«

OK so I cloned my drive to a SATA drive , then I remoed ny original
IDE boot drive and tried to boot with just the SATA connected.

Problem was it did n't work, aster the POST screen it just went to
a black screen.

I read something about drivers, maybe the computer can't boot
from a SATA drive because it has no drivers for one as it expected
and IDE one?

"R. Giggs." wrote:

> OK so I cloned my drive to a SATA drive , then I remoed ny original
> IDE boot drive and tried to boot with just the SATA connected.
>
> Problem was it did n't work, aster the POST screen it just went to
> a black screen.
>
> I read something about drivers, maybe the computer can't boot
> from a SATA drive because it has no drivers for one as it expected
> and IDE one?

After removing your IDE hard disk (which your BIOS could find), and
during the reboot, did you go into your BIOS to reconfigure to boot from
the *SATA* hard disk? Look at the boot drive load order option in your
BIOS. You'll have to move SATA to the top (although it might work if
it's included as any type in the list of boot devices).

"VanguardLH" <> wrote in message
news:k7cggt$ai6$...
> "R. Giggs." wrote:
>
>> OK so I cloned my drive to a SATA drive , then I remoed ny original
>> IDE boot drive and tried to boot with just the SATA connected.
>>
>> Problem was it did n't work, aster the POST screen it just went to
>> a black screen.
>>
>> I read something about drivers, maybe the computer can't boot
>> from a SATA drive because it has no drivers for one as it expected
>> and IDE one?
>
> After removing your IDE hard disk (which your BIOS could find), and
> during the reboot, did you go into your BIOS to reconfigure to boot from
> the *SATA* hard disk? Look at the boot drive load order option in your
> BIOS. You'll have to move SATA to the top (although it might work if
> it's included as any type in the list of boot devices).
>

Thanks,


First I just removed the IDE drive, I expect it to just find the SATA drive
and
boot from tat, but I just got a black screen.

Then I powered down and went to the bios boot menu, (where there was just
the
SATA drive listed (IDE drive was disconnected) and tried to boot like that
but
the same black screen and no boot.

Then I reconnected the IDE drive and went into the bios to a boot order menu
the cd drive was one group then another group was the hard drives, it was
set
to boot from the IDE drive but I selected that and changed it to the SATA
drive. Then I reboted and it booted up OK.

However I think it still booted from the IDE drive, not sure why I think
this but I do.
FOr starters the desktop I have is on the IDE drive, that's why I think it
booted from the
IDE drive.


So just to make sure I will remove the IDE drive (disconnect it) and try
and boot.

I expect it to fail to boot. We shall see I am going to try it again.

The whole point of doing this is to be abl to boot from the SATA drive
alone.


Slighly odd (to me) thing is that the IDE drive has letter I: for one
partition and F: for the
next partition, but the drive was always listed as I: when it was just a
blank drive.
I expect it's a conventionfor the first SATA drive to be I:

Will try a reboot now on justthe SATA drive, don't expect to succeed!!!

On Nov 7, 2:40 am, "R. Giggs." <co...@trunt.com> wrote:
> "VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message
>
> news:k7cggt$ai6$...
>
>
>
> > "R. Giggs." wrote:
>
> >> OK so I cloned my drive to a SATA drive , then I remoed ny original
> >> IDE boot drive and tried to boot with just the SATA connected.
>
> >> Problem was it did n't work, aster the POST screen it just went to
> >> a black screen.
>
> >> I read something about drivers, maybe the computer can't boot
> >> from a SATA drive because it has no drivers for one as it expected
> >> and IDE one?
>
> > After removing your IDE hard disk (which your BIOS could find), and
> > during the reboot, did you go into your BIOS to reconfigure to boot from
> > the *SATA* hard disk? Look at the boot drive load order option in your
> > BIOS. You'll have to move SATA to the top (although it might work if
> > it's included as any type in the list of boot devices).
>
> Thanks,
>
> First I just removed the IDE drive, I expect it to just find the SATA drive
> and
> boot from tat, but I just got a black screen.
>
> Then I powered down and went to the bios boot menu, (where there was just
> the
> SATA drive listed (IDE drive was disconnected) and tried to boot like that
> but
> the same black screen and no boot.
>
> Then I reconnected the IDE drive and went into the bios to a boot order menu
> the cd drive was one group then another group was the hard drives, it was
> set
> to boot from the IDE drive but I selected that and changed it to the SATA
> drive. Then I reboted and it booted up OK.
>
> However I think it still booted from the IDE drive, not sure why I think
> this but I do.
> FOr starters the desktop I have is on the IDE drive, that's why I think it
> booted from the
> IDE drive.
>
> So just to make sure I will remove the IDE drive (disconnect it) and try
> and boot.
>
> I expect it to fail to boot. We shall see I am going to try it again.
>
> The whole point of doing this is to be abl to boot from the SATA drive
> alone.
>
> Slighly odd (to me) thing is that the IDE drive has letter I: for one
> partition and F: for the
> next partition, but the drive was always listed as I: when it was just a
> blank drive.
> I expect it's a conventionfor the first SATA drive to be I:
>
> Will try a reboot now on justthe SATA drive, don't expect to succeed!!!

