Working with BING

Does it really say BUJIP5Q? That looks like a controller fault, or
possibly RAM errors.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"ms" wrote in message ...
snip

Hard drive is described as BUJIP5Q IPA3102AP, this was the reported
Fujitsu model number before.

Capacity 9773 MB EIDE

9767 MB BIOS

It shows 3 partitions, 4th is empty.

ms

PCR wrote:

We were so close to getting the full amount! The proper
manufacturer's hard drive diagnostic utility is supposed to correct
the errors-- not disown the drive!

That drive has been fdisked/formatted/binged so many times that
Fujitsu doesn't recognize it as one of their own. Or maybe they just
don't want the responsibility

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote in
:

You used this one from Fujitsu?
http://www.fis.fujitsu.com/support/d...fjdt_v6.61.zip

Note, the version is 6.61. When you say it worked before, was that
before you used the LBA setting in BIOS? Has this BIOS been upgraded
to the latest firmware? (I'm sure there are questions here that were
answered in that BIG thread, but it got soooo confusing... Bear with
me.)

Not sure what's going on with BING, but if it doesn't see the full
size of the disk... Have you gone and changed anything in BIOS today?
I have to think that if LBA-enabled is required to access the full
capacity, but you're getting these weird errors with LBA enabled (and
the Fujitsu diags think the disk is fine with no LBA enabled) then
either your BIOS is goofy or the disk itself is goofy. BING reporting
error(s) and this new anomaly of BING only being able to create
approx. the same amount of partition as it would be without LBA
enabled...

You see what I'm getting at? Something is wrong, and it can only be
BIOS or the disk itself. I'm tend to think it's the BIOS, frankly. If
you've recently flashed it, perhaps it was the wrong upgrade? Hope you
wrote down the original BIOS string.


I'm sorry you're "out of here", because your post recalled something. I
was getting better results until I changed User to Auto.

Just a guess, but if as you suggested there was an overlay put in
before, in User, the partitions seemed to go Ok in the 7.5 GB, the
Fujitsu util worked, etc. After I set it to Auto, the entire capacity
showed up, but BING started acting odd and the diag util stopped working.

Hope you can comment on this.

Some of the advice is too complex for me, so I may try going back to
User, can't be much worse off.

ms

Franc Zabkar wrote in
:

On 8 Oct 2006 23:15:18 GMT, ms put finger to keyboard
and composed:

ms wrote in :

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote in
:

Please delete all partitions. Then look in "View MBR" and click on
"Standard MBR". Then go back and create new partitions.

Done

I'm concerned that a drive overlay may exist. I haven't been
following the previous mega-thread except in a very cursory manner.
Are you certain that no overlay exists

IIRC the OP performed an Fdisk /MBR from a startup diskette. That
should have trashed any overlay.

I have no knowledge, but the drive capacity jumped from 7.5 GB to
about 10 GB due to a bios change, don't know if that effects what you
said.

(you'd probably use the drive
manufacturer's own tools to determine this and remove the overlay if
present.)

That's a strange one. Now, even will all partitions removed, free
space = 97XX MB, the Fujitsu diag util that did run fine, now still
refuses to regognize the hard drive. So it can't check the hard
drive,
but before, it scanned the entire drive and checked OK several times.

I've never seen that ANP notation in BING and don't know what it
means. In my experience, MBR Entry ## is the usual label that's
applied to all Primary Partitions BING creates. You might want to
check out BING Support, especially the BING forums.
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/support.html

There is a paragraph on that page called "TeraByte Sponsored
Newsgroups".


I recreated new partitions,
Each partition was created entirely normal, in each, the drive
checked
for errors OK. Each one is created with MBR label, but the first name
does not look like a Primary partition? Here is what I see, then will
finish the comment.

JES IBR ANP-0 Partition 2494 MB Fat32
JES IBR ANP-1 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32
MBR Entry 2 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32

The last partition is the right size, but should have left about
2400MB free space, like it did before, for a 4th partition. It did
not. And as soon as it was created, the "errors exist" legend
appeared.

