Re: storage problem

Discussion in 'A+ Certification' started by MF, Jun 3, 2005.

  1. MF

    MF Guest

    "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    news:T0Qne.16494$...
    >
    > I'm having a strange problem with my system involving the disk drive
    > (although I'm pretty sure it's not hardware, but software).
    > The system (a laptop) is dual boot and has 4 partitions:
    > C: Windows 98 FAT32 (10 gigs)(Primary)
    > Extended DOS partition containing:
    > D: Windows XP Pro FAT32 (11 gigs)
    > E: Data Fat32 (24 gigs)
    > F: Data NTFS (10 gigs)
    >
    > The system is 3 years old and has been working fine until tonight. The
    > problem is that if I boot Windows 98, the 3 FAT32 partitions in the
    > Extended DOS partition appear very badly corrupted. In fact, Norton Disk
    > Doctor reports that the entire chain of logical drives in the extended
    > partition is corrupted, and in Windows itself, it's clear that something
    > is wrong, badly, seriously wrong (filenames are totally corrupt with
    > invalid characters).
    >
    > However, if I boot XP, both XP and any diagnostic programs that I run all
    > report everything to be fine, and indeed everything I do (including actual
    > file access) under XP looks fine.
    >
    > It's really odd, because the very same programs (Norton Disk Doctor,
    > installed separately in both OS') give totally different results depending
    > on which OS you are running them under.
    >
    > Again, this problem has developed (or I've just become aware of it)
    > tonight, the system is 3 years old.
    >
    > Anyone have any idea what could be going on here that things seem so wrong
    > under 98SE but fine under XP?


    Corruption in IFS, corruption in W98's ide drivers (iosubsystem) and
    probably several other things.

    You don't mention results if you boot to win98 DOS, or from chkdsk/scandisk,
    an a-v scan, or from system file checker. It sounds like something went
    haywire with 98, perhaps corrupted installable file system, or corrupted ide
    drivers. (If DOS reports the FAT 32 partitions correctly then it's probably
    IFS.) So the solution seems to be backing everything up with XP then
    running more diagnostics. You could try replacing the basic 98 ide driver,
    the name of which might have been ESDI_506.??? or replacing the whole
    iosubsys directory. It's in windows\system.

    But I once tried replacing various system drivers and VXDs on a hosed 98
    system, just to see if I could get the right one (s). I couldn't. So I
    just reinstalled over top of it and everything was hunky dory. So you could
    just back up everything with XP then do an inplace upgrade of 98.

    good luck.

    Mike
     
    MF, Jun 3, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. MF

    MF Guest

    well, file systems in the sense of ntfs vs. fat is not the issue, but the
    operating systems use different mechanisms to read disks and files,
    interpret what they read, and access the locations on the disk, mechanisms
    based in part on the differences in their native file systems. IFS in 98 is
    not "really" used to access the disk, it's used to overlay the DOS disk
    access mechanism with the 98 features.

    if it is a partition table issue, and one of the operating systems reads it
    correctly and one doesn't, it would seem the problem lies with the operating
    system, not the partition table. there is a possible exception to this, in
    that each file system/OS uses entries in the partition table not used by the
    others, but the likelihood of only those entries specific to win98 and the
    extended partition being corrupt while everything else is fine seems low.

    So there would be three ways to learn the cause:

    1. Find the right article (or someone who has read that article): XP will
    read my partition table, win98 won't. Symptoms/Cause/Resolution.

    2. If it's the partition table: get a disk editor and read all the entries
    in the partition table, whilst learning what each is and how it should be
    set up. Locate the errors. Thus figuring out the answer to your last
    question. But this would be difficult to near impossible, because you would
    have to know the correct entries both for generic partition tables and your
    particular one.

    3. If it's windows 98, reinstall it piece by piece till you replace the
    piece that is corrupt and 98 can once again locate your logical drives.

    Or, just get it to work: replace all from backup; re-install 98 on top of
    the current one; replace the MBR from backup with diskprobe or some other
    tool (if you have backed it up), or forget about 98 :):0.

    (as some may not know, if it is a partition table problem, fixmbr will not
    work, because it fixes the code, not the partition table.)

    OTH, as you seem to indicate, it also seems unlikely that only the partition
    table entries having to do with the extended partition are corrupt. And
    it's also unlikely that the BIOS is corrupt (98 uses it to access the drive,
    XP doesn't) because 98 can access part of the drive. as a matter of fact,
    all causes of this problem seem unlikely; leading therefore to the only
    probable conclusion: you are hallucinating.





