|
Home > Archive > alt.certification.a-plus > February 2004 > MSConfig Error
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Barry Watzman 2004-01-07, 5:24 pm |
| When I run MSConfig, I get the following error message several times:
**************
System Configuration Utility Cannot Read the {filename.ext} file because
an error occured.
The system-reported error is: The system cannot find the path specified.
You will not be able to view or modify this file until you correct the
problem and restart the system configuration utility.
**************
I get this error repeated for every system file (config.sys,
autoexec.bat, system.ini, etc.).
My system is multi-boot and I believe that there is a problem with
boot.ini, but that's just a guess. My boot.ini file is:
**************
[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0
)partition(3)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(3)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
Professional" /fastdetect
C:\="Microsoft Windows 98"
**************
The system has a single hard drive. Drive C: is Windows 98, while drive
D: (2nd partition) is XP (there are also E:, F:, G: and H: partitions.
All partitions except H: are FAT32, H: is NTFS.
Does anyone see an obvious problem? I'm wondering if the "partition(3)"
that appears twice in boot.ini file should be "partition(2)".
Is there an online reference for the format of boot.ini?
If this isn't the problem, then any ideas as to what might be?
Thanks
| |
| Tom MacIntyre 2004-01-07, 7:24 pm |
| On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:30:17 GMT, Barry Watzman
<WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>When I run MSConfig, I get the following error message several times:
>
>**************
>
>System Configuration Utility Cannot Read the {filename.ext} file because
>an error occured.
>
>The system-reported error is: The system cannot find the path specified.
>
>You will not be able to view or modify this file until you correct the
>problem and restart the system configuration utility.
>
>**************
>
>I get this error repeated for every system file (config.sys,
>autoexec.bat, system.ini, etc.).
>
>My system is multi-boot and I believe that there is a problem with
>boot.ini, but that's just a guess. My boot.ini file is:
>
>**************
>
>[boot loader]
>timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0
)partition(3)\WINDOWS
>[operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(3)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
>Professional" /fastdetect
>C:\="Microsoft Windows 98"
>
>**************
>
>The system has a single hard drive. Drive C: is Windows 98, while drive
>D: (2nd partition) is XP (there are also E:, F:, G: and H: partitions.
>All partitions except H: are FAT32, H: is NTFS.
>
>Does anyone see an obvious problem? I'm wondering if the "partition(3)"
>that appears twice in boot.ini file should be "partition(2)".
Since partition 0 appears to be a possible option, maybe drive D: is
partition(1)?
Tom
>
>Is there an online reference for the format of boot.ini?
>
>If this isn't the problem, then any ideas as to what might be?
>
>Thanks
| |
| Billy 2004-01-07, 10:24 pm |
| The boot.ini file you show indicates that XP is indeed the third
partition. However if it is booting into XP, then this is correct. If
you run the Recovery Console command bootcfg /scan it will show you any
windows OS available. You can run bootcfg /query from the command line,
but I think it only reads the current .ini file.
You might open the MMC, disk management to check the disk layout.
Right click My Computer, select manage.
Boot.ini, how to modify (and basic info).
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...2&Product=winxp
RC.
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...8&Product=winxp
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:JT_Kb.5245$_w.2331@fe1.columbus.rr.com...
> When I run MSConfig, I get the following error message several times:
>
> **************
>
> System Configuration Utility Cannot Read the {filename.ext} file
because
> an error occured.
>
> The system-reported error is: The system cannot find the path
specified.
>
> You will not be able to view or modify this file until you correct the
> problem and restart the system configuration utility.
>
> **************
>
> I get this error repeated for every system file (config.sys,
> autoexec.bat, system.ini, etc.).
>
> My system is multi-boot and I believe that there is a problem with
> boot.ini, but that's just a guess. My boot.ini file is:
>
> **************
>
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0
)partition(3)\WINDOWS
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(3)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
> Professional" /fastdetect
> C:\="Microsoft Windows 98"
>
> **************
>
> The system has a single hard drive. Drive C: is Windows 98, while
drive
> D: (2nd partition) is XP (there are also E:, F:, G: and H: partitions.
