Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

System restore isn't working

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 6:54:53 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Since I had been having several problems lately & because I know it can't be
because of a virus or sypware,(there updated ever day) I receded to try
'System Restore'. I choose a time which I considered to be from before the
troubles began but once the system rebooted I got the message that the
system can't be restored to that checkpoint. I choose 3 more dates & all
gave the same results, that I can't restore the chosen date.

What's going on? What's the point of this tool unless it works? Where does
one go from here?

Could I try reinstalling XP over my existing installation? If I did this is
the reinstall smart enough to know that it shouldn't update using older
files if I already have a newer one in place?

--
Thanks in advance

More about : system restore working

Anonymous
June 7, 2005 6:54:54 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Hi

One or more of the System Restore files could have been corrupted - try
turning SR off/on - but I'm afraid that you will lose any existing
checkpoints:

Right click My Computer, select Properties and then the System Restore tab.
Enable 'Turn off System Restore on all drives' and reboot your PC. After
that 1st reboot go back into SR and disable 'Turn off System Restore on all
drives' and reboot your PC again. After that 2nd reboot you should have one
new SR checkpoint.

--

Will Denny
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
Please reply to the News Groups


"Videot" <notathome@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:ulqhC$yaFHA.2664@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Since I had been having several problems lately & because I know it can't
> be because of a virus or sypware,(there updated ever day) I receded to try
> 'System Restore'. I choose a time which I considered to be from before
> the troubles began but once the system rebooted I got the message that the
> system can't be restored to that checkpoint. I choose 3 more dates & all
> gave the same results, that I can't restore the chosen date.
>
> What's going on? What's the point of this tool unless it works? Where
> does one go from here?
>
> Could I try reinstalling XP over my existing installation? If I did this
> is the reinstall smart enough to know that it shouldn't update using older
> files if I already have a newer one in place?
>
> --
> Thanks in advance
>
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 6:54:54 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Hi Videot,

Here are some troubleshooting tips for System Restore in Windows XP.

Go to Start - Run and type eventvwr.msc and press enter.
Click on System in the left pane.
Click the gray title “Source” at the top of the source name column in
the right pane to sort by source name, look for "sr" and "srservice".
Double click on each of these events, then click on the button below
the two arrows in the upper right corner. This will copy the event
information to the clipboard. Paste the information for each of the
two event here. This will help us in diagnosing the problem.
System Restore Failures to restore:
http://bertk.mvps.org/html/srfail.html

--
Regards,
Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
http://dts-l.org/


Videot wrote:
> Since I had been having several problems lately & because
> I know it can't be because of a virus or sypware,(there
> updated ever day) I receded to try 'System Restore'. I
> choose a time which I considered to be from before the
> troubles began but once the system rebooted I got the
> message that the system can't be restored to that
> checkpoint. I choose 3 more dates & all gave the same
> results, that I can't restore the chosen date.
> What's going on? What's the point of this tool unless it
> works? Where does one go from here?
>
> Could I try reinstalling XP over my existing
> installation? If I did this is the reinstall smart
> enough to know that it shouldn't update using older files
> if I already have a newer one in place?
Related resources
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 7:58:28 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

As what about the reinstall over existing versions of XP questions?

Thanks in adavance
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 7:58:29 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Hi

Either way the checkpoints are going to lost. Turning SR off/on is a lot
quicker than a 'Repair' install.

--

Will Denny
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
Please reply to the News Groups


"The Old Fart" <videot@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:eCZJ6azaFHA.724@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> As what about the reinstall over existing versions of XP questions?
>
> Thanks in adavance
>
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 10:25:12 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

"Videot" <notathome@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:ulqhC$yaFHA.2664@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Since I had been having several problems lately & because I know it can't
> be because of a virus or sypware,(there updated ever day) I receded to try
> 'System Restore'. I choose a time which I considered to be from before
> the troubles began but once the system rebooted I got the message that the
> system can't be restored to that checkpoint. I choose 3 more dates & all
> gave the same results, that I can't restore the chosen date.
>
> What's going on? What's the point of this tool unless it works? Where
> does one go from here?
>
> Could I try reinstalling XP over my existing installation? If I did this
> is the reinstall smart enough to know that it shouldn't update using older
> files if I already have a newer one in place?
>
> --
> Thanks in advance
If you are lucky, you can repair/restore System Restore (SR) but it really
isn't worth it as SR is simply unreliable. As seems to be the natural law,
it doesn't 'work' when you most need it. Fortunately there is an
alternative that appears to be rock solid, namely ERUNT. ERUNT will create
a restore point is configurable and is freeware. ERUNT can be downloaded
from here www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 8:54:42 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

This is incorrect. ERUNT does not create a restore point in the way
System Restore does. It only backs up the registry. Nothing else. Big
difference.

--
Regards,
Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
http://dts-l.org/

Edward W. Thompson wrote:
> If you are lucky, you can repair/restore System Restore
> (SR) but it really isn't worth it as SR is simply
> unreliable. As seems to be the natural law, it doesn't
> 'work' when you most need it. Fortunately there is an
> alternative that appears to be rock solid, namely ERUNT. ERUNT will
> create a restore point is configurable and is
> freeware. ERUNT can be downloaded from here
> www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 10:19:54 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

"Bert Kinney" <bert@NSmvps.org> wrote in message
news:eXv0JxGbFHA.2756@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> This is incorrect. ERUNT does not create a restore point in the way System
> Restore does. It only backs up the registry. Nothing else. Big difference.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
> http://dts-l.org/
>
> Edward W. Thompson wrote:
>> If you are lucky, you can repair/restore System Restore
>> (SR) but it really isn't worth it as SR is simply
>> unreliable. As seems to be the natural law, it doesn't
>> 'work' when you most need it. Fortunately there is an
>> alternative that appears to be rock solid, namely ERUNT. ERUNT will
>> create a restore point is configurable and is
>> freeware. ERUNT can be downloaded from here
>> www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/
>
Aren't you nit-picking Bert. Effectively ERUNT will provide a file or files
from which the Registry can be restored if required. In what way is this
functionaly different from SR? I certainly have restored the Registry from
ERUNT as well as SR (in the past that is when it worked) and the end product
was the same. Where's the 'big difference'?

If the 'big difference' is in the case of ERUNT each 'registry backup' is
standalone, it would seem to me to be a very big plus and is superior in all
respects to SR. From a functional point of view both are the same. I
venture to suggest that most users are concerned with function not process.
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 2:10:15 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Edward W. Thompson wrote:

> "Bert Kinney" wrote
>> This is incorrect. ERUNT does not create a restore point
>> in the way System Restore does. It only backs up the
>> registry. Nothing else. Big difference. --
>> Regards,
>> Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
>> http://dts-l.org/
>>
>> Edward W. Thompson wrote:
>>> If you are lucky, you can repair/restore System Restore
>>> (SR) but it really isn't worth it as SR is simply
>>> unreliable. As seems to be the natural law, it doesn't
>>> 'work' when you most need it. Fortunately there is an
>>> alternative that appears to be rock solid, namely
>>> ERUNT. ERUNT will create a restore point is
>>> configurable and is freeware. ERUNT can be downloaded from here
>>> www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/
>>
> Aren't you nit-picking Bert.

No, I am simply pointing out inaccurate information so that reader
will not think Erunt is a substitute for System Restore.

> Effectively ERUNT will
> provide a file or files from which the Registry can be
> restored if required. In what way is this functionaly
> different from SR?

I am surprised at this question considering the amount of information
you have been supplied with concerning System Restore. Here's the
difference.

System Restore:
What's Restored
Registry (note: some current values will persist)
Profiles (local only—roaming user profiles not impacted by
restore)
COM+ DB
WFP.dll cache
WMI DB
IIS Metabase
Files with extensions listed in the Monitored File
Extensions list
Here is a list of files and folders System Restore monitors.
http://bertk.mvps.org/html/filesfolders.html
What's Not Restored
DRM settings
SAM hives (does not restore passwords)
WPA settings (Windows authentication information is not
restored)
Contents of the My Documents folder(s)
Specific directories/files listed in the Monitored File
Extensions list
Any file with an extension not listed in the Monitored File
Extensions list
Items listed in both Filesnottobackup and KeysnottoRestore
(hklm->system->controlset001->control->backuprestore->filesnottobackup
and keysnottorestore)
User-created data stored in the user profile
Contents of redirected folders

Erunt:
Backs up and restores the registry, nothing else.

> I certainly have restored the
> Registry from ERUNT as well as SR (in the past that is
> when it worked) and the end product was the same. Where's the 'big
> difference'?

Obviously the problem you were experiencing at the time laid in the
registry! Not one of the files or folder System Restore monitors.

> If the 'big difference' is in the case of ERUNT each
> 'registry backup' is standalone, it would seem to me to
> be a very big plus and is superior in all respects to SR.
> From a functional point of view both are the same. I
> venture to suggest that most users are concerned with
> function not process.

As you can see above they are NOT the same.

Erunt is an excellent application for what it does. I personally
recommend it. But please don't make it out to be something it is not.

I am aware of the issues you are having with System Restore on your
system. I share in your frustration. It's not perfect, and it is the
target of virus and malware hacker.

For the majority of users System Restore works as designed.

--
Regards,
Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
http://dts-l.org/
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 10:30:47 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 10:10:15 -0400, "Bert Kinney" <bert@NSmvps.org>
wrote:

>
>
>Edward W. Thompson wrote:
>
>> "Bert Kinney" wrote
>>> This is incorrect. ERUNT does not create a restore point
>>> in the way System Restore does. It only backs up the
>>> registry. Nothing else. Big difference. --
>>> Regards,
>>> Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>>
>>> Edward W. Thompson wrote:
>>>> If you are lucky, you can repair/restore System Restore
>>>> (SR) but it really isn't worth it as SR is simply
>>>> unreliable. As seems to be the natural law, it doesn't
>>>> 'work' when you most need it. Fortunately there is an
>>>> alternative that appears to be rock solid, namely
>>>> ERUNT. ERUNT will create a restore point is
>>>> configurable and is freeware. ERUNT can be downloaded from here
>>>> www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/
>>>
>> Aren't you nit-picking Bert.
>
>No, I am simply pointing out inaccurate information so that reader
>will not think Erunt is a substitute for System Restore.
>
>> Effectively ERUNT will
>> provide a file or files from which the Registry can be
>> restored if required. In what way is this functionaly
>> different from SR?
>
>I am surprised at this question considering the amount of information
>you have been supplied with concerning System Restore. Here's the
>difference.
>
>System Restore:
> What's Restored
> Registry (note: some current values will persist)
> Profiles (local only—roaming user profiles not impacted by
>restore)
> COM+ DB
> WFP.dll cache
> WMI DB
> IIS Metabase
> Files with extensions listed in the Monitored File
>Extensions list
>Here is a list of files and folders System Restore monitors.
>http://bertk.mvps.org/html/filesfolders.html
> What's Not Restored
> DRM settings
> SAM hives (does not restore passwords)
> WPA settings (Windows authentication information is not
>restored)
> Contents of the My Documents folder(s)
> Specific directories/files listed in the Monitored File
>Extensions list
> Any file with an extension not listed in the Monitored File
>Extensions list
> Items listed in both Filesnottobackup and KeysnottoRestore
> (hklm->system->controlset001->control->backuprestore->filesnottobackup
>and keysnottorestore)
> User-created data stored in the user profile
> Contents of redirected folders
>
>Erunt:
>Backs up and restores the registry, nothing else.
>
>> I certainly have restored the
>> Registry from ERUNT as well as SR (in the past that is
>> when it worked) and the end product was the same. Where's the 'big
>> difference'?
>
>Obviously the problem you were experiencing at the time laid in the
>registry! Not one of the files or folder System Restore monitors.
>
>> If the 'big difference' is in the case of ERUNT each
>> 'registry backup' is standalone, it would seem to me to
>> be a very big plus and is superior in all respects to SR.
>> From a functional point of view both are the same. I
>> venture to suggest that most users are concerned with
>> function not process.
>
>As you can see above they are NOT the same.
>
>Erunt is an excellent application for what it does. I personally
>recommend it. But please don't make it out to be something it is not.
>
>I am aware of the issues you are having with System Restore on your
>system. I share in your frustration. It's not perfect, and it is the
>target of virus and malware hacker.
>
>For the majority of users System Restore works as designed.

Thanks for the explanation but I think that the reason for SR is to
provide a means to restore the Registry as I suspect that in the vast
majority of cases that is what is required when problems occur. If
what I think is valid then ERUNT does exactly that without the
uncertainty of SR. That uncertainty is principally brought about by
all SR points being interdependent whereas each ERUNT event is
standalone.

While SR may function without problems for the majority of users there
is no way of knowing the percentage of users that have and are
experiencing SR problems. From the NGs it does appear that problems
with SR are not uncommon but whether the NGs are a snapshot of all
users I couldn't guess.

Returning to the subject, SR is unreliable and an alternative is
required. At present the only viable alternative I know is ERUNT.
The additional features that appear to be offered by SR appear to me
to be of less significance when compared to the need to be able to
restore the Registry.
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 10:30:48 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Edward W. Thompson <thomeduk1@btopenworld.com> wrote:

>Returning to the subject, SR is unreliable and an alternative is
>required. At present the only viable alternative I know is ERUNT.
>The additional features that appear to be offered by SR appear to me
>to be of less significance when compared to the need to be able to
>restore the Registry.

I'm in total agreement. I have used both. SR has failed me before,
while ERUNT has never failed me.
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 3:07:25 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

All I suggest is that when Erunt is recommended, in place of System
Restore, it be made clear what it's function is, and nothing more. It
is not fair to mislead the reader into thinking it is a replacement of
System Restore.

--
Regards,
Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
http://dts-l.org/

Edward W. Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 10:10:15 -0400, "Bert Kinney"
> <bert@NSmvps.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Edward W. Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> "Bert Kinney" wrote
>>>> This is incorrect. ERUNT does not create a restore
>>>> point in the way System Restore does. It only backs up
>>>> the registry. Nothing else. Big difference. --
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>>>
>>>> Edward W. Thompson wrote:
>>>>> If you are lucky, you can repair/restore System
>>>>> Restore (SR) but it really isn't worth it as SR is
>>>>> simply
>>>>> unreliable. As seems to be the natural law, it
>>>>> doesn't 'work' when you most need it. Fortunately
>>>>> there is an alternative that appears to be rock
>>>>> solid, namely
>>>>> ERUNT. ERUNT will create a restore point is
>>>>> configurable and is freeware. ERUNT can be downloaded
>>>>> from here www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/
>>>>
>>> Aren't you nit-picking Bert.
>>
>> No, I am simply pointing out inaccurate information so
>> that reader
>> will not think Erunt is a substitute for System Restore.
>>
>>> Effectively ERUNT will
>>> provide a file or files from which the Registry can be
>>> restored if required. In what way is this functionaly
>>> different from SR?
>>
>> I am surprised at this question considering the amount
>> of information
>> you have been supplied with concerning System Restore.
>> Here's the
>> difference.
>>
>> System Restore:
>> What's Restored
>> Registry (note: some current values will
>> persist) Profiles (local only-roaming user
>> profiles not impacted by
>> restore)
>> COM+ DB
>> WFP.dll cache
>> WMI DB
>> IIS Metabase
>> Files with extensions listed in the Monitored
>> File
>> Extensions list
>> Here is a list of files and folders System Restore
>> monitors. http://bertk.mvps.org/html/filesfolders.html
>> What's Not Restored
>> DRM settings
>> SAM hives (does not restore passwords)
>> WPA settings (Windows authentication
>> information is not
>> restored)
>> Contents of the My Documents folder(s)
>> Specific directories/files listed in the
>> Monitored File
>> Extensions list
>> Any file with an extension not listed in the
>> Monitored File Extensions list
>> Items listed in both Filesnottobackup and
>> KeysnottoRestore
>> (hklm->system->controlset001->control->backuprestore->filesnottobackup
>> and keysnottorestore)
>> User-created data stored in the user profile
>> Contents of redirected folders
>>
>> Erunt:
>> Backs up and restores the registry, nothing else.
>>
>>> I certainly have restored the
>>> Registry from ERUNT as well as SR (in the past that is
>>> when it worked) and the end product was the same.
>>> Where's the 'big difference'?
>>
>> Obviously the problem you were experiencing at the time
>> laid in the
>> registry! Not one of the files or folder System Restore
>> monitors.
>>
>>> If the 'big difference' is in the case of ERUNT each
>>> 'registry backup' is standalone, it would seem to me to
>>> be a very big plus and is superior in all respects to
>>> SR.
>>> From a functional point of view both are the same. I
>>> venture to suggest that most users are concerned with
>>> function not process.
>>
>> As you can see above they are NOT the same.
>>
>> Erunt is an excellent application for what it does. I
>> personally
>> recommend it. But please don't make it out to be
>> something it is not.
>>
>> I am aware of the issues you are having with System
>> Restore on your
>> system. I share in your frustration. It's not perfect,
>> and it is the
>> target of virus and malware hacker.
>>
>> For the majority of users System Restore works as
>> designed.
>
> Thanks for the explanation but I think that the reason
> for SR is to provide a means to restore the Registry as I
> suspect that in the vast majority of cases that is what
> is required when problems occur. If what I think is
> valid then ERUNT does exactly that without the
> uncertainty of SR. That uncertainty is principally
> brought about by all SR points being interdependent
> whereas each ERUNT event is standalone.
>
> While SR may function without problems for the majority
> of users there is no way of knowing the percentage of
> users that have and are experiencing SR problems. From
> the NGs it does appear that problems with SR are not
> uncommon but whether the NGs are a snapshot of all users
> I couldn't guess.
>
> Returning to the subject, SR is unreliable and an
> alternative is required. At present the only viable
> alternative I know is ERUNT. The additional features that
> appear to be offered by SR appear to me to be of less
> significance when compared to the need to be able to
> restore the Registry.
January 23, 2009 3:27:01 PM

System Restore will not delete a virus or spyware and you would have to use it in safe mode for better results. A virus, you'd pretty much have to save your docs and re-image the machine.
!