jaclaz

IF I managed to understand your question , the answer is here: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/157-install-windows-from-usb/ jaclaz

Yep, but there also several apps that may be able to get the filename. But we need a $MFT, for this. http://memberwebs.com/stef/software/scrounge/ http://memberwebs.com/stef/software/scrounge/guessing.html The sector you found is definitely part of the $MFT or of it's mirror. However it's position makes no sense to me, right now. Was the disk originally "Vista" or "Windows 7"? Maybe the $MFT position has been shifted on these systems? And somehow the position was reverted in the bootsector to the default XP ones? Try going on searching and take note of which sectors have this leading "FILE0" tag, maybe we can find a pattern. jaclaz

Check thoroughfully the pop-up when you want to mount a disk or large image file as disk, you can choose how many sectors you want to load. I will re-check the calculations, but maybe we have found somehow the culprit. The $MFT should be there, according to the data in the bootsector. Now what could have happened? Possibilities: the $MFT Mirror was corrupt and somehow you overwrote the $MFT with it BOTH the $MFT and $MFT Mirror were somehow corrupt the bootsector got corrupt somehow and now holds incorrect data about the location of the $MFT more of the above together. I just re-checked (doing also a check with a virtual drive) and the location of the $MFT is correct, as well as the whole first sector of the bootsector. I wonder what can have happened. You can try loading the disk in Tiny Hexer (the whole disk), load just one sector (the MBR), then go to Edit->Find/Replace set the box "Text", in the dropdown box choose "DOS 8 bits" and enter the search text "FILE0" (without quotes, that's FILE with appended a 0 - zero) it will tell you it didn't find it in current loaded sector, press "Yes to all" it will load and scan the whole hard disk until it finds the searched text, it will take a lot of time, be warned. If it is found, please save the sector on which it is found and post it in a .zip, post also the sector number where it's found. If we can understand WHAT happened maybe we may be able to rebuild the structure, otherwise you will have to use file-based recovery, I'm afraid . jaclaz

Which sums up in two steps to: I originally posted before actually connecting properly brain to fingers I now try desperately to find a reason not to admit that I may have been wrong in this case It is just a guess, as much as mine, and, most probably, just like this: The general Rule is NEVER trust anyone, CHECK YOURSELF! http://www.housemd-guide.com/characters/houserules.php To the above you add incomplete, deceiving or plainly wrong information supplied by anyone (possibly in perfect good faith) and you have the 100% probability (certainty) that until you have checked yourself, you cannot know the truth. Just an example, this comes from the pl2303HXD datasheet: and this comes from the pl2303HX one: Now the added sentence "The range can be from 1.8V~3.3V." can be any of these: a "generic" explanation, optional, that applies to ALL pl2303 chips a "generic" explanation, optional, that applies to ALL circuits designed to work in a 2.5 to 3.3V range but 1.8V tollerant a "specific" recommendation, ONLY valid for pl2303HXD AND NOT for ANY other pl2303 chip Instinctively, I personally tend to read it as "there are two power levels allowed, 2.5V and 3.3V.", all the rest being nonsense. VideoRipper has read it as "anything between 1.8 and 3.3V will do (depending on the level of the serial)" and applied the sentence to BOTH the pl2303HX and pl2303HXD (since there is no way to know WHICH pl2303 is inside the stoopid cable adapter). For the record later in the datasheet, there are for BOTH the pl2303HX and the pl2303HXD THREE tables: VDD_325@3.3V Serial I/O Pins VDD_325@2.5V Serial I/O Pins VDD_325@1.8V Serial I/O Pins Which means that Videoripper was right and I was wrong , but mainly means that even on strictly technical documentation it is easy to misunderstand, since data is either partial or misleading or badly worded. The e-bay seller writes in his page: which should mean that the adapter is self-powered from the USB side, and also confirmed it by e-mail to halbarad, but he also writes on the page: Now, if that wire has "VCC 3V TO 5.5V" it CANNOT be connected to the VDD_325 pin (which ONLY accepts 1.8~3.3 V) it could be connected to VDD_5 (USB Port VBUS, 5V Power) but it would be 5V AND NOT 3.3V or it could be connected to VO_33 (Regulator Power Output, 3.3V) but then it would be 3.3V AND NOT 5 V! jaclaz

Well, no, things don't get swapped by themselves, most probably you did not refresh the whatever you were viewing it with after the TESTDISK change, Well, no, usually TESTDISK asks what you want it to do, then reports something and then asks for a confirmation before doing potentially destructive things. I need to know what happens, what TESTDISK reports, as I cannot see your screen from this distance . If you already ran it maybe that is the thing that created the problem. Yep, typo third is row #1, but since the boot has already swithced all you want (eventually) to do is to chqnge the 07 of the hidden partition back to 12. Let's try to sum up: the MBR DATA (the only thing that is actually needed for the moment) seems OK the first sector of the bootsector seems OK the first MFT entry ( the one on absolute sector 26774331) needs still to be checked The only other things that may have gone "beserk" are: the other 15 sectors of the NTFS bootsector (possible, but unlikely) the MBR CODE (but that should be completely irrelevant) For the 1st you can try repairing the bootsector with bootsect.exe. For the 2nd you can restore a "standard" MBR with MBRFIX: http://www.sysint.no/nedlasting/mbrfix.htm OF COURSE, you should always make a backup of the things you are going to change (the two files you saved are already a backup, but you should also backup the other 15 sectors, i.e. access the partition, loading this time 16 sectors in Tiny Hexer instead of the default one, and do the Save as). A seemingly stupid question, have you tried connecting that hard disk to another PC (or after having booted to another OS)? Can it not be that you have something running (or in the Registry) that prevents the mounting of that partiton? jaclaz