> All partitions except H: are FAT32, H: is NTFS.
>
> Does anyone see an obvious problem? I'm wondering if the
"partition(3)"
> that appears twice in boot.ini file should be "partition(2)".
>
> Is there an online reference for the format of boot.ini?
>
> If this isn't the problem, then any ideas as to what might be?
>
> Thanks
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-01-07, 11:25 pm |
| Actually, I found the problem. For whatever reason, Windows setup did
not install MSCONFIG .... at all. And this was repeatable, it happened
twice. Manually expanding msconfig.ex_ in the I386 folder, and copying
it to \Windows\System32 fixed the problem. And apparently this is
happening to other people as well, rarely, but we found other people
with the same bug on the we in various message groups and boards.
[It's possible that the Windows setup program has a bug and is putting
msconfig in C:\Windows\System32 unconditionally, even when XP is on
another drive and there is another OS on drive C:. This would work fine
in MOST systems, but not where you are dual booting with XP on a drive
other than C: Only speculation, however.]
Tom MacIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:30:17 GMT, Barry Watzman
> <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Since partition 0 appears to be a possible option, maybe drive D: is
> partition(1)?
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-01-07, 11:25 pm |
| That was not the msconfig problem, which is resolved (see my previous post).
But it brings up the question, if Win98 is on C: (1st partition), and
this is booting XP from the 3rd partition (or is (3) the 4th partition
[0,1,2,3]?], what is the 2nd partition?
Does the extended partition that CONTAINS the partitions for drives D:,
E:, F:, G: and H: count as the "2nd" partition, with D: then as the 3rd
partition?
Billy wrote:
> The boot.ini file you show indicates that XP is indeed the third
> partition. However if it is booting into XP, then this is correct. If
> you run the Recovery Console command bootcfg /scan it will show you any
> windows OS available. You can run bootcfg /query from the command line,
> but I think it only reads the current .ini file.
> You might open the MMC, disk management to check the disk layout.
> Right click My Computer, select manage.
> Boot.ini, how to modify (and basic info).
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...2&Product=winxp
> RC.
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...8&Product=winxp
>
>
> "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:JT_Kb.5245$_w.2331@fe1.columbus.rr.com...
>
>
> because
>
>
> specified.
>
>
> drive
>
>
> "partition(3)"
>
>
>
>
| |
| Billy 2004-01-08, 12:24 am |
| Glad to see it was resolved. Not sure why it didn't install it. I have
done a number of installs to drives other than C: and have never ran
into this. I misread your first message (thought it opened but then
could not find paths). There are a few virus (viruii ?) that will cause
this (but not on a fresh install, unless the MBR is infected).
The extended partition does not count as a partition in and of itself.
Try looking in the disk management section for the actual layout.
You were correct the fist time, partitions are listed starting with 1
(agreed makes no sense, when all else is 0 first).
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3FFCD675.1030009@neo.rr.com...
> That was not the msconfig problem, which is resolved (see my previous
post).
>
> But it brings up the question, if Win98 is on C: (1st partition), and
> this is booting XP from the 3rd partition (or is (3) the 4th partition
> [0,1,2,3]?], what is the 2nd partition?
>
> Does the extended partition that CONTAINS the partitions for drives
D:,
> E:, F:, G: and H: count as the "2nd" partition, with D: then as the
3rd
> partition?
>
>
> Billy wrote:
>
If[color=blue]
any[color=blue]
line,[color=blue]
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...2&Product=winxp[color=blue]
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...8&Product=winxp[color=blue]
times:[color=blue]
the[color=blue]
partitions.[color=blue]
>
| |
| mark mandel 2004-01-08, 12:24 pm |
|
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3FFCD596.8040304@neo.rr.com...
> Actually, I found the problem. For whatever reason, Windows setup did
> not install MSCONFIG .... at all. And this was repeatable, it happened
> twice. Manually expanding msconfig.ex_ in the I386 folder, and copying
> it to \Windows\System32 fixed the problem. And apparently this is
> happening to other people as well, rarely, but we found other people
> with the same bug on the we in various message groups and boards.
