Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

mbr for 40G harddrive?

Tags:
  • Hardware
  • Storage
  • Hard Drives
  • IBM
Last response: in Storage
Share
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 12, 2005 9:01:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Is there anywhere to get an mbr for a 40G hard drive using win98? (besides
getting another one and setting it up).

More about : mbr 40g harddrive

Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 13, 2005 12:04:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote in
message news:D 60g8902p48@news2.newsguy.com...

> Is there anywhere to get an mbr for a 40G hard drive using win98?

They arent that specific to the size of the drive.

> (besides getting another one and setting it up).

If you dont care about losing the data on the drive, wipe the
existing boot sector with something like clearhdd and win98
will recreate it when you partition it and format it.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 13, 2005 12:50:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

fdisk /mbr will restore your original MBR.

Regards,
Yaroslav.
www.datarecoveryindex.com
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 13, 2005 1:58:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Is there anywhere to get an mbr for a 40G hard drive using win98? (besides
> getting another one and setting it up).

Please state the purpose you need that MBR for. If to recover a drive that lost
its partition table or self boot ability, then the answer is yes, there is.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 13, 2005 1:58:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out the
old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G drive
(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)

Thanks,

Ben

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:boj8815ivta7mhqel01k7uj3s150ih7bm3@4ax.com...
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Is there anywhere to get an mbr for a 40G hard drive using win98?
(besides
> > getting another one and setting it up).
>
> Please state the purpose you need that MBR for. If to recover a drive
that lost
> its partition table or self boot ability, then the answer is yes, there
is.
>
> Regards, Zvi
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
May 13, 2005 3:42:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Fri, 13 May 2005 04:15:30 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
>getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out the
>old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
>etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G drive
>(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)

Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
partition.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 13, 2005 3:54:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Clueless. He trashed his partition table by copying it from a smaller drive.

The OP should zero the bad MBR and run data recovery software.

<shkvorets@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115999441.353693.247670@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> fdisk /mbr will restore your original MBR.
>
> Regards,
> Yaroslav.
> www.datarecoveryindex.com
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 3:41:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

If you want to know more about partition problems and their solutions
and programming related issues, you can find the Book Contents ("Data
Recovery with & without Programming") on following link:

http://www.datadoctor.biz/author.htm

regards

Sachin
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 3:49:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

<shkvorets@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1115999441.353693.247670@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
> fdisk /mbr will restore your original MBR.

Clueless.

>
> Regards,
> Yaroslav.
> www.datarecoveryindex.com

Obviously to be avoided like the proverbial plague.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 7:20:43 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I didn't know that windows could do that. It doesn't wipe out the files?
(like creating partitions with fdisk?) Would be interested in information on
how to do it.

Thanks.

"Bob" <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
news:4284928d.12628899@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> On Fri, 13 May 2005 04:15:30 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
> >getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out
the
> >old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
> >etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G
drive
> >(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)
>
> Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
> partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
> partition.
>
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 8:53:00 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

<shkvorets@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115999441.353693.247670@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> fdisk /mbr will restore your original MBR.

But wont do anything about the wrong partition table.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 12:04:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Bob is a troll. He did not read your message. He doesn't have a clue.

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D 648sk02o5b@news2.newsguy.com...
> I didn't know that windows could do that. It doesn't wipe out the files?
> (like creating partitions with fdisk?) Would be interested in information
on
> how to do it.
>
> Thanks.
>
> "Bob" <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
> news:4284928d.12628899@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> > On Fri, 13 May 2005 04:15:30 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
> > >getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out
> the
> > >old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the
mbr,
> > >etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G
> drive
> > >(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)
> >
> > Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
> > partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
> > partition.
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 3:05:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
> getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out the
> old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
> etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive.

Ignorance isn't a sin, but combined with hyper activity makes it harmful, as you
just learned. Not really surprising, for a top-poster !

Where from did you take the idea of replacing the MBR of your hard drive to fix
a Winword problem? This isn't just nonsense - it's sheer stupidity!

> Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G drive
> (and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)

That's really bad! For you data sake, hope that replacing the MBR was the only
stupidity conducted on the drive. Being able to see some of the files with the
wrong MBR may indicate that you also overwrote part of the FAT and root
directory. If this is the case, then the chances to recover your data are
smaller.

Follow instructions how to recover the drive and data, if still possible:

Get RESQ from www.resq.co.il/resq.php and prepare a RESQ boot disk as explained
in the ResQ program welcome message.

Set the drive type to "auto" in the setup (modern BIOSes will show the drive's
model instead).

Boot of the RESQ floppy just made. When at the A: prompt, run RESQDISK /KILL of
the floppy. This will reset the partition table to zero, then reboot, with the
RESQ floppy in the drive. Rebooting after zeroing the partition table is a
MUST, to let the BIOS re detect the drive, with the correct settings.

When at the A: prompt, run RESQDISK /FAT32 /REBUILD The program will offer to
write a new MBR when finished with the search. Accept, then reboot, this time
without the floppy in the drive. Windows should start normally if you haven't
done more nonsense that you didn't tell us about.

Regards, Zvi

> "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
> > "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Is there anywhere to get an mbr for a 40G hard drive using win98? (besides
> > > getting another one and setting it up).
> >
> > Please state the purpose you need that MBR for. If to recover a drive that lost
> > its partition table or self boot ability, then the answer is yes, there is.
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 3:21:25 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I didn't know that windows could do that. It doesn't wipe out the files?
> (like creating partitions with fdisk?) Would be interested in information on
> how to do it.

Ignore "spam" advice, if you don't want to lose you data (or what can still be
recovered of it).

Zvi

> "Bob" <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
> news:4284928d.12628899@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> > On Fri, 13 May 2005 04:15:30 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
> > >getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out the
> > >old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
> > >etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G drive
> > >(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)
> >
> > Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
> > partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
> > partition.
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 3:31:36 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <shkvorets@gmail.com> wrote in message

> > fdisk /mbr will restore your original MBR.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yaroslav.

> Clueless. He trashed his partition table by copying it from a smaller drive.
>
> The OP should zero the bad MBR and run data recovery software.

Zeroing the partition (NOT with FDISK) is the first step. The next step is to
rebuild the MBR from scratch (again, NOT with FDISK). If all he did was
importing an unfit MBR, then he has a chance to recover the drive to full
functionality, with all the data on it, and without needing data recovery.

See my other post in this thread <0q9b811698kkcj82mrub81frunfmunp0ld@4ax.com>

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
May 14, 2005 5:33:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 03:20:43 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Please don't top post. It makes following the thread difficult and
makes replying harder. It's alos the sign of an amateur, which is not
something you want to look like on a technical forum.

>I didn't know that windows could do that. It doesn't wipe out the files?
>(like creating partitions with fdisk?) Would be interested in information on
>how to do it.

I should have been more explicit. If you use the so-called "In-Place
Upgrade" (IPU) in Win2K, it appears that the partition is repaired
without loss of data.

I say "appears" because I do not know what really happens. I had an
unbootable disk that was made bootable after I did an IPU, so Win2K
did something to the partition information.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;292175
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/306952/EN-US/

>"Bob" <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
>news:4284928d.12628899@news-server.houston.rr.com...
>> On Fri, 13 May 2005 04:15:30 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
>> >getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out
>the
>> >old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
>> >etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G
>drive
>> >(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)
>>
>> Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
>> partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
>> partition.
May 14, 2005 5:33:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 11:21:25 +0300, Zvi Netiv
<support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote:

>> I didn't know that windows could do that. It doesn't wipe out the files?
>> (like creating partitions with fdisk?) Would be interested in information on
>> how to do it.

>Ignore "spam" advice, if you don't want to lose you data (or what can still be
>recovered of it).

Just what "spam" advice are you referring to?

>> "Bob" <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
>> news:4284928d.12628899@news-server.houston.rr.com...
>> > On Fri, 13 May 2005 04:15:30 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
>> > >getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out the
>> > >old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
>> > >etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G drive
>> > >(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)
>> >
>> > Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
>> > partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
>> > partition.
>--
>NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
>InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 6:23:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Thu, 12 May 2005 17:01:44 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Is there anywhere to get an mbr for a 40G hard drive using win98? (besides
>getting another one and setting it up).

Use the Windows 2000 or XP MBR. All 98 versions contain errors.
--
Svend Olaf
May 14, 2005 7:45:46 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 08:04:28 -0700, "Eric Gisin"
<ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Bob is a troll. He did not read your message. He doesn't have a clue.

