DOS LABEL utility?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Robert Baer, Jan 1, 2013.

  1. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    The baby bird (Goo-gull) is of no help; i am trying to find a
    -->DOS<-- utility (_not_ a Windoze version) for labeling drive volumes.

    Help?
    Robert Baer, Jan 1, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Baer

    Paul Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > The baby bird (Goo-gull) is of no help; i am trying to find a
    > -->DOS<-- utility (_not_ a Windoze version) for labeling drive volumes.
    >
    > Help?


    See the "label" command here.

    http://www.vfrazee.com/ms-dos/6.22/help/

    Paul
    Paul, Jan 1, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >> The baby bird (Goo-gull) is of no help; i am trying to find a
    >> -->DOS<-- utility (_not_ a Windoze version) for labeling drive volumes.
    >>
    >> Help?

    >
    > See the "label" command here.
    >
    > http://www.vfrazee.com/ms-dos/6.22/help/
    >
    > Paul

    Yeah; that is the typical useless kind of stuff i found with the baby
    bird.
    I want the PROGRAM!
    I have 6.22 and Label does not work.
    Problem: Acronis makes a clone of my HD and screws up a few items -
    1) 3rd partition tag is altered from FAT16B (hex06) to FAT16X (hex0E)
    which is unreadable by even adults or computers (Z-rated).
    2) After patching the byte,i find that the volume labels have been
    trashed; the DOS6.22 LABEL does not fix that.

    Now here is where it gets squirrel-lee - PCDOS7.0 reports the garbage
    names on this copy as mentioned BUT DOS6.22, Win98SE, and Win2K all
    report original names and the LABEL command for them does not fix the
    problem.
    Remember, the ORIGINAL HD does _NOT_ have this label name problem!

    That is why i am getting desperate for a fix.
    *
    Is there a good or excellent "generic" HD analysis and fix program
    that would repair partition size and alignment problems, as well as (for
    FAT volumes) ensure the label is located properly at the start of the
    cluster chain (which would require moving things and altering the FAT in
    a corresponding manner)?
    I think that would be the way to go.
    Robert Baer, Jan 1, 2013
    #3
  4. Robert Baer

    Paul Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > Paul wrote:
    >> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>> The baby bird (Goo-gull) is of no help; i am trying to find a
    >>> -->DOS<-- utility (_not_ a Windoze version) for labeling drive volumes.
    >>>
    >>> Help?

    >>
    >> See the "label" command here.
    >>
    >> http://www.vfrazee.com/ms-dos/6.22/help/
    >>
    >> Paul

    > Yeah; that is the typical useless kind of stuff i found with the baby
    > bird.
    > I want the PROGRAM!
    > I have 6.22 and Label does not work.
    > Problem: Acronis makes a clone of my HD and screws up a few items -
    > 1) 3rd partition tag is altered from FAT16B (hex06) to FAT16X (hex0E)
    > which is unreadable by even adults or computers (Z-rated).
    > 2) After patching the byte,i find that the volume labels have been
    > trashed; the DOS6.22 LABEL does not fix that.
    >
    > Now here is where it gets squirrel-lee - PCDOS7.0 reports the garbage
    > names on this copy as mentioned BUT DOS6.22, Win98SE, and Win2K all
    > report original names and the LABEL command for them does not fix the
    > problem.
    > Remember, the ORIGINAL HD does _NOT_ have this label name problem!
    >
    > That is why i am getting desperate for a fix.
    > *
    > Is there a good or excellent "generic" HD analysis and fix program
    > that would repair partition size and alignment problems, as well as (for
    > FAT volumes) ensure the label is located properly at the start of the
    > cluster chain (which would require moving things and altering the FAT in
    > a corresponding manner)?
    > I think that would be the way to go.


    I'd probably try my old copy of Powerquest Partition Magic and see
    if it can copy the partition properly.

    I doubt the Linux GParted would do a good job. I've had enough
    trouble getting good labels out of that. I can't figure out
    why sometimes the labels are OK, and sometimes not.

