Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Uninstall of W2k? Not simple for me!

Last response: in Windows 2000/NT
Share
Anonymous
February 10, 2005 3:52:30 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

This should be easy? Well, there are numerous solutions to my general
question – either they don’t completely address it or they don’t agree.


I haven’t found ant=y of several articles that agree with the best ‘plan’.

Yes, Andre has most points covered? If he addressed my ‘problem’, I
missed it.

I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
in a small Fat primary partition.

One install is completely corrupt - It crashed after an
upgrade/migration to a new drive -that went ok - My problem was when I
had to re-install SP4 and it blinked out - -never to return to it’s
normal state.. I’ve tried everything and the profiles as well as the
configuration are whacked. No matter what fixes I’ve tried it reverts
back to it’s corrupt state. Anyway, it’s the original install and is
full of junk. It has to go.

So? I find articles on:

How to uninstall a W2k stand alone - simple? Wipe it all out from the
boot CD – Or if there is nothing of import on the partition? Reformat.

Or

If it’s a dual boot with a non boot (NT based) loader scenario –
pretty much the same thing -except I’d still lose my boot files (on a
primary partition that serves both install of W2k.) Yeah, I can
‘repair’ the other W2k? I’ve had mostly luck with repair - I’d rather
avoid doing anything more than removing the reference to the other
install from the boot.ini.

So, I have yet to see how to:

1. Remove W2k when it shares a partition with other apps I can’t give
up in a reformat.
2. Remove W2k and ‘not’ destroy the references to the other install of
the other W2k in the boot partition.

I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the W2k
install? And remove its reference from boot.ini? Yeah, that will free
up a load of space.

Something tells me that enough stuff is going to be left in the
registry that I may have problems if I install another OS in that
partition. (My plan)

So, if I simply do the file delete? Knowing much of the install will
not ‘go’ with the folder? I could use a registry cleaner and hope I get
all of the W2k references out and don’t remove the application
references that are used by the other install.

Am I missing something?

Is there a solution to remove a W2k install where there is another W2k
in the system (different partition) along with preserving the other
files in the same partition as the W2k that has to go (no, I don’t want
to reformat the partition).

No, I’m not worried about the ‘Program Files -Documents and Settings.
They’ll go and I’ve kept my installs to a minimum (directly to Program
Files). I am concerned about the shared/common folders? But that’s a
risk I’ll have to take. They’ll go and I’ll see how much I lose in the
functionality of the apps.

Is deleting the W3k files, cleaning the registry and removing the
boot.ini reference my only solution given what I have to work with?

BTW? Is there a simpler way to combine a repair of W2k that combines
SP4 in one single move? Silly question. I was doing fine until I had
to ‘update’ the migrated install to be SP4 compliant...

Trust me? I don’t believe it is worth saving this install - it is
going to leave.

Michael


--
"Fear not those who argue but those who dodge."

(Marie Ebner von Eschenbach, Aphorisms, 1905)

More about : uninstall w2k simple

Anonymous
February 10, 2005 3:52:31 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

Hi, Michael.

Well, your narrative meanders a bit and I might have missed some of it, but
I think I got the important parts...

> Yes, Andre has most points covered?

Who's Andre? You've started a new thread and not bothered to copy any prior
messages, so your post is just "bare" with no context to guide us. :>( But
I'll try.

The WinNT4/2K/XP dual boot system is really pretty simple. It's kind of
like the letter "Y". The base of the Y is the System Partition; the
branches (and there can be more than two, of course) are the Boot Folders
for each installation of Windows (mix'n'match the NT-based versions - and
ignore Win9x/ME for now). And remember the counter-intuitive terminology:
We BOOT from the SYSTEM partition and keep the operating SYSTEM files in the
BOOT folder. The point is that there is only ONE System Partition, even
though there may be multiple boot folders. There is only one set of the
system files (NTLDR, NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini), and they must be in the
Root of the System Partition (typically, C:\).

Although Microsoft (and nearly every Windows guru) strongly advises that
only one copy of Windows be installed in a single volume, it is possible to
install multiple copies in a volume. The default name of the boot volume is
\Windows, except in WinNT and Win2K, in which the default name is \WinNT.
If Win2K is installed into volumes C: and D:, the default names will be
C:\WinNT and D:\WinNT. But if Win2K is installed twice into C:, the name of
the second must be a variation, such as C:\WinNT-2.

What happened in your case? Are both your copies of Win2K in Drive C:?

Win2K will not obey an order to delete its own boot folder, because that's
like obeying an order to commit suicide. But it will happily delete another
installation's boot folder, because if you are booted to D:\WinNT, then
folder C:\WinNT is "just another folder". So, if all you want to do is get
rid of your "bad" Win2K, just boot into the good one and delete the boot
folder for the bad one, then edit C:\boot.ini to remove the line that offers
to boot it.

One casualty of the deletion of the boot folder will be the Registry for
that copy of Win2K. The Registry in Win2K is a set of special files, all in
the \WinNT\system32\config folder; when you delete \Win2K, that entire
Registry gets deleted, too. The computer will forget about all the
applications that had been installed in that copy. You will need to install
those apps again, unless they had been installed already in the remaining
copy of Win2K, even if the apps files remain on the HD, so that entries can
be made in the good Win2K's Registry.

If you wanted to preserve your original Registry, you could do an in-place
upgrade (also known as a repair reinstallation). But if you want to wipe
out your original Win2K and start over, you could just delete C:\WinNT, but
don't reformat C:, then clean install Win2K again into C:. You would need
to reinstall your apps, but your data files would remain intact.

If you have questions, please post back.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc@corridor.net
Microsoft Windows MVP

"Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:ifyOd.182273$w62.176245@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> This should be easy? Well, there are numerous solutions to my general
> question – either they don’t completely address it or they don’t agree.
>
>
> I haven’t found ant=y of several articles that agree with the best ‘plan’.
>
> Yes, Andre has most points covered? If he addressed my ‘problem’, I missed
> it.
>
> I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files in a
> small Fat primary partition.
>
> One install is completely corrupt - It crashed after an upgrade/migration
> to a new drive -that went ok - My problem was when I had to re-install
> SP4 and it blinked out - -never to return to it’s normal state.. I’ve
> tried everything and the profiles as well as the configuration are
> whacked. No matter what fixes I’ve tried it reverts back to it’s corrupt
> state. Anyway, it’s the original install and is full of junk. It has to
> go.
>
> So? I find articles on:
>
> How to uninstall a W2k stand alone - simple? Wipe it all out from the
> boot CD – Or if there is nothing of import on the partition? Reformat.
>
> Or
>
> If it’s a dual boot with a non boot (NT based) loader scenario – pretty
> much the same thing -except I’d still lose my boot files (on a primary
> partition that serves both install of W2k.) Yeah, I can ‘repair’ the
> other W2k? I’ve had mostly luck with repair - I’d rather avoid doing
> anything more than removing the reference to the other install from the
> boot.ini.
>
> So, I have yet to see how to:
>
> 1. Remove W2k when it shares a partition with other apps I can’t give up
> in a reformat.
> 2. Remove W2k and ‘not’ destroy the references to the other install of the
> other W2k in the boot partition.
>
> I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the W2k install?
> And remove its reference from boot.ini? Yeah, that will free up a load of
> space.
>
> Something tells me that enough stuff is going to be left in the registry
> that I may have problems if I install another OS in that partition. (My
> plan)
>
> So, if I simply do the file delete? Knowing much of the install will not
> ‘go’ with the folder? I could use a registry cleaner and hope I get all of
> the W2k references out and don’t remove the application references that
> are used by the other install.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> Is there a solution to remove a W2k install where there is another W2k in
> the system (different partition) along with preserving the other files in
> the same partition as the W2k that has to go (no, I don’t want to reformat
> the partition).
>
> No, I’m not worried about the ‘Program Files -Documents and Settings.
> They’ll go and I’ve kept my installs to a minimum (directly to Program
> Files). I am concerned about the shared/common folders? But that’s a
> risk I’ll have to take. They’ll go and I’ll see how much I lose in the
> functionality of the apps.
>
> Is deleting the W3k files, cleaning the registry and removing the boot.ini
> reference my only solution given what I have to work with?
>
> BTW? Is there a simpler way to combine a repair of W2k that combines SP4
> in one single move? Silly question. I was doing fine until I had to
> ‘update’ the migrated install to be SP4 compliant...
>
> Trust me? I don’t believe it is worth saving this install - it is going
> to leave.
>
> Michael
Anonymous
February 10, 2005 3:16:21 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

On or about 2/9/2005 10:44 PM, R. C. White with due consideration, replied :
> Hi, Michael.
>
> Well, your narrative meanders a bit and I might have missed some of it,
> but I think I got the important parts...

<snip>




>
> The WinNT4/2K/XP dual boot system is really pretty simple. It's kind of
> like the letter "Y". The base of the Y is the System Partition; the
> branches (and there can be more than two, of course) are the Boot
> Folders for each installation of Windows (mix'n'match the NT-based
> versions - and ignore Win9x/ME for now). And remember the
> counter-intuitive terminology: We BOOT from the SYSTEM partition and
> keep the operating SYSTEM files in the BOOT folder. The point is that
> there is only ONE System Partition, even though there may be multiple
> boot folders. There is only one set of the system files (NTLDR,
> NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini), and they must be in the Root of the System
> Partition (typically, C:\).

Line three of my post:

"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
in a small Fat primary partition. "

Not much meanering.

> Although Microsoft (and nearly every Windows guru) strongly advises that
> only one copy of Windows be installed in a single volume, it is possible
> to install multiple copies in a volume. The default name of the boot
> volume is \Windows, except in WinNT and Win2K, in which the default name
> is \WinNT. If Win2K is installed into volumes C: and D:, the default
> names will be C:\WinNT and D:\WinNT. But if Win2K is installed twice
> into C:, the name of the second must be a variation, such as C:\WinNT-2.

Bolume? Partition? Same/same for me.

One volume (FAT) w/DOS and the boot files for two installs of W@K --
each in a different volume/partition. Anyone miss that?

> What happened in your case? Are both your copies of Win2K in Drive C:?

No, C:\ is the FAT partitition with Dos and the start/boot files for
both installs of W2k.

Again:
"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
in a small Fat primary partition. "

Try this on for size:

C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
problem. It's a goner.

> Win2K will not obey an order to delete its own boot folder, because
> that's like obeying an order to commit suicide. But it will happily
> delete another installation's boot folder, because if you are booted to
> D:\WinNT, then folder C:\WinNT is "just another folder". So, if all you
> want to do is get rid of your "bad" Win2K, just boot into the good one
> and delete the boot folder for the bad one, then edit C:\boot.ini to
> remove the line that offers to boot it.

Well, while the installs of W2k are in different partitions..they share
the boot partition, C:\

> One casualty of the deletion of the boot folder will be the Registry for
> that copy of Win2K. The Registry in Win2K is a set of special files,
> all in the \WinNT\system32\config folder; when you delete \Win2K, that
> entire Registry gets deleted, too. The computer will forget about all
> the applications that had been installed in that copy. You will need to
> install those apps again, unless they had been installed already in the
> remaining copy of Win2K, even if the apps files remain on the HD, so
> that entries can be made in the good Win2K's Registry.

Um, the boot folder need not be touched -- (it stands alone on C:|)
-execpt for an entry to the deleted W2k in boot.ini.

I wrote: " I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the
W2k install? And remove its reference from boot.ini?"

> If you wanted to preserve your original Registry, you could do an
> in-place upgrade (also known as a repair reinstallation). But if you
> want to wipe out your original Win2K and start over, you could just
> delete C:\WinNT, but don't reformat C:, then clean install Win2K again
> into C:. You would need to reinstall your apps, but your data files
> would remain intact.


The inplace upgrade didn't take. (after the crash which wiped out the
profiles, it did an in place upgrade -- all was fine - untill
re-install of SP4, - It blinked out during the install of the SP and
nothing will bring it back - It's history. I just want the best way
to remove it)

> If you have questions, please post back.

One question? If I delete the W2k folders and the boot.ini entry, is
that enough to prevent future problems (ex: confusion that th removed
W2k once existed in that partition.

Or, put better. I want to totally remove one install of W2k in one
volume which is in a differrent volume than the boot volume and the
other install of W2k --

C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
problem. It's a goner.
..
1. I don't want to reformat E:\ volume - Um. if that was a
preference? I wouldn't be writing. Yeah, format E: was an early
'solution' -- which would wipe out all the other data in the volume I
wish to keep...

2. I don't want to disturb the boot volume. Yeah, I could do a repair
of the install in D:\ and it might go quick and easy (or not). Again,
why risk it if the boot volume -- which is barely related to the volume
which contains the corrupt W2k? (other than the boot.ini entry)
Related resources
Anonymous
February 11, 2005 12:57:04 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

"Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:o gIOd.23480$Th1.12447@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> On or about 2/9/2005 10:44 PM, R. C. White with due consideration, replied
:
> > Hi, Michael.
> >
> > Well, your narrative meanders a bit and I might have missed some of it,
> > but I think I got the important parts...
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > The WinNT4/2K/XP dual boot system is really pretty simple. It's kind of
> > like the letter "Y". The base of the Y is the System Partition; the
> > branches (and there can be more than two, of course) are the Boot
> > Folders for each installation of Windows (mix'n'match the NT-based
> > versions - and ignore Win9x/ME for now). And remember the
> > counter-intuitive terminology: We BOOT from the SYSTEM partition and
> > keep the operating SYSTEM files in the BOOT folder. The point is that
> > there is only ONE System Partition, even though there may be multiple
> > boot folders. There is only one set of the system files (NTLDR,
> > NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini), and they must be in the Root of the System
> > Partition (typically, C:\).
>
> Line three of my post:
>
> "I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
> in a small Fat primary partition. "
>
> Not much meanering.
>
> > Although Microsoft (and nearly every Windows guru) strongly advises that
> > only one copy of Windows be installed in a single volume, it is possible
> > to install multiple copies in a volume. The default name of the boot
> > volume is \Windows, except in WinNT and Win2K, in which the default name
> > is \WinNT. If Win2K is installed into volumes C: and D:, the default
> > names will be C:\WinNT and D:\WinNT. But if Win2K is installed twice
> > into C:, the name of the second must be a variation, such as C:\WinNT-2.
>
> Bolume? Partition? Same/same for me.
>
> One volume (FAT) w/DOS and the boot files for two installs of W@K --
> each in a different volume/partition. Anyone miss that?
>
> > What happened in your case? Are both your copies of Win2K in Drive C:?
>
> No, C:\ is the FAT partitition with Dos and the start/boot files for
> both installs of W2k.
>
> Again:
> "I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
> in a small Fat primary partition. "
>
> Try this on for size:
>
> C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
> D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
> E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
> problem. It's a goner.
>
> > Win2K will not obey an order to delete its own boot folder, because
> > that's like obeying an order to commit suicide. But it will happily
> > delete another installation's boot folder, because if you are booted to
> > D:\WinNT, then folder C:\WinNT is "just another folder". So, if all you
> > want to do is get rid of your "bad" Win2K, just boot into the good one
> > and delete the boot folder for the bad one, then edit C:\boot.ini to
> > remove the line that offers to boot it.
>
> Well, while the installs of W2k are in different partitions..they share
> the boot partition, C:\
>
> > One casualty of the deletion of the boot folder will be the Registry for
> > that copy of Win2K. The Registry in Win2K is a set of special files,
> > all in the \WinNT\system32\config folder; when you delete \Win2K, that
> > entire Registry gets deleted, too. The computer will forget about all
> > the applications that had been installed in that copy. You will need to
> > install those apps again, unless they had been installed already in the
> > remaining copy of Win2K, even if the apps files remain on the HD, so
> > that entries can be made in the good Win2K's Registry.
>
> Um, the boot folder need not be touched -- (it stands alone on C:|)
> -execpt for an entry to the deleted W2k in boot.ini.
>
> I wrote: " I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the
> W2k install? And remove its reference from boot.ini?"
>
> > If you wanted to preserve your original Registry, you could do an
> > in-place upgrade (also known as a repair reinstallation). But if you
> > want to wipe out your original Win2K and start over, you could just
> > delete C:\WinNT, but don't reformat C:, then clean install Win2K again
> > into C:. You would need to reinstall your apps, but your data files
> > would remain intact.
>
>
> The inplace upgrade didn't take. (after the crash which wiped out the
> profiles, it did an in place upgrade -- all was fine - untill
> re-install of SP4, - It blinked out during the install of the SP and
> nothing will bring it back - It's history. I just want the best way
> to remove it)
>
> > If you have questions, please post back.
>
> One question? If I delete the W2k folders and the boot.ini entry, is
> that enough to prevent future problems (ex: confusion that th removed
> W2k once existed in that partition.
>
> Or, put better. I want to totally remove one install of W2k in one
> volume which is in a differrent volume than the boot volume and the
> other install of W2k --
>
> C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
> D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
> E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
> problem. It's a goner.
> .
> 1. I don't want to reformat E:\ volume - Um. if that was a
> preference? I wouldn't be writing. Yeah, format E: was an early
> 'solution' -- which would wipe out all the other data in the volume I
> wish to keep...
>
> 2. I don't want to disturb the boot volume. Yeah, I could do a repair
> of the install in D:\ and it might go quick and easy (or not). Again,
> why risk it if the boot volume -- which is barely related to the volume
> which contains the corrupt W2k? (other than the boot.ini entry)
>
>
>

If I understand your problem then you can simply edit boot.ini and remove
the reference to the install on E:. Then boot to your D: install and remove
the following folders on E:
Winnt
Documents and Settings
Program Files
Anonymous
February 11, 2005 3:30:40 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

On or about 2/10/2005 4:57 PM, Colon Terminus with due consideration,
replied :

> "Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:o gIOd.23480$Th1.12447@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>>On or about 2/9/2005 10:44 PM, R. C. White with due consideration, replied
>
> :
>
>>>Hi, Michael.
>>>
>>>Well, your narrative meanders a bit and I might have missed some of it,
>>>but I think I got the important parts...
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>The WinNT4/2K/XP dual boot system is really pretty simple. It's kind of
>>>like the letter "Y". The base of the Y is the System Partition; the
>>>branches (and there can be more than two, of course) are the Boot
>>>Folders for each installation of Windows (mix'n'match the NT-based
>>>versions - and ignore Win9x/ME for now). And remember the
>>>counter-intuitive terminology: We BOOT from the SYSTEM partition and
>>>keep the operating SYSTEM files in the BOOT folder. The point is that
>>>there is only ONE System Partition, even though there may be multiple
>>>boot folders. There is only one set of the system files (NTLDR,
>>>NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini), and they must be in the Root of the System
>>>Partition (typically, C:\).
>>
>>Line three of my post:
>>
>>"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
>>in a small Fat primary partition. "
>>
>>Not much meanering.
>>
>>
>>>Although Microsoft (and nearly every Windows guru) strongly advises that
>>>only one copy of Windows be installed in a single volume, it is possible
>>>to install multiple copies in a volume. The default name of the boot
>>>volume is \Windows, except in WinNT and Win2K, in which the default name
>>>is \WinNT. If Win2K is installed into volumes C: and D:, the default
>>>names will be C:\WinNT and D:\WinNT. But if Win2K is installed twice
>>>into C:, the name of the second must be a variation, such as C:\WinNT-2.
>>
>>Bolume? Partition? Same/same for me.
>>
>>One volume (FAT) w/DOS and the boot files for two installs of W@K --
>>each in a different volume/partition. Anyone miss that?
>>
>>
>>>What happened in your case? Are both your copies of Win2K in Drive C:?
>>
>>No, C:\ is the FAT partitition with Dos and the start/boot files for
>>both installs of W2k.
>>
>>Again:
>>"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
>>in a small Fat primary partition. "
>>
>>Try this on for size:
>>
>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>problem. It's a goner.
>>
>>
>>>Win2K will not obey an order to delete its own boot folder, because
>>>that's like obeying an order to commit suicide. But it will happily
>>>delete another installation's boot folder, because if you are booted to
>>>D:\WinNT, then folder C:\WinNT is "just another folder". So, if all you
>>>want to do is get rid of your "bad" Win2K, just boot into the good one
>>>and delete the boot folder for the bad one, then edit C:\boot.ini to
>>>remove the line that offers to boot it.
>>
>>Well, while the installs of W2k are in different partitions..they share
>>the boot partition, C:\
>>
>>
>>>One casualty of the deletion of the boot folder will be the Registry for
>>>that copy of Win2K. The Registry in Win2K is a set of special files,
>>>all in the \WinNT\system32\config folder; when you delete \Win2K, that
>>>entire Registry gets deleted, too. The computer will forget about all
>>>the applications that had been installed in that copy. You will need to
>>>install those apps again, unless they had been installed already in the
>>>remaining copy of Win2K, even if the apps files remain on the HD, so
>>>that entries can be made in the good Win2K's Registry.
>>
>>Um, the boot folder need not be touched -- (it stands alone on C:|)
>>-execpt for an entry to the deleted W2k in boot.ini.
>>
>>I wrote: " I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the
>>W2k install? And remove its reference from boot.ini?"
>>
>>
>>>If you wanted to preserve your original Registry, you could do an
>>>in-place upgrade (also known as a repair reinstallation). But if you
>>>want to wipe out your original Win2K and start over, you could just
>>>delete C:\WinNT, but don't reformat C:, then clean install Win2K again
>>>into C:. You would need to reinstall your apps, but your data files
>>>would remain intact.
>>
>>
>>The inplace upgrade didn't take. (after the crash which wiped out the
>>profiles, it did an in place upgrade -- all was fine - untill
>>re-install of SP4, - It blinked out during the install of the SP and
>>nothing will bring it back - It's history. I just want the best way
>>to remove it)
>>
>>
>>>If you have questions, please post back.
>>
>>One question? If I delete the W2k folders and the boot.ini entry, is
>>that enough to prevent future problems (ex: confusion that th removed
>>W2k once existed in that partition.
>>
>>Or, put better. I want to totally remove one install of W2k in one
>>volume which is in a differrent volume than the boot volume and the
>>other install of W2k --
>>
>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>problem. It's a goner.
>>.
>>1. I don't want to reformat E:\ volume - Um. if that was a
>>preference? I wouldn't be writing. Yeah, format E: was an early
>>'solution' -- which would wipe out all the other data in the volume I
>>wish to keep...
>>
>>2. I don't want to disturb the boot volume. Yeah, I could do a repair
>>of the install in D:\ and it might go quick and easy (or not). Again,
>>why risk it if the boot volume -- which is barely related to the volume
>>which contains the corrupt W2k? (other than the boot.ini entry)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> If I understand your problem then you can simply edit boot.ini and remove
> the reference to the install on E:. Then boot to your D: install and remove
> the following folders on E:
> Winnt
> Documents and Settings
> Program Files
>
>
>