Comment on above results?- before I go to that newsgroup.

Up to now, I had no indication there's anything wrong with this hard
drive.

ms


More data, I ran a DOS version of Aida, a system analysis utility.

Its says:
BIOS is Award ver. 4.51PG

The first hd partition is active.

Hard drive is described as BUJIP5Q IPA3102AP, this was the reported
Fujitsu model number before.

Did Aida really return those ID strings?

Shouldn't ...

BUJIP5Q IPA3102AP

... really be ...

FUJITSU MPE3102AT ? (or MPE3102AP ?)


Franc, the Fujitsu util always did report that, but now it doesn't work,
and Aida did report what I noted, Fujitsu was not mentioned but part of
the model number is there.

If so, then it is no wonder that a Fujitsu diagnostic doesn't
recognise a "BUJIP5Q" (or was it BUJIPSQ ?) hard disc.

If you analyse the ASCII bit patterns for each of the errant
characters, you will see that they all differ in bit 2

B 42h F 46h
P 50h T 54h
Q 51h U 55h
I 49h M 4Dh
A 41h E 45h

I'd suspect that there is something wrong with your IDE cable, or your
HD's or motherboard's IDE connector, probably at pin 13 or pin 8.


IMO not here, the computer had worked, I installed the OS, nothing has
happened to the internal cables since then. I know anythings possible,
but I really doubt it.

ms

Capacity 9773 MB EIDE

9767 MB BIOS

It shows 3 partitions, 4th is empty.

ms

I think the difference of 6MB may represent the reserved last cylinder
plus any "surplus" sectors.

- Franc Zabkar

"MEB" meb@not wrote in
:

Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk
code when he ran the Maxtor tool.

Yes, I certainly think that happened. Why the Maxtor util did that to this
hard drive I don't know.

He has also fdisked and formatted numerous times with the improper
disk CHS. Correct that and he has a chance of using the disk.


Improper CHS?

If fdisk and format wipe previous contents off the disk, why does it matter
how many times I use them?

Isn't it a fresh start each time?

ms

You might try removing and reseating the plugs on the IDE cable.

Ben

"ms" wrote in message ...
Franc Zabkar wrote in
:

On 8 Oct 2006 23:15:18 GMT, ms put finger to keyboard
and composed:

ms wrote in :

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote in
:

Please delete all partitions. Then look in "View MBR" and click on
"Standard MBR". Then go back and create new partitions.

Done

I'm concerned that a drive overlay may exist. I haven't been
following the previous mega-thread except in a very cursory manner.
Are you certain that no overlay exists

IIRC the OP performed an Fdisk /MBR from a startup diskette. That
should have trashed any overlay.

I have no knowledge, but the drive capacity jumped from 7.5 GB to
about 10 GB due to a bios change, don't know if that effects what you
said.

(you'd probably use the drive
manufacturer's own tools to determine this and remove the overlay if
present.)

That's a strange one. Now, even will all partitions removed, free
space = 97XX MB, the Fujitsu diag util that did run fine, now still
refuses to regognize the hard drive. So it can't check the hard
drive,
but before, it scanned the entire drive and checked OK several times.

I've never seen that ANP notation in BING and don't know what it
means. In my experience, MBR Entry ## is the usual label that's
applied to all Primary Partitions BING creates. You might want to
check out BING Support, especially the BING forums.
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/support.html

There is a paragraph on that page called "TeraByte Sponsored
Newsgroups".


I recreated new partitions,
Each partition was created entirely normal, in each, the drive
checked
for errors OK. Each one is created with MBR label, but the first name
does not look like a Primary partition? Here is what I see, then will
finish the comment.

JES IBR ANP-0 Partition 2494 MB Fat32
JES IBR ANP-1 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32
MBR Entry 2 Partition E 2494 MB Fat32

The last partition is the right size, but should have left about
2400MB free space, like it did before, for a 4th partition. It did
not. And as soon as it was created, the "errors exist" legend
appeared.