>
> [It's possible that the Windows setup program has a bug and is putting
> msconfig in C:\Windows\System32 unconditionally, even when XP is on
> another drive and there is another OS on drive C:. This would work fine
> in MOST systems, but not where you are dual booting with XP on a drive
> other than C: Only speculation, however.]
Interesting in that I do have a dual boot setup with both Win 98 and XP and
in several re-installations(both repair/installs)and full reinstalls(of XP
and following crashes of one sort or another) either the original Windows XP
CD or a Norton ghosted image never had this problem. The 98 has always been
on drive C: and the XP on drive D: though on one occasion the latter ended
up as drive E:.
Mark Mandell
>
>
> Tom MacIntyre wrote:
>
>
| |
|
| "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3FFCD675.1030009@neo.rr.com...
> That was not the msconfig problem, which is resolved (see my
previous post).
**************
boot.ini sytax is a bit odd. controllers start at 0 for the first,
disks start at 0 for the first, partitions start at 1
all partitions are listed after the controller and disk they exist on.
Yours means:
multi(0) = the first disk controller in the system
disk(0) = meaningless, if you have, as I guess, and IDE system
rdisk(0)= first ide disk in the system
partition(3)=third partition on the disk
\Windows= the directory where XPs so called boot files (actually the
operating system files called "system files" in all worlds outside
Redmond) exist.
the stuff in quotes= what gets displayed to you
C:\= the drive letter and directory (must be root of the first disk)
where the bootsec.dos file exists. bootsec.dos is a copy of what _was_
the boot sector under Win98. It contains the information to run Win98
or any other MS-dos based operating system.
Let's say you were quadruple booting DOS, Win 3.1 Win95, and Win98,
then put in a new, big drive and installed any version of NT. (Say
it's XP since XP is NT 5.5!!! Let tradition live!!! Sorry, that's
unamerican, time to refill the Vodka keg.)
You'd end up with something like this:
[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1
)partition(1)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
Professional" /fastdetect
C:\="Microsoft Windows"
although the last entry might simply be "Previous MS DOS" When you
choose Microsoft Windows from the boot menu, NTLDR knows to look in
the root of C: for bootsec.dos and hand over control to whatever is in
it. So then boot.sec dos would run and you'd be presented with your
earlier options, MS-DOS through Windows 98. So you'd be quintuple
booting (which would be no problem) but boot.ini would only give you
two options, the rest being presented to you after bootsec.dos ran.
Here is a right mess of a boot ini:
[boot loader]
timeout=22
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0
)partition(2)\WINNT
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(2)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
Professional" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(5)\WIN-3SRV="Windows Server 2003,
Enterprise" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(3)\WINXP="Microsoft Windows XP
Professional" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(4)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
Advanced Server" /fastdetect
C:\="Microsoft Windows"
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
Professional (#1)" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WINXP="Microsoft Windows XP
Professional (#1)" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
Advanced Server (#1)" /fastdetect
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WIN-3SRV="Windows Server 2003,
Enterprise (#1)" /fastdetect
This is the result of a cloned drive occupying the position of
rdisk(1). Not recommended, but, believe
it or not, boot.ini and ntldr can handle _most_ of it. none of the
windows versions on disk 0 have any problems, but as you can see, if I
want to run a Windows on the cloned drive, OR, if I change the cloned
drive to the master, I'll have to go in and fix boot.ini or only one
of the versions will run (win2kPro) - because boot ini has stuck them
all into partition (2). Only Win2KPro is actually there, however,
while the others are in separate partitions. And to get 98 to run on
the cloned drive I'll have to make an entry for C:\="Win 98", so when
NTLDR reads the file (boot.ini) it will learn of the existence of
bootsec.dos.
Longwinded, huh...
regards,
Mike
[color=blue]
partitions.[color=blue]
>
| |
|
| That was interesting.
Could you provide an example of the configuration and bootsec.dos to
allow booting of MS-DOS and more than one 95/98/ME partition? Was it
setup with more than one of the later in the C: drive?
