snipT
Yeah, in some situations there can be a real mess config
data wise and that can prevent the boot from happening.
Can you put the drive in another system as a slave
drive ? That may allow you to boot and run something
to recover the data on the drive like R-Studio etc.
ok,, this is one of those "Good News" posts that are a joy to put up as a
thankyou for the contributions of all,, whatever that may be :- )
it (info) all makes for expanding ones horizons ?
</philosophy>
The problem is solved with the HDD back in service with full functionality.
How?
I did as suggested and configured it as a slave.
The BIOS still remained confused with the MBR data (as in) the POST didnt
get past trying to recognise the drive/s.
Figuring that as the drive was an 'older' style and knowing some of the ATX
boards have problems seeing older drives I thought that maybe despite the
fact the HDD originally came out of an ATX board it may stand a better
chance of recognition with an older BIOS.
I swapped it into a working AT setup as a slave and surprise surprise the
BIOS (AMIBIOS DMI Ver 2.0 - 1995) found the drive and followed through into
the system boot.
The boot then displayed " no win.com found ..blah blah" so I figured it was
the C:\ partition on the dodgy WD HDD that was being seen as "active"
instead of the boot partition on IDE 0.
I then ran scandisk with "no errors" and no changes to the FAT or any of
those "lost file fragments" garbage messages.
I checked the root partition and found ALL the original files intact but no
sign of the extended partition (E:\) that held the work I was looking for.
I ran PQMagic on the HDD and now got a response,, the dreaded #108 error.
I took little heed of that.
As it was obvious the WD HDD was 'booting' and looking for a Windows
system I got another HDD and wrote the Windows image ( that the boot was
looking for) to it and set up the WD HDD as IDE 0/Master with the 2nd HDD
(D:\Windows) as slave.
I should mention here that I keep all my 'builds' in PQDI format for ease
of rewriting, it certainly paid off in this instance.
On firing up the new config,, hey presto Windows started and began to
reconfigure to the new shell. When config was complete I checked the tree
and there was ALL the structure (both C:\ AND E:\) !
I copied the files across to another system and set about checking the HDD
to see if it would respond to some low level commands.
I wont go into that part of it as we all know how to format and fdisk, what
I wanted to mention (which I found interesting) was that until I deleted
all partitions using fdisk and ran <format C> , PQMagic wouldnt respond
with anything else other than Error #108.
I wonder now how many HDDs have been tossed unnecessarily.
The HDD was repartitioned using PQMagic and is now happily whirring along,
no bad sectors, no hiccups when booting - a good result.
Western Digital clammed up after my insistence on SOME support and no doubt
in due course Management will offer some BS policy statement that we
(consumers) are all to be aware of when considering buying their product.
Nonetheless WD completely missed the point as to my intention to resurrect
the HDD as there were no obvious errors and from my perspective, no
tangible reason as to why there should be, defects.
I look after my gear,, or try to :- )
Western Digital OTOH do not intend to look after me (Joe Consumer) so its
the last WD drive that graces my door - so to speak.
IF the reader would bear with me just a few more lines I would like to take
the opportunity to thank all those contributing - throughout c.c.i.p.h.s.
Its information pools like these that will keep the Net alive and free from
those purveyors of the PAY PAY PAY and keep PAYING ethic.
My IT section costs a great deal of money to keep fluid and current and
that is fine, its business. But I am damned if Corporations akin to the one
involved on this occasion should be allowed to simply ignore their
responsibility to the consumer and answer enquires with a request for a
"Valid Credit Card" (to coin a phrase) , as a solution.
They could oh so easily have responded with suggested methods as Rod put
up, something to get me thinking, but no that would be helpful !
UseNET Rules...OK :- )
Thanks
