J
John Doe
Rod Speed said:
That article cited by someone else in this group says that FAT32 is
not only for Windows 9x, but also important for windows NT.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
That article cited by someone else in this group says that FAT32 is
not only for Windows 9x, but also important for windows NT.
J
John Doe
Rod Speed said: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.
J
John Doe
Rod Speed said: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.
J
John Doe
Rod Speed said: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.
manually editing BOOT.INIsees XP stuff up the contents of BOOT.INI and you can fix that by
I don't think that's related to the Registry corruption problem.
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.
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
R
Rod Speed
That article cited by someone else in this group says that FAT32
is not only for Windows 9x, but also important for windows NT.
That particular MS article says nothing like that.
And you arent running NT anyway even if he is right.
R
Rod Speed
Absolutely, I need to swap between the two installs.
Why ?
When you do, you unpack and image?
Yep.
I get more use out of it than that.
So do I, that was just the main use.
The only situation I can think of where there is much point
in swapping between two XP installs much is when you
want to pin down exactly how something has made one
of the XPs go pear shaped, checking details in one and
the other to see where its got screwed etc.
J
John Doe
da_test said: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.
J
John Doe
Rod Speed said:That particular MS article says nothing like that.
It most certainly does.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/learnmore/nt4xp.mspx
"However, using NTFS as the only file system on a computer that
contains both Windows XP and Windows NT is not recommended. On these
computers, a FAT partition containing the Windows NT 4.0 operating
system ensures that when started with Windows NT 4.0, the computer
will have access to needed files. In addition, if Windows NT is not
installed on the system partition, which is almost always the first
partition on the disk, the system partition should also be formatted
with FAT."
J
John Doe
Rod Speed said:Why ?
Because.
So do I, that was just the main use.
The only situation I can think of where there is much point
in swapping between two XP installs much is when you
want to pin down exactly how something has made one
of the XPs go pear shaped, checking details in one and
the other to see where its got screwed etc.
I've never booted to more than one operating system on a regular
basis, but the copy is useful for troubleshooting.
R
Rod Speed
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.
Yeah, must admit that I havent actually tried it with two partitons
on the one drive. And its never been that clear how you are making
the copy either, clearly the boot.ini will be way out if its just
copied intact when the XP is in a different partition to the one
that it was created for.
manually editing BOOT.INI
I don't think that's related to the Registry corruption problem.
Bet it is. And it aint corruption, you are getting a bleed from
the XP install you THINK you are running into the the registry
of the XP install you are ACTUALLY running.
You're just getting confused about which one you are actually
running. And it isnt that easy to guarantee that with the two
copys of XP in different partitions on the one physical drive.
When they are on separate drives, you can always physically
disconnect the drive you dont want boot off and then you will be
completely sure which particular copy you are actually booting.
Bet you dont get a bleed in that particular situation.
Like the Registry? In any case, I have made sure that
Windows XP did not see the other copy at any time.
How ? The XP boot is more complicated than it superfically looks.
The only real way to be completely sure that you
arent using any of the partition you dont want to
use is to image it and write zeros thru that partition
to ensure that XP cant decide that there is any
part of XP in that partition. I bet if you do it that
way there wont be any leak and in fact you will find
that you cant actually boot the copy at all, because
the bits of the original it uses aint there anymore.
The Registry information still leaked.
That doesn't work either.
It does if you do the copy properly and do
the other very early XP boot phase stuff too.
Its perfectly feasible to have two installs of XP selectable in
a boot menu and to not have any registry bleed between them.
The BOOT.INI file is not cryptic to me.
Maybe its not as clear as you assume it is.
But, as far as I know, it's not programmable either.
Corse it is.
Yes, I know it can be edited.
And you can see the editing working if you do it right.
I have been making copies of the operating-system
partition for backup and troubleshooting since before
PartitionMagic 4 was published.
The problem is that the NT/2K/XP family have a
more complex boot than the Win9x and ME family do.
That can and does bite countless in the arse.
The registry information leaks somehow.
It is a problem I can easily reproduce.
Yep, and so can the failure to boot the
copy when the original is removed too.
Your suggestion of ensuring that Windows XP cannot see
the copy on the first boot of the copy simply does not work.
It does with physical drives. You can find quite a few saying
that doing the copy properly on the first boot has worked for
them after I have suggested that using groups.google
You have said that a dozen times in excitefull replies
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
scattered throughout this thread. What you're saying is easy to
understand after the first or second iteration, but it just doesn't work.
It does with separate physical drives, as
even you can check using groups.google.
You must not be hiding the original partition effectively enough.
And thats easy to prove by actually erasing the original
partition. Bet you will find that the copy wont boot anymore
and thats the proof that you arent actually booting JUST
the copy, you're actually using whats in the original too.
AND it must be doable, because its perfectly feasible to
have two bootable copys of XP on a single hard drive
and that MS article tells you one way of achieving that.
R
Rod Speed
Because.
How juvenile.
