Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage > #2612 > unrolled thread

chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage

Contents

  chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 10:59 -0800
    Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> - 2012-02-12 06:46 +1100
    Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 07:15 +1100
      Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 13:00 -0800
        Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 08:53 +1100
          Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 21:54 -0800
            Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 19:31 +1100
              Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 07:04 -0800
    Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-02-11 19:02 -0500
      Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 13:21 +1100
        Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 22:05 -0800
          Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 19:39 +1100
            Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 19:24 -0800
              Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-12 19:37 -0800
              Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-13 19:52 +1100
                Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-13 22:20 -0800
                  Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-13 22:31 -0800
                    Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-15 02:40 +1100
                      Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-02-14 20:51 -0800
                        Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-15 16:12 +1100
                  Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-15 02:36 +1100
        Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Rob <mesamine@gmail.com> - 2012-02-16 03:15 +1100
          Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-16 07:43 +1100
            Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Rob <mesamine@gmail.com> - 2012-02-16 14:29 +1100
              Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-16 16:05 +1100
                Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-02-16 12:40 -0500
                  Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 07:59 +1100
                    Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Rob <mesamine@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 08:55 +1100
                      Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 09:41 +1100
                        Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Rob <mesamine@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 10:14 +1100
                          Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 11:20 +1100
                            Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters Rob <mesamine@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 23:37 +1100
                              Re: chkdsk all partitions at once, including those without drive letters "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-02-18 01:02 +1100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#2630

AndyHancock wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> AndyHancock wrote:

>>> Rod, what did you mean by stuff up a partition?

>> That was a bit carelessly described, I meant that it can see some files go missing.

> I suppose those are the files that contain sectors with irrecoverable data?

Only irrecoverable by chkdsk.

> Would those files be goners anyway?

Nope.

> Or maybe they might not be totally useless if the
> corrupted parts of the files are not always used.

The problem is more that if the problem is in the file structures, you can lose
a lot of file because its doesnt try hard enough to use what data is available. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2635

On 12/02/2012 1:21 PM, Rod Speed wrote:
> Yousuf Khan wrote
>> AndyHancock wrote
>
>>> Partitions 1,3,4 do not have letter drives.  So I was wondering
>>> whether I can still use chkdsk (and if I can do that for all the
>>> partitions at once, so much the better).  I've surfed and found info
>>> on assigning letters to the partitions, but that option is grayed out
>>> in Disk Management.  I am also concerned about possible side effects
>>> of assigning letters on the intended functions of those drives.  Disk
>>> management, partitions, volumes, file systems -- stuff I never really
>>> knew about before having to clone (motivated by a boot failure scare).
>
>> Looks like we had the same issues recently. I bought a new Toshiba
>> laptop too. What I did was changed the Type 17 partitions to Type 07,
>> and then rebooted. They were automatically added with their own drive
>> letters after the reboot. I don't see any reason why just mounting
>> them with drive letters is going to corrupt them in any way.
>
>> I imaged both partitions, and then blew them away. I also used the
>> Toshiba imaging utility to create recovery disks before blowing them
>> away. They took about 3 DL-DVD's or 5 SL-DVD's.
>
> Fark. Wonder why its so big when Win7 isnt ?
>
>
Cause it has all the other extras that come with the computer. W7 32 and 
64, MS Office Nortons Games etc etc. I think it was 14 Gb of extras on 
the partition when I took the HDD out and read it from a docking station.

Yes when I made the restore took 5 DVD's.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2636

Rob wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>> AndyHancock wrote

>>>> Partitions 1,3,4 do not have letter drives.  So I was wondering
>>>> whether I can still use chkdsk (and if I can do that for all the
>>>> partitions at once, so much the better).  I've surfed and found
>>>> info on assigning letters to the partitions, but that option is
>>>> grayed out in Disk Management.  I am also concerned about possible
>>>> side effects of assigning letters on the intended functions of
>>>> those drives.  Disk management, partitions, volumes, file systems
>>>> -- stuff I never really knew about before having to clone
>>>> (motivated by a boot failure scare).

>>> Looks like we had the same issues recently. I bought a new Toshiba
>>> laptop too. What I did was changed the Type 17 partitions to Type
>>> 07, and then rebooted. They were automatically added with their own
>>> drive letters after the reboot. I don't see any reason why just mounting them with drive letters is going to corrupt 
>>> them in any way.

