows it as AOK.

I think perhaps it be time to burn a few DVDs and maybe merge the two into
one 110 Gig extended drive. It's been like this for over a month now and
I'm not having problems with data loss or file corruption. I replaced the
motherboard at the same time with a PCChips K8 Socket 754 64bit running an
AMD Sempron 2800+ with a VIA K8M800/8237 Chipset.

Thanks for your input.


I have to say that I have been using PM since version 1 along with Drive
Image also from version 1 with no problems of any nature. At this time
I have a W98se machine with a Highpoint Tech Rocket Raid board 5 160G WD
drives as Raid 5 partitioned at 5 drives from 100 to 200G in size, at
100G drive partitioned as 6 drives from 15 to 24G & 1 80G drive with 2
primary partitions W98se and a 40G partition for W2k later along with
various smaller drive partitions from 500M to 15G. All drives were
partitioned and formatted with PM. I had one drive failure about a year
into the Raid 5 setup and ran a broken array for about a week before I
had time to put in the replacement drive. That was about 18 months ago.
Since this machine is not called upon to run any apps it typically
runs 30 days plus between reboots. The only data loss I have been able
to identify has been due to a power failure that happened while I was
writing to the drives. Only that file was affected. Lucky me it was my
business address book. Between repair and a backup only a few records
were lost that needed re-entry. Raid 5 is good but even it can fail
under the right conditions. Maybe in my case the larger drive
partitions are being handled by the Raid board but the combined size
before partitioning is 600G which is well beyond the 137G window spoken
of above. BTW I also setup systems for a computer school during the mid
90's and used PM & DI extensively there on over 150 machines with no
problems. The drives were much smaller then but the software was also
DI3 and PM5. We were running Win95 & NT3.51 with various apps from
Office to Sql, Oracl, etc. A couple of other schools were doing the
same thing until we were able to setup a master drive with cloning
hardware followed by pushing the image over the LAN. This was all done
so each student would start their class with a virgin machine.

James
  #6  
Old December 4th 06, 06:29 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.disks.general
Labrat
External Usenet User
 
Posts: 14
Default Drive F: not accessible in 98. Ok in XP

James voiced his/her/it's humble opinion in
microsoft.public.win98.disks.general on Sun 03 Dec 2006 09:21:23p:


I have to say that I have been using PM since version 1 along with
Drive Image also from version 1 with no problems of any nature. At
this time I have a W98se machine with a Highpoint Tech Rocket Raid


snip

schools were doing the same thing until we were able to setup a master
drive with cloning hardware followed by pushing the image over the
LAN. This was all done so each student would start their class with a
virgin machine.

James


I've been using PM for years myself with no problems. Along with Ghost
I've kept the same install of Win98SE for six years. Everything from a
Pentium 133 to the Sempron 2800+ I'm using now.

At least six HDs have been cloned with it and seem to work alright. I've
always just gone into the device manager/hardware and removed everything
that was going to change after the rebuild, clone the C:\ drive to the
new drive, swap them out and reboot. As long as you have all the driver
disks and the old C:\ online as slave the setup only takes an hour or
two.

I'm getting the sense that if I make sure that anything over 137 gig is
filled up with XP and stuff that I don't need to access from 98 I should
be good to go.



Later......

LabRat...... |:^{)




 




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
COLLECTED hard drive usage after XP NTFS MEB General 167 November 23rd 06 05:54 PM
Adding new hard drive for backup CdLSRN General 3 November 19th 06 09:05 PM
Tosh Satellite Bios gone bye bye? bry General 18 March 7th 06 10:55 PM
installing new hard driive, copying from old to new Larry General 12 February 17th 05 09:20 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:09 AM.


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