Thanks

Yes, I knew removing the W2k folder (and getting the entry out of the
boot.ini) would remove the data off the drive (freeing space) and of
course disallow booting into an OS that was gone.

My concern was: Is that good enough? As I plan to install XP in the
volume (not the same volume as the boot which is on a small FAT for all
OS's) I was concerned registry or various data on the disk would still
be there an may cause problems for XP . When one install an app? The
process goes deeper than the information one can 'see' on the drive.

So, I knew your suggestion was an option but and it would provide space
for a new install - but is deleting the folder truly an uninstall or is
it asking for trouble in the future.

However? It may be moot!

Now I'm concerned whether I should even put XP in with the other W2k
install (the one that'st OK). The problem? XP must go in after W2k --
no problem for the first install? At least no problem for XP.

But what if I need to do something drastic with the other W2k install
after W2k goes in? As I understand it, major changes to W2k mean
serious trouble for XP. If you know? The 'repair' for XP (from the
disk, not the console) isn't as selective. In fact? They admit that
'R'" - Repair in XP amounts to an install! Not the selective repair
like in W2k!

So, am I looking for trouble with XP and W2k in the same machine?
Regardless how I choose to eliminate the current install of W2k? I'll
still have another install in another partition. Am I going to be
looking at a lot of downtime for both OS's when one has a problem or if
a major update changes the files in the boot partition that they will
both share?

Anyone running W2k & XP as a multiboot? How serious of a change in one
in the other requires "what kind of attention" to either or both? I
want to stay away from a boot manager...while they are working they
offer benefits - when they fail? it's a nightmare.

So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.
Anonymous
February 11, 2005 1:55:12 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

Hi, Michael.

To cut to the chase...

> So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.

Multibooting WinXP and Win2K is easy and automatic, so long as you (a)
install them into separate volumes and (b) always install the newest Windows
last. If either of these caveats is violated, it still is possible, but not
automatic and not so easy.

When the computer boots, it knows nothing except what is in the BIOS chip.
That lets it located the first physical HDD and read the first physical
sector on the HD. At this point, it knows nothing of partitions, but the
64-byte partition table is in that first sector, along with the ~400 bytes
of the Master Boot Record, which is just enough for the computer to locate
the Active partition, load the first physical sector of that partition into
memory, and start executing it. This Active partition becomes the System
Partition until the computer is rebooted. (This is the System Partition,
NOT the "Boot Partition". At least, not at this point, although it may
later become the boot volume for Windows, but let's leave that for later.)

The first physical sector of the System Partition is the "boot sector", and
it is critical to the dual boot process. It is only 512 bytes long, of
course, so it can't do much. The MBR code loads this sector into the
computer's RAM and starts executing it.

When MS-DOS (or Win9x/ME) is installed on this computer, good old Sys.com
writes code into this boot sector; this code searches the Root of the System
Partition (C:\, typically) for two "system files": io.sys and msdos.sys.
It loads io.sys and turns control over to it, which uses msdos.sys to locate
and load Win9x/ME and start it. This boot sector knows nothing of WinNT or
any of its descendants.

When an NT-based Windows is installed, Setup overwrites the boot sector on
the System Partition with a different 512-byte code. This NT-style boot
sector looks in the Root of the System Partition (C:\, typically) for the
file NTLDR, which looks in C:\ for NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini. At this
point, after loading the BIOS, the MBR, the boot sector and NTLDR, the
computer is smart enough to start using partitions and folders. NTLDR reads
C:\boot.ini to find out how many instances of Windows are installed and
where they are (by disk and partition NUMBER, not by "drive" letter). It
presents the menu onscreen and waits for your selection. When you choose
(or it times out to the default choice), NTLDR and NTDETECT.COM loads your
choice and starts it running.

Once NTLDR loads one instance of Win2K/XP, that instance is in total control
of the computer. There is no way for any other Windows installation to
interfere until the computer is rebooted. At each reboot, the process
starts again at Ground Zero, with the BIOS chip. This session has no memory
of any prior session. So, if you boot Win2K this time and WinXP next time,
neither has any effect on the other. If you install Quicken while booted
into Win2K, then boot into WinXP, you can't run Quicken until you install it
again in WinXP. WinXP can read the Quicken files that were installed on the
hard drive while booted into Win2K, but it can't actually run the program
until Quicken's install program has made the required entries into the WinXP
Registry - which is completely isolated from the Win2K Registry. (Many
simple programs, of course, can be run without installing them, and those
may be run from any version of Windows - or even from DOS.)

When Win2K or WinXP Setup is run (by booting from the Windows CD-ROM), it
detects the existing environment before installing Windows. If it detects a
later version of NTLDR, it will refuse to install its older version; that's
why we can't easily install Win2K after WinXP. But if it detects an earlier
NTLDR, it overwrites the boot sector, NTLDR and NTDETECT.COM with the newer
version and updates C:\boot.ini to add the new installation to what is
already there. (If the boot sector is the MS-DOS style, Win2K/XP Setup
copies it to a new file, C:\bootsect.dos, before overwriting it, then
modifies C:\boot.ini to allow the opening menu to include a choice to boot
to MS-DOS or Win9x/ME.)