>>> I imaged both partitions, and then blew them away. I also used the
>>> Toshiba imaging utility to create recovery disks before blowing them
>>> away. They took about 3 DL-DVD's or 5 SL-DVD's.

>> Fark. Wonder why its so big when Win7 isnt ?

> Cause it has all the other extras that come with the computer.

Dont believe that.

> W7 32 and 64,

They are both there with say W7 Ultimate, just one DVD.

> MS Office Nortons Games etc etc.

Those dont add as much as that.

> I think it was 14 Gb of extras on the partition when I took the HDD out and read it from a docking station.

I find that very hard to believe.

> Yes when I made the restore took 5 DVD's.

I'm not saying it doesnt, just wonder why its 5 times what W7 itself takes. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2638

On 16/02/2012 7:43 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
> Rob wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>>> AndyHancock wrote
>
>>>>> Partitions 1,3,4 do not have letter drives.  So I was wondering
>>>>> whether I can still use chkdsk (and if I can do that for all the
>>>>> partitions at once, so much the better).  I've surfed and found
>>>>> info on assigning letters to the partitions, but that option is
>>>>> grayed out in Disk Management.  I am also concerned about possible
>>>>> side effects of assigning letters on the intended functions of
>>>>> those drives.  Disk management, partitions, volumes, file systems
>>>>> -- stuff I never really knew about before having to clone
>>>>> (motivated by a boot failure scare).
>
>>>> Looks like we had the same issues recently. I bought a new Toshiba
>>>> laptop too. What I did was changed the Type 17 partitions to Type
>>>> 07, and then rebooted. They were automatically added with their own
>>>> drive letters after the reboot. I don't see any reason why just mounting them with drive letters is going to corrupt
>>>> them in any way.
>
>>>> I imaged both partitions, and then blew them away. I also used the
>>>> Toshiba imaging utility to create recovery disks before blowing them
>>>> away. They took about 3 DL-DVD's or 5 SL-DVD's.
>
>>> Fark. Wonder why its so big when Win7 isnt ?
>
>> Cause it has all the other extras that come with the computer.
>
> Dont believe that.
>
>> W7 32 and 64,
>
> They are both there with say W7 Ultimate, just one DVD.
>
>> MS Office Nortons Games etc etc.
>
> Those dont add as much as that.
>
>> I think it was 14 Gb of extras on the partition when I took the HDD out and read it from a docking station.
>
> I find that very hard to believe.
>
>> Yes when I made the restore took 5 DVD's.
>
> I'm not saying it doesnt, just wonder why its 5 times what W7 itself takes.
>
>
Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.

6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders

That better!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2641

Rob wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Rob wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>>>> AndyHancock wrote

>>>>>> Partitions 1,3,4 do not have letter drives.  So I was wondering
>>>>>> whether I can still use chkdsk (and if I can do that for all the
>>>>>> partitions at once, so much the better).  I've surfed and found
>>>>>> info on assigning letters to the partitions, but that option is
>>>>>> grayed out in Disk Management.  I am also concerned about
>>>>>> possible side effects of assigning letters on the intended
>>>>>> functions of those drives.  Disk management, partitions,
>>>>>> volumes, file systems -- stuff I never really knew about before
>>>>>> having to clone (motivated by a boot failure scare).

>>>>> Looks like we had the same issues recently. I bought a new Toshiba
>>>>> laptop too. What I did was changed the Type 17 partitions to Type
>>>>> 07, and then rebooted. They were automatically added with their own drive letters after the reboot. I don't see 
>>>>> any reason why just
>>>>> mounting them with drive letters is going to corrupt them in any way.

>>>>> I imaged both partitions, and then blew them away. I also used the
>>>>> Toshiba imaging utility to create recovery disks before blowing them away. They took about 3 DL-DVD's or 5 
>>>>> SL-DVD's.

>>>> Fark. Wonder why its so big when Win7 isnt ?

>>> Cause it has all the other extras that come with the computer.

>> Dont believe that.

>>> W7 32 and 64,

>> They are both there with say W7 Ultimate, just one DVD.

>>> MS Office Nortons Games etc etc.

>> Those dont add as much as that.

>>> I think it was 14 Gb of extras on the partition when I took the HDD
>>> out and read it from a docking station.

>> I find that very hard to believe.

>>> Yes when I made the restore took 5 DVD's.

