If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
restore MBR
I have a drive that has been diagnosed as having a corrupted/missing MBR
(master boot record). This drive was being used for about 3 months (it is a laptop drive, by the way) without problems. Then all of a sudden it failed to be recognized. Using some demo recovery tools to find out what was wrong, it said the data was there but the MBR was damaged. Now, can I just use fdisk /mbr to restore it? Or does NTFS and/or XP do something different? If not, does it matter what DOS version I use fdisk from? Thanks E |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"ep" wrote:
I have a drive that has been diagnosed as having a corrupted/missing MBR (master boot record). This drive was being used for about 3 months (it is a laptop drive, by the way) without problems. Then all of a sudden it failed to be recognized. "Failed to be recognized" means that the BIOS doesn't recognize the drive hardware. The next part of your post suggests that the drive IS recognized, but its content cannot be accessed normally. This is quite different from a drive that isn't recognized anymore by the BIOS. Using some demo recovery tools to find out what was wrong, it said the data was there but the MBR was damaged. What recovery tool did you use? Now, can I just use fdisk /mbr to restore it? Or does NTFS and/or XP do something different? If not, does it matter what DOS version I use fdisk from? FDISK is not the tool for restoring the MBR of a drive that has NTFS. If the drive had just a single partition that occupied the entire drive capacity, then you can try FIXMBR after having booted from the XP setup CD, into "restore console". If only the MBR got damage then it may work. If not, then there are other options to try. Regards, Zvi -- NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew) InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Zvi Netiv" wrote in message
"ep" wrote: I have a drive that has been diagnosed as having a corrupted/missing MBR (master boot record). This drive was being used for about 3 months (it is a laptop drive, by the way) without problems. Then all of a sudden it failed to be recognized. "Failed to be recognized" means that the BIOS doesn't recognize the drive hardware. That is what you make of it. That is the hardware part. There is also the content part of the bios that is looking for executable bootsectors. If it doesn't find one that can be construed as the drive not being recognized when you know that there should be one. The next part of your post suggests that the drive IS recognized, but its content cannot be accessed normally. This is quite different from a drive that isn't recognized anymore by the BIOS. So obviously that wasn't the context in wich he (meant to) say(d) that the drive wasn't recognized. Using some demo recovery tools to find out what was wrong, it said the data was there but the MBR was damaged. What recovery tool did you use? Now, can I just use fdisk /mbr to restore it? Or does NTFS and/or XP do something different? If not, does it matter what DOS version I use fdisk from? FDISK is not the tool for restoring the MBR of a drive that has NTFS. If the drive had just a single partition that occupied the entire drive capacity, then you can try FIXMBR after having booted from the XP setup CD, into "restore console". What would be different if it didn't have "a single partition that occupied the entire drive capacity"? If only the MBR got damage then it may work. Will that restore the partiton table too or ...? If not, .... guess not then. then there are other options to try. Regards, Zvi |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Folkert Rienstra" wrote:
"Zvi Netiv" wrote in message "ep" wrote: I have a drive that has been diagnosed as having a corrupted/missing MBR (master boot record). This drive was being used for about 3 months (it is a laptop drive, by the way) without problems. Then all of a sudden it failed to be recognized. "Failed to be recognized" means that the BIOS doesn't recognize the drive hardware. That is what you make of it. That is the hardware part. There is also the content part of the bios that is looking for executable bootsectors. If it doesn't find one that can be construed as the drive not being recognized when you know that there should be one. The BIOS will recognize the presence of the drive (hardware) regardless of whether it contains a valid / executable MBR and bootsector(s) or not. A test for BIOS recognition is FDISK being able to see the drive. The next part of your post suggests that the drive IS recognized, but its content cannot be accessed normally. This is quite different from a drive that isn't recognized anymore by the BIOS. So obviously that wasn't the context in wich he (meant to) say(d) that the drive wasn't recognized. I understood what the OP meant, I was just pointing out the difference to him. Using some demo recovery tools to find out what was wrong, it said the data was there but the MBR was damaged. What recovery tool did you use? Now, can I just use fdisk /mbr to restore it? Or does NTFS and/or XP do something different? If not, does it matter what DOS version I use fdisk from? FDISK is not the tool for restoring the MBR of a drive that has NTFS. If the drive had just a single partition that occupied the entire drive capacity, then you can try FIXMBR after having booted from the XP setup CD, into "restore console". What would be different if it didn't have "a single partition that occupied the entire drive capacity"? If only the MBR got damage then it may work. Will that restore the partiton table too or ...? FIXMBR works differently than FDISK with the /MBR argument. FIXMBR will write a default partition table if none exists or if the existing one is corrupted. Unlike FDISK /MBR - the latter will write a default DOS partition only if the boot signature is 00 00 rather than 55 AA. If not, ... guess not then. FIXMBR doesn't check for actually existing partitions before rewriting the MBR. If the partition table is good, then it will use that data, if not, then it will write a default partition table. Quite a good chance to fix things on first attempt, depending on the drive configuration before the MBR was damaged. Regards, Zvi -- NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew) InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I have a drive that has been diagnosed as having a corrupted/missing MBR
