Moving 80 gigs from one spot on a USB drive to another spot on the same drivee

"Arno" wrote in message ...
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage PCR wrote:
Timothy Daniels wrote:
"PCR" wrote:
[.......]
An Extended Partition is
itself actually a non-bootable Primary Partition which is a container
for multiple Logical Partitions....

Perhaps "non-booting" would be a better term than "non-bootable"
because an OS within a logical drive inside an Extended Partition
can be booted using the boot loader (e.g. ntldr for WinNT/2K/XP)
that can be in the Boot Sector of any one of the Primary Partitions.
IOW, in WinXP, one can have the MBR of the drive with the highest
boot priority (the "boot drive") pass control to the Primary Partition
marked "active" on that drive, and the boot.ini boot menu in that
active partition can point to an OS residing in ANY partition -
including a
logical drive within the Extended Partition - and boot load that OS.
I expect that the same flexibility exists for WinVista and Win7. The
restriction imposed on OSes residing on logical drives within Extended
Partitions is that their boot loader must be on one of the Primary
Partitions.

The implication of this is that an OS clone can reside anywhere in
the system - on any partition (Primary or Extended) and on any enabled
internal hard drive - and it can be booted to running status without
an intermediate "restoration" step needed for OS "images". I believe
this
also includes external eSATA hard drives if the motherboard has an
eSATA controller.

*TimDaniels*

I've found a more thorough explaination of what you've said...
http://thpc.info/dual/bootsequence.html
Boot Sequence in a Windows Dual-Boot Explained

It's a bit of a mind-twister, though, that the System partition (marked
Active in the MBR) contains the boot files (NTLoader/IO.sys, etc.) &
the Boot partition contains the system files (Windows directory, etc.).
The System partition must be a Primary partition on the primary controller.
And the Boot partition can be anywhere, even inside an extended
partition on a second hard drive. (It looks like even Win98 may be able
to that using MSDOS! [which, actually, Chauvin may have brought up
here once long ago].)


Left out of that rather good discussion is the definition of the "rdisk()"
parameter in the boot.ini menu. It dodges the definition by saying:
"rdisk(0) is the first hard disk (rdisk(1) would be a second disk)"

In my ancient Dell PC, the Hard Drive Boot Priority is settable in the
BIOS (a product of Phoenix Technologies), and it can arrange all 4
internal HDs in any sequence that you want, and the first HD in the
sequence corresponds to rdisk(0) (the 1st HD that the BIOS searches
to find an MBR), the 2nd HD in the sequence corresponds to rdisk(1)
(the 2nd HD that the BIOS searches to find an MBR), etc. Using that
nomenclature (called "ARC pathways") in boot.ini, one can designate the
location of the OS's partition as being partition(3) on rdisk(2), for instance.

Other BIOSs use less complete methods to set the HD Boot Priority,
some just "enabling" one HD as the drive containing the MBR and using
the physical data cable as the rdisk() location. But the freedom to put
the OS's partition anywhere in the system (on any HD, in any partition -
including a virtual drive inside an Extended partition) remains.



Just MS screwing things up and making them sognificantly more
complex than needed, as usual. The Linux boot process consists
of loading the kernel into memory (by whatever means), passing
it the commandline with the root device and starting its
execution. The kernel does not even need to be on disk anywhere
in this process and you can also compile the commandline
statically in, if you like.

Arno

In one of the microsoft.windows.* NGs, I believe, an old-timer
once described the legacy reason for calling the partition with the
loader the "System partition" and the partition with the Operating
System the "Boot partition". It made sense back in the DOS days,
apparently, when there was only one HD and the Boot and the
System partition were the same partition and had to be the first
partition on the HD. Correct me if I'm wrong, Roddy. :-)

*TimDaniels*

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Timothy Daniels wrote:
"Arno" wrote in message ...
[...]
Just MS screwing things up and making them sognificantly more
complex than needed, as usual. The Linux boot process consists
of loading the kernel into memory (by whatever means), passing
it the commandline with the root device and starting its
execution. The kernel does not even need to be on disk anywhere
in this process and you can also compile the commandline
statically in, if you like.

Arno

In one of the microsoft.windows.* NGs, I believe, an old-timer
once described the legacy reason for calling the partition with the
loader the "System partition" and the partition with the Operating
System the "Boot partition". It made sense back in the DOS days,
apparently, when there was only one HD and the Boot and the
System partition were the same partition and had to be the first
partition on the HD. Correct me if I'm wrong, Roddy. :-)

*TimDaniels*

Well, I guess we will still find fragments of DOS in MS products
several decades after DOS is dead. Its like they cannot admit
something they did in the past was a mistake and correct it.

At least it look like they are now timidly and slowly implementing
some of the stuff the professional part of the OS world has had
for decades. Still getting it wrong in many instances (UAC? WTF!
Never heard of sudo?), but there is hope that eventually MS
OSes will achieve mediocre quality.