I've never booted to more than one operating system on
a regular basis, but the copy is useful for troubleshooting.
Easy to claim.
R
Rod Speed
John Doe said: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
So why did you originally see any registry bleed at all ?
I bet that if you erase the original partition, the copy wont boot.
Because the boot of the copy is using stuff in the original partition.
And the boot.ini in the copy has wrong data in it.
How are you specifying which partition to boot ?
... 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.
I bet its not actually booting just the copy when you think you
are booting the copy and the proof is to erase the original.
Bet the copy wont boot anymore. With the copy boot.ini unmolested.
The result you are getting with empty boot.ini files is likely just an artifact.
R
Rod Speed
Rod Speed said:So why did you originally see any registry bleed at all ?
I bet that if you erase the original partition, the copy wont boot.
Because the boot of the copy is using stuff in the original partition.
And the boot.ini in the copy has wrong data in it.
How are you specifying which partition to boot ?
Why are you deleting the contents of boot.ini and not editing
the boot.ini to have the correct entrys in it for the two XP installs ?
J
John Doe
Rod Speed said:Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
"on the first boot after creating the clone"
"for the first boot of the clone"
"for the first boot of the cloned XP"
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
"on the first boot after the clone"
"on the first boot after the clone"
"on the first boot after the clone"
"during the first boot of the clone"
"on the first boot after the clone"
"during the first boot after the clone"
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
"on the first boot of the clone"
"on the first boot of the clone"
"during the first boot of the clone"
J
John Doe
Troll
Path: newssvr17.news.prodigy.com!newscon07.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: Mon, 9 May 2005 06:27:56 +1000
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <3e7b2fF1jejkU1 individual.net>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
X-Trace: individual.net YT0fATg028pdn/5RSNEMvwtQbVeQ0kknHSCe0Ws0Zu6NbOL14=
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:349909
How juvenile.
Easy to claim.
J
John Doe
Rod Speed said:So why did you originally see any registry bleed at all ?
I bet that if you erase the original partition, the copy wont
boot. Because the boot of the copy is using stuff in the
original partition.
In the post you are replying to, that is more or less what I said.
But it's only using the registry information, definitely not
accessing program files.
And the boot.ini in the copy has wrong data in it.
Actually, Windows XP enters correct information. As I explained,
Windows XP probably defaults to the wrong registry location for
reading and writing if the BOOT.INI contents are deleted.
How are you specifying which partition to boot ?
The boot managers that come with PartitionMagic and Partition
Manager.
I bet its not actually booting just the copy when you think you
are booting the copy and the proof is to erase the original.
Bet the copy wont boot anymore. With the copy boot.ini
unmolested.
It will if I choose the second copy in the Windows XP boot menu.
The result you are getting with empty boot.ini files is likely
just an artifact.
Nope.
R
Rod Speed
Troll
Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your
predicament better than that pathetic effort, child.
R
Rod Speed
<reams of quoting flushed where it belongs>
I didnt say I didnt say it a dozen times, just that it wasnt anything
even remotely resembling anything like 'excitefull replies', child.
I didnt say I didnt say it a dozen times, just that it wasnt anything
even remotely resembling anything like 'excitefull replies', child.
R
Rod Speed
Why didnt you answer this ?
No it isnt. You say nothing about failing to boot.
And as was pointed out to you by da_test, the registry is
just files in partitions, nothing special about the registry there.
When you boot the copy, it corrects the contents of boot.ini ?
Why are you deleting the contents of boot.ini at all if the boot.ini
contents are corrected automatically by XP when you boot the copy ?
Dont believe it. If you didnt get any registry bleed initially,
with the boot.ini file unmolested by you, why did you molest it ?
You have no basis for saying that. Bet you will find
that the copy wont actually boot if you erase the
original partition, with the boot.ini file unmolested.
In the post you are replying to, that is more or less what I said.
No it isnt. You say nothing about failing to boot.
But it's only using the registry information,
definitely not accessing program files.
And as was pointed out to you by da_test, the registry is
just files in partitions, nothing special about the registry there.
Actually, Windows XP enters correct information.
When you boot the copy, it corrects the contents of boot.ini ?
As I explained, Windows XP probably defaults to the wrong registry
location for reading and writing if the BOOT.INI contents are deleted.
Why are you deleting the contents of boot.ini at all if the boot.ini
contents are corrected automatically by XP when you boot the copy ?
The boot managers that come with PartitionMagic and Partition Manager.
It will if I choose the second copy in the Windows XP boot menu.
Dont believe it. If you didnt get any registry bleed initially,
with the boot.ini file unmolested by you, why did you molest it ?
Nope.
You have no basis for saying that. Bet you will find
that the copy wont actually boot if you erase the
original partition, with the boot.ini file unmolested.
J
John Doe
I didnt say I didnt say it a dozen times, just that it wasnt
anything even remotely resembling anything like 'excitefull
replies', child.
You are just a big ego, tough guy wanna-be, big mouth in cyberspace.