Windows 98 issues with SATA drive on VIA KT600

[rloew]

Wouldn't an easier "clone" method be to just boot to a floppy, use FDISK to remove all partitions, then FDISK /MBR that drive, then copy EVERYTHING from original EXCEPT the Page File (which is locked), then swap to booting from the "new" HDD? No MBR/PBS (sic) problems and the Page File gets recreated, right? I could have SWORN I'd done it that way before...

You would need to copy everything including attributes and Short File Names to avoid problems. Most copiers do not match up the Short File Names under all circumstances. Also Directory Timestamps will typically be lost with most copiers.

My XFILE program preserves Short File Names and can Copy Directory Timestamps if run from Windows 98.

@Dencorso: Does XXCOPY preserve Short File names. The documentation does not mention if it does.

Another consideration is time. I have a standalone duplicator that can copy an entire 2TB Hard Drive in about 7 hours. It would take at least 24 Hours to copy the Partitions, even longer to do a File by File Copy. Afterwards I use RFDISK to eliminate all of the duplicate Checksums and Signatures.

Edited June 7, 2012 by rloew

[dencorso]

Does XXCOPY preserve Short File names? The documentation does not mention if it does.

Yes, it does. It's documented in XXTB#03 (and XXTB#08). The full documentation is accessible from this index.

XXCOPY /Clone works very well in creating a working copy of a Win 9x/ME partition.

Of course, this is file-based cloning, not byte-imaging cloning, but it works really well.

If one creates an active partition in a second HDD, and ensures that it can be booted to DOS, then cloning a 9x/ME to this partition with XXCOPY will result in a bootable setup. The partition on the second HDD has to be of the same size as that of the original partition, or bigger, in order for the cloning to be possible, of course.

[jaclaz]

A lot of years have passed since the last time I had to do this, but - just for the record - I remember that it is perfectly possibly (on 9x/Me systems) to use "plain" Xcopy/Xcopy32, the good ol':

I SERVe Kentucky Fried Chicken Hot!

of course target must be partitioned/formatted/SYSed, cannot remember if I used some additional tools/steps, exception made for temporarily disabling pagefile (no pagefile) and running in safe mode, original source:

http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/hd/cpyhd/cpyhd2.htm

The directory dates are usually of no relevance (keeping 'em or having them changed won't make a difference in normal operation).

jaclaz

[rloew]

A lot of years have passed since the last time I had to do this, but - just for the record - I remember that it is perfectly possibly (on 9x/Me systems) to use "plain" Xcopy/Xcopy32, the good ol':

I SERVe Kentucky Fried Chicken Hot!

of course target must be partitioned/formatted/SYSed, cannot remember if I used some additional tools/steps, exception made for temporarily disabling pagefile (no pagefile) and running in safe mode, original source:

http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/hd/cpyhd/cpyhd2.htm

The directory dates are usually of no relevance (keeping 'em or having them changed won't make a difference in normal operation).

jaclaz

Many years ago. I did an XCOPY of my Windows 98 System. The basic system worked OK but some *.LNK Files were jumbled.

[jaclaz]

Many years ago. I did an XCOPY of my Windows 98 System. The basic system worked OK but some *.LNK Files were jumbled.

Yep , once I tried to use my long-time-trusted hammer to drive a nail into a wooden plank and the little bastard got one of my fingers instead .

The moral being:

jaclaz

[dencorso]

For each issue, the right tool. Here XXCOPY is the tool of choice (for file-based cloning).

Of course it can be done with XCOPY, and possibly in many other more difficult ways.

@jaclaz - Here's what the current point of this discussion reminds me of...

@dencorso

Comeon , you know better than suggesting to wipe a whole hard disk, and WHEN this is needed, to suggest anything but the internal ATA commands....

We have at least one report:

http://reboot.pro/13601/

http://reboot.pro/13601/page__st__87

that a "same" 250Gb drive took 85 minutes vs. around 210 (using DBAN)

It yould be interesting if you could do a comparison test of the ATA command and Active Kill Disk (dos extender) on any "spare" disk you may have handy.

JFYI, a carpenter's comparison :

http://reboot.pro/13601/page__st__46

jaclaz *is* right (of course, as always!): HDDErase is faster than Active KILLDISK. The latter remains useful when one wants to zero out just some parts of a HDD, but HDDErase is way faster for a full disk wipe, and the results are equivalent.

[jaclaz]

For each issue, the right tool. Here XXCOPY is the tool of choice (for file-based cloning).

Of course it can be done with XCOPY, and possibly in many other more difficult ways.

... and possibly im many more as simple ways.

