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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 14th 07 11:07 PM |
Disk restoration from image after formatting | Levlg | Disk Drives | 2 | December 4th 06 08:17 PM |
fat32 | neilfrusrated | General | 14 | July 1st 04 09:41 AM |
Formatting hard disk | albertloo | Disk Drives | 1 | May 26th 04 12:47 PM |