Not trying to be skeptical, just curious. I thought the only way to do
this required a third party utility to hide/swap active partitions.
"> Let's say you were quadruple booting DOS, Win 3.1 Win95, and Win98,
> then put in a new, big drive and installed any version of NT. (Say
> it's XP since XP is NT 5.5!!! Let tradition live!!! Sorry, that's
> unamerican, time to refill the Vodka keg.)
>
> You'd end up with something like this:
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1
)partition(1)\WINDOWS
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
> Professional" /fastdetect
> C:\="Microsoft Windows"
>
> although the last entry might simply be "Previous MS DOS" When you
> choose Microsoft Windows from the boot menu, NTLDR knows to look in
> the root of C: for bootsec.dos and hand over control to whatever is in
> it. So then boot.sec dos would run and you'd be presented with your
> earlier options, MS-DOS through Windows 98. So you'd be quintuple
> booting (which would be no problem) but boot.ini would only give you
> two options, the rest being presented to you after bootsec.dos ran.
>
> Here is a right mess of a boot ini:
>
> [boot loader]
> timeout=22
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0
)partition(2)\WINNT
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(2)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
> Professional" /fastdetect
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(5)\WIN-3SRV="Windows Server 2003,
> Enterprise" /fastdetect
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(3)\WINXP="Microsoft Windows XP
> Professional" /fastdetect
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(4)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
> Advanced Server" /fastdetect
> C:\="Microsoft Windows"
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
> Professional (#1)" /fastdetect
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WINXP="Microsoft Windows XP
> Professional (#1)" /fastdetect
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows 2000
> Advanced Server (#1)" /fastdetect
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(2)\WIN-3SRV="Windows Server 2003,
> Enterprise (#1)" /fastdetect
>
Damn, your as nuts as I am 
| |
|
| Billy,
You are right to be curious; the description was a little cavalier.
For only a short while (about 4-5 months) did I need 95 and 98. For
part of that time, I had one drive running DOS, Windows 3.1, 95 and
NT. Then I needed to teach 98 as well (for A+ classes), and what I
first did was simply to put it on another drive, in the first, primary
active partition. Then made that drive the slave and switched to
booting from it in SETUP. I did have a couple boot loaders, but didn't
like the way they looked, so got rid of them and took the trouble to
use BIOS.. You can run DOS Win3.x, and 9x together by simply
installing them in (historical) order, with a clean install for 9x in
a non-standard directory, then enable "multiboot" in 9x's msdos.sys.
Then put NT in a separate partition on the first drive. When NT
starts, it gives you the option for 9x. When 9x starts, it gives you
the option for previous DOS.
Then I found this article, or maybe earlier version, the ostensible
purpose of which is to enable dual booting while running win 98 on a
fat 32 partition and NT on an NTFS partition, but also tells you how
to get 9x off the C: drive and make it (or them) boot from different
partitions. Its at
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;243896 .
In a sense, though, when I was doing this, 9x was assisted by NT. (In
the end I just made a list of differences between 95 and 98, got rid
of 95 and taught the list, because even if the book being used had
chapters on each there wasn't enough time in class to "cover" them
both).
And since NT, from the point of view of 9x (as in horror movies
where they show "POV Carnivorous Cockroach" and such) is a sort of
third party boot loader, in that sense, what you were thinking is
correct. Setting up 95/98/ME to boot from partitions the same
physical drive without a better OS to help them out is beyond me.
Mike
"Billy" <Noone@home.spamnet> wrote in message
news:goHLb.1026$zj7.894@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> That was interesting.
> Could you provide an example of the configuration and bootsec.dos to
> allow booting of MS-DOS and more than one 95/98/ME partition? Was it
> setup with more than one of the later in the C: drive?
> Not trying to be skeptical, just curious. I thought the only way to
do
> this required a third party utility to hide/swap active partitions.
>
> "> Let's say you were quadruple booting DOS, Win 3.1 Win95, and
Win98,
you[color=blue]
in[color=blue]
is in[color=blue]
your[color=blue]
you[color=blue]
ran.[color=blue]
> Damn, your as nuts as I am
>
>
| |
| Billy 2004-01-13, 11:24 am |
| Thanks,
Appreciate the reply.