Hi there!!! This is me!! ie R.Giggs, I am using a new account I
created.
What happened was I could not boot on the SATA drive (as I expected)
but I too the oppertunity to boot up on an only Ubuntu CD I had made
ages
ago, I forgot the loging to my original account (all the info is on
windows) so I created this new account so I could post.

I am quite pleased with this because it means if I screw up my hard
drive I can get on the net via the ubuntu CD, whihc is quite nice, it
means I have a second way to access the internet, which give me a bit
of a fall back in case
of drive failure!! Very nice!!

On Nov 7, 3:17 am, er3...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On Nov 7, 2:40 am, "R. Giggs." <co...@trunt.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message
>
> >news:k7cggt$ai6$...
>
> > > "R. Giggs." wrote:
>
> > >> OK so I cloned my drive to a SATA drive , then I remoed ny original
> > >> IDE boot drive and tried to boot with just the SATA connected.
>
> > >> Problem was it did n't work, aster the POST screen it just went to
> > >> a black screen.
>
> > >> I read something about drivers, maybe the computer can't boot
> > >> from a SATA drive because it has no drivers for one as it expected
> > >> and IDE one?
>
> > > After removing your IDE hard disk (which your BIOS could find), and
> > > during the reboot, did you go into your BIOS to reconfigure to boot from
> > > the *SATA* hard disk? Look at the boot drive load order option in your
> > > BIOS. You'll have to move SATA to the top (although it might work if
> > > it's included as any type in the list of boot devices).
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > First I just removed the IDE drive, I expect it to just find the SATA drive
> > and
> > boot from tat, but I just got a black screen.
>
> > Then I powered down and went to the bios boot menu, (where there was just
> > the
> > SATA drive listed (IDE drive was disconnected) and tried to boot like that
> > but
> > the same black screen and no boot.
>
> > Then I reconnected the IDE drive and went into the bios to a boot order menu
> > the cd drive was one group then another group was the hard drives, it was
> > set
> > to boot from the IDE drive but I selected that and changed it to the SATA
> > drive. Then I reboted and it booted up OK.
>
> > However I think it still booted from the IDE drive, not sure why I think
> > this but I do.
> > FOr starters the desktop I have is on the IDE drive, that's why I think it
> > booted from the
> > IDE drive.
>
> > So just to make sure I will remove the IDE drive (disconnect it) and try
> > and boot.
>
> > I expect it to fail to boot. We shall see I am going to try it again.
>
> > The whole point of doing this is to be abl to boot from the SATA drive
> > alone.
>
> > Slighly odd (to me) thing is that the IDE drive has letter I: for one
> > partition and F: for the
> > next partition, but the drive was always listed as I: when it was just a
> > blank drive.
> > I expect it's a conventionfor the first SATA drive to be I:
>
> > Will try a reboot now on justthe SATA drive, don't expect to succeed!!!
>
> Hi there!!! This is me!! ie R.Giggs, I am using a new account I
> created.
> What happened was I could not boot on the SATA drive (as I expected)
> but I too the oppertunity to boot up on an only Ubuntu CD I had made
> ages
> ago, I forgot the loging to my original account (all the info is on
> windows) so I created this new account so I could post.
>
> I am quite pleased with this because it means if I screw up my hard
> drive I can get on the net via the ubuntu CD, whihc is quite nice, it
> means I have a second way to access the internet, which give me a bit
> of a fall back in case
> of drive failure!! Very nice!!

OK going back to window now lol.

