[LIB] Phantom disks resolved.
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 07:30:57 +0100 (GMT/BST) From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Phantom disks resolved. Thanks to all that offered suggestions. I managed to juggle my partitions (using Linux fdisk) without having to re-install anything, and created a Windows (FAT) partition as the first logical drive in the extended partition. As soon as I removed (or at least, changed the type) of the second FAT primary partition, the phantom drives went away, and when I formatted the D: drive in the extended partition, both Linux and Windows95 could see it just fine. The problem would appear to be that Windows gets confused when there is more than 1 primary FAT partition. The suggestions regarding hiding partitions would probably have worked also, but I really wanted to be able to copy data between the two, so that wouldn't have helped me much. Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cthulhu.dircon.co.uk ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 05:51:56 + From: "Matthew Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? >From: Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >I've never used PM's hide facility ... what exactly does it do? Well, you'll have to get one of the many technical wizs on the list to explain the nuts and bolts of what makes it work, but essentially it writes a bit of code to the partition table that makes any partition, or group of partitions, invisable to the active partition. As Windows tends to snoop around and configure things that you never asked it to configure, I usually hide everything from Windows. System Commander is a boot manager that has the ability to do this too. But instead of going in to the app, and changing the hidden partitions every time you want to switch partitions to boot like PM, in SC you configure the partitions you want visable, invisable, or whatever else for each partition. Then when you select a partition to boot from the SC boot screen, it makes all the changes or hidden/visable, and a slew of other settings automatically without having to do it manually. Matt Hanson (Shel) _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 10:06:05 +0100 (GMT/BST) From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? Just to clarify, any reference I have made to a Windows extended partition was in addition to a primary partition. There is certainly no problem creating a D: drive in the extended partion - indeed that is the only way to create a second windows drive on a single disk. If that didnt work, there would be no point in windows FDISK knowing about extended partitions at all. In my experience, Windows FDISK will only boot from a primary partition, and windows FDISK will not create more than one per drive. On the other hand, if you create two or three primary FAT partitions using a third party partitioning program, windows can be installed on more than one, and will boot to whichever is active. The active partition (1 2 or 3) will always be assigned the drive letter C:, with (I think) D: going to the first extended FAT partition. I have, however, not ruled out the possibilility that the phantom drive phenomenon is the result of Windows getting confused at seeing multiple primary FATS and no extended FAT... Regards, DigbyT Raymond: > > > >>>I wonder if there's any relevance in the fact that you have the extended > >>>partition set as bootable/active? Windows is unhappy about anything > >>>other than the first partition set as bootable, maybe changing that will > >>>alter things? > > > >>Ooh Ooh Ooh this has caused me problems in the past ... maybe thats it? > > > >Yeah... At one time I was told to put Windows on first primary partition, > >definately not on an extended one. You guys have said you, or others have > >put Windows on primary partitions further along without problems though, yes? > > Without weirdo software (which often does strange things anyway) you can't > have Win9x/ME running on anything other than the first partition of the > boot drive. Linux, NT, 2k, XP, they're all fine wherever you put them (as > long as they're configured right). > > > - Raymond > P.S. I'm running a bit behind on the list, apologies if I'm answering > questions that have already been answered! > -- Digby R. S. Tarvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cthulhu.dircon.co.uk ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 10:56:00 +0800 From: Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? At 10:01 PM 25/04/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 05:57:02 +0100 (GMT/BST) >From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? > > > > > > >The final curiosity is that Windows tells me the extended partition is > > >completely empty. If doesn't show the Linux partitions as non-DOS as > > >I would have expected, but appears not to be able to see them at all. > > > > Usually seems to show them as empty but won't allow you to erase it on the > > grounds that it isn't. I've had to use linux fdisk (or friends) to > erase an > > 83 partition before