"MF" < wallacestevens54@removethisfir
styahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Jc2dnbUb_o0Hxp7dRVn_iw@co
mcast.com...
> Billy,
> You are right to be curious; the description was a little cavalier.
> For only a short while (about 4-5 months) did I need 95 and 98. For
> part of that time, I had one drive running DOS, Windows 3.1, 95 and
> NT. Then I needed to teach 98 as well (for A+ classes), and what I
> first did was simply to put it on another drive, in the first, primary
> active partition. Then made that drive the slave and switched to
> booting from it in SETUP. I did have a couple boot loaders, but didn't
> like the way they looked, so got rid of them and took the trouble to
> use BIOS.. You can run DOS Win3.x, and 9x together by simply
> installing them in (historical) order, with a clean install for 9x in
> a non-standard directory, then enable "multiboot" in 9x's msdos.sys.
>
> Then put NT in a separate partition on the first drive. When NT
> starts, it gives you the option for 9x. When 9x starts, it gives you
> the option for previous DOS.
>
> Then I found this article, or maybe earlier version, the ostensible
> purpose of which is to enable dual booting while running win 98 on a
> fat 32 partition and NT on an NTFS partition, but also tells you how
> to get 9x off the C: drive and make it (or them) boot from different
> partitions. Its at
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;243896 .
>
> In a sense, though, when I was doing this, 9x was assisted by NT. (In
> the end I just made a list of differences between 95 and 98, got rid
> of 95 and taught the list, because even if the book being used had
> chapters on each there wasn't enough time in class to "cover" them
> both).
>
> And since NT, from the point of view of 9x (as in horror movies
> where they show "POV Carnivorous Cockroach" and such) is a sort of
> third party boot loader, in that sense, what you were thinking is
> correct. Setting up 95/98/ME to boot from partitions the same
> physical drive without a better OS to help them out is beyond me.
>
> Mike
>
> "Billy" <Noone@home.spamnet> wrote in message
> news:goHLb.1026$zj7.894@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> do
> Win98,
> you
> in
> is in
> your
> you
> ran.
>
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-01-13, 5:24 pm |
| Ok, but what doesn't make sense is why does my Boot.ini say:
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(3)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
Professional" /fastdetect
When XP is on D: which is the SECOND (not 3rd) partition?
Is it counting the Extended partition that contains drives D: thru H: as
the 2nd partition?
It does work just fine, both for manual choice and automatic bootup.
> **************
> boot.ini sytax is a bit odd. controllers start at 0 for the first,
> disks start at 0 for the first, partitions start at 1
> all partitions are listed after the controller and disk they exist on.
> Yours means:
>
> multi(0) = the first disk controller in the system
> disk(0) = meaningless, if you have, as I guess, and IDE system
> rdisk(0)= first ide disk in the system
> partition(3)=third partition on the disk
> \Windows= the directory where XPs so called boot files (actually the
> operating system files called "system files" in all worlds outside
> Redmond) exist.
> the stuff in quotes= what gets displayed to you
> C:\= the drive letter and directory (must be root of the first disk)
> where the bootsec.dos file exists. bootsec.dos is a copy of what _was_
> the boot sector under Win98. It contains the information to run Win98
> or any other MS-dos based operating system.
>
> Let's say you were quadruple booting DOS, Win 3.1 Win95, and Win98,
> then put in a new, big drive and installed any version of NT. (Say
> it's XP since XP is NT 5.5!!! Let tradition live!!! Sorry, that's
> unamerican, time to refill the Vodka keg.)
>
> You'd end up with something like this:
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1
)partition(1)\WINDOWS
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partiti
on(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
> Professional" /fastdetect
> C:\="Microsoft Windows"
>
> although the last entry might simply be "Previous MS DOS" When you
> choose Microsoft Windows from the boot menu, NTLDR knows to look in
> the root of C: for bootsec.dos and hand over control to whatever is in
> it. So then boot.sec dos would run and you'd be presented with your
> earlier options, MS-DOS through Windows 98. So you'd be quintuple
> booting (which would be no problem) but boot.ini would only give you
> two options, the rest being presented to you after bootsec.dos ran.
