Protected?

[Nakatomi2010]

I've integrated Symantec's Norton Systemworks 2005 Reocvery CD into my Multi-Boot DVD, however I just recently got the 2006 verions (Free after rebates, figured what the hell I use Ghost often) and when I do the same thing I did before it says NTLDR is corrupt or missing....

The BIGGEST difference I can see is that there's a setupldr.exe and setupldr.bin..... I was gonna use the setupldr.bin from my other version....

Any thoughts as to what's up with this one? What's sod different, shy and how to integrate into a multi-boot environment?

Edit: Thought I'd mention that the Recovery CD's appear to be Windows PE so used the BartPE integration method which is also used with ERD Commander 2005...

Also a STARTROM.COM file too....

I took a closer look at the boot sectors on this CD and the old one and I just noticed the new one references AMD64 on it, though the CD clearly has no AMD64 directory on it, and upon closer inspection of the actual setupldr.bin I notice many AMD64 references in there too, but again there's no AMD64 directory on the CD... ?

Edit2:

I replaced the setupldr.bin and stuff with the older ones from 2005, it goes through the loading, but at the end of the loading it says "Insufficient memory for CDFS.SYS" and stops....

Edited February 22, 2006 by Nakatomi2010

[Nakatomi2010]

Figured I'd make a reply to get a little more attention...

The problem is solved... The 2006 Symantec Recovery disk must use a newer version of Windows PE built off of the x64 code base, as there are references to the AMD64 directories...

The solution was to take a boot sector from an x64 CD and relabel ONLY the i386 portion of it to something else, in my case 'SYM1'...

Then you need to get the cracked setupldr.bin from the stickied post above and change ONLY the i386 references (7) to the same as above, so again in my case that would be SYM1, DO NOT change any of the AMD64 references.....

Not sure how many of you people will benefit from this, but I thought I'd let you folks know how it's done because this is the first PE I've personally run into which required a similar method to x64 XP...