now, and micro~01 is very unhappy about formatting a > > partition it didn't fdisk (e.g. linux fdisk two partitions, the first > one a > > bootable vfat and the second a linux 83, then ask windows to format the > > first. It stomps the second...) > >Yes, I had discovered that before. I generally make sure I create each >partition with the operating system that is going to live in it. Thats important ... but also its CRITICAL that the first partition on your hard drive is created with MS-DOS FDISK. The problem is Linux FDISK (and CFDISK) looks at the first partition for anything weird (such as drive overlays). It'll completely miss the presence of an overlay if it sees a blank drive with no partitions. I found THAT out the hard way. >Hope you are right about windows not letting me create anything in >the extended partition which it shows as empty. However I am not >really game to try it. Eh? > > >I suspect if I asked it to make a logical DOS drive, it would happily > > >do so, overwriting the Linux partitions. Clearly there is some > > >compatibility > > >problem between Windows and Liniux created extended partitions which > > >means that if I wanted a Windows partition, I would have had to have > > >created that first in the extended drive. > > > > Yes, in windows/dos. Umm ... what exactly do you mean? I found that as long as the extended partition and first partition were created in Windows FDISK (not necessarily in that order ... its fine if you create the first partition with Windows FDISK then use Linux FDISK to create another 2 primaries then use Windows FDISK to create the 4th partition as an extended) then both Linux FDISK and Windows FDISK will be quite happy to populate the extended partition (although Windows freaks if you try to put more than 4 logical partitions in there, in that case you NEED to use Linux FDISK or CFDISK to create Windows partitions but as long as you've already got a Windows-FDISK-created partition in that extended partition somewhere, Linux FDISK/CFDISK seem fine). DOS FORMAT doesn't seem to care what created the partition as long as its the right type. >However I see from my program dump above that this has resulted in the >extended partition nominally finishing at the 8GB boundry. Linux seems >to have happily ignored that, presumably it uses the linear addresses >and ignores the head/cylinder/sector stuff which is invalid after 8GB :-/ Thats why you need a drive overlay. Refer to my 2 or 3 big emails about my experiences with them if you need some hints ;-) >One thing I did find with more experimenting, is that if I remove the >second FAT partition, both D: and E: disappear. So I am wondering if >Windows just doesn't like two primary FAT partitions. I do know that if you have that 8 gig problem then you WILL get inconsistent representations of the disk depending on if the program you're using to view the disk can do the translation independant of the BIOS. Such things as Windows reconing there are 6 partitions when Linux FDISK only sees 3 or vice versa whilst Norton recons the disk is unpartitioned and Partition Magic recons there is only 1 partition. Put the overlay on (and make sure any partition changing or viewing program is run once the overlay loads) and everythign seems fine. >I know Windows >FDISK will not let you create more than one. It may be that I should >have put a FAT partition in the extended partition, which is how I >had it organised before I found that it was possible to boot Linux >from the extended partition, leaving three other bootable partitions. Actually, whilst Windows FDISK won't create more than 1 primary and 4 logicals, if you use another utility (such as NT Disk Admin, Linux FDISK/CFDISK or Partition Magic) to create multiple primaries and more than 4 logicals, as long as you create them as file systems Windows can see, Win9x will be happy to see and format them ... I can use Windows to see the 4th primary partition on the very end of m
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 10:04:21 +0800
From: Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
At 08:07 PM 25/04/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 03:02:24 +
>From: "Matthew Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
>
>{Digby]
>>>>So the puzzle I have is - why is Windows showing the extra drive, and
>>>>where abouts on the disk is it??? Is there any way to find out what is
>>>>happening without destroying some other part of the disk?
>
>[Neil]
>>>It might be worth reading the MBR and the volume boot records that
>>>define the partitions with a hex disc editor - but I bet it'll make
>>>headaches :)
>
>[Raymond]
>>If you've got PM you might want to play with it there ... otherwise if
>>its only annoying you (and not causing any other problems) just hide it
>>using TweakUI.
>
>When this happened to me, PM didn't see those two 'phantom' partitions
>that Windows was reporting it saw. An example of PM doesn't always know
>what's going on with Linux I guess. Your experience creating Linux
>partitions with PM that showed up look like a DOS partition in Linux is
>another example.