>
| |
|
| Because it's the third partition on the first disk on the first
controller in the system.
And boot.ini doesn't read or care about drive letters.
Disk numbering under the "ARC "(Advanced Risk Computing) convention is
not necessarily consistent with drive lettering. I;ve got an older
computer someone gave me last month off the left in my "lab". It's
got a hard disk sitting on top of it, two disks in it, and a CD-RW
drive. It had one HD when I got it and I just sort of stuck the other
ones, and the burner, in there -- and the drives were already
partitioned and formatted - to move stuff around on them -- and then
had to put a post-it note to remember where the drives (meaning drive
letters) were. It says,
Disk 0: C:, E:, F: --
Disk 1: D:, G:, H:, J: --
Disk 2 (maxtor 3 gig) I:, L:, K:
0 and 1 are on the first IDE controller, 2 is on the second (but would
read in boot.ini as multi 1 disk 0)
Boot.ini would present the F drive as multi(0)disk(0) [irrelevant,
it's IDE] rdisk(0) partition (3). Whatever OS is on that partition,
which I think is NT4 server, that's where NTLDR runs it from, after
reading boot.ini. It reads boot.ini, finds that partition and runs
the partition boot sector, which includes info on how to run whatever
OS is on that partition.
The label in boot.ini: multi 0, rdisk 0, partition 3, means, to read
backwards, third partition on the first hard drive on the first
controller (IDE 1) in the computer..
But it shows in Explorer as drive F. In other words, what one would
think was the fourth partition of all the partitions in the system.
That's because it's the last logical drive in the extended partition
on that disk.
I can't know for sure, but would guess that something like that is
happening on your system.
So the question to ask is not what drive letter is XP on, but what
partition on what physical disk. You can see this graphically in
either Partition Magic or NT(XP) Disk Manager.
And, as far as I know, the labelling in boot.ini is unalterable --
i.e., if you change that number to something else, it won't boot --
whereas the drive lettering (after abc, and even including c
sometimes) can be pretty much anything.
there is also the possibility of a hidden partition that windows
doesn\t pick up when it's labelling the drives.
if this doesn't help, do an alt screen print in disk manager and cut
out graphic section of the partition layout on the drives and post it
up here as a graphic. you can get away with that for a little while,
i think, , as i did when i was asking about a monitor that was
going bad) and that might help to understand what's going on in your
system.
Also as in your description. of SCSI priorities, remember the
development of the IDE standard. First one channel, than two
channels, IDE 1 and 2, ------ conceived of, in boot ini, as the first
and second controllers: multi 0 and multi 1.
so you have (assuming all are hard drives)
IDE 1 master = multi(0) ... rdisk (0)
IDE 1 slave = multi(0) ... rdisk (1)
IDE 2 master = multi (1)... rdisk (0)
IDE 2 slave = multi (1) .... rdisk(1)
then the partitions as they are laid out. each logical drive on the
disk reads as a partition.
regards
Mike
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4004693F.7060209@neo.rr.com...
> Ok, but what doesn't make sense is why does my Boot.ini say:
>
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partiti
on(3)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP
> Professional" /fastdetect
>
> When XP is on D: which is the SECOND (not 3rd) partition?
the second partion WHERE? in the alphabet or on the physical
configuration of your disks?
> Is it counting the Extended partition that contains drives D: thru
H: as
> the 2nd partition?
Duno - question is, on what disk?
> It does work just fine, both for manual choice and automatic bootup.
>
>
on.[color=blue]
the[color=blue]
disk)[color=blue]
_was_[color=blue]
Win98[color=blue]
Win98,[color=blue]
you[color=blue]
in[color=blue]
is in[color=blue]
your[color=blue]
you[color=blue]
ran.[color=blue]
>
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-01-15, 1:23 am |
| Your post doesn't answer my question. The partition onto which XP is
loaded is NOT the 3rd partition, it's the 2nd partition. I'm not saying
that because of the drive letter assignment, it is physically the 2nd
partition (UNLESS you count the extended partition that "contains" the 2
thru 6th partitions).
