7tools Partition Manager 2005 problem

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Besides some obvious and difficult bugs in 7tools Partition
Manager 2005, there is one which puzzles me.

In Windows XP:

.... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
making the copy partition 2

.... install some programs in partition 1

.... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2

.... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition
2, the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in
partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup
tab

Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
folders labeled "System Volume Information"?

I was using PartitionMagic, now trying 7tools Partition Manager
2005, I guess Ghost is next?

Should I make the Windows partition backup copies to another
physical disk? Only one per disk?

Copying Windows partitions used to be easy.
 

peter

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2004
3,226
0
20,780
0
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

> Besides some obvious and difficult bugs in 7tools Partition
> Manager 2005, there is one which puzzles me.
>
> In Windows XP:
>
> ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
> making the copy partition 2
>
> ... install some programs in partition 1
>
> ... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2
>
> ... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition
> 2, the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in
> partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup
> tab
>
> Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
> registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
> cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
> the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
> folders labeled "System Volume Information"?
>
> I was using PartitionMagic, now trying 7tools Partition Manager
> 2005, I guess Ghost is next?
>
> Should I make the Windows partition backup copies to another
> physical disk? Only one per disk?
>
> Copying Windows partitions used to be easy.

But what is your objective? What are you trying to achieve?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I wrote:

> In Windows XP:
> ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
> making the copy partition 2
> ... install some programs in partition 1
> ... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2
> ... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition
> 2, the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in
> partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup
> tab

Reading the article referenced in someone elses earlier thread.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/learnmore/multiboot.mspx

Could my problems be resolved by switching away from NTFS and back
to FAT32?

Maybe I will try Ghost first, then try changing the file system.
A solution is necessary.

Thanks for any suggestions.




>
>
>
> Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
> registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
> cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
> the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
> folders labeled "System Volume Information"?
....
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Peter" <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>> Besides some obvious and difficult bugs in 7tools Partition
>> Manager 2005, there is one which puzzles me.
>>
>> In Windows XP:
>>
>> ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
>> making the copy partition 2
>>
>> ... install some programs in partition 1
>>
>> ... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2
>>
>> ... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition
>> 2, the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in
>> partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup
>> tab
>>
>> Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
>> registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
>> cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
>> the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
>> folders labeled "System Volume Information"?
>>
>> I was using PartitionMagic, now trying 7tools Partition Manager
>> 2005, I guess Ghost is next?
>>
>> Should I make the Windows partition backup copies to another
>> physical disk? Only one per disk?
>>
>> Copying Windows partitions used to be easy.
>
> But what is your objective? What are you trying to achieve?

What?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Fri, 06 May 2005 11:01:38 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid>
wrote:

>Besides some obvious and difficult bugs in 7tools Partition
>Manager 2005, there is one which puzzles me.
>
>In Windows XP:
>
>... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
>making the copy partition 2
>
>... install some programs in partition 1
>
>... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2
>
>... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition
>2, the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in
>partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup
>tab
>
>Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
>registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
>cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
>the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
>folders labeled "System Volume Information"?
>
>I was using PartitionMagic, now trying 7tools Partition Manager
>2005, I guess Ghost is next?
>
>Should I make the Windows partition backup copies to another
>physical disk? Only one per disk?
>
>Copying Windows partitions used to be easy.
>
It doesn't sound right. The registry is just a bunch of files,
they're treated the same by partition managers.
Verify that you actually are booting the second partition.
Use diskmgmt.msc from the run box to view
the partition info.

Dave
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns964E62516D520wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> "Peter" <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>>> Besides some obvious and difficult bugs in 7tools Partition
>>> Manager 2005, there is one which puzzles me.
>>>
>>> In Windows XP:
>>>
>>> ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
>>> making the copy partition 2
>>>
>>> ... install some programs in partition 1
>>>
>>> ... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2
>>>
>>> ... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition
>>> 2, the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in
>>> partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup
>>> tab
>>>
>>> Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
>>> registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
>>> cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
>>> the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
>>> folders labeled "System Volume Information"?
>>>
>>> I was using PartitionMagic, now trying 7tools Partition Manager
>>> 2005, I guess Ghost is next?
>>>
>>> Should I make the Windows partition backup copies to another
>>> physical disk? Only one per disk?
>>>
>>> Copying Windows partitions used to be easy.
>>
>> But what is your objective? What are you trying to achieve?
>
> What?