Another ad-hom.

You are the troll.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 7:45:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

The consensus is building - you are the troll.

Be nice or get lost. We don't like trolls.

"Bob" <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
news:42861d19.1633969@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> On Sat, 14 May 2005 08:04:28 -0700, "Eric Gisin"
> <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Bob is a troll. He did not read your message. He doesn't have a clue.
>
> Another ad-hom.
>
> You are the troll.
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 9:47:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

spam@spamcop.com (Bob) wrote:

> On Sat, 14 May 2005 11:21:25 +0300, Zvi Netiv
> <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote:
>
> >> I didn't know that windows could do that. It doesn't wipe out the files?
> >> (like creating partitions with fdisk?) Would be interested in information on
> >> how to do it.
>
> >Ignore "spam" advice, if you don't want to lose you data (or what can still be
> >recovered of it).
>
> Just what "spam" advice are you referring to?

Your post that preceded mine, what else!

"Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
partition."

Regards
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 14, 2005 10:32:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

spam@spamcop.com (Bob) wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2005 03:20:43 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> Please don't top post. It makes following the thread difficult and
> makes replying harder. It's alos the sign of an amateur, which is not
> something you want to look like on a technical forum.

Top-posting also reflects badly on the poster by conveying an egocentric message
to the readers that he doesn't give a damn about them.

> >I didn't know that windows could do that. It doesn't wipe out the files?
> >(like creating partitions with fdisk?) Would be interested in information on
> >how to do it.
>
> I should have been more explicit. If you use the so-called "In-Place
> Upgrade" (IPU) in Win2K, it appears that the partition is repaired
> without loss of data.

Deadly wrong. The suggested in-place upgrade will convert a still recoverable
stupid mistake into full blown disaster. A repair or IPU installation won't
affect existing files only if the partition table, boot sector, FAT and root
directory contain ALL consistent data. Which is not the OP's case!

By transplanting a baboon's kidney (1.5 GB MBR) in place of a lion's heart (40
GB MBR), the setup will follow the geometry dictated by the MBR and by the BIOS
auto-detect (which attempts to achieve a best fit to what it finds in the MBR!),
and irreversibly mess up the system areas of the hard drive.

> I say "appears" because I do not know what really happens.

That's obvious.

> I had an
> unbootable disk that was made bootable after I did an IPU, so Win2K
> did something to the partition information.

Your case and this one differ totally. For one thing: the partition table in
your MBR was correct.

By the way, YOU could restore self-boot ability by just running FIXMBR from the
W2K repair console! No need for the entire IPU. ;-)

Regards, Zvi

> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;292175
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/306952/EN-US/
>
> >"Bob" <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
> >news:4284928d.12628899@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> >> On Fri, 13 May 2005 04:15:30 -0400, "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
> >> >getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out the
> >> >old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the mbr,
> >> >etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive. Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G drive
> >> >(and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)
> >>
> >> Why not use Windows Setup to partition it over again. Just delete any
> >> partitions you have and tell Windows installation to create a new
> >> partition.
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
May 14, 2005 10:32:58 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 18:32:57 +0300, Zvi Netiv
<support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote:

>> I say "appears" because I do not know what really happens.

>That's obvious.

Are you trying to be obnoxious or does it just come naturally for you?
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 15, 2005 7:16:55 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Where did you get your training in etiquette? The Attila Hun School?

The animosity in this newsgoup!

I tried using the resq program. I am now getting the messages "invalid
system disk?" and "disk i/o error?" (with the question marks), when trying
to boot. Fdisk is saying "unknown" under the heading "system". Resq is
saying: boot-yes; type-12.

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:0q9b811698kkcj82mrub81frunfmunp0ld@4ax.com...
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I had a problem with a trojan on a maxtor 40G drive. . After supposedly
> > getting rid of it with avg I wasn't able to use winword 97. I wiped out
the
> > old mbr (and, I think, the partition table) and replaced it with the
mbr,
> > etc. of a 2.5G win98 drive.
>
> Ignorance isn't a sin, but combined with hyper activity makes it harmful,
as you
> just learned. Not really surprising, for a top-poster !
>
> Where from did you take the idea of replacing the MBR of your hard drive
to fix
> a Winword problem? This isn't just nonsense - it's sheer stupidity!
>
> > Now fdisk is only finding 2.5G on the 40G drive
> > (and only some of the files are available, plus, it won't boot.)
>
> That's really bad! For you data sake, hope that replacing the MBR was the
only
> stupidity conducted on the drive. Being able to see some of the files
with the
> wrong MBR may indicate that you also overwrote part of the FAT and root
> directory. If this is the case, then the chances to recover your data are
> smaller.
>
> Follow instructions how to recover the drive and data, if still possible:
>
> Get RESQ from www.resq.co.il/resq.php and prepare a RESQ boot disk as
explained
> in the ResQ program welcome message.
>
> Set the drive type to "auto" in the setup (modern BIOSes will show the
drive's
> model instead).
>
> Boot of the RESQ floppy just made. When at the A: prompt, run RESQDISK
/KILL of
> the floppy. This will reset the partition table to zero, then reboot,
with the
> RESQ floppy in the drive. Rebooting after zeroing the partition table is
a
> MUST, to let the BIOS re detect the drive, with the correct settings.
>
> When at the A: prompt, run RESQDISK /FAT32 /REBUILD The program will
offer to
> write a new MBR when finished with the search. Accept, then reboot, this
time
> without the floppy in the drive. Windows should start normally if you
haven't
> done more nonsense that you didn't tell us about.
>
> Regards, Zvi
>
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
> > > "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is there anywhere to get an mbr for a 40G hard drive using win98?
(besides
> > > > getting another one and setting it up).
> > >
> > > Please state the purpose you need that MBR for. If to recover a drive
that lost
> > > its partition table or self boot ability, then the answer is yes,
there is.
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 15, 2005 9:23:14 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:514c81dmb98rpg4gobchcrethh3dg0v31k@4ax.com...
> spam@spamcop.com (Bob) wrote:
>> *selah* <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote

>> Please don't top post. It makes following the thread difficult and
>> makes replying harder. It's alos the sign of an amateur, which is
>> not something you want to look like on a technical forum.

> Top-posting also reflects badly on the poster by conveying an egocentric
> message to the readers that he doesn't give a damn about them.

Gets sillier by the minute.

Top posting does in fact allow someone browsing the thread to
see the latest material without having to scroll thru the message
to find the latest material, with the context preserved so that its
easier to find if the news server doesnt get all the posts in a thread.
May 15, 2005 9:23:15 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sun, 15 May 2005 05:23:14 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>> Top-posting also reflects badly on the poster by conveying an egocentric
>> message to the readers that he doesn't give a damn about them.

>Gets sillier by the minute.

>Top posting does in fact allow someone browsing the thread to
>see the latest material without having to scroll thru the message
>to find the latest material, with the context preserved so that its
>easier to find if the news server doesnt get all the posts in a thread.

You can achieve the same by snipping out dead material.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 15, 2005 3:56:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I tried using the resq program. I am now getting the messages "invalid
> system disk?" and "disk i/o error?" (with the question marks), when trying
> to boot. Fdisk is saying "unknown" under the heading "system". Resq is
> saying: boot-yes; type-12.

If you adhered to instructions, instead of improvising, then you would have your
drive back by now - if still recoverable.

You'll excuse me if I don't waste my time on your problem anymore.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 15, 2005 6:17:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

No thanks, I prefer to retain the context for those who read
posts on less than reliable news servers and using groups.google.

The latest incarnation of groups.google handles the
quoted text very elegantly indeed, no need to snip it.

Bob <spam@spamcop.com> wrote in message
news:4286b262.4684355@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>> Top-posting also reflects badly on the poster by conveying an egocentric
>>> message to the readers that he doesn't give a damn about them.

>> Gets sillier by the minute.

>> Top posting does in fact allow someone browsing the thread to
>> see the latest material without having to scroll thru the message
>> to find the latest material, with the context preserved so that its
>> easier to find if the news server doesnt get all the posts in a thread.

> You can achieve the same by snipping out dead material.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 16, 2005 6:39:40 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:D 13e8152a2jr2pk849150vl0e4ti9pijrg@4ax.com...
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> If you adhered to instructions, instead of improvising, then you would
have your
> drive back by now - if still recoverable.
>
> You'll excuse me if I don't waste my time on your problem anymore.