    "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > While your suggestion makes more sense than many of the other posts, I'm
    > skeptical that this is the problem. 98 is installed on C:, a Primary DOS
    > partition, and C: is, and is seen as, working perfectly. The problem lies
    > in the structure of the extended DOS partition. The logical drives within
    > an extended DOS partiton are "daisy chained" together, and once corruption
    > occurs, all logical drives past the corrupt drive will be seen as
    > corrupted. That I understand, but what I can't understand is why 98SE is
    > seeing the extended DOS partition as structurally corrupt (making all
    > drives within it corrupt, and, indeed, the directories are grossly
    > corrupt), while XP is seeing it as just fine (and is able to access all
    > files in all 3 logical drives just fine).
    >
    > This problem is occuring at the partition table level, but what about a
    > partition table (in a relatively small drive, 60 gig) could appear so
    > corrupt to 98SE yet perfectly fine to XP? Note that the file system
    > (FAT32 and NTFS) are not even relevant here, it's the partitions
    > themselves that are the issue.
    >
    >
    >
    > MF wrote:
    >
    >> "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    >> news:T0Qne.16494$...
    >>
    >>>I'm having a strange problem with my system involving the disk drive
    >>>(although I'm pretty sure it's not hardware, but software).
    >>>The system (a laptop) is dual boot and has 4 partitions:
    >>>C: Windows 98 FAT32 (10 gigs)(Primary)
    >>>Extended DOS partition containing:
    >>>D: Windows XP Pro FAT32 (11 gigs)
    >>>E: Data Fat32 (24 gigs)
    >>>F: Data NTFS (10 gigs)
    >>>
    >>>The system is 3 years old and has been working fine until tonight. The
    >>>problem is that if I boot Windows 98, the 3 FAT32 partitions in the
    >>>Extended DOS partition appear very badly corrupted. In fact, Norton Disk
    >>>Doctor reports that the entire chain of logical drives in the extended
    >>>partition is corrupted, and in Windows itself, it's clear that something
    >>>is wrong, badly, seriously wrong (filenames are totally corrupt with
    >>>invalid characters).
    >>>
    >>>However, if I boot XP, both XP and any diagnostic programs that I run all
    >>>report everything to be fine, and indeed everything I do (including
    >>>actual file access) under XP looks fine.
    >>>
    >>>It's really odd, because the very same programs (Norton Disk Doctor,
    >>>installed separately in both OS') give totally different results
    >>>depending on which OS you are running them under.
    >>>
    >>>Again, this problem has developed (or I've just become aware of it)
    >>>tonight, the system is 3 years old.
    >>>
    >>>Anyone have any idea what could be going on here that things seem so
    >>>wrong under 98SE but fine under XP?

    >>
    >>
    >> Corruption in IFS, corruption in W98's ide drivers (iosubsystem) and
    >> probably several other things.
    >>
    >> You don't mention results if you boot to win98 DOS, or from
    >> chkdsk/scandisk, an a-v scan, or from system file checker. It sounds
    >> like something went haywire with 98, perhaps corrupted installable file
    >> system, or corrupted ide drivers. (If DOS reports the FAT 32 partitions
    >> correctly then it's probably IFS.) So the solution seems to be backing
    >> everything up with XP then running more diagnostics. You could try
    >> replacing the basic 98 ide driver, the name of which might have been
    >> ESDI_506.??? or replacing the whole iosubsys directory. It's in
    >> windows\system.
    >>
    >> But I once tried replacing various system drivers and VXDs on a hosed 98
    >> system, just to see if I could get the right one (s). I couldn't. So I
    >> just reinstalled over top of it and everything was hunky dory. So you
    >> could just back up everything with XP then do an inplace upgrade of 98.
    >>
    >> good luck.
    >>
    >> Mike
     
    MF, Jun 4, 2005
    #2
    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. Arawak
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,276
    Arawak
    Aug 20, 2003
  2. Lando Chez

    PCI Mass Storage Controller problem

    Lando Chez, Oct 9, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,226
  3. =?Utf-8?B?SWduYXRpdXM=?=

    How to access the external storage unit of storage router

    =?Utf-8?B?SWduYXRpdXM=?=, Nov 5, 2006, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    919
    =?Utf-8?B?SWduYXRpdXM=?=
    Nov 6, 2006
  4. =?Utf-8?B?Sm9obiBDb25uZXR0?=

    Windows 2008 / Matrix Storage / RAID-5 Problem?

    =?Utf-8?B?Sm9obiBDb25uZXR0?=, Jul 13, 2007, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,288
    John Barnes
    Jul 13, 2007
  5. John
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,504
    Alexander Rogge
    Mar 17, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page