>>>Bolume? Partition? Same/same for me.

The terminology problems were not created by me - or by you - or even by
Microsoft, in many cases. But, unless we speak the same language, we're not
going to be able to communicate. Unfortunately, we all use terms
ambiguously and indiscriminately to mean different things at different
times. We use "drive" to mean a physical hard disk drive, or to mean a
partition, or a logical drive. We use "boot" in many different ways.
Usually, the difference is not important, but sometimes it is critical to
understanding what is being said.

A "volume" might be a partition, but an extended partition is not a volume.
An extended partition cannot be assigned a "drive" letter, but each logical
drive within the extended partition is assigned a "drive" letter. Each
primary partition and each logical drive is a "volume". Each volume is
assigned a "drive" letter, so maybe it should be called a "volume letter",
but there's not much chance of changing names at this late stage. Rather
than "format a drive", we create a partition on the physical drive and
format that, unless it is an extended partition, in which case we can't
format until we create a logical drive within the extended partition, then
we can format that.

Only a primary partition can be an Active (bootable) partition, so only a
primary partition may be the System Partition (where NTLDR resides). But
the \Windows "boot folder" can be installed on any volume on any HD in the
computer. That volume becomes the "boot volume" for THAT installation of
Windows. A multi-booting computer will have multiple boot volumes, but
still only a single System Partition. The System Partition MAY also serve
as the boot volume for one installation of Windows, but it is important to
recognize that partition's dual roles.

>>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>>problem. It's a goner.

In your case, Drive C: is your System Partition, D: is the boot volume for
your newer Win2K, and E: is the boot volume for your corrupt Win2K.
D;\WinNT is the boot folder for the "good" Win2K and E:\WinNT is the boot
volume for the "bad" Win2K.

>>>1. I don't want to reformat E:\ volume

OK. No need. I concur with Colon Terminus:
>> edit boot.ini and remove
>> the reference to the install on E:. Then boot to your D: install and
>> remove
>> the following folders on E:
>> Winnt
>> Documents and Settings
>> Program Files

>>>2. I don't want to disturb the boot volume.

No need to disturb C:, the System Partition (NOT the boot volume - those are
D: and E:) . The only change needed is editing C:\boot.ini - and even that
is not critical; it just eliminates the nuisance of seeing an invalid menu
item.


>>>Yeah, I could do a repair
>>>of the install in D:\ and it might go quick and easy (or not). Again,
>>>why risk it if the boot volume -- which is barely related to the volume
>>>which contains the corrupt W2k? (other than the boot.ini entry)

You could do an in-place upgrade, also known as a repair install, of Win2K
on D:, but why? If that installation of Win2K is working fine, don't touch
it. Not that a repair install would be harmful, just unnecessary.

> So, am I looking for trouble with XP and W2k in the same machine?

Not at all! Win2K never heard of WinXP, but WinXP is designed to live right
neighborly with Win2K. Except for all those files and folders taking up
disk space, neither will know the other is installed on your computer. When
you are booted into Win2K, E:\Windows will be "just another folder"; to
WinXP, D:\WinNT will be "just another folder". Neither will see the other's
Registry as "just files", and neither will interpret or work with the
other's Registry. If you have Microsoft Office installed in Win2K, you can
boot into WinXP and install it again into the same D:\Office (or whatever)
folder; WinXP will use the same application files (rather than use up disk
space for duplicates), but will write entries into WinXP's own Registry (in
E:\Windows) so that you can run Office. You can work on the same Office
documents and other data files when booted into either Win2K or WinXP.
Start a letter in Word in WinXP in the morning, then reboot into Win2K and
finish it in the afternoon.

> Anyone running W2k & XP as a multiboot?

Yes!! Well, not now, but for several months while WinXP was still in beta
(RC1, Release Candidate). As soon as WinXP "went gold", I retired Win2K.
But over the past 7 years or so, I've multibooted various combinations of
Win95/98 with WinNT4/2K/XP. Currently, I have 2 parallel installations of
WinXP, plus rarely-used installations of Win2003 Server and Longhorn.
Normally, I boot from my SCSI hard drive, so its first partition (formatted
FAT16) is my System Partition. My main WinXP is in D:\Windows. Others are
in X:\Windows, F:\Windows and L:\Windows. None of them interfere at all
with the others, but I can read/write all of the volumes when booted into
any of them. Just for insurance, I've created minimal (8 MB) primary
partitions at the front of each of my two IDE drives, changed to BIOS to
make each in turn my boot device, and run WinXP Setup to put the boot sector
and system files (NTLDR, etc.) in each of those partitions, so any of them
can become the System Partition. By changing the boot order in the BIOS, I
can boot into D:\Windows (or into X:\Windows) from any of these partitions.

> How serious of a change in one in the other requires "what kind of
> attention" to either or both?

No need to create this boogeyman, Michael. You are imagining problems that
don't exist. You can delete E:\WinNT entirely, or reinstall it - or even
reformat E: completely - with no effect on D:\WinNT. Then you can install
WinXP into E:\Windows (or X:\Windows), if you like, with no effect on
D:\WinNT. When you install WinXP (into any volume), WinXP Setup will update
C:\NTLDR, C:\NTDETECT.COM and C:\Boot.ini, plus the boot sector on C:. But
it will not touch anything on D: - or any other volume.

> So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.

I've tried.

Post back and tell us exactly what you did and what results you saw.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc@corridor.net
Microsoft Windows MVP

"Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Q0TOd.25265$Th1.19813@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> On or about 2/10/2005 4:57 PM, Colon Terminus with due consideration,
> replied :
>
>> "Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>> news:o gIOd.23480$Th1.12447@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>>>On or about 2/9/2005 10:44 PM, R. C. White with due consideration,
>>>replied
>>
>> :
>>
>>>>Hi, Michael.
>>>>
>>>>Well, your narrative meanders a bit and I might have missed some of it,
>>>>but I think I got the important parts...
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The WinNT4/2K/XP dual boot system is really pretty simple. It's kind of
>>>>like the letter "Y". The base of the Y is the System Partition; the
>>>>branches (and there can be more than two, of course) are the Boot
>>>>Folders for each installation of Windows (mix'n'match the NT-based
>>>>versions - and ignore Win9x/ME for now). And remember the
>>>>counter-intuitive terminology: We BOOT from the SYSTEM partition and
>>>>keep the operating SYSTEM files in the BOOT folder. The point is that
>>>>there is only ONE System Partition, even though there may be multiple
>>>>boot folders. There is only one set of the system files (NTLDR,
>>>>NTDETECT.COM and Boot.ini), and they must be in the Root of the System
>>>>Partition (typically, C:\).
>>>
>>>Line three of my post:
>>>
>>>"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
>>>in a small Fat primary partition. "
>>>
>>>Not much meanering.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Although Microsoft (and nearly every Windows guru) strongly advises that
>>>>only one copy of Windows be installed in a single volume, it is possible
>>>>to install multiple copies in a volume. The default name of the boot
>>>>volume is \Windows, except in WinNT and Win2K, in which the default name
>>>>is \WinNT. If Win2K is installed into volumes C: and D:, the default
>>>>names will be C:\WinNT and D:\WinNT. But if Win2K is installed twice
>>>>into C:, the name of the second must be a variation, such as C:\WinNT-2.
>>>
>>>Bolume? Partition? Same/same for me.
>>>
>>>One volume (FAT) w/DOS and the boot files for two installs of W@K --
>>>each in a different volume/partition. Anyone miss that?
>>>
>>>
>>>>What happened in your case? Are both your copies of Win2K in Drive C:?
>>>
>>>No, C:\ is the FAT partitition with Dos and the start/boot files for
>>>both installs of W2k.
>>>
>>>Again:
>>>"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
>>>in a small Fat primary partition. "
>>>
>>>Try this on for size:
>>>
>>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>>problem. It's a goner.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Win2K will not obey an order to delete its own boot folder, because
>>>>that's like obeying an order to commit suicide. But it will happily
>>>>delete another installation's boot folder, because if you are booted to
>>>>D:\WinNT, then folder C:\WinNT is "just another folder". So, if all you
>>>>want to do is get rid of your "bad" Win2K, just boot into the good one
>>>>and delete the boot folder for the bad one, then edit C:\boot.ini to
>>>>remove the line that offers to boot it.
>>>
>>>Well, while the installs of W2k are in different partitions..they share
>>>the boot partition, C:\
>>>
>>>
>>>>One casualty of the deletion of the boot folder will be the Registry for
>>>>that copy of Win2K. The Registry in Win2K is a set of special files,
>>>>all in the \WinNT\system32\config folder; when you delete \Win2K, that
>>>>entire Registry gets deleted, too. The computer will forget about all
>>>>the applications that had been installed in that copy. You will need to
>>>>install those apps again, unless they had been installed already in the
>>>>remaining copy of Win2K, even if the apps files remain on the HD, so
>>>>that entries can be made in the good Win2K's Registry.
>>>
>>>Um, the boot folder need not be touched -- (it stands alone on C:|)
>>>-execpt for an entry to the deleted W2k in boot.ini.
>>>
>>>I wrote: " I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the
>>>W2k install? And remove its reference from boot.ini?"
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you wanted to preserve your original Registry, you could do an
>>>>in-place upgrade (also known as a repair reinstallation). But if you
>>>>want to wipe out your original Win2K and start over, you could just
>>>>delete C:\WinNT, but don't reformat C:, then clean install Win2K again
>>>>into C:. You would need to reinstall your apps, but your data files
>>>>would remain intact.
>>>
>>>
>>>The inplace upgrade didn't take. (after the crash which wiped out the
>>>profiles, it did an in place upgrade -- all was fine - untill
>>>re-install of SP4, - It blinked out during the install of the SP and
>>>nothing will bring it back - It's history. I just want the best way
>>>to remove it)
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you have questions, please post back.
>>>
>>>One question? If I delete the W2k folders and the boot.ini entry, is
>>>that enough to prevent future problems (ex: confusion that th removed
>>>W2k once existed in that partition.
>>>
>>>Or, put better. I want to totally remove one install of W2k in one
>>>volume which is in a differrent volume than the boot volume and the
>>>other install of W2k --
>>>
>>>C:\ FAT -- DOS and boot files for two W2k installs
>>>D:\Newer install of W2k which will stay.
>>>E:\ Totally corrupt W2k - Each repair has seemed to lead to another
>>>problem. It's a goner.
>>>.
>>>1. I don't want to reformat E:\ volume - Um. if that was a
>>>preference? I wouldn't be writing. Yeah, format E: was an early
>>>'solution' -- which would wipe out all the other data in the volume I
>>>wish to keep...
>>>
>>>2. I don't want to disturb the boot volume. Yeah, I could do a repair
>>>of the install in D:\ and it might go quick and easy (or not). Again,
>>>why risk it if the boot volume -- which is barely related to the volume
>>>which contains the corrupt W2k? (other than the boot.ini entry)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> If I understand your problem then you can simply edit boot.ini and remove
>> the reference to the install on E:. Then boot to your D: install and
>> remove
>> the following folders on E:
>> Winnt
>> Documents and Settings
>> Program Files
>>
>>
>>
>
> Thanks
>
> Yes, I knew removing the W2k folder (and getting the entry out of the
> boot.ini) would remove the data off the drive (freeing space) and of
> course disallow booting into an OS that was gone.
>
> My concern was: Is that good enough? As I plan to install XP in the
> volume (not the same volume as the boot which is on a small FAT for all
> OS's) I was concerned registry or various data on the disk would still be
> there an may cause problems for XP . When one install an app? The
> process goes deeper than the information one can 'see' on the drive.
>
> So, I knew your suggestion was an option but and it would provide space
> for a new install - but is deleting the folder truly an uninstall or is
> it asking for trouble in the future.
>
> However? It may be moot!
>
> Now I'm concerned whether I should even put XP in with the other W2k
> install (the one that'st OK). The problem? XP must go in after W2k --
> no problem for the first install? At least no problem for XP.
>
> But what if I need to do something drastic with the other W2k install
> after W2k goes in? As I understand it, major changes to W2k mean serious
> trouble for XP. If you know? The 'repair' for XP (from the disk, not the
> console) isn't as selective. In fact? They admit that 'R'" - Repair in
> XP amounts to an install! Not the selective repair like in W2k!
>
> So, am I looking for trouble with XP and W2k in the same machine?
> Regardless how I choose to eliminate the current install of W2k? I'll
> still have another install in another partition. Am I going to be looking
> at a lot of downtime for both OS's when one has a problem or if a major
> update changes the files in the boot partition that they will both share?
>
> Anyone running W2k & XP as a multiboot? How serious of a change in one in
> the other requires "what kind of attention" to either or both? I want to
> stay away from a boot manager...while they are working they offer
> nefits - when they fail? it's a nightmare.
>
> So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.
Anonymous
February 11, 2005 10:05:59 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

On or about 2/11/2005 11:55 AM, R. C. White with due consideration,
replied :

<Snip>

You've been more than kind and patient - thanks!

>> How serious of a change in one in the other requires "what kind of
>> attention" to either or both?


>
>
> No need to create this boogeyman, Michael. You are imagining problems
> that don't exist. You can delete E:\WinNT entirely, or reinstall it -
> or even reformat E: completely - with no effect on D:\WinNT. Then you
> can install WinXP into E:\Windows (or X:\Windows), if you like, with no
> effect on D:\WinNT. When you install WinXP (into any volume), WinXP
> Setup will update C:\NTLDR, C:\NTDETECT.COM and C:\Boot.ini, plus the
> boot sector on C:. But it will not touch anything on D: - or any other
> volume.
>
>> So, give me the lowdown of a multiboot with SP and W2k.
>
>
> I've tried.
>
> Post back and tell us exactly what you did and what results you saw.


Why am I worried?