[Also, for what it's worth this system has only a single hard drive and
only the motherboard IDE controllers, and the hard drive is on the
Primary Master, as usual. It's very straightforward, one drive, only
the standard motherboard IDE controllers, although there are 3 optical
drives (CD-RW, DVD and DVD-R/RW).]
MF wrote:
> Because it's the third partition on the first disk on the first
> controller in the system.
> And boot.ini doesn't read or care about drive letters.
>
> Disk numbering under the "ARC "(Advanced Risk Computing) convention is
> not necessarily consistent with drive lettering. I;ve got an older
> computer someone gave me last month off the left in my "lab". It's
> got a hard disk sitting on top of it, two disks in it, and a CD-RW
> drive. It had one HD when I got it and I just sort of stuck the other
> ones, and the burner, in there -- and the drives were already
> partitioned and formatted - to move stuff around on them -- and then
> had to put a post-it note to remember where the drives (meaning drive
> letters) were. It says,
>
> Disk 0: C:, E:, F: --
> Disk 1: D:, G:, H:, J: --
> Disk 2 (maxtor 3 gig) I:, L:, K:
>
> 0 and 1 are on the first IDE controller, 2 is on the second (but would
> read in boot.ini as multi 1 disk 0)
>
> Boot.ini would present the F drive as multi(0)disk(0) [irrelevant,
> it's IDE] rdisk(0) partition (3). Whatever OS is on that partition,
> which I think is NT4 server, that's where NTLDR runs it from, after
> reading boot.ini. It reads boot.ini, finds that partition and runs
> the partition boot sector, which includes info on how to run whatever
> OS is on that partition.
>
> The label in boot.ini: multi 0, rdisk 0, partition 3, means, to read
> backwards, third partition on the first hard drive on the first
> controller (IDE 1) in the computer..
>
> But it shows in Explorer as drive F. In other words, what one would
> think was the fourth partition of all the partitions in the system.
> That's because it's the last logical drive in the extended partition
> on that disk.
>
> I can't know for sure, but would guess that something like that is
> happening on your system.
>
> So the question to ask is not what drive letter is XP on, but what
> partition on what physical disk. You can see this graphically in
> either Partition Magic or NT(XP) Disk Manager.
>
> And, as far as I know, the labelling in boot.ini is unalterable --
> i.e., if you change that number to something else, it won't boot --
> whereas the drive lettering (after abc, and even including c
> sometimes) can be pretty much anything.
>
> there is also the possibility of a hidden partition that windows
> doesn\t pick up when it's labelling the drives.
>
> if this doesn't help, do an alt screen print in disk manager and cut
> out graphic section of the partition layout on the drives and post it
> up here as a graphic. you can get away with that for a little while,
> i think, , as i did when i was asking about a monitor that was
> going bad) and that might help to understand what's going on in your
> system.
>
> Also as in your description. of SCSI priorities, remember the
> development of the IDE standard. First one channel, than two
> channels, IDE 1 and 2, ------ conceived of, in boot ini, as the first
> and second controllers: multi 0 and multi 1.
>
> so you have (assuming all are hard drives)
> IDE 1 master = multi(0) ... rdisk (0)
> IDE 1 slave = multi(0) ... rdisk (1)
> IDE 2 master = multi (1)... rdisk (0)
> IDE 2 slave = multi (1) .... rdisk(1)
>
> then the partitions as they are laid out. each logical drive on the
> disk reads as a partition.
>
> regards
> Mike
>
> "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:4004693F.7060209@neo.rr.com...
>
>
>
> the second partion WHERE? in the alphabet or on the physical
> configuration of your disks?
>
>
>
> H: as
>
>
>
> Duno - question is, on what disk?
>
>
>
> on.
>
>
> the
>
>
> disk)
>
>
> _was_
>
>
> Win98
>
>
> Win98,
>
>
> you
>
>
> in
>
>
> is in
>
>
> your
>
>
> you
>
>
> ran.
