Formatting on drive wiped out when testing another drive

[Pennywise]

|>> HD0: if you have CDEF and add HD1 with active partition you will then
|>> have CEF - HD1's first partition will take over D: and the rest of the
|>> partitions follow F (GH..)
|>>
|>
|> You've not had much real life experience with the NT class OSes,
|>especially XP.

And a follow up, no I haven't experienced this on XP as I have only
one drive one it and always had one drive (this computer) - but darn
if I don't feel like adding another.

The second hard drive taking the D: spot was a problem for many
people, over the years at one time - mayhaps XP fix;d this as well as
now not being able to create a CON directory - my suggestion to the OP
wayyy up there, was maybe this had happen'd and it wasn't his
partition he thought it was

 

[Rod Speed]

(e-mail address removed) wrote

And a follow up, no I haven't experienced this on XP as I have
only one drive one it and always had one drive (this computer)

So you hadnt even noticed what the NT/2K/XP family
does with drive letters when extra drives are added.

Its done quite differently to the way its done in the 9x/ME family.

but darn if I don't feel like adding another.

You'll find its a lot more bulletproof drive letter wise.

The second hard drive taking the D: spot was a
problem for many people, over the years at one time

Yes, but in the 9x/ME family.

- mayhaps XP fix;d this

No perhaps about it. So did NT and 2K too.

as well as now not being able to create a CON directory -
my suggestion to the OP wayyy up there, was maybe this
had happen'd and it wasn't his partition he thought it was

And you were just plain wrong with XP, it doesnt work like that.

 

[Pennywise]

|>So you hadnt even noticed what the NT/2K/XP family
|>does with drive letters when extra drives are added.

sigh......

 

[Rod Speed]

(e-mail address removed) wrote

sigh......

Heavy breathing aint gunna save your bacon, child.

 

[JAD]

Howdy!



With NT 4, most likely - it didn't just default to writing the
persistent drive letter to the partition boot blocks unless you reallocated
the drive letter.

2K - Might have had the NT4 handling.

But he OBIOUSLY hasn't had much experience with XP - which writes
that damn persistent drive letter out ANYTIME Disk Manglement ****s over ....
err, touches a logical partition.

RwP

question If this is true AND there is no way that this drive letter
'swapping' CAN happen....why is it that the OP did exactly what I and Mike T
had suggested?

 

[David Maynard]

Folkert Rienstra wrote:

<snip>

Soory, but your reply was such an incoherent jumble I'm not going to bother.

 

[Rod Speed]

Folkert Rienstra wrote

Soory, but your reply was such an incoherent jumble I'm not going to bother.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[Ralph Wade Phillips]

Howdy!

Sure, but there is more than just what it puts in the partition
boot blocks, persistence with the NT/2K/XP family also
involves the database in the registry of the drive letters.

And said registry database was there for non-BIOS-enumerated
partitions in NT 4.0, because I have had several machines running 4.0
workstation (and yes, even server!) move drives around due to partitions.

But NOT if the drive was prepared by NT 4.0's Disk Administrator ...

Yeah, forget exactly when that other stuff changed.


Yep, and hadnt even noticed that the drive enumation is done
completely differently in the NT/2K/XP family as far as letter
persistence is concerned to how its done in the 9x/ME family.


And not just disk management either, it also happens
whenever the boot phase finds a new physical drive
or partition thats been created outside XP too.

Err - no, at least not in my experience.

It uses the BIOS for BIOS-enumerated drives, then remaps as the
volume boot blocks specify, as long as it won't overwrite a BIOS drive
letter. It THEN checks the registry for other drives ...

And I've been in several machines without anything but floppies and
the boot partition specified in HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Mounted
Devices ...

RwP

 

[Ralph Wade Phillips]

Howdy!

question If this is true AND there is no way that this drive letter
'swapping' CAN happen....why is it that the OP did exactly what I and Mike T
had suggested?

You didn't read all the messages, did you?

IF Disk Manager hasn't touched the drive, then it will mount by the
assigned drive letters FIRST then the BIOS positions.

IF, however, Disk Manager was used on the drive, and a drive letter
assigned to it ... it'll keep it.

That's how it happened.

Two cases. But Pennywise keeps claiming that the NT class OSen
don't do persistent drive letters ... and ayep, they do.

RwP

 

[Odie]

Folkert Rienstra wrote:

<snip>

Soory, but your reply was such an incoherent jumble I'm not going to bother.

That's Folkert for you.

Nothing constructive, but excessive amounts of useless drivel.

Happy to condemn posts, but posts nothing constructive or informative
himself.

I suppose it goes with the territory.

Useless waste of time.


Odie

 

[Eric Gisin]

You are a ****ing moron. There are no "bios drive letters".

 

[Pennywise]

|> IF, however, Disk Manager was used on the drive, and a drive letter
|>assigned to it ... it'll keep it.
|>
|> That's how it happened.
|>
|> Two cases. But Pennywise keeps claiming that the NT class OSen
|>don't do persistent drive letters ... and ayep, they do.

Ok here's the deal - I bought a Gateway computer - it was cheaper than
building one.