Nah what I meant was creating DOS partitions with Linux didn't quite work
and that PM did weird things creating any major partitioning scheme when
you had a drive overlay running and the disk was blank. Once I'd used DOS
FDISK to create the first partition and the extended then used Linux FDISK
to create the Linux partition, PM was fine moving partitions around or
creating new partitions. I guess it does what Linux FDISK does ... look to
the existing partitions to see if anything weird is happening as opposed to
trying to find out for itself (like DOS FDISK).
>Of course I had an big investment in the time I had put into setting up a
>lot of software on the Win95 partition. If you've just begun setting up
>your OSs, you might just want to scrap everything and start over.
Bah ... Windows is fine if you just do a straight file copy. Put the hard
drive into your desktop and copy all the stuff off (do NOT use XCOPY or
you'll lose all your long filenames ... do it under Windows, its safe to
copy files OFF the hard drive without the overlay active, just don't change
any partition info) ... then repartition then copy all the stuff back on
then go FDISK /MBR I've done it 3 times and its worked ... don't try
it with NT or Linux though!
>I'd start by making one primary partition for Windows, and installing it.
>Then use PM to hide it, create a small partition to start your Linux
>installation, and go from there.
I've never used PM's hide facility ... what exactly does it do?
- Raymond
P.S. I'm running a bit behind on the list, apologies if I'm answering
questions that have already been answered!
---
/~\
| | "Does fuzzy logic tickle?"|
| ___ | "My HDD has no reverse. How do I backup?" |
| /__/ +---|
| / \ a y b o t | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| | HTTP://www.raybot.net|
| ICQ: 31756092 | Need help? Visit #Windows98 on DALNet! |
\~/
**
http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list
http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives
---TO UNSUBSCRIBE---
Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be
addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text
on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe
TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST--
Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest
**
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 10:05:25 +0800 From: Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? At 08:17 PM 25/04/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 03:12:58 + >From: "Matthew Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? > > >>>I wonder if there's any relevance in the fact that you have the extended >>>partition set as bootable/active? Windows is unhappy about anything >>>other than the first partition set as bootable, maybe changing that will >>>alter things? > >>Ooh Ooh Ooh this has caused me problems in the past ... maybe thats it? > >Yeah... At one time I was told to put Windows on first primary partition, >definately not on an extended one. You guys have said you, or others have >put Windows on primary partitions further along without problems though, yes? Without weirdo software (which often does strange things anyway) you can't have Win9x/ME running on anything other than the first partition of the boot drive. Linux, NT, 2k, XP, they're all fine wherever you put them (as long as they're configured right). - Raymond P.S. I'm running a bit behind on the list, apologies if I'm answering questions that have already been answered! --- /~\ | | "Does fuzzy logic tickle?"| | ___ | "My HDD has no reverse. How do I backup?" | | /__/ +---| | / \ a y b o t | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | HTTP://www.raybot.net| | ICQ: 31756092 | Need help? Visit #Windows98 on DALNet! | \~/ ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 05:57:02 +0100 (GMT/BST) From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? > > > >The final curiosity is that Windows tells me the extended partition is > >completely empty. If doesn't show the Linux partitions as non-DOS as > >I would have expected, but appears not to be able to see them at all. > > Usually seems to show them as empty but won't allow you to erase it on the > grounds that it isn't. I've had to use linux fdisk (or friends) to erase an > 83 partition before now, and micro~01 is very unhappy about formatting a > partition it didn't fdisk (e.g. linux fdisk two partitions, the first one a > bootable vfat and the second a linux 83, then ask windows to format the > first. It stomps the second...) Yes, I had discovered that before. I generally make sure I create each partition with the operating system