(master boot record). This drive was being used for about 3 months (it is a laptop drive, by the way) without problems. Then all of a sudden it failed to be recognized. Using some demo recovery tools to find out what was wrong, it said the data was there but the MBR was damaged. Now, can I just use fdisk /mbr to restore it? Or does NTFS and/or XP do something different? If not, does it matter what DOS version I use fdisk from? It looks like some people have already disagreed with what I'm about to say but... If you are using WindowsXP, simply clearing the MBR using "fdisk /mbr" or "fixmbr" will allow Windows to work. I know this from first hand experience with restoring WinXP after uninstalling Linux on dual boot systems. However, if your drive is corrupt, that might be the least of your problems. Or maybe your software misdiagnosed the problem. What exactly was the problem you were having? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Brandon" wrote:
If you are using WindowsXP, simply clearing the MBR using "fdisk /mbr" or "fixmbr" will allow Windows to work. I know this from first hand experience with restoring WinXP after uninstalling Linux on dual boot systems. What were the symptoms of disfunction after uninstalling Linux from the dual boot system? Was it merely that the dual boot option still presented itself at boot time? *TimDaniels* |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The drive is accessed as not being able to read from it. That is at Boot
time. I can boot from a floppy and have used EasyRecovery Professional Trial to see I can "see" the data. However, the Trial does not let me do that just analyze the drive. All the reports say it is OK with the exception that the MBR is bad. Does that help understand why I want to do this? Last, how can I use "fixmbr" from a floppy? I have found reference to this, but no specifics. P.S. I do not want to write to the disk because it has data I need on it. I also am trying to do all I can before resorting to sending it to a recovery house (and the large expense of a 40G drive that was, as I recall, over 70% full - not all data but that full). Thanks E "Brandon" wrote in message m... I have a drive that has been diagnosed as having a corrupted/missing MBR (master boot record). This drive was being used for about 3 months (it is a laptop drive, by the way) without problems. Then all of a sudden it failed to be recognized. Using some demo recovery tools to find out what was wrong, it said the data was there but the MBR was damaged. Now, can I just use fdisk /mbr to restore it? Or does NTFS and/or XP do something different? If not, does it matter what DOS version I use fdisk from? It looks like some people have already disagreed with what I'm about to say but... If you are using WindowsXP, simply clearing the MBR using "fdisk /mbr" or "fixmbr" will allow Windows to work. I know this from first hand experience with restoring WinXP after uninstalling Linux on dual boot systems. However, if your drive is corrupt, that might be the least of your problems. Or maybe your software misdiagnosed the problem. What exactly was the problem you were having? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Zvi Netiv" wrote in message
"Folkert Rienstra" wrote: "Zvi Netiv" wrote in message "ep" wrote: I have a drive that has been diagnosed as having a corrupted/missing MBR (master boot record). This drive was being used for about 3 months (it is a laptop drive, by the way) without problems. Then all of a sudden it failed to be recognized. "Failed to be recognized" means that the BIOS doesn't recognize the drive hardware. That is what you make of it. That is the hardware part. There is also the content part of the bios that is looking for executable bootsectors. If it doesn't find one, that can be construed as the drive not being recognized when you know that there should be one. The BIOS will recognize the presence of the drive (hardware) regardless of whether it contains a valid / executable MBR and bootsector(s) or not. Yes, no one contents that. He said it failed to be recognized without saying what 'it' was or what it was that didn't 'recognize' it. 'It' and 'not recognized' therefor can be several things. A test for BIOS recognition is FDISK being able to see the drive. It is stil possible that a drive is (hardware) recognized by POST but not by FDISK but then that would be of ones own doing (bios setup). The next part of your post suggests that the drive IS recognized, but its content cannot be accessed normally. This is quite different from a drive that isn't recognized anymore by the BIOS. So obviously that wasn't the context in wich he (meant to) say(d) that the drive wasn't recognized. I understood what the OP meant, I was just pointing out the difference to him. Well, "content cannot be accessed normally" is quite vague in pointing out a 'difference'. To all intends and purposes it could actually mean the same thing as 'not recognized by bios'. Using some demo recovery tools to find out what