Yep , but that used CDIMAGE, and unless you are from MS you can't use it, mkisofs.exe is on the other hand completely free. http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=88660 jaclaz

Which means that the changes you did before are now effective. Well, that's entirely up to you, hidden partitions should stay hidden (they are meant to stay hidden by design). You can use the apps in the given link if you want to temporarily mount it in order to access it, but there should be no reason normally to fiddle with it. The bootsector data seems ok. The $MFT should be at absolute sector (786432*8 + 20482875) if accessing the Physical drive or 786432*8=6291456 if accessing partition. The first thing you should see there is "FILE*" or "FILE0". if opened the whole disk: File->Disk->Goto Sector->26774331 or if opened the partition: File->Disk->Goto Sector->6291456 Test disk should be able to check and fix this kind of errors: http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/Advanced_NTFS_Boot_and_MFT_Repair Try running it as per above, and see what it reports. jaclaz

It seems to me like a lot of money to have an enormous computing power (that you won't need, probably don't even know HOW to use) in a crippled 1U server rack-mount. I mean you need some actual reasons, like: I need a rack mounted thingy. I need it in a 1U form factor. I need to do my own (choose one among OS, digital movie, etc...) You can have the "advantages" of: 2.5" SAS drives (fast but expensive) "only" 5 USB ports (of which one internal) Low Profile PCIe slots (far more expensive should you want to add a card) 65.8 dB noise level Lousy video card But you need to put on the other side of the scale also the "disadvantages" (the same as above ) Now, with US$1800 you can have a more than "decent" conventional system, which is more easily upgradable and serviceable. If you got that server for, say US$ 1000 or an earlier model for US$ 250 at a garage sale that would be a possibility, but not for that amount of money (btw you don't say with how much storage space are you getting it, a typical 300 Gb 10K 2.5" SAS is around US$250 each). A "normal" 3.5" 500 Gb 7200 SATA is around US$80, as a reference. jaclaz

I am missing the reason for the LCISOcreator.exe. A batch to launch a .vbs that launches mkisofs.exe.... You could also add a .hta in the middle (just for the fun of it): http://mysite.verizon.net/hartsec/make.htm Or a Auto-it tool: http://www.solriche.co.uk/files/mgiso/mgiso.htm Seriously, you could ask, say, gunsmokingman to add the choices to the .vbs (and also remove the unneeded parts, getting rid of the batch) or, say, Yzöwl to add the mkisofs commands inside the batch (and get rid of the .vbs),right now there is an unneeded complication, as I see it. jaclaz

Yep. @VideoRipper I wouldn't be so sure about the need of that adapter needing to be powered. For all I know the "+" pin OUTputs +5V (and not between 3V and 5.5 V), drawing it from the USB connection. Otherwise the three cable version: http://cgi.ebay.it/USB-to-serial-adapter-PL2303-TTL-console-recovery-RS232-/180528396085?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a0854b735 would NEVER work. Of course it is well possible that there are TWO different versions, one powered from the USB port (above) and one with 4 wires because it needs to be powered: http://cgi.ebay.it/2-x-PL2303-USB-TTL-rs232-adattatore-convertitore-cavo-/220645333205?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Cavi_Prolunghe_Convertitori&hash=item335f7c98d5 http://cgi.ebay.it/2-x-PL2303-USB-TTL-RS232-Serial-Port-Converter-Adapter-/320563532928?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aa3135480 but I frankly doubt it. @halbarad No need to make it more complex than needed. DO NOT connect ANYTHING to the cable adapter. Plug it in a USB port. Do a loopback test. Two possibilities: If it works, it means that it is powered form the USB. If it doesn't you need to supply power to VCC+GND OR: DO NOT connect ANYTHING to the cable adapter. Plug it in a USB port. Test with a multimeter the Voltage (if any) between VCC and GND As often happens the seller has published incomplete, wrong or deceiving information. Sentences like this: i.e.: contribute a lot to confuse ideas. jaclaz