    I would not expect a modern utility, to deal with older
    partitions properly. They'd be an after-thought for the
    software designers.

    There are other, free partition manager programs out there,
    but like anything, you do the testing. I like to test some
    of that stuff in a virtual machine, for safety (so I can
    continue to do other things, while torturing a virtual disk).

    If you wanted to pull a physical disk, into a VHD for usage
    inside a virtual machine, you could try this freebie. VHD should be
    supported on a few different virtual machine environments. And
    then, you're not dropping the machine entirely to DOS,
    to see "hows it going". Your "mess" is in a window, and
    you can continue to do other things while an attempted clone
    is running. A virtual machine can allow you to have at
    least three virtual disks (like a src, dest, and OS disk image).
    And that's how I tested my last partition maneger, was using
    a virtual machine.

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/ee656415

    This is me testing Macrium Reflect, in a Windows 7 environment,
    all inside a virtual machine. It allows me to take screenshots
    and make a documentary. (Click with your mouse to zoom in.)

    http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/4512/macriumrestore.gif

    Paul
    Paul, Jan 1, 2013
    #4
  5. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >> Paul wrote:
    >>> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>>> The baby bird (Goo-gull) is of no help; i am trying to find a
    >>>> -->DOS<-- utility (_not_ a Windoze version) for labeling drive volumes.
    >>>>
    >>>> Help?
    >>>
    >>> See the "label" command here.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.vfrazee.com/ms-dos/6.22/help/
    >>>
    >>> Paul

    >> Yeah; that is the typical useless kind of stuff i found with the baby
    >> bird.
    >> I want the PROGRAM!
    >> I have 6.22 and Label does not work.
    >> Problem: Acronis makes a clone of my HD and screws up a few items -
    >> 1) 3rd partition tag is altered from FAT16B (hex06) to FAT16X (hex0E)
    >> which is unreadable by even adults or computers (Z-rated).
    >> 2) After patching the byte,i find that the volume labels have been
    >> trashed; the DOS6.22 LABEL does not fix that.
    >>
    >> Now here is where it gets squirrel-lee - PCDOS7.0 reports the garbage
    >> names on this copy as mentioned BUT DOS6.22, Win98SE, and Win2K all
    >> report original names and the LABEL command for them does not fix the
    >> problem.
    >> Remember, the ORIGINAL HD does _NOT_ have this label name problem!
    >>
    >> That is why i am getting desperate for a fix.
    >> *
    >> Is there a good or excellent "generic" HD analysis and fix program
    >> that would repair partition size and alignment problems, as well as
    >> (for FAT volumes) ensure the label is located properly at the start of
    >> the cluster chain (which would require moving things and altering the
    >> FAT in a corresponding manner)?
    >> I think that would be the way to go.

    >
    > I'd probably try my old copy of Powerquest Partition Magic and see
    > if it can copy the partition properly.
    >
    > I doubt the Linux GParted would do a good job. I've had enough
    > trouble getting good labels out of that. I can't figure out
    > why sometimes the labels are OK, and sometimes not.
    >
    > I would not expect a modern utility, to deal with older
    > partitions properly. They'd be an after-thought for the
    > software designers.
    >
    > There are other, free partition manager programs out there,
    > but like anything, you do the testing. I like to test some
    > of that stuff in a virtual machine, for safety (so I can
    > continue to do other things, while torturing a virtual disk).
    >
    > If you wanted to pull a physical disk, into a VHD for usage
    > inside a virtual machine, you could try this freebie. VHD should be
    > supported on a few different virtual machine environments. And
    > then, you're not dropping the machine entirely to DOS,
    > to see "hows it going". Your "mess" is in a window, and
    > you can continue to do other things while an attempted clone
    > is running. A virtual machine can allow you to have at
    > least three virtual disks (like a src, dest, and OS disk image).
    > And that's how I tested my last partition maneger, was using
    > a virtual machine.
    >
    > http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/ee656415
    >
    > This is me testing Macrium Reflect, in a Windows 7 environment,
    > all inside a virtual machine. It allows me to take screenshots
    > and make a documentary. (Click with your mouse to zoom in.)
    >
    > http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/4512/macriumrestore.gif
    >
    > Paul

    I did not know that PM could make a copy; i used GhostPE for the copy
    and fixed the "FS" partition type byte (hex0E to hex06).
    Did not use Acronis because it screws up the labels as well.