Comment on above results?- before I go to that newsgroup.

Up to now, I had no indication there's anything wrong with this hard
drive.

ms


More data, I ran a DOS version of Aida, a system analysis utility.

Its says:
BIOS is Award ver. 4.51PG

The first hd partition is active.

Hard drive is described as BUJIP5Q IPA3102AP, this was the reported
Fujitsu model number before.

Did Aida really return those ID strings?

Shouldn't ...

BUJIP5Q IPA3102AP

... really be ...

FUJITSU MPE3102AT ? (or MPE3102AP ?)


Franc, the Fujitsu util always did report that, but now it doesn't work,
and Aida did report what I noted, Fujitsu was not mentioned but part of
the model number is there.

If so, then it is no wonder that a Fujitsu diagnostic doesn't
recognise a "BUJIP5Q" (or was it BUJIPSQ ?) hard disc.

If you analyse the ASCII bit patterns for each of the errant
characters, you will see that they all differ in bit 2

B 42h F 46h
P 50h T 54h
Q 51h U 55h
I 49h M 4Dh
A 41h E 45h

I'd suspect that there is something wrong with your IDE cable, or your
HD's or motherboard's IDE connector, probably at pin 13 or pin 8.


IMO not here, the computer had worked, I installed the OS, nothing has
happened to the internal cables since then. I know anythings possible,
but I really doubt it.

ms

Capacity 9773 MB EIDE

9767 MB BIOS

It shows 3 partitions, 4th is empty.

ms

I think the difference of 6MB may represent the reserved last cylinder
plus any "surplus" sectors.

- Franc Zabkar

Franc Zabkar wrote in
:

On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 00:26:35 -0400, "MEB" meb@not
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Add to first sentence:
Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk code
when he ran the Maxtor tool ...

See page 105 and 106 of the Fujitsu Product Manual for the MPE3xxxAT
series:

http://www.fis.fujitsu.com/support/d...s/PB14_PM1.PDF

Table 5.7 lists the drive's response to the diagnostic command. If the
drive's EEPROM was corrupted, as would be the case if it was
misreporting its model number, then the drive would return a ROM
checksum error which means it would be dead.

Table 5.7 Diagnostic code

Code Result of diagnostic

X‘01’ No error detected.
X‘03’ Data buffer compare error
X‘05’ ROM sum check error
X‘8x’ Failure of device 1

... "with the incorrect BIOS setting".

The manufacturer's diagnostic would most likely bypass the BIOS when
accessing the HD. In fact that's what overlays do.

NOTE: this is the only post I will place in this discussion.

Likewise.

Good Luck

I think it's time the OP called in a professional. Otherwise, if he's
willing to open up the box, I would have him test the IDE cable by
using different combinations of the connectors, eg use the middle
connector instead of the end one, and swap the motherboard end for the
drive end. Oh, and jumper the drive as Master rather than Cable
Select.

If the OP has a CD-ROM/DVD-ROM drive on a secondary IDE port, then he
could swap the two cables.

- Franc Zabkar

Thanks, Franc, various things to think about above.

ms

ms wrote:
"MEB" meb@not wrote in
:

Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk
code when he ran the Maxtor tool.

Yes, I certainly think that happened. Why the Maxtor util did that
to this hard drive I don't know.

Maybe because it was a Maxtor program and not one from the drive
manufacturer. Think maybe?
________________

He has also fdisked and formatted numerous times with the improper
disk CHS. Correct that and he has a chance of using the disk.


Improper CHS?

Cylinders/Heads/Sectors. Which, in aggregate, define capacity
________________

If fdisk and format wipe previous contents off the disk...
snip

Because they *don't* wipe off the previous contents. Not the info
that was put there when the manufacturer did a true, complete format
of the drive prior to its sale. Note that that sort of format is
totally different from the wimpy thing that passes for "format" in DOS

_______________

... why does it matter how many times I use them?

