"Rod Speed" wrote:
You'll find that it claims to have found new hardware
even if the drives are identical size and model too.

It can take a while to report that, one quirk of XP.


Then standard procedure should be to boot up
the new clone in isolation *twice* instead of just
once?

*TimDaniels*

Timothy Daniels wrote in
message ...
Rod Speed wrote
Timothy Daniels wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Timothy Daniels wrote
Fang may be an Ozzyism,

Nope, its in Webster's and all yankee dictionarys.

But not as a verb.

Wrong.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fang

Here is your best shot, an obsolete Shakespearism
or an enablement as in "furnished with fangs":

Wrong again. That aint the only reference to the use of that word as a verb.

And thats a tiny subset of dictionarys anyway.

fang
\Fang\ (f[a^]ng), v. t. [OE. fangen, fongen, fon (g orig. only in p. p. and imp.
tense), AS. f[=o]n; akin to D. vangen, OHG. f[=a]han, G. fahen, fangen, Icel.
f[=a], Sw. f[*a], f[*a]nga, Dan. fange, faae, Goth. fahan, and prob. to E. fair,
peace, pact. Cf. Fair, a.] 1. To catch; to seize, as with the teeth; to lay hold
of; to gripe; to clutch. [Obs.] --Shak.

He's in the law's clutches; you see he's fanged. --J. Webster.

2. To enable to catch or tear; to furnish with fangs.
``Chariots fanged with scythes.'' --Philips.

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

In short, "to fang" is only rarely used
as a transitive verb in American English,

More pig ignorant bull****.

as a search of Groups.Google.com will show.

It isnt even feasible to search for its use there as a transitive verb.

As a matter of fact, it's used less frequently than "arse".

Completely and utterly irrelevant whether its less used than that or not.

Rule of Holes, child.

"Rod Speed" wrote in his inimitable style:
Timothy Daniels wrote:
In short, "to fang" is only rarely used
as a transitive verb in American English,

More pig ignorant bull****.

as a search of Groups.Google.com will show.

It isnt even feasible to search for its use there as a transitive verb.


Wrong. Just search for its use, as in "fang you", "fang him",
"fang them", "got fanged", "were fanged", etc., and then weed
out the uses as an adjective. You'll find that Americans use
the word exceedingly rarely as a verb, and when they do, it is
usually as a pun on "thank you" or as a comic immitation of
Rod Speed.

*TimDaniels*

Timothy Daniels wrote in
message ...
Rod Speed wrote

You'll find that it claims to have found new hardware
even if the drives are identical size and model too.

It can take a while to report that, one quirk of XP.

Then standard procedure should be to boot up the
new clone in isolation *twice* instead of just once?

Like I said, that second one isnt necessary
to ensure that XP doesnt boot with files
from both the original and the clone drive.

Timothy Daniels wrote in
message ...
Rod Speed wrote
Timothy Daniels wrote:

In short, "to fang" is only rarely used
as a transitive verb in American English,

More pig ignorant bull****.

as a search of Groups.Google.com will show.

It isnt even feasible to search for its use there as a transitive verb.

Wrong.

Right.

Just search for its use, as in "fang you", "fang him",
"fang them", "got fanged", "were fanged", etc.,

Not feasible, child.

and then weed out the uses as an adjective. You'll find
that Americans use the word exceedingly rarely as a verb,

More mindless bull****. There is a lot more
around than just groups.google, child.

and when they do, it is usually as a pun on "thank you"

Pathetic, really.

Rule of Holes, Timmy child.

That always works. The problem is when the original is removed,
you'll find that you cant CONTINUE to boot off the clone once
the original is removed because the boot is still trying to get
stuff off the original drive and it cant when the original is removed.

I just disconnected my source IDE drive, and rebooted off of the RAID
alone, and it worked perfectly fine. Of course, since cloning, I have
cleaned out the old pointers to boot drives in my boot.ini. But you
seem to be saying there's some data problem. Maybe xxclone has fixed
this problem and your information is out of date. It is of note that
xxclone runs some quick cleanup routine when the the cloned drive is
first booted.


Because you had both drives visible to the system
for the first boot after the clone had been made.

Thats the problem thats avoided by ensuring that the
OS cant see the original and the clone on the first boot.

This is probably true. But the only problems that occurred in my case
were the ones I mentioned, and they were minor problems. I have
cloned with xxclone from the SCSI to the IDE and back, and have not
experienced any worse problems than what I've already mentioned.


kludge, fang, and arse are funny words


This is no laughing matter, boy.

I'm not laughing, the usage just sounded new and interesting to a
native American English speaker. When you said "fang you in the
arse", I thought at first you were using "fang" as a euphemism for a
more nasty four letter f-word, but maybe it's just a different way of
saying "bite".

Yes, I reported the problems to them. The versions I had used were
2.08 and 2.09.

Thanks for the elaboration on xxClone. I hope you reported
the problems to xxClone so they could squash those bugs. What
version were you using?

"Rod Speed" wrote:
The problem is potentially with an unpowered drive physically
connected to the ribbon cable...

I guess "potentially" is the critical word, because I just
cloned my primary HD (containing WinXP Pro) to my
secondary HD, and then I simply unplugged the power
cable that ran to the primary HD, leaving the data (ribbon)
cable still connected to it. Without resetting the BIOS' boot
sequence, I restarted the PC. Since the BIOS found only
the secondary HD, it booted from it, and the clone OS was
born, and I was able to surf, get mail, etc. with it. Then I
reconnected the primary HD, and thereafter, I could choose
which OS to boot by adjusting the boot sequence in the
BIOS. So, at least for Maxtor DiamonMax Plus 9 HDs
used with a SIIG IDE controller card, it's OK to use simple
power removal to "hide" a drive from the system.

*TimDaniels*

"Timothy Daniels" asked:
BTW, does is matter a whit if there are 2 devices
(e.g. HDs) on a cable and the device jumpered "Master"
is at the mid connector and the device jumpered "Slave"
were at the end connector? I have been assuming that
there is no difference other than which device will default
to being the boot device. Is that correct?


Yes, it apparently is. I've just done some experimenting
with switching 2 HDs on the same IDE cable between
being Master and Slave, and it doesn't affect the cloning,
nor does it affect boot capability. But it does affect the
default BIOS boot sequence. For 2 HDs on the same
cable, the default BIOS boot sequence has the Master
HD at a higher priority than the Slave HD. So unless one
adjusts the BIOS boot sequence, the Master HD will
boot (if it's bootable).

*TimDaniels*

"Rod Speed" opined:
Timothy Daniels wrote:
Just search for its use, as in "fang you", "fang him",
"fang them", "got fanged", "were fanged", etc.,

Not feasible, child.


You just don't know how. "Fang you", for instance,
is easy to find, and when used, it is usually a pun on
"Thank you". The rest are rare because, as I said,
"fang" as a verb is almost not used in American English.

*TimDaniels*