R. Giggs. wrote:
> "VanguardLH" <> wrote in message
> news:k7cggt$ai6$...
>> "R. Giggs." wrote:
>>
>>> OK so I cloned my drive to a SATA drive , then I remoed ny original
>>> IDE boot drive and tried to boot with just the SATA connected.
>>>
>>> Problem was it did n't work, aster the POST screen it just went to
>>> a black screen.
>>>
>>> I read something about drivers, maybe the computer can't boot
>>> from a SATA drive because it has no drivers for one as it expected
>>> and IDE one?
>> After removing your IDE hard disk (which your BIOS could find), and
>> during the reboot, did you go into your BIOS to reconfigure to boot from
>> the *SATA* hard disk? Look at the boot drive load order option in your
>> BIOS. You'll have to move SATA to the top (although it might work if
>> it's included as any type in the list of boot devices).
>>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> First I just removed the IDE drive, I expect it to just find the SATA drive
> and
> boot from tat, but I just got a black screen.
>
> Then I powered down and went to the bios boot menu, (where there was just
> the
> SATA drive listed (IDE drive was disconnected) and tried to boot like that
> but
> the same black screen and no boot.
>
> Then I reconnected the IDE drive and went into the bios to a boot order menu
> the cd drive was one group then another group was the hard drives, it was
> set
> to boot from the IDE drive but I selected that and changed it to the SATA
> drive. Then I reboted and it booted up OK.
>
> However I think it still booted from the IDE drive, not sure why I think
> this but I do.
> FOr starters the desktop I have is on the IDE drive, that's why I think it
> booted from the
> IDE drive.
>
>
> So just to make sure I will remove the IDE drive (disconnect it) and try
> and boot.
>
> I expect it to fail to boot. We shall see I am going to try it again.
>
> The whole point of doing this is to be abl to boot from the SATA drive
> alone.
>
>
> Slighly odd (to me) thing is that the IDE drive has letter I: for one
> partition and F: for the
> next partition, but the drive was always listed as I: when it was just a
> blank drive.
> I expect it's a conventionfor the first SATA drive to be I:
>
> Will try a reboot now on justthe SATA drive, don't expect to succeed!!!
>
>

For its first boot, a cloned drive should be by itself.
I think you're following that rule.

Because of that, I personally see no benefit to connecting
both original and cloned drive, at the same time, and attempting
to boot the cloned drive. This causes the very problem, that
the "cloned drive should boot by itself the first time"
rule is supposed to prevent.

When the drive is cloned, you should be verifying, with
Disk Management, that the two drives have the same
content. The Disk Management should be showing the same
partitions, something like "Healthy (Active)" for
the cloned disk OS partition (the one with the boot
flag set). If the new drive was completely empty for example,
you'd want some portion of Sector 0 to get copied over, to
support booting.

In the BIOS, it's important that the SATA and IDE drive settings,
are selected according to the drivers already loaded in Windows.
When you cloned the drive, there should have been a driver at
that time, to access the SATA drive. So both an IDE and SATA driver
must have been there. The only way to get around such a situation,
is if you cloned with an OS other than the one that is being
copied to both disks.

Now, say the SATA drive, freshly cloned again, was connected
to the motherboard, and the IDE is disconnected. Now, you're
saying "I can't boot - got black screen, flashing cursor".
At this point, I'd boot my WinXP installer CD (if the OS was
WinXP), and use the "recovery console". That looks like a
MSDOS prompt when you get there. When you do that, the installer
CD loads its set of drivers, and at some point, it prompts you
with "type a number to select the partition to log into". With
just the one disk connected, there is only one choice here,
and that is to select the OS on Disk 1. The installer CD will
ask for the administrator password (as that's an excellent way
of verifying you're attacking the correct partition). I have
two OSes on my computer, and I see two choices in the menu,
and the password on the two OS administrator accounts is different.

Once there, doing "fixmbr" would repair the 440 bytes of
boot code for the cloned disk. That doesn't touch the four
primary partition slots in sector 0.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true

Sector 0
446 bytes boot code (on Windows version, searches for boot flag)
64 bytes = (4) 16 byte primary partition table entries
2 bytes = 0xAA55 signature bytes, meaning "somebody put a valid
MBR in sector 0". If this field is zeroed out, any OS
looking at it, would treat the other info with extreme
suspicion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record

When the disk was cloned, the partition table has to be set up.
That means the 0xAA55 type signature is there. The 4x16 area
has to be defined. But the 446 byte area, I don't know if
there's a guarantee that gets copied. If the copied partition
was "active", then it makes sense that the 446 bytes should be
copied as well.

In any case, if the new drive, plus a CD drive are connected,
you boot from the CD drive using the Windows installer disc,
log into the recovery console, and do a "fixmbr", that should
remove all doubt.

You can also use "diskpart" in the recovery console, if you
need to list the various partitions.

And the fact you could "log into" the cloned C:. proves there
is enough OS-like info there, to convince the recovery console
that you're actually repairing an OS partition.

Now, the next command of interest, is fixboot. This is less
likely to be needed in your case. When you format a partition,
the partition boot sector is overwritten. When you install an
OS, the partition boot sector is loaded. So when you installed
Windows on C: of the original drive, a special sector near
the front of the partition gets defined.

The cloning software, upon realizing it's an OS partition,
can copy the file system and the partition boot sector.

Now, I use "non-cloning" software sometimes. I format C:
(erasing the partition boot sector), then I use Robocopy
to copy files from an archive, back onto C:. This looks
for all the world, like a C: partition. But the problem is,
Robocopy has no interest in partition boot sectors, so now
I "don't got one". To fix that, I boot my WinXP installer
CD and do "fixboot C:" or whatever drive letter the recovery
console happens to think it is. As long as you correctly
identify the partition, the partition boot sector will be
defined for you.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true

What other things prevent booting ? On WinXP, it would be
boot.ini. Using another OS, you can edit boot.ini if you want.