I don't agree that you wasted your time. And I appreciate the help - the
resq program seems useful. I would have appreciated it more if the abusive
talk didn't come along with it.

I should add that fdisk is now reporting 34G on the drive (instead of 2.5).
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 16, 2005 3:44:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message

> > If you adhered to instructions, instead of improvising, then you would have your
> > drive back by now - if still recoverable.
> >
> > You'll excuse me if I don't waste my time on your problem anymore.
>
> I don't agree that you wasted your time. And I appreciate the help - the
> resq program seems useful. I would have appreciated it more if the abusive
> talk didn't come along with it.

Abuse is in the eye of the beholder.

I suppose you still believe that transplanting an MBR to your hard drive is what
you need to resolve your problem. I you have a problem in accepting that it was
a silly move then your situation is worse than I thought.

> I should add that fdisk is now reporting 34G on the drive (instead of 2.5).

You are doing it again, by providing sparse, detached and therefore useless
information.

If you don't know otherwise, then simply reply my previous post with the
instructions, paragraph after paragraph, and describe the result(s) on each
step.

You could also post here the report produced by running RESQDISK /ASSESS
The command should be run from the RESQ floppy, after having booted from it.
Leave the floppy write-enabled in the drive, the report name in the A: drive is
RESQDISK.RPT. It's a text file, just paste it in your follow-up post.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
May 16, 2005 4:11:36 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Mon, 16 May 2005 11:44:52 +0300, Zvi Netiv
<support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote:

>Abuse is in the eye of the beholder.

Tell that to the ADL.


--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"Our country's a place of limitless hopes and
possibilities, and nowhere is that spirit more
alive than in the great nation of Texas."
--GW Bush, U.S. President from Texas

"One thing that makes George Bush such a great
president is that he does not govern according
to public opinion polls."
--John Cornyn, U.S. Senator from Texas
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 17, 2005 6:39:04 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:mpmg81lk34hp9b8i1u6tulb7c3avqjoan9@4ax.com...
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
>
> > > If you adhered to instructions, instead of improvising, then you would
have your
> > > drive back by now - if still recoverable.

I had to do some improvising because the drive had an overlay from the
manufacturer which prevented resq from functioning. I zeroed the mbr myself
(using norton diskedit) and then ran resq /kill - reboot - resq
/fat32/rebuild. The error messages when trying to boot from the drive were:

verifying dmi pool data
invalid system disk?
disk i/o error?

This is the resq assess file:

17 May 2005 01:29
Evaluation Copy *************************************** CHS mode W9x
******************* * R e s Q d i s k 576 *
********************
* Hard Disk Rescue and Recovery *
Disk 1 * * Copyright (c) '90-04 NetZ Computing * SeeThru *
ExtBIOS * * Virus Control, Disk & Data Recovery * ON F9 *
********* *************************************** *********
* Drive * AltHelp *
********* *********
^2:FAT-32*
CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 0 Sector 1 *********
*********************** Setup Diagnostics ************************
* Disk Type: Maxtor 34098H4 *
* BIOS/CHS IDE/LBA data *
* Number of Heads: 255 16 *
* Number of Cylinders: 1025 16383 *
* Sectors per Track: 63 63 *
* Disk Capacity in Mbytes: 8040 32253 *
* IDE Access Time: 10 msec *
* Total sectors on drive: 66055248 *
******* Use Space to toggle between IDE and Ext.BIOS mode ********
Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout



17 May 2005 01:29
Evaluation Copy *************************************** CHS mode W9x
******************* * R e s Q d i s k 576 *
********************
* Hard Disk Rescue and Recovery *
Disk 1 * * Copyright (c) '90-04 NetZ Computing * SeeThru *
ExtBIOS * * Virus Control, Disk & Data Recovery * ON F9 *
********* *************************************** *********
* Drive * AltHelp *
********* *********
^2:FAT-32*
CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 0 Sector 1
******************** Partition Table Layout **********************
* *
* Partition Starting Ending Reserved Total *
* Boot Type Head Cyl. Sec. Head Cyl. Sec. Sectors Sectors *
* Yes 12 1 0 1 254 18 63 63 66043152 *
* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
* *
******* Press Alt+B to see as boot sector, Alt+M to edit *********
Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout



17 May 2005 01:29
Evaluation Copy *************************************** CHS mode W9x
******************* * R e s Q d i s k 576 *
********************
* Hard Disk Rescue and Recovery *
Disk 1 * * Copyright (c) '90-04 NetZ Computing * SeeThru *
ExtBIOS * * Virus Control, Disk & Data Recovery * ON F9 *
********* *************************************** *********
* Drive * AltHelp *
********* *********
^2:FAT-32*
CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 1 Sector 1
******************** Boot Sector Data FAT-16 *********************
* *
* Sectors per Cluster: 4 *
* Number of Heads: 255 *
* Sectors in Partition: 174063 *
* Sectors per FAT Copy: 0 *
* Hidden Sectors: 63 *
* Capacity in Kilobytes: 89120 *
* *
********** Press Alt+P to analyze as partition sector ************
Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout



17 May 2005 01:29
Evaluation Copy *************************************** Extended W9x
******************* * R e s Q d i s k 576 *
********************
* Hard Disk Rescue and Recovery *
Disk 1 * * Copyright (c) '90-04 NetZ Computing * SeeThru *
ExtBIOS * * Virus Control, Disk & Data Recovery * OFF F9 *
********* *************************************** *********
* Drive * AltHelp *
********* *********
^2:FAT-32*
Checking cylinder 0 for FAT pair
******************************************************************
* Press Space to pause, Esc to stop searching *
* -------------------------------------------------------------- *
* First FAT-32 copy starts on sector 95, Cyl 0 *
* Second FAT-32 copy starts on sector 9861, Cyl 0 *
* Sectors per FAT copy: 9766 *
* *
* *
* *
******************************************************************
Searching for existing FAT partitions on drive 1



> I suppose you still believe that transplanting an MBR to your hard drive
is what
> you need to resolve your problem. I you have a problem in accepting that
it was
> a silly move then your situation is worse than I thought.

I don't think it was a silly move. We have an old computer with a cyrix cpu.
I've tried numerous versions of well known anti-virus software which made
the computer function worse than having a virus. Avg-free seemed to be ok
but then immediately after it supposedly got rid of a trojan our ms-word
program stopped functioning. Anyway, I enjoy learning.

This is what linux fdisk reported for this drive:

Disk /dev/hda1: 33.8 GB, 33814093824 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 4110 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

This doesn't look like a partition table
Probably you selected the wrong device.

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1p1 ? 120513 235786 925929529+ c W95 FAT32 (LBA)
Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hda1p2 ? 82801 116350 269488144 79 Unknown
Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hda1p3 ? 33551 120595 699181456 53 OnTrack DM6 Aux3
Partition 3 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hda1p4 ? 86812 86813 10668+ 49 Unknown
Partition 4 does not end on cylinder boundary.

Partition table entries are not in disk order

Thanks,

Ben
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 17, 2005 2:22:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Ron Speed wrote:

>
>Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
>news:514c81dmb98rpg4gobchcrethh3dg0v31k@4ax.com...
>> spam@spamcop.com (Bob) wrote:
>>> *selah* <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>>> Please don't top post. It makes following the thread difficult and
>>> makes replying harder. It's alos the sign of an amateur, which is
>>> not something you want to look like on a technical forum.
>
>> Top-posting also reflects badly on the poster by conveying an egocentric
>> message to the readers that he doesn't give a damn about them.
>
>Gets sillier by the minute.

Since you joined-in, Ron.

>Top posting does in fact allow someone browsing the thread to
>see the latest material without having to scroll thru the message
>to find the latest material, with the context preserved so that its
>easier to find if the news server doesnt get all the posts in a thread.

Idiot.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 18, 2005 5:20:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message

> > > > If you adhered to instructions, instead of improvising, then you would have your
> > > > drive back by now - if still recoverable.
>
> I had to do some improvising because the drive had an overlay from the
> manufacturer which prevented resq from functioning.