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:40062467.5060007@neo.rr.com...
> Your post doesn't answer my question.
you didn't answer my question. did you check for hidden partitions?
The partition onto which XP is
> loaded is NOT the 3rd partition, it's the 2nd partition. I'm not
saying
> that because of the drive letter assignment, it is physically the
2nd
> partition (UNLESS you count the extended partition that "contains"
the 2
> thru 6th partitions).
no, it doesn't count the extended partition as a drive. look at it
with some other program and see what you can figure out.
> [Also, for what it's worth this system has only a single hard drive
and
> only the motherboard IDE controllers, and the hard drive is on the
> Primary Master, as usual. It's very straightforward, one drive,
only
> the standard motherboard IDE controllers, although there are 3
optical
> drives (CD-RW, DVD and DVD-R/RW).]
>
>
>
> MF wrote:
convention is[color=blue]
older[color=blue]
It's[color=blue]
other[color=blue]
then[color=blue]
drive[color=blue]
would[color=blue]
[irrelevant,[color=blue]
partition,[color=blue]
after[color=blue]
runs[color=blue]
whatever[color=blue]
read[color=blue]
would[color=blue]
system.[color=blue]
partition[color=blue]
boot --[color=blue]
cut[color=blue]
it[color=blue]
while,[color=blue]
your[color=blue]
first[color=blue]
the[color=blue]
bootup.[color=blue]
first,[color=blue]
exist[color=blue]
outside[color=blue]
(Say[color=blue]
that's[color=blue]
>
| |
| silentkid 2004-02-13, 8:24 pm |
|
I have a client who has been getting this issue progressively on all of
their WINXP machines. I'm not quite sure what's causing it, possibly a
Windows Update or maybe a virus... But it used to be one machine and
now a dozen have the same exact issue. Replacing the msconfig.exe does
the trick, but I wish I knew what caused it. By the way, none of these
machines have multiple OS partitions as you mentioned. They are out of
the box Compaq Evo systems with OEM installed XP.
Any suggestions/comments?
Pete
silentkid
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
------------------------------------------------------------------------
View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message256580.html
| |
| Barry Watzman 2004-02-14, 10:23 pm |
| I posted a few weeks ago that I'd had the same problem on several
machines. [the problem is that on starting MSCONFIG it reports that
several system files were not found or are missing].
The problem was finally solved, apparently for some unknown reason, in
some situations, MSCONFIG simply doesn't get installed !! The fix is to
get the file from another machine and put it on the machine in question.
silentkid wrote:
> I have a client who has been getting this issue progressively on all of
> their WINXP machines. I'm not quite sure what's causing it, possibly a
> Windows Update or maybe a virus... But it used to be one machine and
> now a dozen have the same exact issue. Replacing the msconfig.exe does
> the trick, but I wish I knew what caused it. By the way, none of these
> machines have multiple OS partitions as you mentioned. They are out of
> the box Compaq Evo systems with OEM installed XP.
>
> Any suggestions/comments?
>
> Pete
>
>
> silentkid
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message256580.html
>
| |
| silentkid 2004-02-16, 5:24 pm |
|
Yeah. I was responding to your post. Wish I knew what causes it.
Anyway, you can extract the file from the i386 direct instead of
needing to copy it from another machine:
c:\>extract c:\i386\msconfig.ex_ c:\windows\system32\msconfig.exe
pete
Barry Watzman wrote:[color=blue]
> *I posted a few weeks ago that I'd had the same problem on several
> machines. [the problem is that on starting MSCONFIG it reports that
> several system files were not found or are missing].
>
> The problem was finally solved, apparently for some unknown reason,
> in
> some situations, MSCONFIG simply doesn't get installed !! The fix is
> to
> get the file from another machine and put it on the machine in
> question.
>
>
> silentkid wrote:
>
> all of
> possibly a
> and
> does
> these
> out of
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
silentkid
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
------------------------------------------------------------------------
View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message256580.html
|
|
|
|
|