    In any event, for both the source and destination, PartInfo gave the
    following info; the cyl=1022 was the error, so the pointers for the NTFS
    volume overlapped desired space for partition 3 (80 cols wide):

    Disk 0: 4865 Cylinders, 255 Heads, 63 Sectors/Track.
    ========================== Partition Tables =========================
    Partition -----Begin---- ------End----- Start Num
    Sector # Boot Cyl Head Sect FS Cyl Head Sect Sect Sects
    --------- - ---- ---- ---- ---- -- ---- ---- ---- --------- ---------
    0 0 80 0 1 1 06 260 254 63 63 4192902
    0 1 00 261 0 1 05 782 254 63 4192965 8385930
    0 2 00 783 0 1 06 1022* 254 63 12578895 4192965
    Error #110: Number of sectors in partition is inconsistent.
    ucSectors = 4192965 end - begin = 3855600
    0 3 00 1023 0 1 07 1023 254 63 16771860 45062325
    Info: Begin C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    Actual values are: *Note: PartitionMagic reports correct cyl 1043
    0 3 00 1044 0 1 07 3848 254 63 16771860 45062325
    4192965 0 00 261 1 1 06 521 254 63 4193028 4192902
    4192965 1 00 522 0 1 05 782 254 63 8385930 4192965
    8385930 0 00 522 1 1 06 782 254 63 8385993 4192902
    ============================ Partition Information
    ===========================
    Volume Partition Partition Start
    Total
    Letter:Label Type Status Size MB Sector # Sector
    Sectors
    ------------- --------------- -------- ------- --------- - ---------
    ---------
    C:WIN98SE FAT16B Pri,Boot 2047.3 0 0 63
    4192902
    Extended Pri 4094.7 0 1 4192965
    8385930
    EPBR Log 2047.3 None - 4192965
    4192965
    D:WORK FAT16B Log 2047.3 4192965 0 4193028
    4192902
    EPBR Log 2047.3 4192965 1 8385930
    4192965
    E:DEVEL FAT16B Log 2047.3 8385930 0 8385993
    4192902
    F:MASTER FAT16B Pri 2047.3 0 2 12578895
    4192965
    NTFS Pri 22003.1 0 3 16771860
    45062325
    Free Space Pri 7969.7 None - 61834185
    16322040
    *****
    What i did was use PM to move the NTFS volume "up" enough to have
    zero overlap. Right after the move, PM showed a 337.3Meg unpartioned gap.
    Reboot and PM reported all perfectly OK, BUT PartInfo data did not
    change at all(!).
    PM and CheckDisk reports no problems.

    This is driving me nuts!

    My next step is to see what GhostPE will do when i copy from this
    fixed copy..
    Robert Baer, Jan 2, 2013
    #5
  6. Robert Baer

    meagain Guest


    >> I'd probably try my old copy of Powerquest Partition Magic and see
    >> if it can copy the partition properly.
    >>
    >> I doubt the Linux GParted would do a good job. I've had enough
    >> trouble getting good labels out of that. I can't figure out
    >> why sometimes the labels are OK, and sometimes not.
    >>
    >> I would not expect a modern utility, to deal with older
    >> partitions properly. They'd be an after-thought for the
    >> software designers.
    >>
    >> There are other, free partition manager programs out there,
    >> but like anything, you do the testing. I like to test some
    >> of that stuff in a virtual machine, for safety (so I can
    >> continue to do other things, while torturing a virtual disk).
    >>
    >> If you wanted to pull a physical disk, into a VHD for usage
    >> inside a virtual machine, you could try this freebie. VHD should be
    >> supported on a few different virtual machine environments. And
    >> then, you're not dropping the machine entirely to DOS,
    >> to see "hows it going". Your "mess" is in a window, and
    >> you can continue to do other things while an attempted clone
    >> is running. A virtual machine can allow you to have at
    >> least three virtual disks (like a src, dest, and OS disk image).
    >> And that's how I tested my last partition maneger, was using
    >> a virtual machine.
    >>
    >> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/ee656415
    >>
    >> This is me testing Macrium Reflect, in a Windows 7 environment,
    >> all inside a virtual machine. It allows me to take screenshots
    >> and make a documentary. (Click with your mouse to zoom in.)
    >>
    >> http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/4512/macriumrestore.gif