Inconsistent with your previous posts. In your original post you claim having
imported the MBR from elsewhere. If this is correct, then the overlay MBR (we
don't yet know if you imported the entire overlay - i.e. the whole track 0) came
from the 2.5 GB drive. Yet another possibility surfaced now: That your BIOS
doesn't support drives over 32 GB and you needed to install an overlay in order
to use the drive to its full 40 GB capacity. In which case your story about
importing the MBR is questionable (you may have gone through the motions of
transplanting the MBR, but failed).

FYI, RESQDISK /KILL has an purposely safety that prevents the zeroing of a DDO
partition, and you erred grossly by not reporting the RESQDISK warning message
before forcing your way with Norton DE. More about it, below.

I now wonder if there is any conceivable mistake that you skipped applying to
that drive.

> I zeroed the mbr myself (using norton diskedit) and then ran resq /kill - reboot - resq
> /fat32/rebuild.
>
> The error messages when trying to boot from the drive were:
>
> verifying dmi pool data
> invalid system disk?
> disk i/o error?

These messages are issued by the boot sector, when attempting to load system
files that can't be found, for obvious reasons.

> This is the resq assess file:
>
> Evaluation Copy *************************************** CHS mode W9x
> ******************* * R e s Q d i s k 576 *
> * Hard Disk Rescue and Recovery *
> Disk 1 * * Copyright (c) '90-04 NetZ Computing * SeeThru *
> ExtBIOS * * Virus Control, Disk & Data Recovery * ON F9 *
> ********* *************************************** *********
> * Drive * AltHelp *
> ********* *********
> ^2:FAT-32*

The report header indicates that the IDE channel functions properly (SeeThru is
ON) and that your BIOS supports extended Int 13h (ExtBIOS is ON). Although it's
impossible to know from here if the BIOS also supports larger than 32 GB drives.

I also see that you have an additional drive installed. Its parameters may be
important to resolve some issues about the problem drive.

> CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 0 Sector 1
> *********************** Setup Diagnostics ************************
> * Disk Type: Maxtor 34098H4 *
> * BIOS/CHS IDE/LBA data *
> * Number of Heads: 255 16 *
> * Number of Cylinders: 1025 16383 *
> * Sectors per Track: 63 63 *
> * Disk Capacity in Mbytes: 8040 32253 *
> * IDE Access Time: 10 msec *
> * Total sectors on drive: 66055248 *
> ******* Use Space to toggle between IDE and Ext.BIOS mode ********
> Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout

The problems start showing here. The drive make and model say it's 40.9 GB
(from the Maxtor site). Yet your BIOS only detects 32 GB. The reason could be
one of the following:

1. A 32 GB limit jumper, if the drive has one, or

2. You managed to alter the max size value in the internal drive settings. A
utility to test and fix that condition is FINDPART by Svend Olaf Mikkelsen.
Svend will tell you how to use it, if he is reading this thread.

3. Lastly, (and also the most likely), your BIOS is old and doesn't support
drives over 32 GB, unassisted. That's why you may have had a boot overlay ever
since you installed the drive, to let you use it to its full 40 gig capacity.

> CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 0 Sector 1
> ******************** Partition Table Layout **********************
> * *
> * Partition Starting Ending Reserved Total *
> * Boot Type Head Cyl. Sec. Head Cyl. Sec. Sectors Sectors *
> * Yes 12 1 0 1 254 18 63 63 66043152 *
> * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
> * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
> * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
> * *
> ******* Press Alt+B to see as boot sector, Alt+M to edit *********
> Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout

The above partition table is now meaningless since it was created with incorrect
drive settings in the BIOS.

> CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 1 Sector 1
> ******************** Boot Sector Data FAT-16 *********************
> * *
> * Sectors per Cluster: 4 *
> * Number of Heads: 255 *
> * Sectors in Partition: 174063 *
> * Sectors per FAT Copy: 0 *
> * Hidden Sectors: 63 *
> * Capacity in Kilobytes: 89120 *
> * *
> ********** Press Alt+P to analyze as partition sector ************
> Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout

The above boot sector raises concern as it doesn't belong here. Depending on
whether you had a boot overlay, and on its type, sector 011 (CHS) should have
contained the DDO calculated master partition table (if the DDO was Disk
Manager), or a FAT-32 boot sector, if the overlay was EZ-BIOS or for a plain
FAT-32 partition.

The FAT-16 boot sector suggests that you may have attempted to "fix" the drive
with Norton Disk Destroyer and forgot to tell us about. In case you did, then
NDD may have ploughed the config areas beyond repair.

> Checking cylinder 0 for FAT pair
> ******************************************************************
> * Press Space to pause, Esc to stop searching *
> * -------------------------------------------------------------- *
> * First FAT-32 copy starts on sector 95, Cyl 0 *
> * Second FAT-32 copy starts on sector 9861, Cyl 0 *
> * Sectors per FAT copy: 9766 *
> ******************************************************************
> Searching for existing FAT partitions on drive 1

The above FAT pair suggests that *if* there was an overlay involved, then it
was of the EZ-bios type (Disk Manager would put the first copy of the FAT on
sector 127). It also suggests that the first partition occupied less than the
entire drive capacity, or the number of sectors per FAT should have been in the
range of 16,000 or more. Hence, this FAT pair could not have been created by
one of your bad manipulations and is therefore genuine.

So far this is the *only* encouraging sign that your data may be intact and
could be recovered, given better cooperation from your side.

> > I suppose you still believe that transplanting an MBR to your hard drive is what
> > you need to resolve your problem. I you have a problem in accepting that it was
> > a silly move then your situation is worse than I thought.
>
> I don't think it was a silly move.

Trust me that it was silly, and could serve no useful purpose, whatsoever.
Especially if you had a boot overlay, which I now believe is the most likely
explanation to the self-inflicted mess.

> We have an old computer with a cyrix cpu.

What's important is the BIOS, whether it supports > 32 GB drives. What brand is
the BIOS from and what version and date does it show?

> I've tried numerous versions of well known anti-virus software which made
> the computer function worse than having a virus.

Excuse the analogy, but running some of those AV products is like wearing a
condom all the time. It won't protect from what they are supposed to, but it
will blow your kidneys (and bladder) for sure ... ;-)

> Avg-free seemed to be ok
> but then immediately after it supposedly got rid of a trojan our ms-word
> program stopped functioning.

You get what you pay for.

> Anyway, I enjoy learning.

Rests to see ... ;) 

Your options, in case you want to try to recover the data:

You first should decide if your data is worth the effort. If it is, then
consider leaving it to professional data recovery. The judgement and skills
that you have shown so far don't yield the brightest prognosis.

If you prefer trying it yourself, then here goes ...

First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB of the
drive. If the other installed drive is larger than 32 GB, then it may provide a
clue. Or you could try the drive in another PC with a newer mobo/BIOS and see
if it's recognized with its correct capacity. If the problem is the drive
itself, then wait for Svend's instructions how to restore the max size value.

If the problem is your BIOS then consider the following:

Reinstalling the overlay is the worst option, as you will lose the drive
content! Even if you plan keeping the drive (system and apps rebuilt from
scratch) with the old board and BIOS, then an overlay is still a bad option for
its vulnerability and incompatibility with the newer OS. Search on the web if
there exists an upgrade for your BIOS/board and reflash it if there is one. If
there is none, or the last upgrade doesn't support > 32 GB drives, then buy an
EIDE controller card (they sell for about $10) and attach the hard drives to it.

With the new setup, repeat once more the procedure RESQDISK /KILL => reboot =>
RESQDISK /FAT32 /REBUILD then reboot once more with the RESQ floppy in the
drive and check with RESQDISK (F5) if the BIOS sees the drive to its full
capacity. If I am correct, then ResQdisk should find more than one partition
during the /rebuild cycle. Use judgment which partition to accept or reject
during the 'rebuild' scan. ResQdisk provides all the available data to decide,
just run the /rebuild more than once, without writing the new MBR to disk right
away, to sort out what ResQdisk is telling you. Then go for the final run.

The next step would be to rewrite the boot sector of the first partition with a
good one. If lucky, then a backup copy of the original boot sector should exist
in sector 0/1/7 (CHS). Navigate to that sector with RESQDISK by first pressing
^P (puts ResQdisk in 'extended' mode) then use the left-right-up-down arrow keys
to place ResQdisk on head 1, sector 7, cyl 0. Press ^A (analyze) and select "as
boot sector". If you see 9766 sectors per FAT copy then bless your luck. You
then need to copy the content of sector 0/1/7 to sec 0/1/1 and I'll leave it to
you how you do that (RESQDISK requires registering to undertake corrective
maintenance from a certain level and up). If sector 0/1/7 doesn't contain a
valid copy of the boot sector, then go back to CHS mode (^P), and try the ^F2
procedure (recreate the boot sector from existing configuration data) after you
assured that the program is in FAT32 mode (toggle with ^2 to put it in the
correct mode). This should write a default FAT32 boot sector. Use the ^F2
procedure *only* if there is no backup of the boot in sector 7, head 1, cyl 0.