Why are you making a copy of the XP system partition ?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns964E3D5475535wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...

> Besides some obvious and difficult bugs in 7tools
> Partition Manager 2005, there is one which puzzles me.

> In Windows XP:

> ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive
> Windows partition, making the copy partition 2

> ... install some programs in partition 1

> ... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2

> ... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition 2,
> the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in partition
> 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup tab

> Anybody know why that is happening?

Presumably the usual problem with cloning an XP system
partition and allowing the clone and original to be visible
to XP on the first boot after the clone has been made.

You'll find that while it appears that you have
booted the clone, in practice you havent and
are still using the original most of the time.

> Apparently Windows XP puts registry information somewhere
> on the disk that disk managers cannot correctly copy?
> That information is sharred throughout the drive?

Nope, and the evidence that that isnt the case
is that if you ensure that XP cant see both the
original and the clone on the first boot after the
clone has been made, you dont get that effect.

> Could it have something to do with the system
> folders labeled "System Volume Information"?

Nope, just the visibility of both copys to XP on
the first boot after the clone has been made.

> I was using PartitionMagic, now trying 7tools
> Partition Manager 2005, I guess Ghost is next?

> Should I make the Windows partition
> backup copies to another physical disk?

Doesnt help, in fact that situatioin is even worse,
if the original and the clone are visible to XP
during the first boot of the clone after the clone
has been made, you'll find that if you physically
unplug the original drive, you cant even boot the
other drive, even tho you could with them both
plugged in. Thats because the boot of the clone
uses files from both copys for the boot if you
allow both to be visible to XP on the first boot
after the clone has been made.

> Only one per disk?

Ditto.

> Copying Windows partitions used to be easy.

It still is, just ensure that XP cant see the original and the
clone during the first boot after the clone has been made.
You can then boot either copy and not get any interaction
effect with changes made to either copy.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns964E4F1A8D1B1wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> I wrote

>> In Windows XP:
>> ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
>> making the copy partition 2
>> ... install some programs in partition 1
>> ... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2
>> ... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition 2,
>> the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in partition
>> 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup tab

> Reading the article referenced in someone elses earlier thread.

> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/learnmore/multiboot.mspx

> Could my problems be resolved by switching
> away from NTFS and back to FAT32?

Nope. FAT32 is only relevant for OSs which
dont support NTFS like Win98 and ME.

> Maybe I will try Ghost first, then try changing the file system.

Wont help.

> A solution is necessary.

Just ensure that XP cant see both the original and the clone
on the first boot after creating the clone. If they are on separate
physical disks, just unplug the drive which has the original copy
of XP on it for the first boot of the clone and if they are on the
same physical drive in separate partitions, just hide the first
partition that has the original install of XP on it for the first
boot of the cloned XP install, using a partition manager.

> Thanks for any suggestions.

>> Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
>> registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
>> cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
>> the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
>> folders labeled "System Volume Information"?
> ...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Why are you making a copy of the XP system partition ?

Because doing so is extremely useful, for incremental installation
backups and troubleshooting. It's the main function of my disk
manager (PartitionMagic, Partition Manager, whatever). Can't live
without them.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message

>> Could my problems be resolved by switching
>> away from NTFS and back to FAT32?
>
> Nope. FAT32 is only relevant for OSs which
> dont support NTFS like Win98 and ME.

Is that code for "NTFS is better than FAT32"? It sounds
oversimple.