    If it were me, I would Follow Paul's advice.
    meagain, Jan 2, 2013
    #6
  7. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    meagain wrote:
    >
    >>> I'd probably try my old copy of Powerquest Partition Magic and see
    >>> if it can copy the partition properly.
    >>>
    >>> I doubt the Linux GParted would do a good job. I've had enough
    >>> trouble getting good labels out of that. I can't figure out
    >>> why sometimes the labels are OK, and sometimes not.
    >>>
    >>> I would not expect a modern utility, to deal with older
    >>> partitions properly. They'd be an after-thought for the
    >>> software designers.
    >>>
    >>> There are other, free partition manager programs out there,
    >>> but like anything, you do the testing. I like to test some
    >>> of that stuff in a virtual machine, for safety (so I can
    >>> continue to do other things, while torturing a virtual disk).
    >>>
    >>> If you wanted to pull a physical disk, into a VHD for usage
    >>> inside a virtual machine, you could try this freebie. VHD should be
    >>> supported on a few different virtual machine environments. And
    >>> then, you're not dropping the machine entirely to DOS,
    >>> to see "hows it going". Your "mess" is in a window, and
    >>> you can continue to do other things while an attempted clone
    >>> is running. A virtual machine can allow you to have at
    >>> least three virtual disks (like a src, dest, and OS disk image).
    >>> And that's how I tested my last partition maneger, was using
    >>> a virtual machine.
    >>>
    >>> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/ee656415
    >>>
    >>> This is me testing Macrium Reflect, in a Windows 7 environment,
    >>> all inside a virtual machine. It allows me to take screenshots
    >>> and make a documentary. (Click with your mouse to zoom in.)
    >>>
    >>> http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/4512/macriumrestore.gif

    >
    > If it were me, I would Follow Paul's advice.
    >

    Looked at the blurb for Disk2vhd, seems to imply that the "cloud" is
    used (which i DEFINITELY do not want).
    Also implies that another HD/drivespace is necessary.
    I see no "advantage" other than being able to do other business at
    "the same time".
    To much hassle for no real benefits for me.
    Besides,i run DOS, Win3.11, Win98SE and Win2K and not "XP or better".
    Robert Baer, Jan 2, 2013
    #7
  8. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > Paul wrote:
    >> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>> Paul wrote:
    >>>> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>>>> The baby bird (Goo-gull) is of no help; i am trying to find a
    >>>>> -->DOS<-- utility (_not_ a Windoze version) for labeling drive
    >>>>> volumes.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Help?
    >>>>
    >>>> See the "label" command here.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.vfrazee.com/ms-dos/6.22/help/
    >>>>
    >>>> Paul
    >>> Yeah; that is the typical useless kind of stuff i found with the baby
    >>> bird.
    >>> I want the PROGRAM!
    >>> I have 6.22 and Label does not work.
    >>> Problem: Acronis makes a clone of my HD and screws up a few items -
    >>> 1) 3rd partition tag is altered from FAT16B (hex06) to FAT16X (hex0E)
    >>> which is unreadable by even adults or computers (Z-rated).
    >>> 2) After patching the byte,i find that the volume labels have been
    >>> trashed; the DOS6.22 LABEL does not fix that.
    >>>
    >>> Now here is where it gets squirrel-lee - PCDOS7.0 reports the garbage
    >>> names on this copy as mentioned BUT DOS6.22, Win98SE, and Win2K all
    >>> report original names and the LABEL command for them does not fix the
    >>> problem.
    >>> Remember, the ORIGINAL HD does _NOT_ have this label name problem!