Reboot now to let the configuration elements take effect. If the goddess of
luck loves you then the drive may resurface now. If not, then give DIR C: a try
after booting of the RESQ floppy. If the directory structure seems okay, with
no signs of file system corruption, then a simple reinstallation of Windows, in
repair mode, could do the trick. *Important*: backup your data, first thing, as
soon as it becomes available!

DON'Ts: Don't use disk or file-system repair or management utilities on the
problem drive, such as NDD (it's for people that know what they do, and the
paradox is that people that know wouldn't touch NDD), ScanDisk, or even Defrag,
before having backed up your data.

If OTOH the file system is corrupted, after having completed the above, then it
could be worth trying recovery software such as Easy Recovery (there is no point
in trying that in the current condition of the drive, only after you fixed the
max capacity problem). Note that ER is commercial software and may be
expensive. Be also informed that ER and its like are only effective to recover
files that were contiguous at the time access to them was lost.

Good luck, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 18, 2005 9:23:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:D 6c3l00fdf@news3.newsguy.com
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message

[...]
> Number of cylinders display is wrong for (L)CHS "BIOS/CHS", correct for (P)CHS "IDE/LBA".
> Probably because of wrong interrupt call.

[...]
> ODD, BIOS/CHS capacity matches BIOS/CHS values above, but IDE/LBA capacity does not match
> IDE/LBA values. That makes no sense. 32253 must have been derived from elsewhere, presumably from
> 'Total sectors on drive'.

[...]
> Cyl. 18 is obviously wrong.
> Resq obviously pulled that out of it's arse. Looks like it could be a modulo 1024 problem,
> except that it's modulo 1023. Two mistakes in one looks is very sloppy programming.

None of the above is wrong, except in your book-keeper's mind. You'll forgive
me if I don't bother explaining you why, since it serves no useful purpose.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
May 18, 2005 9:23:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Wed, 18 May 2005 17:23:17 +0300, Zvi Netiv
<support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote:

>None of the above is wrong, except in your book-keeper's mind. You'll forgive
>me if I don't bother explaining you why, since it serves no useful purpose.

You are living proof why so many people are anti-semitic.


--

Million Mom March For Gun Confiscation
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/mmm.html

A liberal is a person who is so open minded
that their brains have fallen out.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 20, 2005 4:30:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message news:cajm8198kjcsdnn5rovoah3ng27200g37a@4ax.com
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
> > "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:D 6c3l00fdf@news3.newsguy.com
> > > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
>
> [...]

> > * BIOS/CHS IDE/LBA data *
> > * Number of Cylinders: 1025 16383 *

> > Number of cylinders display is wrong for (L)CHS "BIOS/CHS", correct for (P)CHS "IDE/LBA".
> > Probably because of wrong interrupt call.

1025 is obviously wrong. Cylinders can't be more than 1024 (1023, zero based).
The Int13 CHS calls won't accept any bigger than 1023 as any 2-bit programmer
knows (even Gisin) since there's only 10 bits reserved for it. Even you know that, Netiv.
Sounds like you hard-inserted 1024 in your programming but forgot that your routine
compensates for 0-based values.
Another sign of your sloppy programming Netiv, just like that modulo 1023 result.

>
> [...]

> CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 0 Sector 1
> *********************** Setup Diagnostics ************************
> * Disk Type: Maxtor 34098H4 *
> * BIOS/CHS IDE/LBA data *
> * Number of Heads: 255 16 *
> * Number of Cylinders: 1025 16383 *
> * Sectors per Track: 63 63 *
> * Disk Capacity in Mbytes: 8040 32253 *


> > ODD, BIOS/CHS capacity matches BIOS/CHS values above, but IDE/LBA capacity
> > does not match IDE/LBA values. That makes no sense.

CHS addressable capacity should be similar for the CHS part in both BIOS/CHS and
IDE/LBA and there's a seperate LBA addressable capacity for the LBA part in IDE/LBA.
However the 16 heads suggest bigger than 15,481,935 sectors on the drive which means
LBA assist translation so CHS addressable space would be 1024*255*63 = 16,450,560
sectors or 8032 M(i)B or 8,422,686,720 bytes or 8.4 GB.

In contrast: Large can access up to 15,481,935 sectors or 7,926,750,720 bytes (7.9 GB).

> > 32253 must have been derived from elsewhere, presumably from 'Total sectors on drive'.

Which is the LBA (Int13 extended) addressable capacity.
Btw, what's the point of showing it in MB when no other apps display it that way, especially
since it is in binary MB format: 8032 M(i)B is 7.8 G(i)B.

>
> [...]
> > Cyl. 18 is obviously wrong.
> > Resq obviously pulled that out of it's arse. Looks like it could be a modulo 1024 problem,
> > except that it's modulo 1023. Two mistakes in one looks like very sloppy programming.
>
> None of the above is wrong, except in your book-keeper's mind.

66043152 = 4110*255*63, 4110 modulo 1023 = 18

If you have a better and credible explanation, then let's hear it.

> * Yes 12 1 0 1 254 18 63 63 66043152 *

Resqdisk declared a 140 MB FAT32X (yet claims to find a FAT16 of 89 MB) partition
if you believe the CHS values in MBR, a 32GB one if you believe the LBA number.

> You'll forgive me if I don't bother explaining you why, since it serves no useful purpose.

Now isn't that very convenient, since you wouldn't know how to in the first place, and so
avoid making an even bigger fool of yourself.

>
> Regards, Zvi
Anonymous
a b G Storage
May 20, 2005 4:51:27 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message news:kk0m8190i878jgr38ji88ltn08fbqcvhi9@4ax.com
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > > If you adhered to instructions, instead of improvising, then you would have your
> > > > > drive back by now - if still recoverable.
> >
> > I had to do some improvising because the drive had an overlay from the
> > manufacturer which prevented resq from functioning.
>

> Inconsistent with your previous posts.

Nope, he did say he had trouble.
But whether he was telling the truth may be debatable.

> In your original post you claim having imported the MBR from elsewhere.

> If this is correct, then the overlay MBR (we don't yet know if you imported
> the entire overlay - i.e. the whole track 0) came from the 2.5 GB drive.

Yes, and?

> Yet another possibility surfaced now: That your BIOS doesn't support
> drives over 32 GB and you needed to install an overlay in order to use the
> drive to its full 40 GB capacity.

Or that it does support over 32 GB but the overlay was installed anyway.

> In which case your story about importing the MBR is questionable

If one believes your (inherent) accusation. One could also believe that you are
desperately looking for a convenient bullshit excuse for the fact that RESQDISK
made a mess that has nothing to do with the overlay.

> (you may have gone through the motions of transplanting the MBR, but failed).

Failed how? It doesn't work either way. You're obviously looking for straws.

>
> FYI, RESQDISK /KILL has a purposely safety that prevents the zeroing of a DDO

> partition,

Presumably that is meant to be partition 'entry'.
He zeroed that, it was no longer there.

> and you erred grossly by not reporting the RESQDISK warning message
> before forcing your way with Norton DE.

> More about it, below.

Couldn't find it.

>
> I now wonder if there is any conceivable mistake that you skipped applying to
> that drive.

That's gibber. Come to think of it, the previous sentence was too.

>
> > I zeroed the mbr myself (using norton diskedit) and then ran resq /kill - reboot -
> > resq/fat32/rebuild.
> >
> > The error messages when trying to boot from the drive were:
> >
> > verifying dmi pool data
>
> > invalid system disk?
> > disk i/o error?

> These messages are issued by the boot sector, when attempting to load system
> files that can't be found,

> for obvious reasons.

For you maybe. Not for anyone else. Supposedly for that Fat16 bootsector then.
But let me guess: You won't "bother explaining why, since it serves no useful purpose".

It's even amazing that he came that far with no bootcode in the MBR.