They have the hard drive set where the first partition of the hard
drive is D: and is the restore partition; and came installed with XP
home. The first thing I did was to change from NTFS to FAT32, with no
loss of data (the entire drive).

Then I installed XP Pro on the E: partition, when I boot'd up in that
OS all the drive letters were screw'd up - I went as far as naming the
H: drive "Last_Drive" to help me out (it was F: I think). I was lucky
E: stay'd E: - and of course I had to change most of the drive letters
around to make it easier for me whichever OS I was in.

It would seem this function of drive letters being written in stone is
a function of NFTS and not XP.

Why FAT32 and not NTFS - in a pinch I want to be able to boot up with
a Win98 disk and fix a problem if it ever occurs.

 

[Ralph Wade Phillips]

Howdy!

|> IF, however, Disk Manager was used on the drive, and a drive letter
|>assigned to it ... it'll keep it.
|>
|> That's how it happened.
|>
|> Two cases. But Pennywise keeps claiming that the NT class OSen
|>don't do persistent drive letters ... and ayep, they do.

Ok here's the deal - I bought a Gateway computer - it was cheaper than
building one.

They have the hard drive set where the first partition of the hard
drive is D: and is the restore partition; and came installed with XP
home. The first thing I did was to change from NTFS to FAT32, with no
loss of data (the entire drive).

Then I installed XP Pro on the E: partition, when I boot'd up in that
OS all the drive letters were screw'd up - I went as far as naming the
H: drive "Last_Drive" to help me out (it was F: I think). I was lucky
E: stay'd E: - and of course I had to change most of the drive letters
around to make it easier for me whichever OS I was in.

It would seem this function of drive letters being written in stone is
a function of NFTS and not XP.

Err - Pennywise? You ever see a 9X OS running with NTFS partitions?

You've got it backwards. AND - XP will happily put the drive letter
in the boot blocks for a FAT32 partition also, when it a) formats it or b)
when you reassign the drive letters in Disk Management.

HOWEVER - If that partition is formatted in a 9X OS, then UNTIL you
touch it with Disk Manager, it stays in the "Oh, look - here's an open drive
letter. Let's stuff it in there!" mode.

Which *ahem* is what I said earlier.

And you might want to note - if you HAD been right about it being
just like Win9X, then you wouldn't have had to move the drive letters
around, eh?

RwP

 

[Ralph Wade Phillips]

Howdy!

You are a ****ing moron. There are no "bios drive letters".

*shrug* So make it "Drive letters assigned in the BIOS enumeration
order".

And *ahem* I've seen several BIOSes that do use drive letters to
refer to drives. Albeit somewhat enhanced BIOSes, that included such
nicities as "Flash recovery" in ROM.

RwP

 

[Eric Gisin]

You and Ralph together are more stupid than Arnie.
Old Award BIOS did letter the drives, but changed it to HDD#.
However, it had nothing to do with DOS, which really assigns letters.

 

[Pennywise]

|>Which *ahem* is what I said earlier.
|>
|> And you might want to note - if you HAD been right about it being
|>just like Win9X, then you wouldn't have had to move the drive letters
|>around, eh?

I was right and stand by it. I guess experence beats out reading a web
page.

 

[Pennywise]

(e-mail address removed) wrote:

|>experience

Damn,

 

[Rod Speed]

And said registry database was there for non-BIOS-enumerated
partitions in NT 4.0, because I have had several machines running 4.0
workstation (and yes, even server!) move drives around due to partitions.

Not clear what you mean by that last bit, after the bracket.

But NOT if the drive was prepared by NT 4.0's Disk Administrator ...

Err - no, at least not in my experience.

Fraid so.

It uses the BIOS for BIOS-enumerated drives, then remaps as
the volume boot blocks specify, as long as it won't overwrite a
BIOS drive letter. It THEN checks the registry for other drives ...

I was JUST talking about NEW physical drives and drive letters there.

 

[Rod Speed]

*shrug* So make it "Drive letters assigned
in the BIOS enumeration order".

There is no "Drive letters assigned in the BIOS enumeration
order", because the bios works at the physical drive level,
and drive letters have to be allocated by partition.

And even with the simple case of one partition per physical
drive, XP still doesnt allocate letters in the BIOS enumeration
order, otherwise you wouldnt get the odd result you sometimes
see where XP decides to give the boot partition other than the
C letter with a later install of XP.

And *ahem* I've seen several BIOSes that do use drive letters
to refer to drives. Albeit somewhat enhanced BIOSes, that
included such nicities as "Flash recovery" in ROM.

Sure, but thats a separate issue to the letter XP gives it.

 

[Rod Speed]

I was right

Nope, not once. You've mangled the story even more comprehensively now.

and stand by it.

You can stand wherever you like, changes absolutely nothing at all.

I guess experence beats out reading a web page.

Guess again. It cant have happened anything like you claimed.

And you're just plain wrong with your claim that the NT/2K/XP family
allocates the drive letters the same way that the DOS/9x/ME family
does, and its completely trivial to prove that too. Dont need a web page.