that is going to live in it. Hope you are right about windows not letting me create anything in the extended partition which it shows as empty. However I am not really game to try it. > >I suspect if I asked it to make a logical DOS drive, it would happily > >do so, overwriting the Linux partitions. Clearly there is some > >compatibility > >problem between Windows and Liniux created extended partitions which > >means that if I wanted a Windows partition, I would have had to have > >created that first in the extended drive. > > Yes, in windows/dos. > > > > >So the puzzle I have is - why is Windows showing the extra drive, and > >where abouts on the disk is it??? Is there any way to find out what is > >happening without destroying some other part of the disk? > > > > It might be worth reading the MBR and the volume boot records that define > the partitions with a hex disc editor - but I bet it'll make headaches :) I have done that, and went to the extend of writing my own bit of code to parse all the partition information. This is the output: rover:/home/digbyt/boot # ./bootinfo [BANY] Master Boot Record : [MWIN] Part 0: 00 01-000-01 06 fe-0c2-3f 003f-002fcd02 (DOS 16-bit >=32) [BSDI] Part 1: 00 00-0c3-01 9f fe-185-3f 002fcd03-005f9a05 (BSD/OS) [MWIN] Part 2: 00 00-186-01 06 fe-247-3f 005f9a06-008f2847 (DOS 16-bit >=32) [LILO] Part 3: 80 00-248-01 0f fe-3ff-3f 008f2848-0154bbed (Win95 Extended) Master Boot Record :008f2848 [LILO] Part 0: 00 01-248-01 83 fe-258-3f 003f-00042ad0 (Linux native) Part 1: 00 00-259-01 05 fe-264-3f 00042ad1-00071bdc (Extended) Master Boot Record 00042ad1:008f2848 Part 0: 00 01-259-01 82 fe-264-3f 003f-0002f10b (Linux swap) Part 1: 00 00-265-01 05 fe-2a6-3f 00071bdd-0017499e (Extended) Master Boot Record 00071bdd:008f2848 Part 0: 00 01-265-01 83 fe-2a6-3f 003f-00102dc1 (Linux native) Part 1: 00 00-2a7-01 05 fe-3ac-3f 0017499f-00578324 (Extended) Master Boot Record 0017499f:008f2848 Part 0: 00 01-2a7-01 83 fe-3ac-3f 003f-00403985 (Linux native) Part 1: 00 00-3ad-01 05 fe-3f9-3f 00578325-006a6331 (Extended) Master Boot Record 00578325:008f2848 Part 0: 00 01-3ad-01 83 fe-3f9-3f 003f-0012e00c (Linux native) Part 1: 00 00-3fa-01 05 fe-3ff-3f 006a6332-006cd6bb (Extended) Master Boot Record 006a6332:008f2848 Part 0: 00 01-3fa-01 2a fe-3ff-3f 003f-00027389 Part 1: 00 fe-3ff-3f 05 fe-3ff-3f 006cd6bc-00ad1041 (Extended) Master Boot Record 006cd6bc:008f2848 Part 0: 00 fe-3ff-3f 83 fe-3ff-3f 003f-00403985 (Linux native) Part 1: 00 fe-3ff-3f 05 fe-3ff-3f 00ad1042-014d228e (Extended) Master Boot Record 00ad1042:008f2848 Part 0: 00 fe-3ff-3f 83 fe-3ff-3f 003f-00a0124c (Linux native) Part 1: 00 fe-3ff-3f 05 fe-3ff-3f 014d228f-01c4c276 (Extended) Master Boot Record 014d228f:008f2848 Part 0: 00 fe-3ff-3f 83 fe-3ff-3f 003f-00779fe7 (Linux native) I did create the extended partition under Windows, and then populate it using Linux, knowing that Windows was more likely to get things wrong if they were not as expected. However I see from my program dump above that this has resulted in the extended partition nominally finishing at the 8GB boundry. Linux seems to have happily ignored that, presumably it uses the linear addresses and ignores the head/cylinder/sector stuff which is invalid after 8GB :-/ > > I wonder if there's any relevance in the fact that you have the extended > partition set as bootable/active? Windows is unhappy about anything other > than the first partition set as bootable, maybe changing that will alter > things? No - that is not it. The 'BOOTANY' boot manager I am using always leaves the partition you booted from marked as active. So had I booted Windows, the windows pa
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 03:12:58 + From: "Matthew Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? >>I wonder if there's any relevance in the fact that you have the extended >>partition set as bootable/active? Windows is unhappy about anything other >>than the first partition set as bootable, maybe changing that will alter >>things? >Ooh Ooh Ooh this has caused me problems in the past ... maybe thats it? Yeah... At one time I was told to put Windows on first primary partition, definately not on an extended one. You guys have said you, or others have put Windows on primary partitions further along without problems though, yes? M. _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 03:02:24 +
From: "Matthew Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
{Digby]
>>>So the puzzle I have is - why is Windows showing the extra drive, and
>>>where abouts on the disk is it??? Is there any way to find out what is
>>>happening without destroying some other part of the disk?