Arno
--
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email:
GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

Timothy Daniels wrote:
"Arno" wrote in message
...
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage PCR wrote:
Timothy Daniels wrote:
"PCR" wrote:
[.......]
An Extended Partition is
itself actually a non-bootable Primary Partition which is a
container for multiple Logical Partitions....

Perhaps "non-booting" would be a better term than
"non-bootable" because an OS within a logical drive inside an
Extended Partition
can be booted using the boot loader (e.g. ntldr for WinNT/2K/XP)
that can be in the Boot Sector of any one of the Primary
Partitions. IOW, in WinXP, one can have the MBR of the drive with
the highest boot priority (the "boot drive") pass control to the
Primary Partition marked "active" on that drive, and the boot.ini
boot menu in that active partition can point to an OS residing in
ANY partition - including a
logical drive within the Extended Partition - and boot load that
OS. I expect that the same flexibility exists for WinVista and
Win7. The restriction imposed on OSes residing on logical drives
within Extended Partitions is that their boot loader must be on
one of the Primary Partitions.

The implication of this is that an OS clone can reside
anywhere in the system - on any partition (Primary or Extended)
and on any enabled internal hard drive - and it can be booted to
running status without an intermediate "restoration" step needed
for OS "images". I believe this
also includes external eSATA hard drives if the motherboard has an
eSATA controller.

*TimDaniels*

I've found a more thorough explaination of what you've said...
http://thpc.info/dual/bootsequence.html
Boot Sequence in a Windows Dual-Boot Explained

It's a bit of a mind-twister, though, that the System partition
(marked Active in the MBR) contains the boot files
(NTLoader/IO.sys, etc.) &
the Boot partition contains the system files (Windows directory,
etc.). The System partition must be a Primary partition on the
primary controller. And the Boot partition can be anywhere, even
inside an extended
partition on a second hard drive. (It looks like even Win98 may be
able
to that using MSDOS! [which, actually, Chauvin may have brought up
here once long ago].)


Left out of that rather good discussion is the definition of the
"rdisk()" parameter in the boot.ini menu. It dodges the definition
by saying: "rdisk(0) is the first hard disk (rdisk(1) would be a
second disk)"

You are right. I was looking into rdisk() in another thread, & I wasn't
finding a site that fully explained it. I wanted its value to be...

0 - primary master
1 - primary slave
2 - secondary master
3 - secondary slave

And that probably still holds, except, with Blanton's help...

I'd say now rdisk(x) is derived from the order in which BIOS enumerates
the hard drives starting with the number 0, which normally is as shown
above. A slot that hasn't got a hard drive on it isn't counted. So, if
all the slots except the secondary master slot has a hard drive on it,
the secondary slave slot will need to have an rdisk value of 2 -- not 3!

In my ancient Dell PC, the Hard Drive Boot Priority is settable
in the
BIOS (a product of Phoenix Technologies), and it can arrange all 4
internal HDs in any sequence that you want, and the first HD in the
sequence corresponds to rdisk(0) (the 1st HD that the BIOS searches
to find an MBR), the 2nd HD in the sequence corresponds to rdisk(1)
(the 2nd HD that the BIOS searches to find an MBR), etc. Using that
nomenclature (called "ARC pathways") in boot.ini, one can designate
the location of the OS's partition as being partition(3) on rdisk(2),
for instance.


Ah. I see now what you meant by "the drive with the highest boot
priority (the 'boot drive')" above. It is the HDD that BIOS is set (for
those that can be set) to select to start the boot. So, to the thpc.info
site's...

BIOS MBR (1st sector of disk) OS Boot Sector Code of system
partition (Active) boot files (system partition) OS (boot partition)

...., you more fully explained BIOS's role. But, then, I should have
known that already, because I did know some BIOS can be set that way.
Also, the site did say the boot could start from a floppy too. But the
whole thing STILL is a mind twister to me!

Other BIOSs use less complete methods to set the HD Boot Priority,
some just "enabling" one HD as the drive containing the MBR and using
the physical data cable as the rdisk() location.

That sounds like my Compaq BIOS. It will only start its boot from the
Primary Master.

But the freedom to
put the OS's partition anywhere in the system (on any HD, in any
partition - including a virtual drive inside an Extended partition)
remains.

Nice enough. (But I'll bet I can do it with just Win98's MSDOS.sys too!
I'm starting to get irradiation burns from all these discussions of XP
stuff!)

Just MS screwing things up and making them sognificantly more
complex than needed, as usual. The Linux boot process consists
of loading the kernel into memory (by whatever means), passing
it the commandline with the root device and starting its
execution. The kernel does not even need to be on disk anywhere
in this process and you can also compile the commandline
statically in, if you like.

I did consider Linux & even Apple overnight after my latest HDD crash
which had complications making it worse than the first. But I've fully
recovered!

Arno

In one of the microsoft.windows.* NGs, I believe, an old-timer
once described the legacy reason for calling the partition with the
loader the "System partition" and the partition with the Operating
System the "Boot partition". It made sense back in the DOS days,
apparently, when there was only one HD and the Boot and the
System partition were the same partition and had to be the first
partition on the HD. Correct me if I'm wrong, Roddy. :-)

That still sounds like my own situation with a BIOS that boots from only
the Primary Master & with an MSDOS set for C:.