>> I'm not saying it doesnt, just wonder why its 5 times what W7 itself takes.

> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.

> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders

> That better!

Yeah, that makes much more sense.

But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.

Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2643

On 16/02/2012 12:05 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
> Rob wrote
>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.
>
>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders
>
>> That better!
>
> Yeah, that makes much more sense.
>
> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.
>
> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.

It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the Windows 
recovery environment.

	Yousuf Khan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2644

Yousuf Khan wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Rob wrote

>>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.

>>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders

>>> That better!

>> Yeah, that makes much more sense.

>> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.

>> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.

> It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the Windows recovery environment.

The maths still dont add up.

That can only account for 3 SL DVDs at most and the Win7 distribution does it fine in a single DVD.

Add another for the extra crap like Office and Nortons etc and it still doesnt add up. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2645

On 17/02/2012 7:59 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
> Yousuf Khan wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Rob wrote
>
>>>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.
>
>>>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders
>
>>>> That better!
>
>>> Yeah, that makes much more sense.
>
>>> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.
>
>>> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.
>
>> It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the Windows recovery environment.
>
> The maths still dont add up.
>
> That can only account for 3 SL DVDs at most and the Win7 distribution does it fine in a single DVD.
>
> Add another for the extra crap like Office and Nortons etc and it still doesnt add up.
>
>


I tried to install Office off the files but it will not work. So I 
assume that there must be an installer somewhere within those files and 
folders.

When I had problems with the windows install and used the backup on the 
HDD it took 2.5hrs to delete the files then another 1.5hrs to install 
the system up again and in doing so installed all the extras again which 
were on the backup. No options. Only when finished was I able to delete 
the extras through W7 control panel.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2646

Rob wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Rob wrote

>>>>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.

>>>>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders

>>>>> That better!

>>>> Yeah, that makes much more sense.

>>>> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.

>>>> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.

>>> It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the Windows recovery environment.

>> The maths still dont add up.

>> That can only account for 3 SL DVDs at most and the Win7 distribution does it fine in a single DVD.

>> Add another for the extra crap like Office and Nortons etc and it still doesnt add up.

> I tried to install Office off the files but it will not work. So I assume that there must be an installer somewhere 
> within those files and folders.

> When I had problems with the windows install and used the backup on
> the HDD it took 2.5hrs to delete the files

Sounds like a complete abortion to take so long to do something as basic as that.

> then another 1.5hrs to install the system up again

Even odder that it takes twice as long to delete as to install.

> and in doing so installed all the extras again which were on the backup. No options.

Yeah, thats not that unusual. You often only get the option of 32 or 64 bit versions.

> Only when finished was I able to delete the extras through W7 control panel.

That approach isnt that unusual either. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2647

On 17/02/2012 9:41 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
> Rob wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Rob wrote
>
>>>>>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.
>
>>>>>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders
>
>>>>>> That better!
>
>>>>> Yeah, that makes much more sense.
>
>>>>> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.
>
>>>>> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.
>
>>>> It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the Windows recovery environment.
>
>>> The maths still dont add up.
>
>>> That can only account for 3 SL DVDs at most and the Win7 distribution does it fine in a single DVD.
>
>>> Add another for the extra crap like Office and Nortons etc and it still doesnt add up.
>
>> I tried to install Office off the files but it will not work. So I assume that there must be an installer somewhere
>> within those files and folders.
>
>> When I had problems with the windows install and used the backup on
>> the HDD it took 2.5hrs to delete the files
>
> Sounds like a complete abortion to take so long to do something as basic as that.
>
>> then another 1.5hrs to install the system up again
>
> Even odder that it takes twice as long to delete as to install.
>
>> and in doing so installed all the extras again which were on the backup. No options.
>
> Yeah, thats not that unusual. You often only get the option of 32 or 64 bit versions.


On the first install it gave the option of 32 or 64 somehow I messed up 
the install of 64 which had started.  On a reboot it went straight into 
completing the first install. But this ended up as 32 bit, think it must 
have defaulted into 32.

Now when you work off the B/Up partition starting with the prompts, and 
selecting x64, you remove all files off C:  this tells you it will take 
2.5hrs to complete which is exactly what it took, no fast tracking etc. 
After that it proceeds to install the system etc again this tells you 
the exact time to complete the installation.