    ** snipped **
    >

    Tried something a bit different.
    I _THINK_ i have a decent drive now.
    Notice i am refusing to use Acronis because it creates a garbage drive.
    Please look at the following info and make liberal comments (80
    column format).

    Drive: "SCRATCH" made by:
    Ghostpe from "COPY", Drivecopy partition 2, Ptedit * placeholders to 1023
    ========================== Partition Tables =========================
    Partition -----Begin---- ------End----- Start Num
    Sector # Boot Cyl Head Sect FS Cyl Head Sect Sect Sects
    --------- - ---- ---- ---- ---- -- ---- ---- ---- --------- ---------
    0 0 80 0 1 1 06 260 254 63 63 4192902
    0 1 00 261 0 1 05 782 254 63 4192965 8385930
    0 2 00 783 0 1 06 1023* 254 63 12578895 4192965
    Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    Actual values are:
    0 2 00 783 0 1 06 1043 254 63 12578895 4192965
    0 3 00 1023* 0 1 07 1023* 254 63 16771860 45062325
    Info: Begin C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    Actual values are:
    0 3 00 1044 0 1 07 3848 254 63 16771860 45062325
    4192965 0 00 261 1 1 06 521 254 63 4193028 4192902
    4192965 1 00 522 0 1 05 782 254 63 8385930 4192965
    8385930 0 00 522 1 1 06 782 254 63 8385993 4192902
    ============================ Partition Information
    ===========================
    Volume Partition Partition Start
    Total
    Letter:Label Type Status Size MB Sector # Sector
    Sectors
    ------------- --------------- -------- ------- --------- - ---------
    ---------
    C:WIN98SE FAT16B Pri,Boot 2047.3 0 0 63
    4192902
    Extended Pri 4094.7 0 1 4192965
    8385930
    EPBR Log 2047.3 None - 4192965
    4192965
    E:WORK FAT16B Log 2047.3 4192965 0 4193028
    4192902
    EPBR Log 2047.3 4192965 1 8385930
    4192965
    F:DEVEL FAT16B Log 2047.3 8385930 0 8385993
    4192902
    I:MASTER FAT16B Pri 2047.3 0 2 12578895
    4192965
    NTFS Pri 22003.1 0 3 16771860
    45062325
    Free Space Pri 7969.7 None - 61834185
    16322040
    Robert Baer, Jan 2, 2013
    #8
  9. Robert Baer

    Paul Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > meagain wrote:
    >>
    >>>> I'd probably try my old copy of Powerquest Partition Magic and see
    >>>> if it can copy the partition properly.
    >>>>
    >>>> I doubt the Linux GParted would do a good job. I've had enough
    >>>> trouble getting good labels out of that. I can't figure out
    >>>> why sometimes the labels are OK, and sometimes not.
    >>>>
    >>>> I would not expect a modern utility, to deal with older
    >>>> partitions properly. They'd be an after-thought for the
    >>>> software designers.
    >>>>
    >>>> There are other, free partition manager programs out there,
    >>>> but like anything, you do the testing. I like to test some
    >>>> of that stuff in a virtual machine, for safety (so I can
    >>>> continue to do other things, while torturing a virtual disk).
    >>>>
    >>>> If you wanted to pull a physical disk, into a VHD for usage
    >>>> inside a virtual machine, you could try this freebie. VHD should be
    >>>> supported on a few different virtual machine environments. And
    >>>> then, you're not dropping the machine entirely to DOS,
    >>>> to see "hows it going". Your "mess" is in a window, and
    >>>> you can continue to do other things while an attempted clone
    >>>> is running. A virtual machine can allow you to have at
    >>>> least three virtual disks (like a src, dest, and OS disk image).
    >>>> And that's how I tested my last partition maneger, was using
    >>>> a virtual machine.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/ee656415
    >>>>
    >>>> This is me testing Macrium Reflect, in a Windows 7 environment,
    >>>> all inside a virtual machine. It allows me to take screenshots
    >>>> and make a documentary. (Click with your mouse to zoom in.)
    >>>>
    >>>> http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/4512/macriumrestore.gif

    >>
    >> If it were me, I would Follow Paul's advice.
    >>

    > Looked at the blurb for Disk2vhd, seems to imply that the "cloud" is
    > used (which i DEFINITELY do not want).
    > Also implies that another HD/drivespace is necessary.
    > I see no "advantage" other than being able to do other business at
    > "the same time".
    > To much hassle for no real benefits for me.
    > Besides,i run DOS, Win3.11, Win98SE and Win2K and not "XP or better".