>
> > This is the resq assess file:
> >
> > Evaluation Copy *************************************** CHS mode W9x
> > ******************* * R e s Q d i s k 576 *
> > * Hard Disk Rescue and Recovery *
> > Disk 1 * * Copyright (c) '90-04 NetZ Computing * SeeThru *
> > ExtBIOS * * Virus Control, Disk & Data Recovery * ON F9 *
> > ********* *************************************** *********
> > * Drive * AltHelp *
> > ********* *********
> > ^2:FAT-32*
>
> The report header indicates that the IDE channel functions properly (SeeThru is
> ON) and that your BIOS supports extended Int 13h (ExtBIOS is ON). Although it's
> impossible to know from here if the BIOS also supports larger than 32 GB drives.
>
> I also see that you have an additional drive installed. Its parameters may be
> important to resolve some issues about the problem drive.
>
> > CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 0 Sector 1
> > *********************** Setup Diagnostics ************************
> > * Disk Type: Maxtor 34098H4 *
> > * BIOS/CHS IDE/LBA data *
> > * Number of Heads: 255 16 *
> > * Number of Cylinders: 1025 16383 *
> > * Sectors per Track: 63 63 *
> > * Disk Capacity in Mbytes: 8040 32253 *
> > * IDE Access Time: 10 msec *
> > * Total sectors on drive: 66055248 *
> > ******* Use Space to toggle between IDE and Ext.BIOS mode ********
> > Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout
>
> The problems start showing here. The drive make and model say it's 40.9 GB
> (from the Maxtor site). Yet your BIOS only detects 32 GB.
> The reason could be one of the following:
>
> 1. A 32 GB limit jumper, if the drive has one, or
>
> 2. You managed to alter the max size value in the internal drive settings.

Or the bootoverlay install software did.

> A utility to test and fix that condition is FINDPART by Svend Olaf Mikkelsen.

Or the Feature Tool (FTool) from IBM/Hitachi.

> Svend will tell you how to use it, if he is reading this thread.

It would be interesting to see what Svend's Findpart thinks of Resqdisk's handywork.
And Partinfo.

>
> 3. Lastly, (and also the most likely), your BIOS is old and doesn't support
> drives over 32 GB, unassisted.

But does that spoil that Int13 AH=48 offset 16 Qword 'Number of sectors' result?
That is supposedly read from the drive's identification sector.

The 'most likely' is that the drive itself reports the 32 GB (2.).
The reason for that may ly in (3.) and the overlay software limiting it to 32GB to
get it past POST, the overlay code setting it back to 40GB each time at boot.

> That's why you may have had a boot overlay ever since you installed the drive,
> to let you use it to its full 40 gig capacity.
>
> > CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 0 Sector 1
> > ******************** Partition Table Layout **********************
> > * *
> > * Partition Starting Ending Reserved Total *
> > * Boot Type Head Cyl. Sec. Head Cyl. Sec. Sectors Sectors *
> > * Yes 12 1 0 1 254 18 63 63 66043152 *
> > * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
> > * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
> > * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
> > * *
> > ******* Press Alt+B to see as boot sector, Alt+M to edit *********
> > Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout
>
> The above partition table is now meaningless since it was created with incorrect
> drive settings in the BIOS.

Nonsense. 32GB or 40GB, it makes no difference to CHS which is limited to 8GB.
The drive geometry of 63 sectors 255 heads is correct and has no influence of what
supposedly is wrong. RESQDISK blew it and you are desperately looking for an excuse.

>
> > CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 1 Sector 1
> > ******************** Boot Sector Data FAT-16 *********************
> > * *
> > * Sectors per Cluster: 4 *
> > * Number of Heads: 255 *
> > * Sectors in Partition: 174063 *
> > * Sectors per FAT Copy: 0 *
> > * Hidden Sectors: 63 *
> > * Capacity in Kilobytes: 89120 *
> > * *
> > ********** Press Alt+P to analyze as partition sector ************
> > Disk 1, Master Partition Sector, F6 for Layout
>
> The above boot sector raises concern as it doesn't belong here.

A bootsector belongs there. That particular one however probably not.

> Depending on whether you had a boot overlay, and on its type, sector 011 (CHS)
> should have contained the DDO calculated master partition table (if the DDO
> was Disk Manager),

> or a FAT-32 boot sector, if the overlay was EZ-BIOS or for a plain FAT-32 partition.

Yet Resqdisk apparently ignored it and put a FAT32X in the MBR.
Presumably it did that because it was told so by resqdisk/*fat32*/rebuild.
Apparently there is some risk in that when it doesn't warn that there is no FAT32
to start with.

>
> The FAT-16 boot sector suggests that you may have attempted to "fix" the drive
> with Norton Disk Destroyer and forgot to tell us about. In case you did, then
> NDD may have ploughed the config areas beyond repair.

Doesn't explain why Resqdisk apparently ignored it and put a FAT32X in the MBR
instead. Unless of course it thinks: hey you asked for one so I'll get you one, even if I
have to make one up.

>
> > Checking cylinder 0 for FAT pair
> > ******************************************************************
> > * Press Space to pause, Esc to stop searching *
> > * -------------------------------------------------------------- *

> > * First FAT-32 copy starts on sector 95, Cyl 0 *

sector 95, cylinder 0: gobble-de-gook for CHS 0/1/33
Nice combination, an CHS sector in LBA notation, Cylinder offset based.
What next.


> > * Second FAT-32 copy starts on sector 9861, Cyl 0 *
> > * Sectors per FAT copy: 9766 *
> > ******************************************************************
> > Searching for existing FAT partitions on drive 1
>
> The above FAT pair suggests that *if* there was an overlay involved, then it
> was of the EZ-bios type

> (Disk Manager would put the first copy of the FAT on sector 127).

For the un-initiated, that is CHS address 0/2/1, as opposed to 0/1/33.

> It also suggests that the first partition occupied less than the entire drive
> capacity, or the number of sectors per FAT should have been in the range of
> 16,000 or more.

> Hence, this FAT pair could not have been created by
> one of your bad manipulations and is therefore genuine.

The logic in that, magnificent!

>
> So far this is the *only* encouraging sign that your data may be intact and
> could be recovered, given better cooperation from your side.
>
> > > I suppose you still believe that transplanting an MBR to your hard drive is what
> > > you need to resolve your problem. I you have a problem in accepting that it was
> > > a silly move then your situation is worse than I thought.
> >
> > I don't think it was a silly move.
>
> Trust me that it was silly, and could serve no useful purpose, whatsoever.

> Especially if you had a boot overlay,

Not in his case, where the bootoverlay did nothing to the partition(s),
IF there ever was one.
Whether the bootoverlay code that came with the 2,5 GB drive MBR
was any harmful, well, who's to say, we would need the sourcecode.

> which I now believe is the most likely explanation to the self-inflicted mess.

Nonsense.
You yourself showed that the bootoverlay was harmless to the partition(s)
themselfs as it didn't change anything to the partition start, which would
have been the most harmful.

>
> > We have an old computer with a cyrix cpu.
>
> What's important is the BIOS, whether it supports > 32 GB drives.

That is only important if the FAT32 partition is bigger than 32GB.

> What brand is the BIOS from and what version and date does it show?
>

[snip]
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 3, 2005 9:11:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:kk0m8190i878jgr38ji88ltn08fbqcvhi9@4ax.com...

> First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB of
the
> drive.

I spoke to the manufacturer and the drive had a limiting jumper. When I
removed it, the bios reported the full 40G.