[Neil]
>>It might be worth reading the MBR and the volume boot records that define
>>the partitions with a hex disc editor - but I bet it'll make headaches :)
[Raymond]
>If you've got PM you might want to play with it there ... otherwise if its
>only annoying you (and not causing any other problems) just hide it using
>TweakUI.
When this happened to me, PM didn't see those two 'phantom' partitions that
Windows was reporting it saw. An example of PM doesn't always know what's
going on with Linux I guess. Your experience creating Linux partitions with
PM that showed up look like a DOS partition in Linux is another example.
As I wrote, I ended up just MAKING two tiny logical drives on the Windows
primary. Windows recognized them, and I was able to write data to and from
both in Windows (as well as in Linux as I recall).
Of course I had an big investment in the time I had put into setting up a
lot of software on the Win95 partition. If you've just begun setting up
your OSs, you might just want to scrap everything and start over.
I'd start by making one primary partition for Windows, and installing it.
Then use PM to hide it, create a small partition to start your Linux
installation, and go from there.
Matt
_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
**
http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list
http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives
---TO UNSUBSCRIBE---
Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be
addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text
on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe
TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST--
Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest
**
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 07:20:17 +0800 From: Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? At 08:11 AM 25/04/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:05:53 + >From: "neil barnes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? > > >>Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:37:39 +0100 (GMT/BST) >>From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Subject: Phantom disks?? > > >All I can say is that windows is broken on its *own* fdisk specification... >> >>The final curiosity is that Windows tells me the extended partition is >>completely empty. If doesn't show the Linux partitions as non-DOS as >>I would have expected, but appears not to be able to see them at all. > >Usually seems to show them as empty but won't allow you to erase it on the >grounds that it isn't. I've had to use linux fdisk (or friends) to erase >an 83 partition before now, and micro~01 is very unhappy about formatting >a partition it didn't fdisk (e.g. linux fdisk two partitions, the first >one a bootable vfat and the second a linux 83, then ask windows to format >the first. It stomps the second...) Hmm ... how did you create the Windows partitions under Linux? IIRC I had problems of getting DOS to even SEE what I thought were DOS partitions created with Linux FDISK but then when I gave up and used Partition Magic to create them then went back to look at them in Linux FDISK they actually showed up as a different type (and not a type that would have struck me as a DOS partition type) ... I can't remember what it was but that seemed to fix it for me ... >>I suspect if I asked it to make a logical DOS drive, it would happily >>do so, overwriting the Linux partitions. Clearly there is some compatibility >>problem between Windows and Liniux created extended partitions which >>means that if I wanted a Windows partition, I would have had to have >>created that first in the extended drive. > >Yes, in windows/dos. Umm ... well I had a Win98/Red Hat 6.2 installation running fine with 4 primaries (created using Partition Magic) ... >>So the puzzle I have is - why is Windows showing the extra drive, and >>where abouts on the disk is it??? Is there any way to find out what is >>happening without destroying some other part of the disk? > >It might be worth reading the MBR and the volume boot records that define >the partitions with a hex disc editor - but I bet it'll make headaches :) If you've got PM you might want to play with it there ... otherwise if its only annoying you (and not causing any other problems) just hide it using TweakUI. >I wonder if there's any relevance in the fact that you have the extended >partition set as bootable/active? Windows is unhappy about anything other >than the first partition set as bootable, maybe changing that will alter >things? Ooh Ooh Ooh this has caused me problems in the past ... maybe thats it? - Raymond --- /~\ | | "Does fuzzy logic tickle?"