    NOT CORRECT.

    Disk2vhd, converts the information on a hard drive, into a VHD file.
    Such a file is a representation of a hard drive, that you can load
    in things like VirtualBox or VPC2007 or other kinds of virtual machine
    software.

    It allows you to experiment and run a second OS, while your regular OS
    continues to run.

    For example, I could install MSDOS in a virtual machine, bring over
    my hard drive image to the virtual machine, and carry out an experiment
    in that window, all the while reading Foxnews with my regular web browser
    in my regular OS.

    NOTHING is copied to the Internet. It all stays on your machine.

    As far as the mechanics of the operation go, it is very similar to
    running Macrium Reflect or Acronis and having them "make an image" of
    a hard drive. The VSS service can be used for the operation. And only
    the busy sectors are copied from the hard drive source, to the .vhd
    file target. Just like Macrium would do, when it makes a backup. The
    advantage is, .vhd files are a pseudo-standard, whereas other forms
    of backup software use formats that aren't good for much else. At
    least the .vhd file, you can mount it in Windows 7 or Windows 8, or
    even with some downloaded software, mount the image on a WinXP machine
    (a bit flaky, but some people get it to work).

    Paul
    Paul, Jan 2, 2013
    #9
  10. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >> meagain wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> I'd probably try my old copy of Powerquest Partition Magic and see
    >>>>> if it can copy the partition properly.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I doubt the Linux GParted would do a good job. I've had enough
    >>>>> trouble getting good labels out of that. I can't figure out
    >>>>> why sometimes the labels are OK, and sometimes not.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I would not expect a modern utility, to deal with older
    >>>>> partitions properly. They'd be an after-thought for the
    >>>>> software designers.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> There are other, free partition manager programs out there,
    >>>>> but like anything, you do the testing. I like to test some
    >>>>> of that stuff in a virtual machine, for safety (so I can
    >>>>> continue to do other things, while torturing a virtual disk).
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If you wanted to pull a physical disk, into a VHD for usage
    >>>>> inside a virtual machine, you could try this freebie. VHD should be
    >>>>> supported on a few different virtual machine environments. And
    >>>>> then, you're not dropping the machine entirely to DOS,
    >>>>> to see "hows it going". Your "mess" is in a window, and
    >>>>> you can continue to do other things while an attempted clone
    >>>>> is running. A virtual machine can allow you to have at
    >>>>> least three virtual disks (like a src, dest, and OS disk image).
    >>>>> And that's how I tested my last partition maneger, was using
    >>>>> a virtual machine.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/ee656415
    >>>>>
    >>>>> This is me testing Macrium Reflect, in a Windows 7 environment,
    >>>>> all inside a virtual machine. It allows me to take screenshots
    >>>>> and make a documentary. (Click with your mouse to zoom in.)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/4512/macriumrestore.gif
    >>>
    >>> If it were me, I would Follow Paul's advice.
    >>>

    >> Looked at the blurb for Disk2vhd, seems to imply that the "cloud" is
    >> used (which i DEFINITELY do not want).
    >> Also implies that another HD/drivespace is necessary.
    >> I see no "advantage" other than being able to do other business at
    >> "the same time".
    >> To much hassle for no real benefits for me.
    >> Besides,i run DOS, Win3.11, Win98SE and Win2K and not "XP or better".