I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
directories (and won't boot). I was wondering if it would be a good idea to
try it again with the full 40G. I should also add that when I originally
installed the drive I used the manufacturers software which put in the
EZ-BIOS program. At some point I saw that the bios itself was seeing the
drive so I removed ez-bios. If I remember correctly, after zeroing the mbr,
I tried reinstalling ez-bios and using ndd as well. Since this didn't
function, I zeroed everything from about sector 0 to around sector 67 and
transplanted the sectors from the 2.1G drive. This made the directories
reappear although many of the files were inaccessible.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 3, 2005 10:55:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On 03/07/05 10:11, *selah* wrote:
> "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
> news:kk0m8190i878jgr38ji88ltn08fbqcvhi9@4ax.com...
>
>
>>First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB of
>
> the
>
>>drive.
>
>
> I spoke to the manufacturer and the drive had a limiting jumper. When I
> removed it, the bios reported the full 40G.
>
> I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
> directories (and won't boot). I was wondering if it would be a good idea to
> try it again with the full 40G. I should also add that when I originally
> installed the drive I used the manufacturers software which put in the
> EZ-BIOS program. At some point I saw that the bios itself was seeing the
> drive so I removed ez-bios. If I remember correctly, after zeroing the mbr,
> I tried reinstalling ez-bios and using ndd as well. Since this didn't
> function, I zeroed everything from about sector 0 to around sector 67 and
> transplanted the sectors from the 2.1G drive. This made the directories
> reappear although many of the files were inaccessible.
>
>

Many older PC's have BIOS's with an 8 GB limit for ATA disk drives.
If a 6GB drive worked in that macine and a 40GB doesn't than that might
be the problem.
Try if you can get the new drive to work with a primaty partition < 8GB.
If it does than that is the problem.
If you are shure that the drive is configured as LBA or "Large" in the
BIOS than you may need some thrid party driver to see the rest of the
drive once booted from the 8GB partition.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 4, 2005 3:41:10 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

You can try Super Fdisk to manage your hard disk
Super Fdisk is a driven disk partitioning utility. With Super Fdisk you
can quickly and easily create, delete, format partitions on
IDE/ATA/SATA/SCSI hard disk drives without destroying data. Super Fdisk
manages for Windows 95/98/Me, MS-DOS, Freedos.

For more infomation: http://www.ptdd.com/manual2.htm
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 4, 2005 4:48:46 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

There were 43 messages in this thread, what exactly did you not understand?

"Arie Bant" <abant@mail.com> wrote in message news:D a98pr$6nh$1@news.freedom2surf.net
> On 03/07/05 10:11, *selah* wrote:
> > "Zvi Netiv" support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message news:kk0m8190i878jgr38ji88ltn08fbqcvhi9@4ax.com...
> >
> >
> > > First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB of
> >
> > the
> >
> > > drive.

And what exactly was wrong with ...

> First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB of the
> drive.

.... that it now has to occupy 5 lines?

> >
> >
> > I spoke to the manufacturer and the drive had a limiting jumper. When I
> > removed it, the bios reported the full 40G.
> >
> > I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
> > directories (and won't boot). I was wondering if it would be a good idea to
> > try it again with the full 40G. I should also add that when I originally
> > installed the drive I used the manufacturers software which put in the
> > EZ-BIOS program. At some point I saw that the bios itself was seeing the
> > drive so I removed ez-bios. If I remember correctly, after zeroing the mbr,
> > I tried reinstalling ez-bios and using ndd as well. Since this didn't
> > function, I zeroed everything from about sector 0 to around sector 67 and
> > transplanted the sectors from the 2.1G drive. This made the directories
> > reappear although many of the files were inaccessible.
> >
> >
>
> Many older PC's have BIOS's with an 8 GB limit for ATA disk drives.
> If a 6GB drive worked in that macine and a 40GB doesn't than that might
> be the problem.
> Try if you can get the new drive to work with a primaty partition < 8GB.
> If it does than that is the problem.
> If you are shure that the drive is configured as LBA or "Large" in the
> BIOS than you may need some thrid party driver to see the rest of the
> drive once booted from the 8GB partition.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 4, 2005 4:48:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
>
> > First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB of the
> > drive.
>
> I spoke to the manufacturer and the drive had a limiting jumper. When I
> removed it, the bios reported the full 40G.

It means that your BIOS supports > 32 GB drives and needn't be reflashed. At
least not for that drive.

> I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
> directories (and won't boot).

It took you almost fifty days to return here and THIS is all you can tell us?
Which steps of the procedure I offered were completed and which not? Which of
the methods offered to rebuild the boot sector did you use? What are the new
boot sector parameters?

From your phrasing seems that you didn't rebuild the FAT-32 boot sector at all,
and you are still trying to find your directories with the FAT-16 boot sector.
I told you that this sector doesn't belong there and you will never recover your
files that way.

> I was wondering if it would be a good idea to
> try it again with the full 40G.

How was the drive jumpered when you could still see all directories? With or
without the 32 GB limiting jumper? If with the jumper, then there is no point
trying to recover the files with full drive capacity. It's a different mapping
of the drive!

> I should also add that when I originally
> installed the drive I used the manufacturers software which put in the
> EZ-BIOS program.

I told you that it should have been EZ-bios rather than Disk Manager.

> At some point I saw that the bios itself was seeing the
> drive so I removed ez-bios.

Unfortunately, removing EZ-bios with the manufacturer's utility also resets the
partition data, and I suspect that the boot sector too. For your information,
the partition layout with EZ-bios and the standard FAT-32 partition are
*identical* from sector 64 (the boot sector) and on. In other words, you dumped
the baby with the water.

> If I remember correctly, after zeroing the mbr,
> I tried reinstalling ez-bios and using ndd as well.

God forbid!

> Since this didn't
> function, I zeroed everything from about sector 0 to around sector 67 and
> transplanted the sectors from the 2.1G drive.

Zeroing sectors 0 to 63 was no big deal as the MBR can be easily rebuilt.
Zeroing sector 64 is another story as it contains the boot sector of the boot
partition, which tells the BIOS how to read that partition. Now you tell us
that you transplanted not only the MBR from the 2.1 GB drive to the 32 GB one,
but *also* the boot sector.

In my previous post I wrote that your FAT-32 maybe intact but inaccessible,
PROVIDED YOU DIDN'T/DON'T RUN NDD ON THAT DRIVE after having done the insane
transplant. Because if you do, then NDD will plough through your file system
and shred it into worthless electronic confetti.

> This made the directories
> reappear although many of the files were inaccessible.

And they will remain so until you help yourself.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 5, 2005 4:51:40 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message news:1pthc1tp93kv53qd5psoci1s0pkh341ihn@4ax.com
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB of the
> > > drive.
> >
> > I spoke to the manufacturer and the drive had a limiting jumper. When I
> > removed it, the bios reported the full 40G.

> It means that your BIOS supports > 32 GB drives and needn't be reflashed.
> At least not for that drive.

No it doesn't. It means that it just can do the size calculation correctly.
You'll need further tests to confirm that the bios can handle > 32 GB.

>
> > I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
> > directories (and won't boot).
>
> It took you almost fifty days to return here and THIS is all you can tell us?
> Which steps of the procedure I offered were completed and which not? Which of
> the methods offered to rebuild the boot sector did you use? What are the new
> boot sector parameters?
>
> From your phrasing seems that you didn't rebuild the FAT-32 boot sector at all,
> and you are still trying to find your directories with the FAT-16 boot sector.
> I told you that this sector doesn't belong there and you will never recover your
> files that way.
>
> > I was wondering if it would be a good idea to
> > try it again with the full 40G.
>
> How was the drive jumpered when you could still see all directories? With or
> without the 32 GB limiting jumper? If with the jumper, then there is no point
> trying to recover the files with full drive capacity.

Doesn't make any difference.

> It's a different mapping of the drive!

No, it's not.

>
> > I should also add that when I originally
> > installed the drive I used the manufacturers software which put in the
> > EZ-BIOS program.
>
> I told you that it should have been EZ-bios rather than Disk Manager.
>
> > At some point I saw that the bios itself was seeing the
> > drive so I removed ez-bios.
>
> Unfortunately, removing EZ-bios with the manufacturer's utility also resets
> the partition data, and I suspect that the boot sector too.

That would be bordering to near criminality.

> For your information, the partition layout with EZ-bios and the standard
> FAT-32 partition are *identical* from sector 64 (the boot sector) and on.

So? It should be safe then.

> In other words, you dumped the baby with the water.

The EZ-bios removal has no business there, it should be safe.
The MBR is a different matter but any half decent software would
replace the MBR code only, leaving the tables intact.

>
> > If I remember correctly, after zeroing the mbr,
> > I tried reinstalling ez-bios and using ndd as well.
>
> God forbid!
>
> > Since this didn't
> > function, I zeroed everything from about sector 0 to around sector 67 and
> > transplanted the sectors from the 2.1G drive.
>
> Zeroing sectors 0 to 63 was no big deal as the MBR can be easily rebuilt.
> Zeroing sector 64 is another story as it contains the boot sector of the boot
> partition, which tells the BIOS how to read that partition.

> Now you tell us that you transplanted not only the MBR from the 2.1 GB drive
> to the 32 GB one, but *also* the boot sector.

Actually, he confirmed what you already knew.