was wrong, it said the data was there but the MBR was damaged. What recovery tool did you use? Now, can I just use fdisk /mbr to restore it? Or does NTFS and/or XP do something different? If not, does it matter what DOS version I use fdisk from? FDISK is not the tool for restoring the MBR of a drive that has NTFS. If the drive had just a single partition that occupied the entire drive capacity, then you can try FIXMBR after having booted from the XP setup CD, into "restore console". What would be different if it didn't have "a single partition that occupied the entire drive capacity"? [...] If only the MBR got damage then it may work. Will that restore the partiton table too or ...? FIXMBR works differently than 'FDISK with the /MBR argument'. FIXMBR will write a default partition table if none exists or if the existing one is corrupted. Unlike FDISK /MBR - the latter will write a default DOS partition only if the boot signature is 00 00 rather than 55 AA. Something seems amiss with that. Presumably that is to read as : Unlike FIXMBR, FDISK /MBR will write a default DOS par- tition only if the boot signature is 00 00 rather than 55 AA. What if the signature bytes are neither? If not, ... guess not then. FIXMBR doesn't check for actually existing partitions before rewriting the MBR. If the partition table is good, then it will use that data, if not, then it will write a default partition table. Quite a good chance to fix things on first attempt, depending on the drive configuration before the MBR was damaged. MBR's don't get damaged, they get overwritten completely. There are two possibilities: It gets overwritten with garbage by a programming error, destructive virus or crash, or it gets manipulated by a virus or partitioning software (overlays included) or fix that reads it, changes it, and writes it back. So FIXMBR and MBR/FIX only work successfully on the latter case. Q:How big a chance that it will overwrite the existing but slightly unconventional partition table that nonetheless still works? Or in other words, do you know what it checks to determine whether the table is good? Are there risks of loosing it? Regards, Zvi |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Folkert Rienstra" wrote:
"Zvi Netiv" wrote in message [...] A test for BIOS recognition is FDISK being able to see the drive. It is stil possible that a drive is (hardware) recognized by POST but not by FDISK but then that would be of ones own doing (bios setup). It's possible that POST (the BIOS) will appear to detect the drive but FDISK when run will return "no hard drive found". A closer inspection of the drive parameter in the setup will show erratic data for the drive. This is a rare hardware mode of failure. Setting the wrong parameters in the BIOS setup will result in FDISK finding the drive, but with erratic configuration. FDISK finding the drive (not necessarily with correct drive parameters) is a reliable indicator whether the BIOS "sees" the drive or not. [...] FIXMBR works differently than 'FDISK with the /MBR argument'. FIXMBR will write a default partition table if none exists or if the existing one is corrupted. Unlike FDISK /MBR - the latter will write a default DOS partition only if the boot signature is 00 00 rather than 55 AA. Something seems amiss with that. Presumably that is to read as : Unlike FIXMBR, FDISK /MBR will write a default DOS par- tition only if the boot signature is 00 00 rather than 55 AA. That's better, and correct. What if the signature bytes are neither? FDISK /MBR will then leave the partition data as is, and correct the signature to 55 AA. The only case where FDISK will write a new partition table is when the signature is zero. Regards, Zvi -- NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew) InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"ep" wrote:
The drive is accessed as not being able to read from it. That is at Boot time. I can boot from a floppy and have used EasyRecovery Professional Trial to see I can "see" the data. However, the Trial does not let me do that just analyze the drive. All the reports say it is OK with the exception that the MBR is bad. So you have a positive indication that only the MBR is bad. Does that help understand why I want to do this? Last, how can I use "fixmbr" from a floppy? I have found reference to this, but no specifics. You need to boot from your XP setup CD (you may need to change the boot device order to CDROM as first), and select "repair" mode. When at the command prompt, simply type FIXMBR and then Enter. P.S. I do not want to write to the disk because it has data I need on it. I also am trying to do all I can before resorting to sending it to a recovery house (and the large expense of a 40G drive that was, as I recall, over 70% full - not all data but that full). If you want to play it safe, then you may clone the entire drive to another one and work on the clone. This way you don't ruin your chances to give it out to a recovery house (expect at least a 1,000 $ price tag for professional recovery). For cloning software, check CloneDisk from www.resq.co.il/resq.php Regards, Zvi -- NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew) InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
System Restore Problem | KA6UUP | Dell Computers | 0 | October 18th 04 03:01 PM |
Quick Restore CD | [email protected] | Compaq Computers | 9 | September 18th 04 12:27 PM |
Compaq Presario 6000 restore problem. | Gary | Compaq Computers | 10 | May 22nd 04 09:06 PM |
Some general questions about backup systems, mainly speed of restore | Rob Nicholson | Storage & Hardrives | 6 | April 19th 04 07:33 PM |
Need help: System Restore malfunction | HistoryFan | Dell Computers | 18 | February 6th 04 10:04 PM |