Let's say the original disk has C: as the third partition.
When the cloning software clones it, it's supposed to put
C: as the third partition of the new disk. Now, say something
already occupies that slot. The clone software may still
complete its job, by copying the third partition on the
original disk, to the second partition on the new disk.

When the new disk tries to boot, the boot.ini has the wrong
ARC path inside it. If you hand-edit the boot.ini, you can
change the original reference to the third partition, and
make it equal to the new second partition location.

[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOW S
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Micro soft Windows XP Professional" /noexecute=optin /fastdetect /numproc=2

My partition structure - four primary partitions are defined.

First slot = WinXP <--- this is partition(1)
Second slot = data partition
Third slot = data partition
Fourth slot = data partition

Now, if my boot.ini says "partition(2)" for some reason,
I would edit it with a text editor and change it to partition(1)
to match the partition table definitions. One way to view these
entries, is with PTEDIT32 for Windows. This removes the ambiguity
about spatial position, versus slot number (the four partition
table entries, do not have to be in spatial order - the second
partition in, can be loaded into the third slot for example - this
tool reports the slot number for each partition).

ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/englis...s/PTEDIT32.zip

While "bootcfg" exists in the recovery console, to recompute boot.ini,
I prefer to fix it manually, rather than have this command trash
something I don't have a backup copy of.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true

The list of recovery console commands is here. I had trouble
getting to this page on the first try.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true

Anyway, those are some ideas about fiddling with repair work
to get that pig booted. I think you have a driver present for
the disk, because you were able to clone the disk, and that
driver can later be used for booting the OS on the clone.
There are ways to clone a disk, without using Windows, and
if you were to do that, we'd have no proof the necessary
drivers was absolute and for sure, present and ready to go.

Paul

"Paul" <> wrote in message
news:k7ckj5$821$...
> R. Giggs. wrote:
>> "VanguardLH" <> wrote in message
>> news:k7cggt$ai6$...
>>> "R. Giggs." wrote:
>>>
>>>> OK so I cloned my drive to a SATA drive , then I remoed ny original
>>>> IDE boot drive and tried to boot with just the SATA connected.
>>>>
>>>> Problem was it did n't work, aster the POST screen it just went to
>>>> a black screen.
>>>>
>>>> I read something about drivers, maybe the computer can't boot
>>>> from a SATA drive because it has no drivers for one as it expected
>>>> and IDE one?
>>> After removing your IDE hard disk (which your BIOS could find), and
>>> during the reboot, did you go into your BIOS to reconfigure to boot from
>>> the *SATA* hard disk? Look at the boot drive load order option in your
>>> BIOS. You'll have to move SATA to the top (although it might work if
>>> it's included as any type in the list of boot devices).
>>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> First I just removed the IDE drive, I expect it to just find the SATA
>> drive and
>> boot from tat, but I just got a black screen.
>>
>> Then I powered down and went to the bios boot menu, (where there was just
>> the
>> SATA drive listed (IDE drive was disconnected) and tried to boot like
>> that but
>> the same black screen and no boot.
>>
>> Then I reconnected the IDE drive and went into the bios to a boot order
>> menu
>> the cd drive was one group then another group was the hard drives, it was
>> set
>> to boot from the IDE drive but I selected that and changed it to the SATA
>> drive. Then I reboted and it booted up OK.
>>
>> However I think it still booted from the IDE drive, not sure why I think
>> this but I do.
>> FOr starters the desktop I have is on the IDE drive, that's why I think
>> it booted from the
>> IDE drive.
>>
>>
>> So just to make sure I will remove the IDE drive (disconnect it) and try
>> and boot.
>>
>> I expect it to fail to boot. We shall see I am going to try it again.
>>
>> The whole point of doing this is to be abl to boot from the SATA drive
>> alone.
>>
>>
>> Slighly odd (to me) thing is that the IDE drive has letter I: for one
>> partition and F: for the
>> next partition, but the drive was always listed as I: when it was just a
>> blank drive.
>> I expect it's a conventionfor the first SATA drive to be I:
>>
>> Will try a reboot now on justthe SATA drive, don't expect to succeed!!!
>
> For its first boot, a cloned drive should be by itself.
> I think you're following that rule.


HI there!! Thanks, I am back on my old account and my PC running windows.

Yes I did initially try the cloned drive by itself.

>
> Because of that, I personally see no benefit to connecting
> both original and cloned drive, at the same time, and attempting
> to boot the cloned drive. This causes the very problem, that
> the "cloned drive should boot by itself the first time"
> rule is supposed to prevent.