>
> In my previous post I wrote that your FAT-32 maybe intact but inaccessible,
> PROVIDED YOU DIDN'T/DON'T RUN NDD ON THAT DRIVE after having done the insane
> transplant. Because if you do, then NDD will plough through your file system
> and shred it into worthless electronic confetti.
>
> > This made the directories
> > reappear although many of the files were inaccessible.
>
> And they will remain so until you help yourself.
>
> Regards, Zvi
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 6, 2005 8:24:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:1pthc1tp93kv53qd5psoci1s0pkh341ihn@4ax.com...
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > First, you need to determine the cause for the BIOS seeing only 32 GB
of the
> > > drive.
> >
> > I spoke to the manufacturer and the drive had a limiting jumper. When I
> > removed it, the bios reported the full 40G.
>
> It means that your BIOS supports > 32 GB drives and needn't be reflashed.
At
> least not for that drive.
>
> > I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
> > directories (and won't boot).
>
> It took you almost fifty days to return here and THIS is all you can tell
us?
> Which steps of the procedure I offered were completed and which not?
Which of
> the methods offered to rebuild the boot sector did you use? What are the
new
> boot sector parameters?

I went thru the whole procedure. There weren't 9766 sectors per fat. I tried
the ^f2 (fat32 mode) I rebooted and got the same error messages as before.

[...]

> Zeroing sectors 0 to 63 was no big deal as the MBR can be easily rebuilt.
> Zeroing sector 64 is another story as it contains the boot sector of the
boot
> partition, which tells the BIOS how to read that partition. Now you tell
us
> that you transplanted not only the MBR from the 2.1 GB drive to the 32 GB
one,
> but *also* the boot sector.

I would rerun the res-q procedure and post the results but it seems the
trial period past.

I think I found a copy of the mbr and br at sector 40759. I did a search for
things I saw in the mbr of the 2.1G drive using norton de. In the 2.1G
drive, the br seems to be at sector 62 and 63. Also, in between the mbr (at
sector 0) and sector 62 are a few things having to do with apple systems.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 7, 2005 8:58:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message

> > > I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
> > > directories (and won't boot).
> >
> > It took you almost fifty days to return here and THIS is all you can tell us?
> > Which steps of the procedure I offered were completed and which not?

> > Which of the methods offered to rebuild the boot sector did you use? What are the
> > new boot sector parameters?
>
> I went thru the whole procedure. There weren't 9766 sectors per fat. I tried
> the ^f2 (fat32 mode) I rebooted and got the same error messages as before.

I asked for the parameters of the reconstructed boot sector. Press F7 to read
them, when running RESQDISK, and post the data here. The ^F2 procedure is just
step 1 in the recovery of the boot sector.

> [...]
> > Zeroing sectors 0 to 63 was no big deal as the MBR can be easily rebuilt.
> > Zeroing sector 64 is another story as it contains the boot sector of the boot
> > partition, which tells the BIOS how to read that partition. Now you tell us
> > that you transplanted not only the MBR from the 2.1 GB drive to the 32 GB one,
> > but *also* the boot sector.
>
> I would rerun the res-q procedure and post the results but it seems the
> trial period past.

Either set back the system date, or make a new RESQ floppy from a fresh
download.

> I think I found a copy of the mbr and br at sector 40759. I did a search for
> things I saw in the mbr of the 2.1G drive using norton de. In the 2.1G
> drive, the br seems to be at sector 62 and 63. Also, in between the mbr (at
> sector 0) and sector 62 are a few things having to do with apple systems.

You are improvising dangerously, again!

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 8, 2005 9:39:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:r1dqc1dn0p8sdjnn47jree6huff6fsvs33@4ax.com...
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > I tried the procedure you recommended and the drive still gives no
> > > > directories (and won't boot).
> > >
> > > It took you almost fifty days to return here and THIS is all you can
tell us?
> > > Which steps of the procedure I offered were completed and which not?
>
> > > Which of the methods offered to rebuild the boot sector did you use?
What are the
> > > new boot sector parameters?

The rebuild scan only found 1 partition of 33G ending at cylinder 4111 which
is what I expected since I
had only installed 1 partition when I originally set up the drive.

^A gave "invalid boot or partition sector at 0/1/7, (it was full of "+". I
used ^F2.

^2:FAT-32*
CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 1 Sector 1
******************** Boot Sector Data FAT-32 *********************
* *
* Sectors per Cluster: 32 *
* Number of Heads: 255 *
* Sectors in Partition: 66043152 *
* Sectors per FAT Copy: 16109 *
* Reserved Sectors: 32 *
* Capacity in Kilobytes: 33814016 *
* *
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 9, 2005 4:06:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message

[...]
> > > > Which of the methods offered to rebuild the boot sector did you use?
> > > > What are the new boot sector parameters?
>
> The rebuild scan only found 1 partition of 33G ending at cylinder 4111 which
> is what I expected since I
> had only installed 1 partition when I originally set up the drive.
>
> ^A gave "invalid boot or partition sector at 0/1/7, (it was full of "+". I
> used ^F2.

Which means that the entire original extended boot sector (three sectors) AND
its mirror (three more sectors starting at CHS 017) were overwritten in one of
the manipulations applied to the drive.

> CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 1 Sector 1
> ******************** Boot Sector Data FAT-32 *********************
> * *
> * Sectors per Cluster: 32 *
> * Number of Heads: 255 *
> * Sectors in Partition: 66043152 *
> * Sectors per FAT Copy: 16109 *
> * Reserved Sectors: 32 *
> * Capacity in Kilobytes: 33814016 *

That's bad news as there is no chance that this boot sector matches the FAT that
was found on your drive (quoting a previous post of yours: "Sectors per FAT
copy: 9766"). In other words, the FAT32 found on the drive doesn't belong there
either and was created by some bad manipulation, possibly NDD, PM, or SCANDISK.

The only option left now is data recovery by file headers, but don't expect much
here as a) only few file types have a distinguishable enough header to be
recovered by that method, and b) only files that were fully contiguous at the
time access was lost can be recovered this way.

Good luck, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 9, 2005 9:43:58 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
news:o 44vc1hv5gja9f6vvvvas31qc30buonifo@4ax.com...
> "*selah*" <pzion.naax@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message
>
> [...]
> > > > > Which of the methods offered to rebuild the boot sector did you
use?
> > > > > What are the new boot sector parameters?
> >
> > The rebuild scan only found 1 partition of 33G ending at cylinder 4111
which
> > is what I expected since I
> > had only installed 1 partition when I originally set up the drive.
> >
> > ^A gave "invalid boot or partition sector at 0/1/7, (it was full of "+".
I
> > used ^F2.
>
> Which means that the entire original extended boot sector (three sectors)
AND
> its mirror (three more sectors starting at CHS 017) were overwritten in
one of
> the manipulations applied to the drive.
>
> > CHS address: Cyl 0 Head 1 Sector 1
> > ******************** Boot Sector Data FAT-32
*********************
> > *
*
> > * Sectors per Cluster: 32
*
> > * Number of Heads: 255
*
> > * Sectors in Partition: 66043152
*
> > * Sectors per FAT Copy: 16109
*
> > * Reserved Sectors: 32
*
> > * Capacity in Kilobytes: 33814016
*
>
> That's bad news as there is no chance that this boot sector matches the
FAT that
> was found on your drive (quoting a previous post of yours: "Sectors per
FAT
> copy: 9766"). In other words, the FAT32 found on the drive doesn't belong
there
> either and was created by some bad manipulation, possibly NDD, PM, or
SCANDISK.
>
> The only option left now is data recovery by file headers, but don't
expect much
> here as a) only few file types have a distinguishable enough header to be
> recovered by that method, and b) only files that were fully contiguous at
the
> time access was lost can be recovered this way.

Amazing news - I tried searching for the mbr again. For some reason, it was
no longer at sector 40759. There was something else there that did look like
an mbr but was different than before. I don't know if maybe res-q might have
done it? I continued searching and found another one at 126508 that looked
like the one I had originally found with [begin] and [end] marks. I tried
copying and pasting the 1st part in sector 0, then the whole thing in sector
62 & 63 (following the way that it looked in res-q). To my great surprise -
the whole directory structure reappeared. The files are all there but some
have distortions. Maybe if I put in a mirror at 0/1/7 that will clear up
that problem?

Thanks for your help.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!