>
>
>
> Path: newssvr33.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm06.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
> From: "Rod Speed" <rod_speed yahoo.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
> Subject: Re: 7tools Partition Manager 2005 problem
> Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 03:58:17 +1000
> Lines: 48
> Message-ID: <3e1phrFoshqU1 individual.net>
> References: <Xns964E3D5475535wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158> <Xns964E4F1A8D1B1wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158>
> X-Trace: individual.net 2il6j5D9skbkgEUqmW4okgfqeQpBYzu4DFrbKY2sp25ETQV6M=
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
> X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
> Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage:349830
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns964EE9BDE83A7wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>> Why are you making a copy of the XP system partition ?

> Because doing so is extremely useful, for
> incremental installation backups and troubleshooting.

Its better to use images for that, not copying the partition.

That allows you to keep more than one image file
because the image is quite a bit smaller than a copy
which copys the free space as well as the used space.

> It's the main function of my disk manager (PartitionMagic,
> Partition Manager, whatever). Can't live without them.

You can, actually, use an imager instead.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>> Why are you making a copy of the XP system partition ?
>
>> Because doing so is extremely useful, for
>> incremental installation backups and troubleshooting.
>
> Its better to use images for that, not copying the partition.
> That allows you to keep more than one image file
> because the image is quite a bit smaller than a copy
> which copys the free space as well as the used space.

Saving disk space might help, but (at least here) troubleshooting
would be easier being able to boot to a backup copy.

>> It's the main function of my disk manager (PartitionMagic,
>> Partition Manager, whatever). Can't live without them.
>
> You can, actually, use an imager instead.

I guess you mean like Ghost.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns964F6F67A9DEwisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>>> Why are you making a copy of the XP system partition ?

>>> Because doing so is extremely useful, for
>>> incremental installation backups and troubleshooting.

>> Its better to use images for that, not copying the partition.
>> That allows you to keep more than one image file
>> because the image is quite a bit smaller than a copy
>> which copys the free space as well as the used space.

> Saving disk space might help, but (at least here) troubleshooting
> would be easier being able to boot to a backup copy.

Maybe, if you need to swap between the two installs. I dont
find that I do that much at all, basically I image the OS and
apps partition before installing anything except trivial stuff,
so I can just restore the image if the install goes pear
shaped and thats usually obvious quite soon into the install.

>>> It's the main function of my disk manager (PartitionMagic,
>>> Partition Manager, whatever). Can't live without them.

>> You can, actually, use an imager instead.

> I guess you mean like Ghost.

Yep.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns964F5C773BA6Fwisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote

>>> Reading the article referenced in someone elses earlier thread.

>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/learnmore/multiboot.mspx

>>> Could my problems be resolved by switching
>>> away from NTFS and back to FAT32?

>> Nope. FAT32 is only relevant for OSs which
>> dont support NTFS like Win98 and ME.

> Is that code for "NTFS is better than FAT32"?

Nope, just recognising the basics, that Win9x and ME cant see
the contents of NTFS formatted partitons and so if you setting
up a dual boot system, thats an important consideration.

> It sounds oversimple.

It might if that was what was being said. It isnt.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I wrote:

> Could my problems be resolved by switching away from NTFS and back
> to FAT32?

Switching back to FAT32 appears to solve the PartitionMagic
"cannot lock drive" problem when operating in pre-Windows XP mode.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message

>> In Windows XP: ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive
>> Windows partition, making the copy partition 2 ... install some
>> programs in partition 1 ... hide partition 1 and switch to
>> partition 2 ... registry information from partition 1 shows up
>> in partition 2, the newly installed programs from partition 1
>> show up in partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig
>> Startup tab Anybody know why that is happening?

> Presumably the usual problem with cloning an XP system partition
> and allowing the clone and original to be visible to XP on the
> first boot after the clone has been made.

Tried that, didn't last. Here, apparently the problem has to do
with deleting the contents of BOOT.INI.

Using FAT32, after deleting the contents of BOOT.INI, the system
didn't hang when switching from the original to the copy of
Windows XP (just an observation, not promoting FAT32), but
registry information started to leak again.

I delete the contents of BOOT.INI so the Windows XP startup menu
doesn't show.