| | ___ | "My HDD has no reverse. How do I backup?" | | /__/ +---| | / \ a y b o t | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | HTTP://www.raybot.net| | ICQ: 31756092 | Need help? Visit #Windows98 on DALNet! | \~/ ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 16:05:28 + From: "Matthew Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? >From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >I have partitioned my hard disk (IBM 20GB) with 3 primary partitions >of about 1.5GB each, and the remainder in a Linux extended partion. > >My intention was to have the original Toshiba Windows95 in the >first partition, BSD Unix in the second (BSD needs a primary partition >which it sub-divides into its own partitions), the third partition reserved >for any other OS I want to run that needs a primary partition (eg NT, >OS-9000) etc. > >The problem is that when I installed Windows on the first partition, it >seemed to think that I had two additional drives (partitions) available. > >I had expected one additional drive, because partition 3 is currently >of >type FAT32, but it sees drives C:, D: and E:?? I had a very similar problem installing Redhat on a friend's system a few years back. Two non-existant partitions suddenly appeared in an existing Win95 single partition setup after installing Redhat, and I forget... it was either impossible to boot Win95, or it took AGES. And nothing could find the partitions that Windows was reporting. It was suggested to do a 'fdisk /mbr' thinking that the partition table had been corrupted. That didn't work. The concensus opinion was that I'd have to delete all partitions and re-install everything. But I had so much invested in the Win95 setup, I didn't want to take the time to do that. I figured out a workaround for the problem that worked well. I used Partition Magic to create 2 extra tiny logical partitions on the Windows primary, and hid the rest. I was able to reinstall Redhat and System Commander after that to manage booting OSs, and Win95 and Redhat lived happily with each other after that. Perhaps lilo or another Linux bootloader will work for you. But I'm assuming you made sure that you set those other non-Windows partitions to 'hidden' before you installed Windows on the first partition, right? Or are Linux partitions supposed to be invisable to Windows? I suspect that it was the Redhat installation that caused Windows to see two extra partitions, as Win95 had not seen them before. Matt _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
Re: [LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:05:53 + From: "neil barnes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] Phantom disks?? >Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:37:39 +0100 (GMT/BST) >From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Phantom disks?? All I can say is that windows is broken on its *own* fdisk specification... > >The final curiosity is that Windows tells me the extended partition is >completely empty. If doesn't show the Linux partitions as non-DOS as >I would have expected, but appears not to be able to see them at all. Usually seems to show them as empty but won't allow you to erase it on the grounds that it isn't. I've had to use linux fdisk (or friends) to erase an 83 partition before now, and micro~01 is very unhappy about formatting a partition it didn't fdisk (e.g. linux fdisk two partitions, the first one a bootable vfat and the second a linux 83, then ask windows to format the first. It stomps the second...) > >I suspect if I asked it to make a logical DOS drive, it would happily >do so, overwriting the Linux partitions. Clearly there is some >compatibility >problem between Windows and Liniux created extended partitions which >means that if I wanted a Windows partition, I would have had to have >created that first in the extended drive. Yes, in windows/dos. > >So the puzzle I have is - why is Windows showing the extra drive, and >where abouts on the disk is it??? Is there any way to find out what is >happening without destroying some other part of the disk? > It might be worth reading the MBR and the volume boot records that define the partitions with a hex disc editor - but I bet it'll make headaches :) >Any guesses? > >Here is how Linux sees my partitioning: >rover:/home/digbyt/boot # fdisk -l /dev/hda > >Disk /dev/hda: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 2432 cylinders >Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes > >Device BootStart EndBlocks Id System >/dev/hda1 1 195 1566306b Win95 FAT32 >/dev/hda2 196 390 1566306 9f BSD/OS >/dev/hda3 390 584 1558336+ b Win95 FAT32 >/dev/hda4 * 585 1390 6474195f Win95 Ext'd (LBA) >/dev/hda5 585 601136521 83 Linux >/dev/hda6 602 613 96358+ 82 Linux swap >/dev/hda7 614 679530113+ 83 Linux >/dev/hda8 680 941 2104483+ 83 Linux >/dev/hda9 942 1018618471 83 Linux >/dev/hda10 1019 1028 80293+ 2a Unknown >/dev/hda11 1029 1290 2104483+ 83 Linux >/dev/hda12 1291 1943 5245191 83 Linux >/dev/hda13 1944 2431 3919828+ 83 Linux > I wonder if there's any relevance in the fact that you have the extended partition set as bootable/active? Windows is unhappy about anything other than the first partition set as bootable, maybe changing that will alter things? Neil _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
[LIB] Phantom disks??