Well I when I put both on I never really expected the SATA drive to boot
really
but I need both on to have a look at both.

>
> When the drive is cloned, you should be verifying, with
> Disk Management, that the two drives have the same
> content.


I didn't do that, mind you I never did that when I cloned previously
to that now faulty drive.

>The Disk Management should be showing the same
> partitions, something like "Healthy (Active)" for
> the cloned disk OS partition (the one with the boot
> flag set). If the new drive was completely empty for example,
> you'd want some portion of Sector 0 to get copied over, to
> support booting.


I am not sure I folow this, I have both drives now, I have drives
c: healthy (system) ntfs 60 gig
f: healthy (active) ntff 400 gig
(recovery) d: (healthy) fat32 6 gig
(recovery) i: (healthy) fat32 6 gig

basically one physical drive is c: and d: (80GB) and f: and i: (500GB)

>
> In the BIOS, it's important that the SATA and IDE drive settings,
> are selected according to the drivers already loaded in Windows.
> When you cloned the drive, there should have been a driver at
> that time, to access the SATA drive. So both an IDE and SATA driver
> must have been there. The only way to get around such a situation,
> is if you cloned with an OS other than the one that is being
> copied to both disks.
>
Well if's clone with the same system basically

> Now, say the SATA drive, freshly cloned again, was connected
> to the motherboard, and the IDE is disconnected. Now, you're
> saying "I can't boot - got black screen, flashing cursor".
> At this point, I'd boot my WinXP installer CD (if the OS was
> WinXP), and use the "recovery console". That looks like a
> MSDOS prompt when you get there.

Maybe it is, I think it was just like an underscore ie _
I never pressed return or anything like that.

I have never used my winXP installer CD before so I am unfamillilar with
this.

> When you do that, the installer
> CD loads its set of drivers, and at some point, it prompts you
> with "type a number to select the partition to log into". With
> just the one disk connected, there is only one choice here,
> and that is to select the OS on Disk 1. The installer CD will
> ask for the administrator password (as that's an excellent way
> of verifying you're attacking the correct partition). I have
> two OSes on my computer, and I see two choices in the menu,
> and the password on the two OS administrator accounts is different.
>
> Once there, doing "fixmbr" would repair the 440 bytes of
> boot code for the cloned disk. That doesn't touch the four
> primary partition slots in sector 0.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true
>
> Sector 0
> 446 bytes boot code (on Windows version, searches for boot flag)
> 64 bytes = (4) 16 byte primary partition table entries
> 2 bytes = 0xAA55 signature bytes, meaning "somebody put a valid
> MBR in sector 0". If this field is zeroed out, any OS
> looking at it, would treat the other info with extreme
> suspicion.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record
>
> When the disk was cloned, the partition table has to be set up.
> That means the 0xAA55 type signature is there. The 4x16 area
> has to be defined. But the 446 byte area, I don't know if
> there's a guarantee that gets copied. If the copied partition
> was "active", then it makes sense that the 446 bytes should be
> copied as well.
>
> In any case, if the new drive, plus a CD drive are connected,
> you boot from the CD drive using the Windows installer disc,
> log into the recovery console, and do a "fixmbr", that should
> remove all doubt.
>
> You can also use "diskpart" in the recovery console, if you
> need to list the various partitions.
>
> And the fact you could "log into" the cloned C:. proves there
> is enough OS-like info there, to convince the recovery console
> that you're actually repairing an OS partition.
>
> Now, the next command of interest, is fixboot. This is less
> likely to be needed in your case. When you format a partition,
> the partition boot sector is overwritten. When you install an
> OS, the partition boot sector is loaded. So when you installed
> Windows on C: of the original drive, a special sector near
> the front of the partition gets defined.
>
> The cloning software, upon realizing it's an OS partition,
> can copy the file system and the partition boot sector.
>
> Now, I use "non-cloning" software sometimes. I format C:
> (erasing the partition boot sector), then I use Robocopy
> to copy files from an archive, back onto C:. This looks
> for all the world, like a C: partition. But the problem is,
> Robocopy has no interest in partition boot sectors, so now
> I "don't got one". To fix that, I boot my WinXP installer
> CD and do "fixboot C:" or whatever drive letter the recovery
> console happens to think it is. As long as you correctly
> identify the partition, the partition boot sector will be
> defined for you.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true
>
> What other things prevent booting ? On WinXP, it would be
> boot.ini. Using another OS, you can edit boot.ini if you want.
>
> Let's say the original disk has C: as the third partition.
> When the cloning software clones it, it's supposed to put
> C: as the third partition of the new disk. Now, say something
> already occupies that slot. The clone software may still
> complete its job, by copying the third partition on the
> original disk, to the second partition on the new disk.
>
> When the new disk tries to boot, the boot.ini has the wrong
> ARC path inside it. If you hand-edit the boot.ini, you can
> change the original reference to the third partition, and
> make it equal to the new second partition location.
>
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOW S
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Micro soft Windows XP
> Professional" /noexecute=optin /fastdetect /numproc=2
>
> My partition structure - four primary partitions are defined.
>
> First slot = WinXP <--- this is partition(1)
> Second slot = data partition
> Third slot = data partition
> Fourth slot = data partition
>
> Now, if my boot.ini says "partition(2)" for some reason,
> I would edit it with a text editor and change it to partition(1)
> to match the partition table definitions. One way to view these
> entries, is with PTEDIT32 for Windows. This removes the ambiguity
> about spatial position, versus slot number (the four partition
> table entries, do not have to be in spatial order - the second
> partition in, can be loaded into the third slot for example - this
> tool reports the slot number for each partition).
>
> ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/englis...s/PTEDIT32.zip
>
> While "bootcfg" exists in the recovery console, to recompute boot.ini,
> I prefer to fix it manually, rather than have this command trash
> something I don't have a backup copy of.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true
>
> The list of recovery console commands is here. I had trouble
> getting to this page on the first try.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true
>
> Anyway, those are some ideas about fiddling with repair work
> to get that pig booted. I think you have a driver present for
> the disk, because you were able to clone the disk, and that
> driver can later be used for booting the OS on the clone.
> There are ways to clone a disk, without using Windows, and
> if you were to do that, we'd have no proof the necessary
> drivers was absolute and for sure, present and ready to go.
>
> Paul