Anybody know how to get Windows XP to automatically follow the
boot manager choice?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote

>>>> Reading the article referenced in someone elses earlier thread.
>
>>>>
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/learnmore/multiboot.m
spx
>
>>>> Could my problems be resolved by switching
>>>> away from NTFS and back to FAT32?
>
>>> Nope. FAT32 is only relevant for OSs which
>>> dont support NTFS like Win98 and ME.
>
>> Is that code for "NTFS is better than FAT32"?
>
> Nope, just recognising the basics, that Win9x and ME cant see
> the contents of NTFS formatted partitons and so if you setting
> up a dual boot system, thats an important consideration.

I thought your reply had something to do with my problem, which
doesn't have anything to do with Win9x and ME.








>> It sounds oversimple.
>
> It might if that was what was being said. It isnt.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns964F6F67A9DEwisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>>>>> Why are you making a copy of the XP system partition ?
>
>>>> Because doing so is extremely useful, for
>>>> incremental installation backups and troubleshooting.
>
>>> Its better to use images for that, not copying the partition.
>>> That allows you to keep more than one image file
>>> because the image is quite a bit smaller than a copy
>>> which copys the free space as well as the used space.
>
>> Saving disk space might help, but (at least here) troubleshooting
>> would be easier being able to boot to a backup copy.
>
> Maybe, if you need to swap between the two installs.

Absolutely, I need to swap between the two installs.

> I dont
> find that I do that much at all,

When you do, you unpack and image?

> basically I image the OS and
> apps partition before installing anything except trivial stuff,
> so I can just restore the image if the install goes pear
> shaped and thats usually obvious quite soon into the install.

I get more use out of it than that.







>>>> It's the main function of my disk manager (PartitionMagic,
>>>> Partition Manager, whatever). Can't live without them.
>
>>> You can, actually, use an imager instead.
>
>> I guess you mean like Ghost.
>
> Yep.
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

da_test <davexnet02NO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 06 May 2005 11:01:38 GMT, John Doe
<jdoe@usenet.love.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>Besides some obvious and difficult bugs in 7tools Partition
>>Manager 2005, there is one which puzzles me.
>>
>>In Windows XP:
>>
>>... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive Windows partition,
>>making the copy partition 2
>>
>>... install some programs in partition 1
>>
>>... hide partition 1 and switch to partition 2
>>
>>... registry information from partition 1 shows up in partition
>>2, the newly installed programs from partition 1 show up in
>>partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig Startup
>>tab
>>
>>Anybody know why that is happening? Apparently Windows XP puts
>>registry information somewhere on the disk that disk managers
>>cannot correctly copy? That information is sharred throughout
>>the drive? Could it have something to do with the system
>>folders labeled "System Volume Information"?
>>
>>I was using PartitionMagic, now trying 7tools Partition Manager
>>2005, I guess Ghost is next?
>>
>>Should I make the Windows partition backup copies to another
>>physical disk? Only one per disk?
>>
>>Copying Windows partitions used to be easy.
>>
> It doesn't sound right. The registry is just a bunch of files,
> they're treated the same by partition managers.
> Verify that you actually are booting the second partition.
> Use diskmgmt.msc from the run box to view
> the partition info.

I know how to use Windows XP disk management. The programs do not
exist in the other installation but the registry information exists.
Apparently, somehow the Registry gets corrupted. I'm not suggesting
that partition managers do the corrupting, apparently Windows
changes the registry information in the other installation.

The problem is easy enough to reproduce, given the time. This last
effort, among other things I did this:

.... everything below was done from my PartitionMagic 8 boot CD,
including switching from one partition to the other, making sure
that one or the other partition was hidden and inactive before
booting to the active partition

.... reinstalled Windows XP on a FAT32 partition

.... made a copy

.... install a program in the original Windows XP

.... switched to the copy, there was no registry information of the
newly installed program

.... repeated that in the copy to see if program information would
show up in the original, it didn't, all was fine

.... deleted the contents of BOOT.INI in the original and switched to
the copy

.... deleted the contents of BOOT.INI in the copy

.... the registry information began to leak

Deleting the contents of BOOT.INI caused the malfunction. Maybe
Windows XP depends on BOOT.INI information to somehow point to the
registry files. I guess when BOOT.INI is empty, Windows XP uses a
default location.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96505C2A591C0wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote

>>>>> Reading the article referenced in someone elses earlier thread.

> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/learnmore/multiboot.mspx

>>>>> Could my problems be resolved by switching
>>>>> away from NTFS and back to FAT32?

>>>> Nope. FAT32 is only relevant for OSs which
>>>> dont support NTFS like Win98 and ME.

>>> Is that code for "NTFS is better than FAT32"?

>> Nope, just recognising the basics, that Win9x and ME cant see
>> the contents of NTFS formatted partitons and so if you setting
>> up a dual boot system, thats an important consideration.

> I thought your reply had something to do with my problem,
> which doesn't have anything to do with Win9x and ME.

Nope, I was commenting on why that
article you cited mentions FAT32 format.

>>> It sounds oversimple.

>> It might if that was what was being said. It isnt.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns96505C2A591C0wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote
>
>>>>>> Reading the article referenced in someone elses earlier
thread.
>
>>
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/learnmore/multiboot.m
spx
>
>>>>>> Could my problems be resolved by switching
>>>>>> away from NTFS and back to FAT32?
>
>>>>> Nope. FAT32 is only relevant for OSs which
>>>>> dont support NTFS like Win98 and ME.
>
>>>> Is that code for "NTFS is better than FAT32"?
>
>>> Nope, just recognising the basics, that Win9x and ME cant see
>>> the contents of NTFS formatted partitons and so if you setting
>>> up a dual boot system, thats an important consideration.
>
>> I thought your reply had something to do with my problem,
>> which doesn't have anything to do with Win9x and ME.
>
> Nope, I was commenting on why that
> article you cited mentions FAT32 format.

That article cited by someone else in this group says that FAT32 is
not only for Windows 9x, but also important for windows NT.




>
>>>> It sounds oversimple.
>
>>> It might if that was what was being said. It isnt.
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9650491FAFC10wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> I wrote:

>> Could my problems be resolved by switching
>> away from NTFS and back to FAT32?

> Switching back to FAT32 appears to solve the PartitionMagic
> "cannot lock drive" problem when operating in pre-Windows XP mode.

What exactly is 'pre-Windows XP mode' ?

And this is the first mention of any "cannot lock drive"
problem in this thread, you previously only mentioned a
problem with changes to one copy of XP affecting the other.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns9650491FAFC10wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
>> I wrote:
>
>>> Could my problems be resolved by switching away from NTFS and
>>> back to FAT32?
>
>> Switching back to FAT32 appears to solve the PartitionMagic
>> "cannot lock drive" problem when operating in pre-Windows XP
>> mode.
>
> What exactly is 'pre-Windows XP mode' ?

It's the mode certain programs jump into two Finnish operations,
after a reboot, before the desktop.

> And this is the first mention of any "cannot lock drive" problem
> in this thread, you previously only mentioned a problem with
> changes to one copy of XP affecting the other.

That's true.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96504C10CE14Awisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message

>>> In Windows XP: ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive
>>> Windows partition, making the copy partition 2 ... install some
>>> programs in partition 1 ... hide partition 1 and switch to
>>> partition 2 ... registry information from partition 1 shows up
>>> in partition 2, the newly installed programs from partition 1
>>> show up in partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig
>>> Startup tab Anybody know why that is happening?

>> Presumably the usual problem with cloning an XP system
>> partition and allowing the clone and original to be visible
>> to XP on the first boot after the clone has been made.

> Tried that, didn't last. Here, apparently the problem
> has to do with deleting the contents of BOOT.INI.