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:37:39 +0100 (GMT/BST) From: Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Phantom disks?? I am looking for some advice from any Windows experts out there that think they can explain a mysterious phenomenon I am seeing on My Libretto 100CT. I have partitioned my hard disk (IBM 20GB) with 3 primary partitions of about 1.5GB each, and the remainder in a Linux extended partion. My intention was to have the original Toshiba Windows95 in the first partition, BSD Unix in the second (BSD needs a primary partition which it sub-divides into its own partitions), the third partition reserved for any other OS I want to run that needs a primary partition (eg NT, OS-9000) etc. The problem is that when I installed Windows on the first partition, it seemed to think that I had two additional drives (partitions) available. I had expected one additional drive, because partition 3 is currently of type FAT32, but it sees drives C:, D: and E:?? I formatted drive D under Windows, assuming it to be partition 3, and that seemed to work fine. However when I used Linux to copy my old Windows partition from another disk onto /dev/hda3 (third partition) Windows saw the data appear in drive E:, and attempts to boot from the third partion resulted in a message that it was not bootable. I then copied the same image to partition 1 and it booted fine. So Partition E: is what Linux sees and partition 3, but windows FDISK tells me that drive D: is the third partition and makes no mention of a drive E: The final curiosity is that Windows tells me the extended partition is completely empty. If doesn't show the Linux partitions as non-DOS as I would have expected, but appears not to be able to see them at all. I suspect if I asked it to make a logical DOS drive, it would happily do so, overwriting the Linux partitions. Clearly there is some compatibility problem between Windows and Liniux created extended partitions which means that if I wanted a Windows partition, I would have had to have created that first in the extended drive. So the puzzle I have is - why is Windows showing the extra drive, and where abouts on the disk is it??? Is there any way to find out what is happening without destroying some other part of the disk? Any guesses? Here is how Linux sees my partitioning: rover:/home/digbyt/boot # fdisk -l /dev/hda Disk /dev/hda: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 2432 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes Device BootStart EndBlocks Id System /dev/hda1 1 195 1566306b Win95 FAT32 /dev/hda2 196 390 1566306 9f BSD/OS /dev/hda3 390 584 1558336+ b Win95 FAT32 /dev/hda4 * 585 1390 6474195f Win95 Ext'd (LBA) /dev/hda5 585 601136521 83 Linux /dev/hda6 602 613 96358+ 82 Linux swap /dev/hda7 614 679530113+ 83 Linux /dev/hda8 680 941 2104483+ 83 Linux /dev/hda9 942 1018618471 83 Linux /dev/hda10 1019 1028 80293+ 2a Unknown /dev/hda11 1029 1290 2104483+ 83 Linux /dev/hda12 1291 1943 5245191 83 Linux /dev/hda13 1944 2431 3919828+ 83 Linux -- Digby R. S. Tarvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cthulhu.dircon.co.uk ** http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list http://www.silverace.com/libretto/ - Archives ---TO UNSUBSCRIBE--- Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST-- Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest **
