Corrupt NTFS filesystem

Citizen Bob wrote
kony wrote

A few of them would tend to be HKLM-Software,
HKCU-Software, and you mentioned classes so HKCR.

"A few of them" tells me there are more.

Yes that's quite possible.
As I already wrote, the key to doing it is NOT what you are
doing, not trying to think on things.
The key is to actually do it.
Actually.
Not think, do.

I do not have time to run around on merry chases. Either I know
what I am going to do has a good chance of success or I pass it by.

And spend the NEXT year with your dick in
your hand, just like you did with the last one.

You are spending hours "thinking" on things then telling us you
haven't the spare time to do what wouldn't have taken this long.

I am doing that in hope of running this problem down. I am
confident that you experts will come across something along
the way that points us to the problem. We already have a
lot of data, but there are a couple things still missing.

Pity you refuse to try what will prove where the problem is.

We aint gunna keep bothering with you for years, you watch.

As already written, this is a bulk process to get most things
working. Some may not work. Maybe you install 5 things
again, or maybe you fire up sysinternal's regmon and see
that when you launch the app, it's trying to read a particular
registry entry, so you merely export that parent key and merge it.

I just as well reinstall Windows and all my apps as do that.

Yep, anyone with a clue would try a move to XP using the
files and settings transfer wizard and see if you still get the
corruption in that situation, after its been proven that the
problem isnt the removable drive bay and the cable.

Corse you will play silly buggers for another year instead.

These are basic concepts, which take more time to think on,
than to do. You may not realize this, and that is why I
continually stress not doing what you are doing, which is
anything except the productive path to get it done. I have
been down this road and have advised what addresses your
expressed need, to have minimal time spent, while you
continue to do the opposite, making it the most drawn out
process possible.

You must think I sit around looking for things to do.

Nope, he realises that even a terminal bonehead like you should
be able to grasp that if you havent managed to work out what
is producing the corruption in a YEAR, its time to cut to the chase
and do some VERY basic tests like see what happens with the
drive directly connect and if that turns out to not be the problem
prove whether is a ****ed 2K install.

That is not the case. I am always busy with something.

Wasting your time for a YEAR or more. Having fun ?

If I had more confidence that this Registry stunt of yours
would really work, then I would give it a try. But it sounds
like you are just throwing **** on the wall in the outside
chance it will work, maybe. I need more confidence
before I embark on a long project such as we discussed.

Your problem.

My problem with what you propose - exporting three Registry
keys - is that the Registry has a lot more configuration information
that is specific to applications than just 3 keys. If I don't export that,
then I am not going to get a "clean install", as you call it. The search
for more keys could take days.

Sure beats YEARS.

Then I could leave behind some keys that I do not discover are missing
until months later, in which it is too late to go back and export them

Nope, you can keep that drive with that config on it.

because the apps have changed their configuration
and the exported keys do not have that information.

Pathetic, really.

Whoever came up with that Registry crap should be executed
so his screwed up genes do not contaminate the human race.

Boneheads like you in spades. Pity its too late in your case.

People do not have this kind of nightmare to deal with
on UNIX, because configurations are file-based. It is
much easier to deal with a flat file than a data base.

No one is holding a gun to your head and stopping you from using it.

If they are, call the cops.

Those phrases told me you were not sure,
so I didn't take them as a final statement.

Sure of what? I'm sure you need those keys and I'm sure
it's not guaranteed to make 100% of your apps work. This
was already written, that it is a bulk transfer to get the
majority working, then anything remaining will indicate what
to do next, whether it be more registry entries or files,
but each thing done in turn, NOT trying to do everything at
once is the key.

It is important NOT to do everything at once, because we are
trying to isolate the problem, not duplicate the old
installation perfectly which would naturally reproduce the
problem. Thus, the prudent approach is going to be a
conservative transferral of each type of setting, file, etc.

That makes more sense than your earlier terse comments. But it still
involves a lot of work chasing after things that I know nothing about.

STILL leave farting about for YEARS for dead.

HKCU-software, HKLM- software,
HK-Classes-Root. Is that correct?

Yes, export each of these, but not merging them.
Get new installation working 100% first.

Of course.

Did you do a clean installation yet?

I have not done anything yet because I want to be certain what I am
going to do.

What you need to do is to NOT try to think ahead. It is a
fluid process and you may need adapt to what happens. For
instance, after merging registry keys you might launch an
app and get a message like vbrun*.dll not found (or similar),
meaning you need to install MS's visual basic package.

So in this example, you might google search;

http://www.google.com/search?q=Windo...basic+download

... and the first hit is the page to download it, then install.

I kept every app and its support files in a ZIP directory.
However if I did have to reinstall, I would consider
getting the latest version so I can at least be updated.

you only have 3 options left:

You left out going back to a FAT32 system and
hoping none of my apps ever builds a 4 GB file.

The digital TV card is absolutely guaranteed to do that.

Which is what I may do because I never really tested it.

In fact that is exactly what I am going to do before I do anything
else. I can do a FAT32 conversion in my sleep, so it's no big deal.
I actually have the last one but it is dated by now so it would be
better just to make one with this current version of the operating
system and applications. I have installed a lot of new stuff for my
JP1 project I am working on now, including an update of Java.

Let's run the FAT32 for a full week or two and see what happens.
I realize you don't care for FAT32 because it can lead to lost files.
But that's with Win9x or WinME, not Win2K.

Pathetic, really.

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 20:31:14 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

I have two clones, and I know how to recover. That gets me by.

For now, until the MFT gets so corrupted that even chkdsk cant
save you and you lose whats happened since the last clone.

Wrong again. I maintain a differential backup on the Backup drive,
which is the second removable drive bay. It runs at 4:00 am, and I
force it to run manually before I reboot.

Pity about what you do on that system since you do that.

Don't sweat it,

If something in that sequence goes wrong, I immediately fix it.

Remains to be seen if that is always possible.

It has been possible for over a year.

Yeah, I know - it's a pain in the ass. That's why I am willing to try your
"clean install" procedure after I make damn sure it is going to work.

We'll see...

I will decide what to do next when I get time.


--

"Nothing in the world can take the place of perseverence. Talent
will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education
will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and
determination alone are omnipotent."
--Calvin Coolidge

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 20:52:52 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Doesnt mean that you have to run the test drive continuously for that
time. Even you should be able to boot it occasionally over that time.

I have done that as a test - reboot an uncorrupt disk several times
during the day. That's exactly what I did with both the new FAT32 and
the new NTFS I made the other day. Both passed the test every time.

Doesnt prove much about a problem that you claim can take a week to manifest.

Do you realize you just contradicted yourself. It is you who said

"Even you should be able to boot it occasionally over that time."

Then you turn around and claim that:

"Doesnt prove much about a problem that you claim can take a week to
manifest."

That's what I have been trying to tell you, but you are so boneheaded
you won't listen.

I did not run the FAT32 for a week so I will not know if it would
have worked. I may go back to FAT32 when I figure out what
would happen if one of my DVD applications built a temp file
that is larger than 4 GB. For all I know, that never happens.

Digital TV capture cards will do that, guaranteed.

So will authoring applications.

But I feel that something can be learned by running a FAT32 for a week
or two. I would still be doing it if it weren't for you talking me
into going back to NTFS with your claim that it won't corrupt now that
I have a clean install of the filesystem.

The main reason I went back to NTFS was a comment you made
(actually it was one of your famous pontifications) that if I converted
the FAT32 to a new NTFS filesystem it would not get corrupted.

I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.

Look it up. You did say it, in passing.

Unfortunately you were wrong,

Nope, because I never ever said anything
even remotely resembling anything like that.

You have a poor memory.

But not to worry - I was willing to take the chance that it would be
true. We actually learned something by this, namely a clean install of
NTFS won't solve the problem.

because when I let the system go about
3 days between reboots, it got corrupted.

All that proves is that the fault has nothing
to do with the file system being used.

You don't know if a FAT32 will corrupt.

I agree and that's why I will run ImPerfect Disk when you tell me where to get it.

Pathetic, really.

It's you who is pathetic.

But first I want to run ImPerfect Disk.

Pathetic, really.

LOL. I had you going for a while, didn't I? You are not the only one
who knows how to be sarcastic.

Especially since I am running a 2 GB pagefile in memory.

Fark. What else are you doing like that that you havent even mentioned ?

What do you want to know?

How do you propose to run chkdsk without
rebooting or without remounting the disk as D:?

You cant actually be THAT stupid.

Win2K won't let me run chkdsk on the boot disk while it is running. It
schedules chkdsk for boot time.

Here's what happens when I try:

+++
C:\chkdsk c: /f
The type of the file system is NTFS.
Cannot lock current drive.

Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use by another
process. Would you like to schedule this volume to be
checked the next time the system restarts? (Y/N)
+++

So tell me how I can run chkdsk on C: when it is the active boot
partition.

Please stop with the finger wagging. You are not my wife.

Go and **** yourself.

Jeez, you can sure disk it out, but you can't take it.

I can take it fine, I choose to tell you go and ****
yourself when you try puerile stuff like that.

Go and **** yourself.

reams of your puerile **** flushed where it belongs

Jeez, you can sure disk it out, but you can't take it.

--

"Nothing in the world can take the place of perseverence. Talent
will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education
will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and
determination alone are omnipotent."
--Calvin Coolidge

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 20:56:00 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Citizen Bob wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Why would the removable bay corrupt
an NTFS partition only at boot time?

Because even you should have noticed
considerable drive activity at boot time.

My vote is that the corruption occurs during shutdown,

Irrelevant whether its shutdown or bootup, what matters is why it happens.

when Win2K writes the memory-resident part
to the system files, the pagefile and the MFT.

It doesnt do that either.

Disk Signature Conflict On Identical Clone Drives

http://www.goodells.net/multiboot/partsigs.htm

Doesnt say anything like your claim above.

It explains why I must use Win98SE fdisk to clear the signature.

No it doesnt.

OK, I realised that you had that many physical drives,
just wouldnt have called that an archive myself.

It's shorter than "removable disk I put on the shelf".

But less obvious what you meant.

I just meant the use of the word 'archived' there.

You speak Oz English, which is like Pom English.

Wrong, as always.

I speak Real English,

Wrong, as always.

the same as most of the world's computers. The Real
English meaning of "archive" is found in an Real English
American dictionary like Websters Online:

archive: the material preserved

Pathetic, really.

Congratulations. You managed to get thru an entire post without saying
anything constructive. You must have a lot of time on your hands.


--

"Nothing in the world can take the place of perseverence. Talent
will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education
will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and
determination alone are omnipotent."
--Calvin Coolidge

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 21:11:01 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

People do not have this kind of nightmare to deal with
on UNIX, because configurations are file-based. It is
much easier to deal with a flat file than a data base.

No one is holding a gun to your head and stopping you from using it.

Most applications I use only run on Windows.


--

"Nothing in the world can take the place of perseverence. Talent
will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education
will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and
determination alone are omnipotent."
--Calvin Coolidge

Citizen Bob wrote
Rod Speed wrote

I have two clones, and I know how to recover. That gets me by.

For now, until the MFT gets so corrupted that even chkdsk cant
save you and you lose whats happened since the last clone.

Wrong again.

We'll see...

I maintain a differential backup on the Backup drive,
which is the second removable drive bay. It runs at
4:00 am, and I force it to run manually before I reboot.

You'll still lose some data if the problem gets worse
than it currently is and chkdsk cant fix it, stupid.

Pity about what you do on that system since you do that.

Don't sweat it,

Yeah, I couldnt care less if you lost the lot. Bet you wouldnt
have the balls to admit that you had ****ed up completely.

If something in that sequence goes wrong, I immediately fix it.

Remains to be seen if that is always possible.

It has been possible for over a year.

Proves nothing.

Yeah, I know - it's a pain in the ass. That's why I am willing to try your
"clean install" procedure after I make damn sure it is going to work.

We'll see...

I will decide what to do next when I get time.

The answer is obvious, try the directly connected drive first,
because that is the least effort to try and those removable
drive bays are known to cause problems in some configs.

Citizen Bob wrote
Rod Speed wrote

People do not have this kind of nightmare to deal with
on UNIX, because configurations are file-based. It is
much easier to deal with a flat file than a data base.

No one is holding a gun to your head and stopping you from using it.

Most applications I use only run on Windows.

Your problem.

And a rocket scientist bonehead should be able to work out how to do that with linux too.

Citizen Bob wrote:
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 20:56:00 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Citizen Bob wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Why would the removable bay corrupt
an NTFS partition only at boot time?

Because even you should have noticed
considerable drive activity at boot time.

My vote is that the corruption occurs during shutdown,

Irrelevant whether its shutdown or bootup, what matters is why it
happens.

when Win2K writes the memory-resident part
to the system files, the pagefile and the MFT.

It doesnt do that either.

Disk Signature Conflict On Identical Clone Drives

http://www.goodells.net/multiboot/partsigs.htm

Doesnt say anything like your claim above.

It explains why I must use Win98SE fdisk to clear the signature.

No it doesnt.

OK, I realised that you had that many physical drives,
just wouldnt have called that an archive myself.

It's shorter than "removable disk I put on the shelf".

But less obvious what you meant.

I just meant the use of the word 'archived' there.

You speak Oz English, which is like Pom English.

Wrong, as always.

I speak Real English,

Wrong, as always.

the same as most of the world's computers. The Real
English meaning of "archive" is found in an Real English
American dictionary like Websters Online:

archive: the material preserved

Pathetic, really.

Congratulations. You managed to get thru an entire post without saying
anything constructive. You must have a lot of time on your hands.

Pathetic, really.

Any 2 year old could leave that for dead.

Citizen Bob wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Doesnt mean that you have to run the test drive continuously for that
time. Even you should be able to boot it occasionally over that time.

I have done that as a test - reboot an uncorrupt disk several times
during the day. That's exactly what I did with both the new FAT32 and
the new NTFS I made the other day. Both passed the test every time.

Doesnt prove much about a problem that you claim can take a week to manifest.

Do you realize you just contradicted yourself.

No I didnt.

It is you who said

"Even you should be able to boot it occasionally over that time."

Then you turn around and claim that:

"Doesnt prove much about a problem that
you claim can take a week to manifest."

That last is when you dont reboot for a week or so, stupid.

That's what I have been trying to tell you,

Pity you never could grasp that there is no contradiction there.

I did not run the FAT32 for a week so I will not know if it would
have worked. I may go back to FAT32 when I figure out what
would happen if one of my DVD applications built a temp file
that is larger than 4 GB. For all I know, that never happens.

Digital TV capture cards will do that, guaranteed.

So will authoring applications.

Indeed.

But I feel that something can be learned
by running a FAT32 for a week or two.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to try the drive directly connected instead.

And even if it doesnt corrupt with FAT32, thats a useless config.

I would still be doing it if it weren't for you talking me
into going back to NTFS with your claim that it won't
corrupt now that I have a clean install of the filesystem.

I never ever said anything remotely resembling anything like
that, you pathological liar/pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

The main reason I went back to NTFS was a comment you made
(actually it was one of your famous pontifications) that if I converted
the FAT32 to a new NTFS filesystem it would not get corrupted.

I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.

Look it up.

Nothing to look up. I never ever said anything
even remotely resembling anything like that.

You did say it, in passing.

Nope. You're lying or massively confused, as always.

Unfortunately you were wrong,

Nope, because I never ever said anything
even remotely resembling anything like that.

You have a poor memory.

You are a liar.

But not to worry - I was willing to take the chance that
it would be true. We actually learned something by this,
namely a clean install of NTFS won't solve the problem.

There is no such animal. And you dont even try a
clean NTFS drive, you CONVERTED a FAT32 drive.

because when I let the system go about
3 days between reboots, it got corrupted.

All that proves is that the fault has nothing
to do with the file system being used.

You don't know if a FAT32 will corrupt.

Never ever said I did.

I agree and that's why I will run ImPerfect
Disk when you tell me where to get it.

Pathetic, really.

It's you who is pathetic.

Pathetic, really.

But first I want to run ImPerfect Disk.

Pathetic, really.

LOL. I had you going for a while, didn't I?

Just another of your pathetic little puerile drug crazed fantasys.

You are not the only one who knows how to be sarcastic.

You quite sure you aint one of those rocket scientist boneheads ?

Especially since I am running a 2 GB pagefile in memory.

Fark. What else are you doing like that that you havent even mentioned ?

What do you want to know?

What else are you doing like that that you havent even mentioned, stupid.

How do you propose to run chkdsk without
rebooting or without remounting the disk as D:?

You cant actually be THAT stupid.

Win2K won't let me run chkdsk on the boot disk while
it is running. It schedules chkdsk for boot time.

Presumably you actually ARE that stupid.

Here's what happens when I try:

+++
C:\chkdsk c: /f
The type of the file system is NTFS.
Cannot lock current drive.

Chkdsk cannot run because the volume is in use by another
process. Would you like to schedule this volume to be
checked the next time the system restarts? (Y/N)
+++

So tell me how I can run chkdsk on C: when it is the active boot partition.

Leave the /f off, stupid.

reams of your puerile **** flushed where it belongs

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 07:24:29 GMT, (Citizen Bob)
wrote:


Of course if I did it that way I would first copy over the Profiles
and install a minimum number of apps to keep productive for my most
important projects. The other stuff I would have to put on hold.

But them if I do that, why not install XP Pro and use its wizard to
move everything from Win2K.

The wizard cannot move everything, you're still left with
misc things out of order that will have to be moved
manually.

Recall that you're starting out with a clean install. Once
that is confirmed working correctly, a necessary step, the
copying of apps and export/import registry entries is a
matter of minutes' time. You will have to set user
preferences again, so that's your call to make- if you want
to go to XP, ok, but I would go to XP because you really
wanted XP besides this issue, for it's own merits and
detractions relative to 2K.

I suppose I can learn to live with XP if I
use the compatibility mode. I was wanting to wait for Vista but I
never install a new version of Windows without the first SP out and
tested, and that could be a couple years with Vista. Therefore I
should consider XP for the interim. My son has been running XP for
years and he likes it, so it can't be all that bad.

He's not trying to run a several years old upgrade from NT4
that's acting odd and has 100+ apps either... it's all about
context. Do not think XP will magically make all your old
stuff run with it's wizard, it isn't going to happen, but it
will do some useful things and you may find you still need
to copy files, merge registry entries, etc.



Then I can slowly install my other apps, taking the opportunity to
upgrade them as I install each one.

If you're going to slowly install your apps, there was no
point to any of this... The main thing is, to, umm, do it,
whichever way just get past this perpetual data corruption
and put it behind you forever, ASAP.


It sounds like a plan, but first I want to squeeze the last bit of
life out of Win2K. That's why I am going to convert back to FAT32 and
give it a chance to hang itself by running it a couple weeks.

There's no reason to think you're squeezing the last life
out of 2K, it's a fine OS and no reason to go with XP if
you're going to reinstall everything, actually with XP you
may find that you have just an extra step of running the
Wizard PLUS the other steps of files and registry. Remember
it is not magic, nobody could have envisioned a system in
the situation you have with a realistic testing of that
scenario.