Thats the problem I was talking about, allowing XP to see
both copys of XP on the first boot of the clone after the
clone has been made sees XP stuff up the contents of
BOOT.INI and you can fix that by manually editing BOOT.INI

> Using FAT32, after deleting the contents of BOOT.INI, the
> system didn't hang when switching from the original to the
> copy of Windows XP (just an observation, not promoting
> FAT32), but registry information started to leak again.

Yes, more than just BOOT.INI is affected by
allowing XP to see both copys of XP on the first
boot of the clone after the clone has been made.

> I delete the contents of BOOT.INI so the
> Windows XP startup menu doesn't show.

> Anybody know how to get Windows XP to
> automatically follow the boot manager choice?

Just edit boot.ini so you get the same detail in there
as you have in the boot manager choice. The format
is a tad cryptic, but its not as bad as it looks.

Thats not going to help with the alleged 'registry info leak' tho,
the fix for that is to clone the copy of XP again and then ensure
that XP cant see both copys during the first boot of the clone
of XP. Best by hiding the original XP partition with a boot
manager if they are both on one drive. Best by unplugging
the original drive if they are on different drives.

Still nothing to do with the format of the drive, FAT32 or NTFS.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns96504C10CE14Awisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
>
>>>> In Windows XP: ... make a hidden backup copy of the C drive
>>>> Windows partition, making the copy partition 2 ... install some
>>>> programs in partition 1 ... hide partition 1 and switch to
>>>> partition 2 ... registry information from partition 1 shows up
>>>> in partition 2, the newly installed programs from partition 1
>>>> show up in partition 2's Add or Remove Programs and in MSconfig
>>>> Startup tab Anybody know why that is happening?
>
>>> Presumably the usual problem with cloning an XP system
>>> partition and allowing the clone and original to be visible
>>> to XP on the first boot after the clone has been made.
>
>> Tried that, didn't last. Here, apparently the problem
>> has to do with deleting the contents of BOOT.INI.
>
> Thats the problem I was talking about, allowing XP to see
> both copys of XP on the first boot of the clone after the
> clone has been made

Keeping Windows XP from seeing both copies on the first boot of the
clone after the clone has been made didn't do anything for me.

> sees XP stuff up the contents of BOOT.INI and you can fix that by
manually editing BOOT.INI

I don't think that's related to the Registry corruption problem.

>> Using FAT32, after deleting the contents of BOOT.INI, the
>> system didn't hang when switching from the original to the
>> copy of Windows XP (just an observation, not promoting
>> FAT32), but registry information started to leak again.
>
> Yes, more than just BOOT.INI is affected by
> allowing XP to see both copys of XP on the first
> boot of the clone after the clone has been made.

Like the Registry? In any case, I have made sure that Windows XP did
not see the other copy at any time. The Registry information still
leaked.

>> I delete the contents of BOOT.INI so the
>> Windows XP startup menu doesn't show.
>
>> Anybody know how to get Windows XP to
>> automatically follow the boot manager choice?
>
> Just edit boot.ini so you get the same detail in there
> as you have in the boot manager choice. The format
> is a tad cryptic, but its not as bad as it looks.

That doesn't work either. The BOOT.INI file is not cryptic to me.
But, as far as I know, it's not programmable either. Yes, I know it
can be edited.

> Thats not going to help with the alleged 'registry info leak' tho,

I have been making copies of the operating-system partition for
backup and troubleshooting since before PartitionMagic 4 was
published. The registry information leaks somehow. It is a problem I
can easily reproduce.

Your suggestion of ensuring that Windows XP cannot see the copy on
the first boot of the copy simply does not work.

> the fix for that is to clone the copy of XP again and then ensure
> that XP cant see both copys during the first boot of the clone
> of XP.

You have said that a dozen times in excitefull replies scattered
throughout this thread. What you're saying is easy to understand
after the first or second iteration, but it just doesn't work.






Best by hiding the original XP partition with a boot
> manager if they are both on one drive. Best by unplugging
> the original drive if they are on different drives.
>
> Still nothing to do with the format of the drive, FAT32 or NTFS.
>
>
 

Similar threads


TRENDING THREADS