OK, I bought a new machine. It had XP installed. I wanted a FAT/DOS
partition - I'm goofy and use a lot of DOS utilities and floppys are
garbage - plus it had XP in a single partition and I needed to move
multiple partitions over from the old box..

So! The new drive is all formatted with the FAT (And my DOS apps) and a
couple of FAT32's for W2k and the new XP. I then intalled XP and
planned to use it to bring my W2k over from the old box (via network).

The plan (against all advice) to migrate the W2k from an old machine to
the new one (via a network). Hey, with a quick repair (mainly the HAL
and other hardware fixes) W2k was up and running.

Yes, I knew 2K should go in first but I figured
1. It might not make the migration and I would at least have a viable XP
in place.an
Plus, the 2k it had a buttload of apps with it I figured I could be up
and running if it made it through the migration. It was a wise choice
to use XP to migrate the 2k over -- Hey, it worked!

To repair the XP? It wasn't a 'repair'. Check my posts from October.
An XP 'repair' is nothing like repair in 2k -- it is an install.

Then,later? I had another minor problem with W2k...easily fixed? But?!
XP 'acted' as though I'd installed W2k again!

So? If XP is so sensitive to changes to W2k (indicatiing to XP an
"older" Windows version appeared?) I reallly am not looking forward to
the potential grief I will face because of all the updates that OS's need.

Yeah, I am a little concerned that XP will overreact to changes that are
made to W2k.

I've heard that just about any major change to 2k (that will impact XP)
can be easily solved by simply using the repair console and using
FIXBOOT as that is all a w2k change will effect in XP. If that is true?
I'm not worried. However? I did experience more time than was
necessary to bring back XP after changes were made to 2k. If a few
moves can be made in the Repair Console? Fine! But if it mean using XP
"repair"? Forget it!

So, the ball is in your court. Is XP sensitive to changes made in 2k in
a multiboot environment?

Thanks!

Michael

> RC
Anonymous
February 12, 2005 11:53:39 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

From what I can tell you want to remove an install of Windows 2000 and preserve the files on it. Nope not gonna
happen. You can copy the files you want from that installation somewhere else then byte the bullet and reformat and
install. The fact that you have a dual-boot system is irrelevant other than you can use that system to get the files off the
other system you are going to waste.

--
George Hester
_________________________________
"Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:ifyOd.182273$w62.176245@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> This should be easy? Well, there are numerous solutions to my general
> question – either they don’t completely address it or they don’t agree.
>
>
> I haven’t found ant=y of several articles that agree with the best ‘plan’.
>
> Yes, Andre has most points covered? If he addressed my ‘problem’, I
> missed it.
>
> I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
> in a small Fat primary partition.
>
> One install is completely corrupt - It crashed after an
> upgrade/migration to a new drive -that went ok - My problem was when I
> had to re-install SP4 and it blinked out - -never to return to it’s
> normal state.. I’ve tried everything and the profiles as well as the
> configuration are whacked. No matter what fixes I’ve tried it reverts
> back to it’s corrupt state. Anyway, it’s the original install and is
> full of junk. It has to go.
>
> So? I find articles on:
>
> How to uninstall a W2k stand alone - simple? Wipe it all out from the
> boot CD – Or if there is nothing of import on the partition? Reformat.
>
> Or
>
> If it’s a dual boot with a non boot (NT based) loader scenario –
> pretty much the same thing -except I’d still lose my boot files (on a
> primary partition that serves both install of W2k.) Yeah, I can
> ‘repair’ the other W2k? I’ve had mostly luck with repair - I’d rather
> avoid doing anything more than removing the reference to the other
> install from the boot.ini.
>
> So, I have yet to see how to:
>
> 1. Remove W2k when it shares a partition with other apps I can’t give
> up in a reformat.
> 2. Remove W2k and ‘not’ destroy the references to the other install of
> the other W2k in the boot partition.
>
> I know I can wipe out the various folders associated with the W2k
> install? And remove its reference from boot.ini? Yeah, that will free
> up a load of space.
>
> Something tells me that enough stuff is going to be left in the
> registry that I may have problems if I install another OS in that
> partition. (My plan)
>
> So, if I simply do the file delete? Knowing much of the install will
> not ‘go’ with the folder? I could use a registry cleaner and hope I get
> all of the W2k references out and don’t remove the application
> references that are used by the other install.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> Is there a solution to remove a W2k install where there is another W2k
> in the system (different partition) along with preserving the other
> files in the same partition as the W2k that has to go (no, I don’t want
> to reformat the partition).
>
> No, I’m not worried about the ‘Program Files -Documents and Settings.
> They’ll go and I’ve kept my installs to a minimum (directly to Program
> Files). I am concerned about the shared/common folders? But that’s a
> risk I’ll have to take. They’ll go and I’ll see how much I lose in the
> functionality of the apps.
>
> Is deleting the W3k files, cleaning the registry and removing the
> boot.ini reference my only solution given what I have to work with?
>
> BTW? Is there a simpler way to combine a repair of W2k that combines
> SP4 in one single move? Silly question. I was doing fine until I had
> to ‘update’ the migrated install to be SP4 compliant...
>
> Trust me? I don’t believe it is worth saving this install - it is
> going to leave.
>
> Michael
>
>
> --
> "Fear not those who argue but those who dodge."
>
> (Marie Ebner von Eschenbach, Aphorisms, 1905)
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 5:15:11 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

On or about 2/12/2005 8:53 PM, George Hester with due consideration,
replied :
> From what I can tell you want to remove an install of Windows 2000 and preserve the files on it. Nope not gonna
> happen. You can copy the files you want from that installation somewhere else then byte the bullet and reformat and
> install. The fact that you have a dual-boot system is irrelevant other than you can use that system to get the files off the
> other system you are going to waste.
>

George,

Sorry - I must not have been clear.

I desire the opposite. I want a complete uninstall of the one of two
versions of W2k. (I multiboot)

I knew I could remove the OS folder but didn't want any lingering
references (other than the boot.ini which I can delete).

However, as my main concern dealt with the conflict between XP boot
files *which will replace the W2k install* and W2k which is left --
I'm as peace now that I know that I can manually replace the files that
W2k overwrites (if a repair is done after the install of XP) Not only
do I have a boot CD (now) -- I've always had a floppy of the boot files
and have booted from that if there was any corruptionor overwriting and
can fix most things as I have C:\ formatted as FAT and it's full of DOS
progs.

Here's a curious note? A friend told me yesterday that when I delete
the 2k folders? It also removes references to the install in the
registry? Never heard of that and am not sure how that can happen --
but I'm OK with that!

Actually there isn't much to preserve in that install. Yeah, I'll have
to reinstll some apps...But for some reason, when it crashed during a an
update my profiles were destroyed beyond repair. I've used all the
tricks out there (replacing the files in config and even the
...dat's...for some reason upon reboot it refuses to accept the new files
(which I have from various dates).

For the hell of it I tried a a new install? All it did was create new
profiles --- yet insists on logging onto the corrupt versions!

It's in my old machine which I use mostly for storage (via network) and
I still have the 'old' original W2k install working fine. The problem
is that it's five years old, full of junk files and has filled the
volume (on drive 1)

Soon, I'll have to wipe that out next - it's long overdue.

On my wish list are two items.

1. A way to truly clean an OS of non essential files. Not so much a reg
cleaner -- that's barely 20+ meg. But my WINNT and System32 is probably
20--30% full of files that aren't necessary )after five years. That is,
the a later install had all the progs and updates as the original and is
only 2/3's the size.

Now with larger disks it probably isn't a problem, but in 2000 I didn't
have the luxury of devoting several extra gig to the volume for W2k.
When I tried to increase he sice of the volume with PM It ruined the
geometry of the drive and now (though it works fine) PM won't touch it!
The famous *error 108?*. Yeah, PM is suppose to solve a problem and
it leaves me with a drive that PM won't get near...

2. Another wish (there may be an answer). After an OS gets to be a few
years old? A clean install is just the beginning. I spend more time
bringing 2k up to date with the updates, SP's, the new IE...

No, a clean install is just the begining and it would be great if there
was a way to 'get current' without all the seperate steps *after* a
clean install.

Is there a way to create a disk that streamlines an install so it's not
just the beginning of installing all the files that are currently needed?

See, I'm either stuck with a vesion tha't's five years old and full of
things I don't need or starting from scratch and adding, piece by peice
five years worth of updtaed files!

It would be nice if MS offered and 'upgrade' at a reasonable price that
allowed us original owners of 2k to avoid the *after the install" grind
of bringing the OS up to date. As it is now? A clean install is just
the beginning of the process. The real work (and time) comes after I'm
done with the original disk!

Saldy, that's why I'll probably go with XP which is at least a disk that
is current.

Am I missing something or is there a way I can make an install of my
original W2k a less time consumeing effort? I prefer using it? But the
original disk is not worth all that much! It's only enough to get started...
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 5:15:12 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general,microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

I am not sure I understand what you are looking to do. I am assuming you have two installs of Windows each in their
own partition. When you remove an install in one of those partitions by reformatting that partition then boot.ini (as I
understand where you have it - and that is correct) will lose that call to that operating system. Make a back up of it
anyway before starting this process. Then when you install the new op sys in that partion you can use the old version of
boot.ini put it back where it belongs but use what is in the "new" boot ini to add to the old one so the new op sys
appears in the loader menu.

--
George Hester
_________________________________
"Slip Kid" <G-2@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:p tnQd.41438$Th1.9362@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> On or about 2/12/2005 8:53 PM, George Hester with due consideration,
> replied :
> > From what I can tell you want to remove an install of Windows 2000 and preserve the files on it. Nope not gonna
> > happen. You can copy the files you want from that installation somewhere else then byte the bullet and reformat and
> > install. The fact that you have a dual-boot system is irrelevant other than you can use that system to get the files off the
> > other system you are going to waste.
> >
>
> George,
>
> Sorry - I must not have been clear.
>
> I desire the opposite. I want a complete uninstall of the one of two
> versions of W2k. (I multiboot)
>
> I knew I could remove the OS folder but didn't want any lingering
> references (other than the boot.ini which I can delete).
>
> However, as my main concern dealt with the conflict between XP boot
> files *which will replace the W2k install* and W2k which is left --
> I'm as peace now that I know that I can manually replace the files that
> W2k overwrites (if a repair is done after the install of XP) Not only
> do I have a boot CD (now) -- I've always had a floppy of the boot files
> and have booted from that if there was any corruptionor overwriting and
> can fix most things as I have C:\ formatted as FAT and it's full of DOS
> progs.
>
> Here's a curious note? A friend told me yesterday that when I delete
> the 2k folders? It also removes references to the install in the
> registry? Never heard of that and am not sure how that can happen --
> but I'm OK with that!
>
> Actually there isn't much to preserve in that install. Yeah, I'll have
> to reinstll some apps...But for some reason, when it crashed during a an
> update my profiles were destroyed beyond repair. I've used all the
> tricks out there (replacing the files in config and even the
> ..dat's...for some reason upon reboot it refuses to accept the new files
> (which I have from various dates).
>
> For the hell of it I tried a a new install? All it did was create new
> profiles --- yet insists on logging onto the corrupt versions!
>
> It's in my old machine which I use mostly for storage (via network) and
> I still have the 'old' original W2k install working fine. The problem
> is that it's five years old, full of junk files and has filled the
> volume (on drive 1)
>
> Soon, I'll have to wipe that out next - it's long overdue.
>
> On my wish list are two items.
>
> 1. A way to truly clean an OS of non essential files. Not so much a reg
> cleaner -- that's barely 20+ meg. But my WINNT and System32 is probably
> 20--30% full of files that aren't necessary )after five years. That is,
> the a later install had all the progs and updates as the original and is
> only 2/3's the size.
>
> Now with larger disks it probably isn't a problem, but in 2000 I didn't
> have the luxury of devoting several extra gig to the volume for W2k.
> When I tried to increase he sice of the volume with PM It ruined the
> geometry of the drive and now (though it works fine) PM won't touch it!
> The famous *error 108?*. Yeah, PM is suppose to solve a problem and
> it leaves me with a drive that PM won't get near...
>
> 2. Another wish (there may be an answer). After an OS gets to be a few
> years old? A clean install is just the beginning. I spend more time
> bringing 2k up to date with the updates, SP's, the new IE...
>
> No, a clean install is just the begining and it would be great if there
> was a way to 'get current' without all the seperate steps *after* a
> clean install.
>
> Is there a way to create a disk that streamlines an install so it's not
> just the beginning of installing all the files that are currently needed?
>
> See, I'm either stuck with a vesion tha't's five years old and full of
> things I don't need or starting from scratch and adding, piece by peice
> five years worth of updtaed files!
>
> It would be nice if MS offered and 'upgrade' at a reasonable price that
> allowed us original owners of 2k to avoid the *after the install" grind
> of bringing the OS up to date. As it is now? A clean install is just
> the beginning of the process. The real work (and time) comes after I'm
> done with the original disk!
>
> Saldy, that's why I'll probably go with XP which is at least a disk that
> is current.
>
> Am I missing something or is there a way I can make an install of my
> original W2k a less time consumeing effort? I prefer using it? But the
> original disk is not worth all that much! It's only enough to get started...
Anonymous
February 16, 2005 6:15:16 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

"I want a complete uninstall of the one of two
versions of W2k."
"I have two installs of W2k. Different partitions with the boot files
in a small Fat primary partition."

So what is the confusion here?

Simply boot into the working boot and using disk manager remove the
partitiion containing the corrupt OS boot. Edit the present boot.ini
and remove the entry dealing with that boot.

You are done. Nothing else to do.

Its not clear if you are clear on what to do if you
install W2K AFTER XP. Just to clarify the EASIEST thing
to do is create a folder called FILES and copy ntldr and ntdetect to
this folder. Install W2K. You will only boot
W2k now. Copy the backedup file back to the root overwriting the xp
versions. Now you can boot both.

If you didn't backup the two files you have to run XP's
Recovery console and the utility Fixboot.



--
wanderer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
------------------------------------------------------------------------
View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1413466.html
!