«

Howdy!

"JAD" <> wrote in message
news:Yiseg.429$...
>
> "Ralph Wade Phillips" <> wrote in message
> news:S7leg.33290$4H.22437@dukeread03...
> > Howdy!
> >
> > "Rod Speed" <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> > > 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?

You didn't read all the messages, did you?

IF Disk Manager hasn't touched the drive, then it will mount by the
assigned drive letters FIRST then the BIOS positions.

IF, however, Disk Manager was used on the drive, and a drive letter
assigned to it ... it'll keep it.

That's how it happened.

Two cases. But Pennywise keeps claiming that the NT class OSen
don't do persistent drive letters ... and ayep, they do.

RwP

David Maynard wrote:
>
> Folkert Rienstra wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Soory, but your reply was such an incoherent jumble I'm not going to bother.

That's Folkert for you.

Nothing constructive, but excessive amounts of useless drivel.

Happy to condemn posts, but posts nothing constructive or informative
himself.

I suppose it goes with the territory.

Useless waste of time.


Odie
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts

You are a ****ing moron. There are no "bios drive letters".

"Ralph Wade Phillips" <> wrote in message newszBeg.33373$4H.9574@dukeread03...
> >
> > 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 ...
>

"Ralph Wade Phillips" <> wrote:

|> IF, however, Disk Manager was used on the drive, and a drive letter
|>assigned to it ... it'll keep it.
|>
|> That's how it happened.
|>
|> Two cases. But Pennywise keeps claiming that the NT class OSen
|>don't do persistent drive letters ... and ayep, they do.

Ok here's the deal - I bought a Gateway computer - it was cheaper than
building one.

They have the hard drive set where the first partition of the hard
drive is D: and is the restore partition; and came installed with XP
home. The first thing I did was to change from NTFS to FAT32, with no
loss of data (the entire drive).

Then I installed XP Pro on the E: partition, when I boot'd up in that
OS all the drive letters were screw'd up - I went as far as naming the
H: drive "Last_Drive" to help me out (it was F: I think). I was lucky
E: stay'd E: - and of course I had to change most of the drive letters
around to make it easier for me whichever OS I was in.

It would seem this function of drive letters being written in stone is
a function of NFTS and not XP.

Why FAT32 and not NTFS - in a pinch I want to be able to boot up with
a Win98 disk and fix a problem if it ever occurs.

--
http://www.crazyhamzters.com/flash/cunningstunt.html

Howdy!

<> wrote in message
news:...
> "Ralph Wade Phillips" <> wrote:
>
> |> IF, however, Disk Manager was used on the drive, and a drive letter
> |>assigned to it ... it'll keep it.
> |>
> |> That's how it happened.
> |>
> |> Two cases. But Pennywise keeps claiming that the NT class OSen
> |>don't do persistent drive letters ... and ayep, they do.
>
> Ok here's the deal - I bought a Gateway computer - it was cheaper than
> building one.
>
> They have the hard drive set where the first partition of the hard
> drive is D: and is the restore partition; and came installed with XP
> home. The first thing I did was to change from NTFS to FAT32, with no
> loss of data (the entire drive).
>
> Then I installed XP Pro on the E: partition, when I boot'd up in that
> OS all the drive letters were screw'd up - I went as far as naming the
> H: drive "Last_Drive" to help me out (it was F: I think). I was lucky
> E: stay'd E: - and of course I had to change most of the drive letters
> around to make it easier for me whichever OS I was in.
>
> It would seem this function of drive letters being written in stone is
> a function of NFTS and not XP.

Err - Pennywise? You ever see a 9X OS running with NTFS partitions?

You've got it backwards. AND - XP will happily put the drive letter
in the boot blocks for a FAT32 partition also, when it a) formats it or b)
when you reassign the drive letters in Disk Management.

HOWEVER - If that partition is formatted in a 9X OS, then UNTIL you
touch it with Disk Manager, it stays in the "Oh, look - here's an open drive
letter. Let's stuff it in there!" mode.

Which *ahem* is what I said earlier.

And you might want to note - if you HAD been right about it being
just like Win9X, then you wouldn't have had to move the drive letters
around, eh?

RwP

>
> Why FAT32 and not NTFS - in a pinch I want to be able to boot up with
> a Win98 disk and fix a problem if it ever occurs.
>
> --
> http://www.crazyhamzters.com/flash/cunningstunt.html

Howdy!

"Eric Gisin" <> wrote in message
news:...
> You are a ****ing moron. There are no "bios drive letters".

*shrug* So make it "Drive letters assigned in the BIOS enumeration
order".

And *ahem* I've seen several BIOSes that do use drive letters to
refer to drives. Albeit somewhat enhanced BIOSes, that included such
nicities as "Flash recovery" in ROM.

RwP

>
> "Ralph Wade Phillips" <> wrote in message
newszBeg.33373$4H.9574@dukeread03...
> > >
> > > 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 ...
> >
>
>

You and Ralph together are more stupid than Arnie.
Old Award BIOS did letter the drives, but changed it to HDD#.
However, it had nothing to do with DOS, which really assigns letters.

"Ralph Wade Phillips" <> wrote in message newslGeg.33427$4H.16479@dukeread03...
> Howdy!
>
> "Eric Gisin" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > You are a ****ing moron. There are no "bios drive letters".
>
> *shrug* So make it "Drive letters assigned in the BIOS enumeration
> order".
>
> And *ahem* I've seen several BIOSes that do use drive letters to
> refer to drives. Albeit somewhat enhanced BIOSes, that included such
> nicities as "Flash recovery" in ROM.
>
> RwP
>

"Ralph Wade Phillips" <> wrote:

|>Which *ahem* is what I said earlier.
|>
|> And you might want to note - if you HAD been right about it being
|>just like Win9X, then you wouldn't have had to move the drive letters
|>around, eh?

I was right and stand by it. I guess experence beats out reading a web
page.

--
http://www.crazyhamzters.com/flash/cunningstunt.html

wrote:

|>experience

Damn,

--
http://www.crazyhamzters.com/flash/cunningstunt.html

Ralph Wade Phillips <> wrote
> Rod Speed <> wrote
>> Ralph Wade Phillips <> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <> wrote
>>>> 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.

Not clear what you mean by that last bit, after the bracket.

> 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.

Fraid so.

> 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 ...

I was JUST talking about NEW physical drives and drive letters there.

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