On Sunday 05 November 2006 23:57, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
So, it seems we should plan and implement denial of the resizing for
Vista, asap. This is not so bad, because Vista started to include a
non-destructive resizer.
Well, it is a pity that we will no longer be able to resize partitions
Hi,
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
Thanks a lot for your response!
Thanks for yours too! :)
Ok, I've reinstalled and created a 10GB E: drive in Vista after that.
Surprisingly enough (at least to me), after reducing the size by 1MB
following your original instructions,
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 05 November 2006 23:57, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
So, it seems we should plan and implement denial of the resizing for
Vista, asap. This is not so bad, because Vista started to include a
non-destructive resizer.
Well, it is a pity that we
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 12:41, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
We currently check for the presence two files:
/bootmgr and /Boot/BCD
I'm afraid this is not ok for data partitions, which seemingly also
have the same problem. I suppose data partitions don't have the above
two files, do
Hi Szaka,
Thanks a lot for your response!
On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 01:57 +0300, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
Hi Andree,
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
I have made a Vista partition 1MB smaller as per your instructions. I
can confirm that Vista does not boot anymore after
Hi Szaka,
I have made a Vista partition 1MB smaller as per your instructions. I
can confirm that Vista does not boot anymore after this. Rather it hangs
on the black screen with the 'golden' progress bar with 'C 2006
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.' written underneath.
I have tested
Hi Andree,
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
I have made a Vista partition 1MB smaller as per your instructions. I
can confirm that Vista does not boot anymore after this. Rather it hangs
on the black screen with the 'golden' progress bar with 'C 2006
Microsoft Corporation. All
Hi,
Here is the promised summary. So far, it looks promising :)
Success:0
Failure:0
I've also asked help now on the ntfsresize faq page. 5000-7000 visitors a
week. Let's see if they can help, I'll let you know.
Szaka
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Szakacsits
Hi,
Linux had no problem with Vista Beta NTFS support in the past but there is
indication that this may have changed with the latest Vista Beta releases.
I would like to ask people's help to confirm or refute this situation.
Please, anybody who has the possibility, follow the below
On Saturday 28 October 2006 18:25, you wrote:
5. Reboot into Vista. You must see the scheduled chkdsk running after
which Vista should either continue booting fine (data partition)
or automatically initiate a reboot of the computer (system partition).
Note that I have _never_ seen Vista
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Saturday 28 October 2006 18:25, you wrote:
5. Reboot into Vista. You must see the scheduled chkdsk running after
which Vista should either continue booting fine (data partition)
or automatically initiate a reboot of the computer (system
Please keep the Debian bug report CCed; therefore quoting your full mail.
Sorry for not replying earlier, but I've been too busy with the RC1
release of Debian Installer (and had to replace the hard disk in my
laptop in the mean time too).
On Thursday 12 October 2006 21:13, Szakacsits Szabolcs
You can also safely reboot into Vista after ntfsresize, no need to do
the partitioning at the same time. If Vista boots then it's not
ntfsresize problem, if it doesn't then it's ntfsresize problem.
I'm sorry, but I get exactly the same error if I do not run fdisk to
change the partition size
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
You can also safely reboot into Vista after ntfsresize, no need to do
the partitioning at the same time. If Vista boots then it's not
ntfsresize problem, if it doesn't then it's ntfsresize problem.
I'm sorry, but I get exactly the same error if I do
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
You can also safely reboot into Vista after ntfsresize, no need to do
the partitioning at the same time. If Vista boots then it's not
ntfsresize problem, if it doesn't then it's ntfsresize problem.
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
You can also safely reboot into Vista after ntfsresize, no need to do
the partitioning at the same time. If Vista boots then it's not
ntfsresize
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
Yes, I have done previous tests using 1.13.1 too, indeed with no
difference in behavior. I have just upgraded my test system from etch to
sid, so all my following tests will use 1.13.1 again.
Ok, thanks.
Yes, all my previous tests have been on real
On Monday 21 August 2006 17:06, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
Btw, seemingly you're using ntfsprogs 1.12.1. Can you reproduce this
with 1.13.1 as well? Though there shouldn't be any difference in the
outcome, whatever is the ntfsresize version.