    >
    > NOT CORRECT.
    >
    > Disk2vhd, converts the information on a hard drive, into a VHD file.
    > Such a file is a representation of a hard drive, that you can load
    > in things like VirtualBox or VPC2007 or other kinds of virtual machine
    > software.
    >
    > It allows you to experiment and run a second OS, while your regular OS
    > continues to run.
    >
    > For example, I could install MSDOS in a virtual machine, bring over
    > my hard drive image to the virtual machine, and carry out an experiment
    > in that window, all the while reading Foxnews with my regular web browser
    > in my regular OS.
    >
    > NOTHING is copied to the Internet. It all stays on your machine.
    >
    > As far as the mechanics of the operation go, it is very similar to
    > running Macrium Reflect or Acronis and having them "make an image" of
    > a hard drive. The VSS service can be used for the operation. And only
    > the busy sectors are copied from the hard drive source, to the .vhd
    > file target. Just like Macrium would do, when it makes a backup. The
    > advantage is, .vhd files are a pseudo-standard, whereas other forms
    > of backup software use formats that aren't good for much else. At
    > least the .vhd file, you can mount it in Windows 7 or Windows 8, or
    > even with some downloaded software, mount the image on a WinXP machine
    > (a bit flaky, but some people get it to work).
    >
    > Paul

    Well, one MUST have more than sufficient HD space for the program and
    emulation; they strongly suggest using a different drive than those you
    want to work with.
    In any case like i said, the "benefit" of doing two or more things at
    once is not worth the hassle for me (the HD that has WIN7 on it has 2
    copies plus Win2K and not much extra space due to the piggishness of Win7).
    **
    Does that Partinfo map of my latest attempt look kosher?
    Robert Baer, Jan 3, 2013
    #10
  11. Robert Baer

    Paul Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >> Paul wrote:
    >>> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>>> Paul wrote:
    >>>>> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>>>>> The baby bird (Goo-gull) is of no help; i am trying to find a
    >>>>>> -->DOS<-- utility (_not_ a Windoze version) for labeling drive
    >>>>>> volumes.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Help?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> See the "label" command here.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://www.vfrazee.com/ms-dos/6.22/help/
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Paul
    >>>> Yeah; that is the typical useless kind of stuff i found with the baby
    >>>> bird.
    >>>> I want the PROGRAM!
    >>>> I have 6.22 and Label does not work.
    >>>> Problem: Acronis makes a clone of my HD and screws up a few items -
    >>>> 1) 3rd partition tag is altered from FAT16B (hex06) to FAT16X (hex0E)
    >>>> which is unreadable by even adults or computers (Z-rated).
    >>>> 2) After patching the byte,i find that the volume labels have been
    >>>> trashed; the DOS6.22 LABEL does not fix that.
    >>>>
    >>>> Now here is where it gets squirrel-lee - PCDOS7.0 reports the garbage
    >>>> names on this copy as mentioned BUT DOS6.22, Win98SE, and Win2K all
    >>>> report original names and the LABEL command for them does not fix the
    >>>> problem.
    >>>> Remember, the ORIGINAL HD does _NOT_ have this label name problem!