The MBR DATA seems correct. The code is "strange" at first sight, but it shouldn't matter and can anyway be fixed allright with MBRFIX. There was a misunderstanding. I meant "post the actual sectors", not the view of them. I.E. in the normal Tinyhexer view choose "Save as" and post the two resulting 512 bytes files (MBR and bootsector). The Partition table viewer only applies to a MBR (with partition table ) and not to a boot sector (as you can see in the second "beeblebrox like" screenshot, numbers are "random". Once I have the bootsector data I can point you to other locations to check. After you have these sectors saved: To reset the initial status (before the changes) in the MBR: In the "PTview" view, click on the 07 in row #0 column "Type", a 07 in the hex view will be highlighted, overwrite it with 12. In the "PTview" view, click on the 80 in row #0 column "Boot", a 80 in the hex view will be highlighted, overwrite it with 00. In the "PTview" view, click on the 00 in row #0 column "Boot", a 00 in the hex view will be highlighted, overwrite it with 80. jaclaz

Next time use a "proper" tool :whistling:: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10169 Changed "how"? It seems like "something else". You have not by any chance fiddled with XP on a Vista partitioned drive? There are a few hiccups in doing that, though cannot say if they would apply to your current situation. You seemingly have a correct partition entry for the partition in the MBR. You seemingly have a valid bootsector (at least this is what testdisk reports). But I need to have a look at them to make sure. Get Tiny Hexer: (and my small scripts for it) http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=8734 Check the MBR with PTview. Post the values you see. Save a copy of the MBR and of the first sector of the bootsector, put it inside a .zip archive and attach it to your next post. jaclaz

NOT a good idea. I assume this second partition was NTFS. Run again TESTDISK. See what it finds. Check that the last sector in the NTFS (copy of bootsector) is the same of the actual bootsector (if any) Otherwise get from it the "sectors before" and recreate a suitable partition entry. If you post some actual DATA, I may be able to help you with actually helping advice. See here for an example of a similar recovery: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=141687 jaclaz

DOS or console inside 2K, XP etc.? If the latter (if you want a "cmd"....) : :loop ECHO 1 = Run app ECHO 2 = Run app w\switch /B ECHO 3 = Exit. SET /P Mychoice=Please input a number IF %Mychoice%.==1. GOTO :Run_app_1 IF %Mychoice%.==2. GOTO :Run_app_2 IF %Mychoice%.==3. GOTO :just_exit CLS&GOTO :loop :Run_app_1 ECHO This is Run_app_1 GOTO :EOF :Run_app_2 ECHO This is Run_app_2 GOTO :EOF :just_exit ECHO This is just_exit GOTO :EOF OR: :loop ECHO 1 = Run app ECHO 2 = Run app w\switch /B ECHO 3 = Exit. SET /P MyChoice=Please input a number FOR /L %%A IN (1,1,3) DO IF "%%A"=="%Mychoice%" GOTO :Choice_%MyChoice% CLS&GOTO :loop :Choice_1 ECHO This is Choice_1 GOTO :EOF :Choice_2 ECHO This is Choice_2 GOTO :EOF :Choice_3 ECHO This is Choice_3 GOTO :EOF

Well, if you compare with the Windows ME floppy disk "embedded" in XP, you wiil see how they used a floppy they had around, deleted a few files (most of them recoverable/undeletable) and simply "dded" them inside an .exe. So, they are not new to this kind of behaviour. JFYI: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=16745 jaclaz

Guess why I asked for the find / [TAB]? @hannesrohr12 Rest assured the stick appears like properly formatted by RMPREPUSB, let's see what happens ith the created "tag" file.... jaclaz

Why 0.1.1? You should normally use either vers. 0.2.3 "stable" ot the 1.0 beta x. When you have that error, you should be "dropped" to the grub> prompt (or anyway you should be able to get it by pressing "c"). Now you are in command line mode, you can issue single commands and see the feedback. Try: geometry (hd0) [ENTER] geometry (hd1) [ENTER] Post results of the above two coomands. Then establish root on first partition of the USB device, depending if a switch of the drive already happened it will be either (hd0,0) or (hd1,0): root (hd0,0) [ENTER] or root (hd1,0) [ENTER] Then issue command: find / [TAB] Which files are listed by the auto-completion feature? jaclaz

Try putting a TITLE to it: http://ss64.com/nt/start.html Try putting the parameters inside the quotes, i.e.: jaclaz

Good. Now it comes to mind a question: if a single guy in a few days of his spare time can take a "random" item and reduce it's size tenfold what could do the full-time MS guys if they wanted to? As a dinosaur, in my simplicity I continue thinking that smaller things are faster, no matter how faster is your hardware, managing less bytes it will make it faster! jaclaz

Yep, personally I find the "main"+"sub-routines calls" or "functions" a much better, clearer way to write batches. @patronu Here is a nice source, just in case: http://www.dostips.com/ http://www.dostips.com/DtTutoFunctions.php jaclaz

NO. If it's already SP3 the most it can become after nliting it with SP3 is .... SP3 , I would say not worth the trouble for such a non-dramatical change. jaclaz

And hopefully also in a non Commercial Environment... jaclaz

Sure, no prob, just kidding. jaclaz

Which one? That of dencorso being right or that of finding an ISP that filters out the nasties ? jaclaz

Well, if I am "MSFN SuperB", for basic equal opportunities reasons Tripredacus must be referred as "K-Mart-ian Legend" . jaclaz