Hmmmm... quite a lot of info to take in there, I am not at all sure what I
am supposed
to be doing and why.

I am not sure what I shououdl be doing here, I am trying to think.

1) I have some sort of windows XP disk
2) I have a couple of 'recovery' CD's knocking about.

I am unsure if those disks will still work in the CD drive, it's a bit hit
and miss.
I have just bought some new DVD's and none of them work, however I do have
some old DVD's which do work, ie

So I am not too sure what the best plan is now.

I guess I can try with just the sata drive in and boot on the recovery
CD/DVD
and see if it can do anything?

Anyhow I think I will try rebooting with just the sata and a recovery CD and
see
what I get, at least I will find if that works or not, and I can see what I
can do or see from there.

R. Giggs. wrote:

> Hmmmm... quite a lot of info to take in there, I am not at all sure what I
> am supposed
> to be doing and why.
>
> I am not sure what I shououdl be doing here, I am trying to think.
>
> 1) I have some sort of windows XP disk
> 2) I have a couple of 'recovery' CD's knocking about.
>
> I am unsure if those disks will still work in the CD drive, it's a bit hit
> and miss.
> I have just bought some new DVD's and none of them work, however I do have
> some old DVD's which do work, ie
>
> So I am not too sure what the best plan is now.
>
> I guess I can try with just the sata drive in and boot on the recovery
> CD/DVD
> and see if it can do anything?
>
> Anyhow I think I will try rebooting with just the sata and a recovery CD and
> see
> what I get, at least I will find if that works or not, and I can see what I
> can do or see from there.

OK, here's the deal.

Step 1: Copy old disk to new disk.
Operation is not a success, unless new disk now boots by itself,
without the old disk present.

Step 2: If you know that's going to happen (you've already demonstrated a
lack of boot, with the clone by itself), you need a safe environment
that won't upset the clone. Booting with old and new disks connected,
and selecting the new disk, doesn't count as a success. Booting with
old and new connected, and using old to boot, is roughly back to
step one. But personally, I want step 1 to be "clean", and for the
thing to boot with the other disk absent.

Step 3: The WinXP Recovery Console, is a boot system you can use, while only
the clone is connected. You have your new drive connected, as well as
an optical drive you can use for the WinXP disc. All the recent
Windows OSes have a flavor of this. And to some extent, you can even
use the other discs to do stuff. I can work on WinXP from a Windows 7
recovery console from the Windows 7 DVD. But there are a few, select
commands, that may be missing that way.

So the reason I'm suggesting that method, is booting the old disk and working
from there, we don't really know whether the clone has been affected by anything
you're doing or not. Whereas, running the recovery console, that's not
going to screw the clone up.

And my long procedure, that's example of forensic tests or repair procedures
a person could try, in an effort to try to figure out why the cloning
operation is failing. You don't have to do any of that, if you know
there is something wrong with your recipe. If you know why it's broken,
then go find another cloning method.

When I've used Partition Magic in the past, to copy an OS from one
disk to another, it changed the partition slot in the MBR, and that
screwed up the boot.ini. So that's an example of something I'd
now be looking for, based on discovering the bug in the past. If
the tool you used, has a "reputation", or reviews or a forum
where you can learn stuff about it, it may already be documented
somewhere as to why it might not work.