If the CHS was wrong it is possible that fdisk/format (BING too) were
bad boys and wrote where they shouldn't.


--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

"dadiOH" wrote in news:#DNTYY86GHA.3836
@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:

ms wrote:
"MEB" meb@not wrote in
:

Fine then I'll tell you all one more time he has corrupted the disk
code when he ran the Maxtor tool.

Yes, I certainly think that happened. Why the Maxtor util did that
to this hard drive I don't know.

Maybe because it was a Maxtor program and not one from the drive
manufacturer. Think maybe?
________________

He has also fdisked and formatted numerous times with the improper
disk CHS. Correct that and he has a chance of using the disk.


Improper CHS?

Cylinders/Heads/Sectors. Which, in aggregate, define capacity
________________

If fdisk and format wipe previous contents off the disk...
snip

Because they *don't* wipe off the previous contents. Not the info
that was put there when the manufacturer did a true, complete format
of the drive prior to its sale. Note that that sort of format is
totally different from the wimpy thing that passes for "format" in DOS

_______________

... why does it matter how many times I use them?

If the CHS was wrong it is possible that fdisk/format (BING too) were
bad boys and wrote where they shouldn't.



dadiOH, thanks for the info,

I ran the Maxtor diagnostic only because of advice in this ng, because
people here were interested in my missing hard drive space. No one knew,
I'm sure, the damage it could cause just in Scan mode, as I stated that
before.

I don't appreciate your last comment in the other thread and answered it.
Try to either be helpful or keep your other comments to yourself. Maybe
someday you'll have medical issues and understand.

ms

If User setting in BIOS results in the disk appearing to have much less
capacity than it should, then that's not right, regardless of whether it
"works". If the disk has errors when capacity is reported correctly, then
something is wrong with the hardware. Either BIOS is in need of an upgrade,
or something is wrong with the disk, cable, controller, whatever. If you
want to use the disk with a reduced capacity, and you feel comfortable that
your data will be safe, that's your choice. Personally, I'd want to test
everything and figure out what's wrong. Franc, and now Jeff, have suggested
possible problems based upon data that you've reported. I'd trust them to
know their ways around these kinds of issues. Something is wrong, and you
can either figure out what that is or use the "workaround" of setting BIOS
to User. Myself, I wouldn't build a Windows system on goofy hardware. Not
worth the effort.

--

Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"ms" wrote in message ...
"Gary S. Terhune" wrote in
:

You used this one from Fujitsu?
http://www.fis.fujitsu.com/support/d...fjdt_v6.61.zip

Note, the version is 6.61. When you say it worked before, was that
before you used the LBA setting in BIOS? Has this BIOS been upgraded
to the latest firmware? (I'm sure there are questions here that were
answered in that BIG thread, but it got soooo confusing... Bear with
me.)

Not sure what's going on with BING, but if it doesn't see the full
size of the disk... Have you gone and changed anything in BIOS today?
I have to think that if LBA-enabled is required to access the full
capacity, but you're getting these weird errors with LBA enabled (and
the Fujitsu diags think the disk is fine with no LBA enabled) then
either your BIOS is goofy or the disk itself is goofy. BING reporting
error(s) and this new anomaly of BING only being able to create
approx. the same amount of partition as it would be without LBA
enabled...

You see what I'm getting at? Something is wrong, and it can only be
BIOS or the disk itself. I'm tend to think it's the BIOS, frankly. If
you've recently flashed it, perhaps it was the wrong upgrade? Hope you
wrote down the original BIOS string.


I'm sorry you're "out of here", because your post recalled something. I
was getting better results until I changed User to Auto.

Just a guess, but if as you suggested there was an overlay put in
before, in User, the partitions seemed to go Ok in the 7.5 GB, the
Fujitsu util worked, etc. After I set it to Auto, the entire capacity
showed up, but BING started acting odd and the diag util stopped working.

Hope you can comment on this.

Some of the advice is too complex for me, so I may try going back to
User, can't be much worse off.

ms