XXCOPY is also IMHO an exceptionally goot tool, but it is not the only option, just as an example Xclone would most probably do :

ftp://ftp.sunet.se/pub/simtelnet/win95/diskutl/xclone13.zip

@jaclaz - Here's what the current point of this discussion reminds me of...

I don't see the actual connection , in that case I gave you a report about a tool found to be a MUCH faster way (and JFYI "not-really-equivalent" as hdderase will also wipe a few sectors not normally accessible by external software, so also "better"), I may well be wrong, but I don't think that there are great speed differences when using XXCOPY vs XCOPY vs. XFILE vs. XClone vs. *whatever*, in the sense that any "file based" tool will take more or less the same time.

XXCOPY Author confirms how the program is not particularly tuned towards "speed" (at least no for a "bulk copy" as the one we were talking about:

http://www.xxcopy.com/xarc/msg/msg00189.htm

but the context of that thread:

The WD utility will wipe anyway enough data, at the minimum first and last million sectors:

You don't actually need to 00 out anything but the first (say) 100 sectors.

Anything else is overkill, including the WD utility and ActiveKill disk.

If you want to completely wipe a disk use the secureerase utility:

http://cmrr.ucsd.edu/people/Hughes/SecureErase.shtml

that will use the internal ATA commands and will be faster than *any* software based solution.

Was that what was actually needed was maybe to wipe the first handful of sectors and instead it was suggested to wipe the whole disk and suggested a slowish tool to do this completely unneeded thing .

jaclaz

[dencorso]

With all due respect, and with thanks for the pointer to the interesting xclone13, whatever other options you may come up with, we still have just three cases, really (provided we limit ourselves to file-based cloning):

XXCOPY: the most well-known, still developed, still supported, widely used and very thoroughly debugged, 3rd-party tool adequate for the job.

XCOPY: the tool available with the OS, that is known to be able do the job (and reasonably well test-demonstrated to work as intended).

OTHERS: everything that is not those two above, but that can probably do the job, although much less test-demonstrated to work as intended, if at all.

[jaclaz]

..... we still have just three cases .....

...and some wise philosophy :

Life is "trying things to see if they work".

jaclaz

[mh84]

Guys thanks for the helpful discussion but if you are still interested in my solution then I switched from SATA to IDE to avoid problems. Thanks for help anyway.

[jaclaz]

Guys thanks for the helpful discussion but if you are still interested in my solution then I switched from SATA to IDE to avoid problems. Thanks for help anyway.

Good , the main thing is that you found a suitable way out from the issue .

Unrelated , but not that much , maybe this is an option:

jaclaz

[jumper]

I realize that cloning a drive is no longer topical, but how about simply dragging the source drive (C:) icon onto the destination drive (D:) icon?

4. Clone a Windows system to the Hyperdrive by dragging and dropping the desired Windows system icon onto the Hyperdrive RAM icon.

Just drag the image of your hard drive over to the icon for the external drive, and everything will be copied.

[jaclaz]

I realize that cloning a drive is no longer topical, but how about simply dragging the source drive (C:) icon onto the destination drive (D:) icon?

4. Clone a Windows system to the Hyperdrive by dragging and dropping the desired Windows system icon onto the Hyperdrive RAM icon.

Just drag the image of your hard drive over to the icon for the external drive, and everything will be copied.

Sure , first thing you need to find - WITHOUT installng Hyperdrive and HyperOS - the "My other computers", then it is simply a matter of having something you DID NOT install and DO NOT have, actually clone your drive :

Having connected the HD4 to your PC the simplest way to get started in the case of Windows 2K/XP is as follows...

0. Make sure that the BIOS sees the HyperDrive and that the BIOS Hard Disk Boot order is correct!

1. Boot the PC and install HyperOs OneClick or HyperOs 2007 Geek/SuperGeek on your C: drive.

2. Open My Other Computers.

3. You will see the HyperDrive partition marked with a RAM icon.

4. Clone a Windows system to the Hyperdrive by dragging and dropping the desired Windows system icon onto the Hyperdrive RAM icon.

5. Click OK. HyperOs will clone that Windows system to the HyperDrive and then reboot.

6. Double Click the HyperDrive RAM icon and click OK. HyperOs will swap to the cloned Windows system on the Hyperdrive.

jaclaz

[jumper]

The intersection of the content within my two links is "drag one icon onto the other."

I read years ago that this is the easiest method to clone a drive. I don't remember if what I read pertained to Win3.x, Win9x, or WinXP.

My question is: Does anyone happen to know if the icon drag-and-drop method for cloning a drive will work in Win9x, including preserving short file names?

[submix8c]

Drag-And-Drop is COPY!!!!!! Via "Temp" Folder! Period!