Paul

"Paul" <> wrote in message
news:k7cpj3$ui0$...
> R. Giggs. wrote:
>
>> Hmmmm... quite a lot of info to take in there, I am not at all sure what
>> I am supposed
>> to be doing and why.
>>
>> I am not sure what I shououdl be doing here, I am trying to think.
>>
>> 1) I have some sort of windows XP disk
>> 2) I have a couple of 'recovery' CD's knocking about.
>>
>> I am unsure if those disks will still work in the CD drive, it's a bit
>> hit and miss.
>> I have just bought some new DVD's and none of them work, however I do
>> have
>> some old DVD's which do work, ie
>>
>> So I am not too sure what the best plan is now.
>>
>> I guess I can try with just the sata drive in and boot on the recovery
>> CD/DVD
>> and see if it can do anything?
>>
>> Anyhow I think I will try rebooting with just the sata and a recovery CD
>> and see
>> what I get, at least I will find if that works or not, and I can see what
>> I can do or see from there.
>
> OK, here's the deal.
>
> Step 1: Copy old disk to new disk.
> Operation is not a success, unless new disk now boots by itself,
> without the old disk present.
>
> Step 2: If you know that's going to happen (you've already demonstrated a
> lack of boot, with the clone by itself), you need a safe
> environment
> that won't upset the clone. Booting with old and new disks
> connected,
> and selecting the new disk, doesn't count as a success. Booting
> with
> old and new connected, and using old to boot, is roughly back to
> step one. But personally, I want step 1 to be "clean", and for the
> thing to boot with the other disk absent.
>
> Step 3: The WinXP Recovery Console, is a boot system you can use, while
> only
> the clone is connected. You have your new drive connected, as well
> as
> an optical drive you can use for the WinXP disc. All the recent
> Windows OSes have a flavor of this. And to some extent, you can
> even
> use the other discs to do stuff. I can work on WinXP from a
> Windows 7
> recovery console from the Windows 7 DVD. But there are a few,
> select
> commands, that may be missing that way.
>
> So the reason I'm suggesting that method, is booting the old disk and
> working
> from there, we don't really know whether the clone has been affected by
> anything
> you're doing or not. Whereas, running the recovery console, that's not
> going to screw the clone up.
>
> And my long procedure, that's example of forensic tests or repair
> procedures
> a person could try, in an effort to try to figure out why the cloning
> operation is failing. You don't have to do any of that, if you know
> there is something wrong with your recipe. If you know why it's broken,
> then go find another cloning method.
>
> When I've used Partition Magic in the past, to copy an OS from one
> disk to another, it changed the partition slot in the MBR, and that
> screwed up the boot.ini. So that's an example of something I'd
> now be looking for, based on discovering the bug in the past. If
> the tool you used, has a "reputation", or reviews or a forum
> where you can learn stuff about it, it may already be documented
> somewhere as to why it might not work.
>
> Paul

Well, OK I have tried a few things noe of which worked unsurprisingly
however
I did learn a bit.

One thing I learned is that the windows disk I had knocking around was
actually
a windows98 disk!! Obviously that was not much good except I could perhaps
have
installed windows98, but I restisted the temptataion fairly easilly.
That 98 disk was from my old system, I have never even used it. The reason
why I have
never used it is because it is a HP system which has it's own recovery
system on it
in a seperate partition, so I am not at all familiar with using original
discs.
Indeed I have no windowsXP disk, but I do have a recovery disc for XP
which you are advised to create.

Anyhow I tried usingthe recovery disc without any success. IT gets a bit
confusing using it,
it gives you 3 options, 1) normal windows, 2 recovery console 3 ubuntu
(I had a ubuntu partion (wubi) on the machine at the time).

Anyhow it comes up with can't frin system32/hal.dll

I remember having that before, however I am not sure wwhetehr it is
lookingon the recovery CD
for it or on the hard drive, at first I thought it was lookingon the hard
drive, but now I think it
may be lookingon the CD (or DVD).

There is a hal.dll on the SATA drive I just checked.

I think it can't find the file on the recvoery CD. I just tried to explore
the
recovery CD and it locked up and the drive has disappeared off the menu so
that disc is
pretty useless.

hence I am pretty keen to egt it out of the drive, I will have to reboot to
do that as the drive
will not open.

I will do that now before I forget and is causes problems.