Yes, I have done previous tests using 1.13.1 too,
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 18:02 +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
Yes, I have done previous tests using 1.13.1 too, indeed with no
difference in behavior. I have just upgraded my test system from etch to
sid, so all my following tests will use 1.13.1
On Monday 21 August 2006 16:40, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
If a checksum doesn't match (except a few metadata files) then you've
found an ntfsresize problem.
Attached is the result of the md5sum check straight after running
ntfsresize (failures only).
Let me know if you want the files for
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 16:40, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
If a checksum doesn't match (except a few metadata files) then you've
found an ntfsresize problem.
Attached is the result of the md5sum check straight after running
ntfsresize (failures
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 16:40, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
If a checksum doesn't match (except a few metadata files) then you've
found an ntfsresize problem.
Attached is the result of the md5sum
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 16:40, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
If a checksum doesn't match (except a few metadata files) then you've
found an ntfsresize problem.
Attached is the result of the md5sum check straight after running
ntfsresize (failures
On Monday 21 August 2006 19:31, you wrote:
Would it be possible to send the vista metadata image
Available from: http://people.debian.org/~fjp/ntfsmeta.img.bz2
and tell us at what size you resize? Thanks.
Mostly at 9GB but 12GB also fails.
Just some quick questions: do you always used the
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
Are the files the same for which the checksums differ if you resize
again at the exact same size?
Or do you mean for me to retry again starting from the situation _before_
resizing?
Yes. If it's repeatable then we could exclude that you have a
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 19:31, you wrote:
Would it be possible to send the vista metadata image
Available from: http://people.debian.org/~fjp/ntfsmeta.img.bz2
and tell us at what size you resize? Thanks.
Mostly at 9GB but 12GB also fails.
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 19:31, you wrote:
Would it be possible to send the vista metadata image
Available from: http://people.debian.org/~fjp/ntfsmeta.img.bz2
and tell us at what size you
On Monday 21 August 2006 21:10, you wrote:
Yes. If it's repeatable then we could exclude that you have a hardware
problem with random data corruptions (disk, cable, memory, etc).
Similar happened before.
Looks like I made a mistake somehow while _creating_ the md5sum file.
It turns out the
Hi,
Sorry, I was away and didn't have time yet to answer your former ntfsresize
emails (afair, you also found the solution yourself which is in the manual
and at end of the ntfsresize output).
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
- Use fdisk in sector mode to resize the partition to ~10GB.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 379628 grave
Bug#379628: ntfsresize: resizing a Vista NTFS partition leads to corrupted
partition
Severity set to `grave' from `important'
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking
severity 379628 important
thanks
Just tested with 1.13.1, but it turns out the problem is not in
ntfsresize.
The root of the problem seems to be how the Vista installer created
partitions. Yuval was correct: using default cylinder based partitioning,
the starting sector _is_ indeed changed
Package: ntfsprogs
Version: 1.12.1-1
Severity: critical
Justification: causes serious data loss
Tags: d-i
After a resize using Debian Installer of an NTFS partition created with
Windows Vista Beta 2, I found that the partition was no longer usable.
I have checked that this really is an issue by
After sending the report I noticed that I did not run ntfsfix as root.
Here is the correct output.
debian:~# ntfsfix /dev/sda1
Mounting volume... FAILED
Attempting to correct errors...
Processing $MFT and $MFTMirr...
Reading $MFT... OK
Reading $MFTMirr... OK
Comparing $MFTMirr to $MFT... FAILED
Thanks for your quick reaction Yuval.
On Monday 24 July 2006 19:42, Yuval Fledel wrote:
The two are completely similar, except that the first is successful
and the second leads to corruption.
I noticed that the original partition was not the same in both cases.
example:
Vista: /dev/sda1
On 7/24/06, Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for your quick reaction Yuval.
On Monday 24 July 2006 19:42, Yuval Fledel wrote:
The two are completely similar, except that the first is successful
and the second leads to corruption.
I noticed that the original partition was not the
El lunes, 24 de julio de 2006 18:00, Frans Pop escribió:
Package: ntfsprogs
Version: 1.12.1-1
Severity: critical
Justification: causes serious data loss
Tags: d-i
After a resize using Debian Installer of an NTFS partition created with
Windows Vista Beta 2, I found that the partition was no
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 01:25, Yuval Fledel wrote:
20482843+ is different than 20481024. I know for sure that when I
repartitioned my disk, and entered the same number, only that it
showed with no +, Windows no longer agreed to boot. Returning the
partition table to what it was saved the day.
37 matches
Mail list logo