    > ** snipped **
    >>

    > Tried something a bit different.
    > I _THINK_ i have a decent drive now.
    > Notice i am refusing to use Acronis because it creates a garbage drive.
    > Please look at the following info and make liberal comments (80 column
    > format).
    >
    > Drive: "SCRATCH" made by:
    > Ghostpe from "COPY", Drivecopy partition 2, Ptedit * placeholders to 1023
    > ========================== Partition Tables =========================
    > Partition -----Begin---- ------End----- Start Num
    > Sector # Boot Cyl Head Sect FS Cyl Head Sect Sect Sects
    > --------- - ---- ---- ---- ---- -- ---- ---- ---- --------- ---------
    > 0 0 80 0 1 1 06 260 254 63 63 4192902
    > 0 1 00 261 0 1 05 782 254 63 4192965 8385930
    > 0 2 00 783 0 1 06 1023* 254 63 12578895 4192965
    > Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    > Actual values are:
    > 0 2 00 783 0 1 06 1043 254 63 12578895 4192965
    > 0 3 00 1023* 0 1 07 1023* 254 63 16771860 45062325
    > Info: Begin C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    > Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
    > Actual values are:
    > 0 3 00 1044 0 1 07 3848 254 63 16771860 45062325
    > 4192965 0 00 261 1 1 06 521 254 63 4193028 4192902
    > 4192965 1 00 522 0 1 05 782 254 63 8385930 4192965
    > 8385930 0 00 522 1 1 06 782 254 63 8385993 4192902
    > ========================== Partition Tables =========================
    > Volume Partition Partition Start Total
    > Letter:Label Type Status Size MB Sector # Sector Sectors
    > ------------ ---------- -------- ------- --------- - -------- -------
    > C:WIN98SE FAT16B Pri,Boot 2047.3 0 0 63 4192902
    > Extended Pri 4094.7 0 1 4192965 8385930
    > EPBR Log 2047.3 None - 4192965 4192965
    > E:WORK FAT16B Log 2047.3 4192965 0 4193028 4192902
    > EPBR Log 2047.3 4192965 1 8385930 4192965
    > F:DEVEL FAT16B Log 2047.3 8385930 0 8385993 4192902
    > I:MASTER FAT16B Pri 2047.3 0 2 12578895 4192965
    > NTFS Pri 22003.1 0 3 16771860 45062325
    > Free Space Pri 7969.7 None - 61834185 16322040


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Partition_Boot_Record
    http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types-1.html

    I can only piece a bit of it together. Apparently there are logical
    partitions involved, and the EPBR is supposed to hint at that. And
    the EPBRs form a linked list. That accounts for there being more partitions
    than there is room for primary partitions in the MBR.

    The only bit that doesn't seem reasonable to a casual glance, is these lines.

    > 4192965 1 00 522 0 1 05 782 254 63 8385930 4192965
    > 8385930 0 00 522 1 1 06 782 254 63 8385993 4192902


    Almost like they overlap. I guess the 05 is the actual EPBR (declaration
    of logical), and the line below it is the partition inside ? Maybe
    that's OK then.

    Paul
    Paul, Jan 3, 2013
    #11
  12. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > EPBR Log 2047.3 None - 4192965 4192965
    > E:WORK FAT16B Log 2047.3 4192965 0 4193028 4192902

    I see what you mean; the partition label (2nd) list shows the above,
    while the partition detail (1st) list shows:
    4192965 1 00 522 0 1 05 782 254 63 8385930 4192965
    8385930 0 00 522 1 1 06 782 254 63 8385993 4192902 .
    I note that the EPBR in the first list has the same start and end
    values, so i consider that as a marker for logical drive E(WORK).
    The E:WORK starts at 4192965 and the F:DEVEL starts at 8385930; both
    are logical drives "inside" the extended section.
    I see this EPBR "marker" right before each logical drive.
    Type 05hex is EPBR and type 06hex is FAT16B; FDISK shows the primary
    partition with the extended partition right before I:MASTER, exactly
    what i wanted.
    Then it prompts if you want to see the logical drives; if yes then
    WORK and DEVEL are shown.

    The apparent overlap is from what i am calling a "marker" (first
    line) for the extended partition.

    So it all seems OK.
    *
    However, GhostPE calls them "noname" for copying; i will not talk
    about Acronis; it is so bad i am going to ask for my money back and
    trash the files and CD i had made (trash for the trash).
    Robert Baer, Jan 3, 2013
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?UmFuaSBQb25tYXRoaQ==?=

    Display superscript and subscript text in a label

    =?Utf-8?B?UmFuaSBQb25tYXRoaQ==?=, Apr 14, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,278
    Marlin Munrow
    Apr 14, 2004
  2. Arun
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    912
  3. Don
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,045
    °Mike°
    Feb 11, 2004
  4. Keyser Soze

    Utility to slow down older dos programs?

    Keyser Soze, Apr 11, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    8,730
  5. Igor Mamuziæ

    IOS DoS defense causes DoS to itself:)

    Igor Mamuziæ, May 12, 2006, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    534
    Igor Mamuzic
    May 20, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page