*TimDaniels*

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR

"PCR" wrote:
I was looking into rdisk() in another thread, & I wasn't
finding a site that fully explained it. I wanted its value to be...

0 - primary master
1 - primary slave
2 - secondary master
3 - secondary slave


That is the default setting of the HD Boot Priority in my
PC's BIOS. Of course, that changes when one goes to
SATA HDs or a mixture of PATA and SATA. And, as
you probably already know, the terms "primary/secondary"
and "master/slave" are otherwise completely arbitrary.
That is, "0/1" or "A/B" or "¢/£" would make as much sense.


I'd say now rdisk(x) is derived from the order in which BIOS enumerates
the hard drives starting with the number 0, which normally is as shown
above. A slot that hasn't got a hard drive on it isn't counted. So, if
all the slots except the secondary master slot has a hard drive on it,
the secondary slave slot will need to have an rdisk value of 2 -- not 3!

[............]
Also, the site did say the boot could start from a floppy too. But the
whole thing STILL is a mind twister to me!


That is set by the Boot Sequence - the sequence of device *types*
that the BIOS tries in finding an MBR. Usually, when installing the OS,
an optical drive is put at the head of the Boot Sequence so that the BIOS
will find it before it finds a HD with an MBR. Normally, though, HDs
are put at the head of the Boot Sequence. Other device types might be
USB or floppy drive.

*TimDaniels*

On 12/3/2010 20:22, Timothy Daniels wrote:
"PCR" wrote:
I was looking into rdisk() in another thread,& I wasn't
finding a site that fully explained it. I wanted its value to be...

0 - primary master
1 - primary slave
2 - secondary master
3 - secondary slave


That is the default setting of the HD Boot Priority in my
PC's BIOS. Of course, that changes when one goes to
SATA HDs or a mixture of PATA and SATA. And, as
you probably already know, the terms "primary/secondary"
and "master/slave" are otherwise completely arbitrary.
That is, "0/1" or "A/B" or "¢/£" would make as much sense.



I'd say now rdisk(x) is derived from the order in which BIOS enumerates
the hard drives starting with the number 0, which normally is as shown
above. A slot that hasn't got a hard drive on it isn't counted. So, if
all the slots except the secondary master slot has a hard drive on it,
the secondary slave slot will need to have an rdisk value of 2 -- not 3!

[............]
Also, the site did say the boot could start from a floppy too. But the
whole thing STILL is a mind twister to me!


That is set by the Boot Sequence - the sequence of device *types*
that the BIOS tries in finding an MBR. Usually, when installing the OS,
an optical drive is put at the head of the Boot Sequence so that the BIOS
will find it before it finds a HD with an MBR. Normally, though, HDs
are put at the head of the Boot Sequence. Other device types might be
USB or floppy drive.

Add to that, the first HDD in the sequence, no matter the controller
position, has to be enumerated by the BIOS as HDD0 or the Windows
standard MBR code will fail.

Bill Blanton wrote:
On 12/3/2010 20:22, Timothy Daniels wrote:
"PCR" wrote:
I was looking into rdisk() in another thread,& I wasn't
finding a site that fully explained it. I wanted its value to be...

0 - primary master
1 - primary slave
2 - secondary master
3 - secondary slave


That is the default setting of the HD Boot Priority in my
PC's BIOS. Of course, that changes when one goes to
SATA HDs or a mixture of PATA and SATA. And, as
you probably already know, the terms "primary/secondary"
and "master/slave" are otherwise completely arbitrary.
That is, "0/1" or "A/B" or "¢/£" would make as much sense.


All right. But I haven't gone there yet. And I'm hopeful XP has a
command -- maybe MAP -- that can be used to determine what BIOS has done
as far as the enumeration, anyhow, at the time one moves one's HDD
around.

I'd say now rdisk(x) is derived from the order in which BIOS
enumerates the hard drives starting with the number 0, which
normally is as shown above. A slot that hasn't got a hard drive on
it isn't counted. So, if all the slots except the secondary master
slot has a hard drive on it, the secondary slave slot will need to
have an rdisk value of 2 -- not 3!

[............]
Also, the site did say the boot could start from a floppy too. But
the whole thing STILL is a mind twister to me!


That is set by the Boot Sequence - the sequence of device
*types* that the BIOS tries in finding an MBR. Usually, when
installing the OS, an optical drive is put at the head of the Boot
Sequence so that the BIOS will find it before it finds a HD with an
MBR. Normally, though, HDs are put at the head of the Boot
Sequence. Other device types might be USB or floppy drive.

That's right, but I was saying BIOS's floppy vrs. HDD decision is
similar to its HDD vrs. HDD one, when deciding which to boot.

Add to that, the first HDD in the sequence, no matter the controller
position, has to be enumerated by the BIOS as HDD0 or the Windows
standard MBR code will fail.

That sounds like the problem I ran into once!

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR