Error: INACCESSIBLE BOOT RECORD

[Bob]

Shows how little you know.

I was referring to System V Release 4.

But you are right - I haven't used UNIX in 15 years.

I was using it 29 years ago, and I still use
it. It's radically different.

That's a shame.

 

[Bob]

Bullshit, most modern versions have GUIs.

I was kinda making that comment tongue in cheek.

After all, how much has UNIX System V Release 4 changed?

 

[Bob Eager]

I was referring to System V Release 4.

Which is not where Bell Labs started. In fact, I don't think it was even
Bell Labs when SVR4 started.

 

[Bob]

Which is not where Bell Labs started. In fact, I don't think it was even
Bell Labs when SVR4 started.

Hmm... this is really stretching my recall, but I thought Bell Labs
sold Release 4 to Novell, which dropped the ball when offered the
chance of a lifetime to put UNIX on every desktop.

 

[Bob Eager]

Hmm... this is really stretching my recall, but I thought Bell Labs
sold Release 4 to Novell, which dropped the ball when offered the
chance of a lifetime to put UNIX on every desktop.

Crossed wires. It was AT&T by that time...that's all I meant. I've lost
track ofg it now, but it was SCO when I last looked!

 

[Rod Speed]

I was kinda making that comment tongue in cheek.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament better than that pathetic effort |-)

After all, how much has UNIX System V Release 4 changed?

Irrelevant, you said UNIX, not System V Release 4

 

[Rod Speed]

Maybe Win2K works and PM doesn't.

Nope, it really is because PM is doing much more
drastic stuff to partitions than 2K does at boot time.

Here's the partition info dump.

Using what ?

The drive is a WD 30GB divided into nearly equal partitions.
The second partition contains a DIP disk copy of the first.

I thought you said that the copy was on a second drive in a
removable drive bay ? This dump is irrelevant to that config.

 

[Bob]

Crossed wires. It was AT&T by that time...that's all I meant.

Bell Labs was AT&T until Lucent.

I've lost track ofg it now, but it was SCO when I last looked!

SCO was MS Xenix originally. I did not know they acquired SVR4 from
Novell.

 

[Bob Eager]

Bell Labs was AT&T until Lucent.


SCO was MS Xenix originally. I did not know they acquired SVR4 from
Novell.

Well, they acquired the rights to version 6, which was much earlier than
SVR4 of course. So I would guess it all went together.

 

[Bob]

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament better than that pathetic effort |-)

I am in no predicament and therefore I do not need to bs because I
know what I meant. If you don't know what I meant, that's not my
problem - that's your problem. You need to bs your way out of your
predicament.

Your predicament is that you imagine that the term "UNIX" applies to
every variation and not specifically to SVR4.

Irrelevant, you said UNIX, not System V Release 4

Is there any other official UNIX(TM)? Or do you believe that AT&T Bell
Labs didn't trademark the name "UNIX". After all the original purpose
of UNIX(TM) was to assist the patents/trademarks department.

Even one of its closest cousins, Berkeley "unix", goes by the name BSD
and not UNIX(TM).

 

[Bob]

Using what ?

PM 8.0 utility called "PartitionInfo"

 

[Bob]

Hey, guess what, sports fans. Acronis True Image is not totally
Windows-based .

You set up the cloning procedure in Windows but when it comes time to
implement it, you have to boot into what looks like a DOS shell to
carry out the procedure.

This means it is not any better than Drive Image in terms of use.
However, it is much better s/w.

My Enermax 352 RAID 1 and Backup system is looking better each day.
It's on order so I should have it sometime soon.

With that system, I can put a target drive into the backup tray and
insert it hot into the Enermax. I can then either set it to make a
mirror or to create a removable archive. After doing its thing, I can
remove the drive hot and put it on the shelf for disaster recovery.
And I can do all that without having to stop what I am doing and boot
to a DOS shell. The only restriction is that while it is making a
backup, I can't do any low-level disk hardware operations, like
formatting a drive. DUH!

I successfully created a clone with Acronis onto a drive that was in a
Kingwin removable bay and with round IDE cables. This was with my 2.4
GHz Intel system and 2 WD 80 GB Caviar drives (ATA 100).

I am flouting specs so blatantly that you would think I was asking for
disaster. But it chugged along without a hiccup.

 

[Jeremy Boden]

Hey, guess what, sports fans. Acronis True Image is not totally
Windows-based .

You set up the cloning procedure in Windows but when it comes time to
implement it, you have to boot into what looks like a DOS shell to
carry out the procedure.

This means it is not any better than Drive Image in terms of use.
However, it is much better s/w.

My Enermax 352 RAID 1 and Backup system is looking better each day.
It's on order so I should have it sometime soon.

With that system, I can put a target drive into the backup tray and
insert it hot into the Enermax. I can then either set it to make a
mirror or to create a removable archive. After doing its thing, I can
remove the drive hot and put it on the shelf for disaster recovery.
And I can do all that without having to stop what I am doing and boot
to a DOS shell. The only restriction is that while it is making a
backup, I can't do any low-level disk hardware operations, like
formatting a drive. DUH!

I successfully created a clone with Acronis onto a drive that was in a
Kingwin removable bay and with round IDE cables. This was with my 2.4
GHz Intel system and 2 WD 80 GB Caviar drives (ATA 100).

I am flouting specs so blatantly that you would think I was asking for
disaster. But it chugged along without a hiccup.

But don't get too excited...
It *usually* works - but when I used Acronis to resize a logical NTFS
partition, it got corrupted...

 

[Bob]

But don't get too excited...
It *usually* works - but when I used Acronis to resize a logical NTFS
partition, it got corrupted...

Yeah, but you didn't flout specs. Life's no fun unless you flout some
specs here and there.

BTW, I notice that Partition magic 8.0 purports to be able to create a
copy of a disk. I didn't have the time to fool with it. Has anyone
tried to use it for that purpose?


--

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

Liberal

A person so open minded their brains have fallen out.

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote

Hey, guess what, sports fans. Acronis
True Image is not totally Windows-based .

No news to me, its obviously using linux with its 'rescue' bootable CD.

You set up the cloning procedure in Windows but when
it comes time to implement it, you have to boot into
what looks like a DOS shell to carry out the procedure.

Thats mangling the story rather comprehensively.

This means it is not any better than Drive Image in terms of use.

Bullshit. One obvious difference is the MUCH better support
for other than bog standard devices, if its visible at the Win
level, its fine as a destination for image files etc.

In spaces with lan support, by definition if the
NIC is usable by Win, its fine for TI ops too.

THATS the main advantage over DI 2002 and
Ghost 2003 which do actually operate on DOS.

However, it is much better s/w.

My Enermax 352 RAID 1 and Backup
system is looking better each day.

Not for those who care about standards.

And its useless for those who want image files too.

It's on order so I should have it sometime soon.

Hope you have ordered the cast iron shorts too.

With that system, I can put a target drive into the backup
tray and insert it hot into the Enermax. I can then either
set it to make a mirror or to create a removable archive.
After doing its thing, I can remove the drive hot and put
it on the shelf for disaster recovery.

And you get to wear the consequences
of flouting the ATA standard too.

Not my idea of a viable approach to
something as important as backup thanks.

And I can do all that without having to stop
what I am doing and boot to a DOS shell.

You dont have to do that with any of the modern imaging apps.

The only restriction is that while it is making
a backup, I can't do any low-level disk
hardware operations, like formatting a drive. DUH!

And you get to wear the consequences
of flouting the ATA standard too.

Not my idea of a viable approach to
something as important as backup thanks.

I successfully created a clone with Acronis onto a drive that was in a
Kingwin removable bay and with round IDE cables. This was with my
2.4 GHz Intel system and 2 WD 80 GB Caviar drives (ATA 100).

And you have no way of knowing if that would result in fangs in the
arse when you need it most, just like with last time that happened.

I am flouting specs so blatantly that you would think I was
asking for disaster. But it chugged along without a hiccup.

You dont know it will be hiccup free when you
need it, just like it wasnt with the previous system.

 

[Rod Speed]

I notice that Partition magic 8.0 purports to be able to
create a copy of a disk. I didn't have the time to fool
with it. Has anyone tried to use it for that purpose?

Yeah, a few have. I prefer to use a modern imaging app for that myself.

 

[Bob]

Yeah, a few have. I prefer to use a modern imaging app for that myself.

I presume that is Acronis True Image.


--

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

Liberal

A person so open minded their brains have fallen out.

 

[Bob]

Not for those who care about standards.

There are two sides to this standards business. One is the functional
specification which states how a device is to operate. The other is
the design specification which states how a device is to be built.

We accept your comments regarding the fact that removable bays do not
meet current design specs. However if the design that is implemented
by the removable bay is functionally compliant, then that is good
enough for the typical user who is not pushing the envelope.

Do you know for a fact that the Directron Kingwin KF-2x series of
removable bays is not functionally compliant? How about the Enermax
352?

I talked with the Product Manager at Maxpoint, which is the US
distributor of Enermax products. He personally uses the 352 and he
reports that he has seen *no* problems with it. I discussed briefly
this issue of ATA non-compliance, and he asked me if I had any direct
evidence that the 352 was not *functionally* compliant. He said the
engineers at Enermax are not idiots and they abviously took ATA
compliance issues into consideration. It would be financial suicide to
introduce a product with an alternative design that failed to live up
to the functional specifications required by the disk drive industry.

Where are all the warnings about how such devices are not functional?
I have seen none. Just because someone had trouble with their rig does
not mean there is something functionally wrong with those units I have
discussed.

Hope you have ordered the cast iron shorts too.

My invoice from Directron has a statement added that if the 352 does
not function as advertised, I can return it for a full cash refund. In
return I promised them that I would evaluate the unit and let them
know how it performs.

I checked with the Product Manager to make sure there were no gotchas
hidden in the woodwork. I went thru the scenarios I planned on using
to make disaster recovery archives. He said that the unit is designed
to be straightforward in its use - no undocumented "error codes" like
with the other methods.

And you get to wear the consequences
of flouting the ATA standard too.

What consequences? I have been flouting the ATA *design* standard for
a long time now and there have been *no* consequences. I cannot help
it if some others get burnt using substandard parts. I am using
top-line parts.

Not my idea of a viable approach to
something as important as backup thanks.

If the backup fails, I will know about it, in which case I can always
hook the target drive up directly to the IDE connector.

You dont have to do that with any of the modern imaging apps.

That's what I had to do with Acronis True Image. After I got done
configuring the disk copy operation, it rebooted the computer into the
same kind of DOS shell that CHKDSK uses when Windows detects a disk
problem.

And you get to wear the consequences
of flouting the ATA standard too.

What consequences functionally are there?

And you have no way of knowing if that would result in fangs in the
arse when you need it most, just like with last time that happened.

The last time was caused by a defective motherboard. How was I to know
that Epox MBs had electrlytic capacitor problems. I got almost 6 full
years out of that system, so it's not as though I am out anything.

And because I kept a disastor recovery archive on the shelf I was able
to recover with a minimum of effort, thanks to Windows' IPU.

So I am not in such a bad condition as you make it out to be.

You dont know it will be hiccup free when you
need it, just like it wasnt with the previous system.

I will be watching carefully. The other system died of old age. This
is a completely new system.

One reason why I like to clone a disk to make a backup - and not build
an image file - is that I can inspect the backup using the standard
Windows tools. If the backup has no problems, then on the shelf it
goes.


--

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

Liberal

A person so open minded their brains have fallen out.

 

[Dan Seur]

This is without a doubt one of the longest and most important threads
ever to hit m.p.w2k.hdw, and I suspect one of the most captivating. How
fortunate, too, that the thread traffic is so widely distributed,
affording so many people this unusual opportunity for personal growth.

I want to congratulate Bob, who initially had a simple windows message,
on his ability to keep the thread alive long after his problem was
presumably solved. The forays into unrelated discussions are reminiscent
of various late night bars I've visited; so much so that I'm getting
thirsty at inappropriate times of day.

I can only hope that Bob and his correspondents won't get into family
histories, or religion or politics or grade school experiences. Not in
any of the W2k tech newsgroups, at least.

 

[Rod Speed]

I presume that is Acronis True Image.

Lately, yes. Particularly after Ghost 9 turned out to be a steaming turd
for that with XP, essentially because you cant do it from the bootable CD.

Prior to that I did use both Drive Image and Ghost 2003 instead of True Image.
TI is rather more elegant with lan support from the bootable CD which isnt
necessarily that useful when cloning drives, but its rather more elegant in
the sense that a single bootable CD does all I normally want to do using
the bootable CD, including do a safety image of a system without installing
the imager, to a drive on the lan, before doing any work on a system that
has got into a considerable mess. TI is the best for that by far currently.

ghost32.exe from say the ultimate boot CD isnt bad, but you
have to setup the CD yourself for that and the user interface is
much worse. Much easier to just create the TI bootable CD.

The only real very minor blemish with TI is that there are
two items you seen when booting the CD that look like
they might be for copying a hard drive. Turns out to be just
clumsy wording and the second one is just for preparing a
new drive, partitioning etc, not for copying from an existing
drive. I personally do that at the XP level, not using TI, but
it could be quite useful if you are running the Win9x family.