I didn't try to manually remove the files off C: because I didn't want 
to loose the BUp partition - you can't see that partition under normal 
circumstances (nor can I understand the file system)

Good learning curve. :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2648

Rob wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Rob wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Rob wrote

>>>>>>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.

>>>>>>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders

>>>>>>> That better!

>>>>>> Yeah, that makes much more sense.

>>>>>> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.

>>>>>> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.

>>>>> It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the Windows recovery environment.

>>>> The maths still dont add up.

>>>> That can only account for 3 SL DVDs at most and the Win7 distribution does it fine in a single DVD.

>>>> Add another for the extra crap like Office and Nortons etc and it still doesnt add up.

>>> I tried to install Office off the files but it will not work. So I assume that there must be an installer somewhere 
>>> within those files and folders.

>>> When I had problems with the windows install and used the backup on
>>> the HDD it took 2.5hrs to delete the files

>> Sounds like a complete abortion to take so long to do something as basic as that.

>>> then another 1.5hrs to install the system up again

>> Even odder that it takes twice as long to delete as to install.

>>> and in doing so installed all the extras again which were on the
>>> backup. No options.

>> Yeah, thats not that unusual. You often only get the option of 32 or 64 bit versions.

> On the first install it gave the option of 32 or 64 somehow I messed
> up the install of 64 which had started.  On a reboot it went straight
> into completing the first install. But this ended up as 32 bit, think
> it must have defaulted into 32.

Sounds very plausible/likely.

> Now when you work off the B/Up partition starting with the prompts,
> and selecting x64, you remove all files off C:  this tells you it will take 2.5hrs to complete which is exactly what 
> it took, no fast tracking etc.

Biuzarre that it takes that long to do something that basic.

It certainly doesnt when you use the standard Win7 Ultimate
and change between 32 bit and 64 bit versions and I know
that because I did that a number of times when working out
whether a few of the quirks I did see when moving to Win7
were due to the 64 bit version or not.

> After that it proceeds to install the system etc again this tells you the exact time to complete the installation.

None of the Win7 installs from the official MS Win7
Ultimate DVD take anything like that long either even
when you include the time to install Office and Nortons etc.

> I didn't try to manually remove the files off C: because I didn't want
> to loose the BUp partition - you can't see that partition under normal
> circumstances (nor can I understand the file system)

> Good learning curve. :)

Yeah, its certainly that sort of thing that gets a better understanding of the basics.

The other obvious question tho is why you lot dont just shrink the bootable
C drive installed partition and use the free space you have created that
way for the Linux partition you want to add to the Toshiba config. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2651

On 17/02/2012 11:20 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
> Rob wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Rob wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Rob wrote
>
>>>>>>>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.
>
>>>>>>>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders
>
>>>>>>>> That better!
>
>>>>>>> Yeah, that makes much more sense.
>
>>>>>>> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.
>
>>>>>>> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.
>
>>>>>> It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the Windows recovery environment.
>
>>>>> The maths still dont add up.
>
>>>>> That can only account for 3 SL DVDs at most and the Win7 distribution does it fine in a single DVD.
>
>>>>> Add another for the extra crap like Office and Nortons etc and it still doesnt add up.
>
>>>> I tried to install Office off the files but it will not work. So I assume that there must be an installer somewhere
>>>> within those files and folders.
>
>>>> When I had problems with the windows install and used the backup on
>>>> the HDD it took 2.5hrs to delete the files
>
>>> Sounds like a complete abortion to take so long to do something as basic as that.
>
>>>> then another 1.5hrs to install the system up again
>
>>> Even odder that it takes twice as long to delete as to install.
>
>>>> and in doing so installed all the extras again which were on the
>>>> backup. No options.
>
>>> Yeah, thats not that unusual. You often only get the option of 32 or 64 bit versions.
>
>> On the first install it gave the option of 32 or 64 somehow I messed
>> up the install of 64 which had started.  On a reboot it went straight
>> into completing the first install. But this ended up as 32 bit, think
>> it must have defaulted into 32.
>
> Sounds very plausible/likely.
>
>> Now when you work off the B/Up partition starting with the prompts,
>> and selecting x64, you remove all files off C:  this tells you it will take 2.5hrs to complete which is exactly what
>> it took, no fast tracking etc.
>
> Biuzarre that it takes that long to do something that basic.
>
> It certainly doesnt when you use the standard Win7 Ultimate
> and change between 32 bit and 64 bit versions and I know
> that because I did that a number of times when working out
> whether a few of the quirks I did see when moving to Win7
> were due to the 64 bit version or not.
>
>> After that it proceeds to install the system etc again this tells you the exact time to complete the installation.
>
> None of the Win7 installs from the official MS Win7
> Ultimate DVD take anything like that long either even
> when you include the time to install Office and Nortons etc.
>

I haven't seen that either when installing W7 Ult.  The Toshiba came 
with Pro x32 and x64. It a Toshiba setup screen not the regular W7.


