Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Formatting on drive wiped out when testing another drive

Reply
Thread Tools

Formatting on drive wiped out when testing another drive

 
 
Rod Speed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
Ralph Wade Phillips <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> Rod Speed <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>> http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote


>>> Whatever, I've run into this with both NT and W2K,


>> No you havent. You're just attempting to bullshit
>> your way out of your predicament now.


> With NT 4, most likely - it didn't just default to writing
> the persistent drive letter to the partition boot blocks
> unless you reallocated the drive letter.


Sure, but there is more than just what it puts in the partition
boot blocks, persistence with the NT/2K/XP family also
involves the database in the registry of the drive letters.

> 2K - Might have had the NT4 handling.


Yeah, forget exactly when that other stuff changed.

> But he OBIOUSLY hasn't had much experience with XP


Yep, and hadnt even noticed that the drive enumation is done
completely differently in the NT/2K/XP family as far as letter
persistence is concerned to how its done in the 9x/ME family.

> - which writes that damn persistent drive letter out ANYTIME
> Disk Manglement ****s over ... err, touches a logical partition.


And not just disk management either, it also happens
whenever the boot phase finds a new physical drive
or partition thats been created outside XP too.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pennywise@DerryMaine.Gov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
"Ralph Wade Phillips" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

|>
|><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
|>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
|>
|>>
|>> HD0: if you have CDEF and add HD1 with active partition you will then
|>> have CEF - HD1's first partition will take over D: and the rest of the
|>> partitions follow F (GH..)
|>>
|>
|> You've not had much real life experience with the NT class OSes,
|>especially XP.
|>
|> Because, as anyone who works with it knows, It Does Not Work Like
|>That.
|>
|> Well, it can - if a) all the logical drives were formatted first
|>with FAT32, and b) nobody's EVERY run Disk Management to handle anything.
|>
|> But if EITHER is wrong (i.e., the partitioning and formatting was
|>done by XP, OR Disk Manager was ever run to remap, say, an optical drive),
|>then it gets a persistent drive letter written in the PARTITION'S BOOT
|>BLOCK.
|>
|> As is WELL documented by Microsoft and others.
|>
|> Keep this up, and you'll look like ever more and anon someone who
|>doesn't have any idea what they're talking about.

Ok one more time, Two Drives both are bootable one new one out of an
old machine both Fat16 second - on both systems NT - W2K with 98 on
C:.

HD0 was C HD1 was D: HD0 filled up the drive letters where HD1 took
over.




|> Otherwise, please explain why so many XP machines get first logical
|>partition C, first optical D, and the added HD's primary partition as E ...
|>
|> Or why removing the USB card readers doesn't automagically make an
|>E: or F: boot partition C: ...
|>
|> RwP
|>
|> RwP
|>


--
Save a planet
http://www.samorost2.net/samorost1/
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pennywise@DerryMaine.Gov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
"Ralph Wade Phillips" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

|>> HD0: if you have CDEF and add HD1 with active partition you will then
|>> have CEF - HD1's first partition will take over D: and the rest of the
|>> partitions follow F (GH..)
|>>
|>
|> You've not had much real life experience with the NT class OSes,
|>especially XP.

And a follow up, no I haven't experienced this on XP as I have only
one drive one it and always had one drive (this computer) - but darn
if I don't feel like adding another.

The second hard drive taking the D: spot was a problem for many
people, over the years at one time - mayhaps XP fix;d this as well as
now not being able to create a CON directory - my suggestion to the OP
wayyy up there, was maybe this had happen'd and it wasn't his
partition he thought it was

--
Save a planet
http://www.samorost2.net/samorost1/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rod Speed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
(E-Mail Removed) wrote
> Ralph Wade Phillips <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote


>>>> HD0: if you have CDEF and add HD1 with active partition
>>>> you will then have CEF - HD1's first partition will take over
>>>> D: and the rest of the partitions follow F (GH..)


>>> You've not had much real life experience
>>> with the NT class OSes, especially XP.


> And a follow up, no I haven't experienced this on XP as I have
> only one drive one it and always had one drive (this computer)


So you hadnt even noticed what the NT/2K/XP family
does with drive letters when extra drives are added.

Its done quite differently to the way its done in the 9x/ME family.

> but darn if I don't feel like adding another.


You'll find its a lot more bulletproof drive letter wise.

> The second hard drive taking the D: spot was a
> problem for many people, over the years at one time


Yes, but in the 9x/ME family.