"R. Giggs." <> wrote in message
news:0jmms.268094$4...
>
> "Paul" <> wrote in message
> news:k7cpj3$ui0$...
>> R. Giggs. wrote:
>>
>>> Hmmmm... quite a lot of info to take in there, I am not at all sure what
>>> I am supposed
>>> to be doing and why.
>>>
>>> I am not sure what I shououdl be doing here, I am trying to think.
>>>
>>> 1) I have some sort of windows XP disk
>>> 2) I have a couple of 'recovery' CD's knocking about.
>>>
>>> I am unsure if those disks will still work in the CD drive, it's a bit
>>> hit and miss.
>>> I have just bought some new DVD's and none of them work, however I do
>>> have
>>> some old DVD's which do work, ie
>>>
>>> So I am not too sure what the best plan is now.
>>>
>>> I guess I can try with just the sata drive in and boot on the recovery
>>> CD/DVD
>>> and see if it can do anything?
>>>
>>> Anyhow I think I will try rebooting with just the sata and a recovery CD
>>> and see
>>> what I get, at least I will find if that works or not, and I can see
>>> what I can do or see from there.
>>
>> OK, here's the deal.
>>
>> Step 1: Copy old disk to new disk.
>> Operation is not a success, unless new disk now boots by itself,
>> without the old disk present.
>>
>> Step 2: If you know that's going to happen (you've already demonstrated a
>> lack of boot, with the clone by itself), you need a safe
>> environment
>> that won't upset the clone. Booting with old and new disks
>> connected,
>> and selecting the new disk, doesn't count as a success. Booting
>> with
>> old and new connected, and using old to boot, is roughly back to
>> step one. But personally, I want step 1 to be "clean", and for
>> the
>> thing to boot with the other disk absent.
>>
>> Step 3: The WinXP Recovery Console, is a boot system you can use, while
>> only
>> the clone is connected. You have your new drive connected, as
>> well as
>> an optical drive you can use for the WinXP disc. All the recent
>> Windows OSes have a flavor of this. And to some extent, you can
>> even
>> use the other discs to do stuff. I can work on WinXP from a
>> Windows 7
>> recovery console from the Windows 7 DVD. But there are a few,
>> select
>> commands, that may be missing that way.
>>
>> So the reason I'm suggesting that method, is booting the old disk and
>> working
>> from there, we don't really know whether the clone has been affected by
>> anything
>> you're doing or not. Whereas, running the recovery console, that's not
>> going to screw the clone up.
>>
>> And my long procedure, that's example of forensic tests or repair
>> procedures
>> a person could try, in an effort to try to figure out why the cloning
>> operation is failing. You don't have to do any of that, if you know
>> there is something wrong with your recipe. If you know why it's broken,
>> then go find another cloning method.
>>
>> When I've used Partition Magic in the past, to copy an OS from one
>> disk to another, it changed the partition slot in the MBR, and that
>> screwed up the boot.ini. So that's an example of something I'd
>> now be looking for, based on discovering the bug in the past. If
>> the tool you used, has a "reputation", or reviews or a forum
>> where you can learn stuff about it, it may already be documented
>> somewhere as to why it might not work.
>>
>> Paul
>
> Well, OK I have tried a few things noe of which worked unsurprisingly
> however
> I did learn a bit.
>
> One thing I learned is that the windows disk I had knocking around was
> actually
> a windows98 disk!! Obviously that was not much good except I could perhaps
> have
> installed windows98, but I restisted the temptataion fairly easilly.
> That 98 disk was from my old system, I have never even used it. The reason
> why I have
> never used it is because it is a HP system which has it's own recovery
> system on it
> in a seperate partition, so I am not at all familiar with using original
> discs.
> Indeed I have no windowsXP disk, but I do have a recovery disc for XP
> which you are advised to create.
>
> Anyhow I tried usingthe recovery disc without any success. IT gets a bit
> confusing using it,
> it gives you 3 options, 1) normal windows, 2 recovery console 3 ubuntu
> (I had a ubuntu partion (wubi) on the machine at the time).
>
> Anyhow it comes up with can't frin system32/hal.dll
>
> I remember having that before, however I am not sure wwhetehr it is
> lookingon the recovery CD
> for it or on the hard drive, at first I thought it was lookingon the hard
> drive, but now I think it
> may be lookingon the CD (or DVD).
>
> There is a hal.dll on the SATA drive I just checked.
>
> I think it can't find the file on the recvoery CD. I just tried to explore
> the
> recovery CD and it locked up and the drive has disappeared off the menu so
> that disc is
> pretty useless.
>
> hence I am pretty keen to egt it out of the drive, I will have to reboot
> to do that as the drive
> will not open.
>
> I will do that now before I forget and is causes problems.
>

Well I have rebooted and got the disk out. I am not 100% sure what happened
with the
recovery disc, I think it had problems reading itself as opposed to the hard
drive.

I have one idea that it can't read the SATA drive. The system seems to like
to call the
SATA drive i: for some reason, at least when itis connect as a slave. I
can't see what it
is called when connected as a master of course because it will not boot up.

I also have DOS drive so I think I will try and boot up on that if it still
works.

I am just wondering if there was anything else I did last time when I cloned
the drive,
however I suspect the problem may be related to it being a SATA drive.