>> I didn't try to manually remove the files off C: because I didn't want
>> to loose the BUp partition - you can't see that partition under normal
>> circumstances (nor can I understand the file system)
>
>> Good learning curve. :)
>
> Yeah, its certainly that sort of thing that gets a better understanding of the basics.
>
> The other obvious question tho is why you lot dont just shrink the bootable
> C drive installed partition and use the free space you have created that
> way for the Linux partition you want to add to the Toshiba config.
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2653

Rob wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Rob wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Rob wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Yousuf Khan wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>> Rob wrote

>>>>>>>>> Sorry its on a 14Gb partition which has the backup files.

>>>>>>>>> 6.1Gb  20,000files 3700 folders

>>>>>>>>> That better!

>>>>>>>> Yeah, that makes much more sense.

>>>>>>>> But you now have a problem with why it takes 5 DVDs.

>>>>>>>> Even a very crude sector by sector copy of the whole 14GB wont take 5 SL DVDs.

>>>>>>> It's actually 4 data DVD's, plus one DVD that contains the
>>>>>>> Windows recovery environment.

>>>>>> The maths still dont add up.

>>>>>> That can only account for 3 SL DVDs at most and the Win7 distribution does it fine in a single DVD.

>>>>>> Add another for the extra crap like Office and Nortons etc and
>>>>>> it still doesnt add up.

>>>>> I tried to install Office off the files but it will not work. So
>>>>> I assume that there must be an installer somewhere within those
>>>>> files and folders.

>>>>> When I had problems with the windows install and used the backup
>>>>> on the HDD it took 2.5hrs to delete the files

>>>> Sounds like a complete abortion to take so long to do something as
>>>> basic as that.

>>>>> then another 1.5hrs to install the system up again

>>>> Even odder that it takes twice as long to delete as to install.

>>>>> and in doing so installed all the extras again which were on the
>>>>> backup. No options.

>>>> Yeah, thats not that unusual. You often only get the option of 32
>>>> or 64 bit versions.

>>> On the first install it gave the option of 32 or 64 somehow I messed
>>> up the install of 64 which had started.  On a reboot it went straight into completing the first install. But this 
>>> ended up as 32 bit, think it must have defaulted into 32.

>> Sounds very plausible/likely.

>>> Now when you work off the B/Up partition starting with the prompts,
>>> and selecting x64, you remove all files off C:  this tells you it
>>> will take 2.5hrs to complete which is exactly what it took, no fast
>>> tracking etc.

>> Biuzarre that it takes that long to do something that basic.

>> It certainly doesnt when you use the standard Win7 Ultimate
>> and change between 32 bit and 64 bit versions and I know
>> that because I did that a number of times when working out
>> whether a few of the quirks I did see when moving to Win7
>> were due to the 64 bit version or not.

>>> After that it proceeds to install the system etc again this tells
>>> you the exact time to complete the installation.

>> None of the Win7 installs from the official MS Win7
>> Ultimate DVD take anything like that long either even
>> when you include the time to install Office and Nortons etc.

> I haven't seen that either when installing W7 Ult.  The Toshiba came
> with Pro x32 and x64. It a Toshiba setup screen not the regular W7.

Yeah, I realise that. I was JUST commenting that for some reason
those ops are MUCH slower than with an official MS W7 Ultimate DVD.

>>> I didn't try to manually remove the files off C: because I didn't want to loose the BUp partition - you can't see 
>>> that partition under normal circumstances (nor can I understand the file system)

>>> Good learning curve. :)

>> Yeah, its certainly that sort of thing that gets a better
>> understanding of the basics.

>> The other obvious question tho is why you lot dont just shrink the bootable C drive installed partition and use the 
>> free space you have created that way for the Linux partition you want to add to the Toshiba config. 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage

csiph-web