> - mayhaps XP fix;d this


No perhaps about it. So did NT and 2K too.

> as well as now not being able to create a CON directory -
> my suggestion to the OP wayyy up there, was maybe this
> had happen'd and it wasn't his partition he thought it was


And you were just plain wrong with XP, it doesnt work like that.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Pennywise@DerryMaine.Gov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
"Rod Speed" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

|>So you hadnt even noticed what the NT/2K/XP family
|>does with drive letters when extra drives are added.

sigh......



--
Save a planet
http://www.samorost2.net/samorost1/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rod Speed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
(E-Mail Removed) wrote
> Rod Speed <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote


>> So you hadnt even noticed what the NT/2K/XP family
>> does with drive letters when extra drives are added.


> sigh......


Heavy breathing aint gunna save your bacon, child.


 
Reply With Quote
 
JAD
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-29-2006

"Ralph Wade Phillips" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:S7leg.33290$4H.22437@dukeread03...
> Howdy!
>
> "Rod Speed" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > (E-Mail Removed) wrote

>
> > > Whatever, I've run into this with both NT and W2K,

> >
> > No you havent. You're just attempting to bullshit
> > your way out of your predicament now.

>
> With NT 4, most likely - it didn't just default to writing the
> persistent drive letter to the partition boot blocks unless you

reallocated
> the drive letter.
>
> 2K - Might have had the NT4 handling.
>
> But he OBIOUSLY hasn't had much experience with XP - which writes
> that damn persistent drive letter out ANYTIME Disk Manglement ****s over

....
> err, touches a logical partition.
>
> RwP
>
>


question If this is true AND there is no way that this drive letter
'swapping' CAN happen....why is it that the OP did exactly what I and Mike T
had suggested?


 
Reply With Quote
 
David Maynard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-29-2006
Folkert Rienstra wrote:

<snip>

Soory, but your reply was such an incoherent jumble I'm not going to bother.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rod Speed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-29-2006
David Maynard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> Folkert Rienstra wrote


> <snip>


> Soory, but your reply was such an incoherent jumble I'm not going to bother.


Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ralph Wade Phillips
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-29-2006
Howdy!

"Rod Speed" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Ralph Wade Phillips <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> > Rod Speed <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> >> (E-Mail Removed) wrote

>
> >>> Whatever, I've run into this with both NT and W2K,

>
> >> No you havent. You're just attempting to bullshit
> >> your way out of your predicament now.

>
> > With NT 4, most likely - it didn't just default to writing
> > the persistent drive letter to the partition boot blocks
> > unless you reallocated the drive letter.

>
> Sure, but there is more than just what it puts in the partition
> boot blocks, persistence with the NT/2K/XP family also
> involves the database in the registry of the drive letters.


And said registry database was there for non-BIOS-enumerated
partitions in NT 4.0, because I have had several machines running 4.0
workstation (and yes, even server!) move drives around due to partitions.

But NOT if the drive was prepared by NT 4.0's Disk Administrator ...

>
> > 2K - Might have had the NT4 handling.

>
> Yeah, forget exactly when that other stuff changed.
>
> > But he OBIOUSLY hasn't had much experience with XP

>
> Yep, and hadnt even noticed that the drive enumation is done
> completely differently in the NT/2K/XP family as far as letter
> persistence is concerned to how its done in the 9x/ME family.
>
> > - which writes that damn persistent drive letter out ANYTIME
> > Disk Manglement ****s over ... err, touches a logical partition.

>
> And not just disk management either, it also happens
> whenever the boot phase finds a new physical drive
> or partition thats been created outside XP too.


Err - no, at least not in my experience.

It uses the BIOS for BIOS-enumerated drives, then remaps as the
volume boot blocks specify, as long as it won't overwrite a BIOS drive
letter. It THEN checks the registry for other drives ...

And I've been in several machines without anything but floppies and
the boot partition specified in HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Mounted
Devices ...

RwP


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wiped out config - how to reconfigure? Skippyboy Cisco 5 05-15-2007 01:52 PM
Slingshot Website down or wiped out by Telecom's lawyers perhaps? E. Scrooge NZ Computing 16 05-19-2006 09:42 PM
Thunderbird Mail Wiped Out Promajority Firefox 11 01-31-2005 04:57 AM
BIOS wiped out - is it a virus? Simon@d.j Computer Security 8 07-21-2004 08:11 PM
Keep getting my server wiped out. corrco@telus.net Computer Security 6 01-27-2004 04:45 PM



Advertisments