Virtual Machine and NTFS

you give me a link to info website for hard drives bigger than 32 GB it can
be 1,000,000 GB all I care.
I say to you to make one 32 GB partition on it with a FAT32 system
partition partition partition partition partition partition partition
partition partition
Then Xcopy to the 32 GB partitionon the new 1,000,000 GB hard drive!

We tell you all 32 GB partition for win98

We care not of the size of the Hard Drives

Do you know you can only have one partition on a Hard Drive
And one Extended on the same Hard Drive
But you can have Log up to X

Partition C:\
Extended Log1 D:\
Log 2 E:\
Log 3 F
Log 4 G
Log 5 H
Log 6 I
UP TO
Log 23 x:\

"Sunny" wrote in message
d.com...

The 32Gb limit can easily be overcome :
http://jacquesbron.com/blog/general/...under-windows/

On 10/19/2010 10:29, glee wrote:
"mm" wrote in message
...



I read, probably in the wikip entry for this, that it was free for a
while after MS bought it, but it also gavem me the impression it
wasn't anymore. No time now to go reread it. I'm happy to have the
new version.



It's been free since Microsoft bought it, AFAIK.

Actually, MS put it out as retail for a short period of time after they
bought it. I have the book size box and leaflet size manual to prove it.
I think it sold for around $100 ;-/

On 10/18/2010 15:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , glee
writes:
[]
The second list are the operating systems you can install it on, as a
host machine. I have read elsewhere that it will install and run on XP
Home as well as Pro, but have never tried.

That's what I thought. (Anyone else know?)

VPC will run on XP Home, apparently with no problems, but is officially
unsupported.

The first list is what operating systems are "supported" to be run as
a virtual system on the host. Other systems can be run....Win98,
Linux, etc...they are just not "supported" , meaning you won't get any
help or support for issues, there may not be Additions available for
everything, or there may only be partial functionality of the
unsupported virtual system.

Yes, I thought so too (-:. [What's an "Addition" in this context?]

VPC additions is a software package that runs as a service in the
virtual OS, and allows for some host to guest integration.

"Bill Blanton" wrote in message
ng.com...
On 10/19/2010 10:29, glee wrote:
"mm" wrote in message
...



I read, probably in the wikip entry for this, that it was free for a
while after MS bought it, but it also gavem me the impression it
wasn't anymore. No time now to go reread it. I'm happy to have the
new version.



It's been free since Microsoft bought it, AFAIK.

Actually, MS put it out as retail for a short period of time after
they bought it. I have the book size box and leaflet size manual to
prove it. I think it sold for around $100 ;-/


Ahh...thanks Bill!
--
Glen Ventura
MS MVP Oct. 2002 - Sept. 2009
CompTIA A+
http://dts-l.net/

On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 19:28:27 -0500, "Hot-Text"
wrote:

you give me a link to info website for hard drives bigger than 32 GB it can
be 1,000,000 GB all I care.
I say to you to make one 32 GB partition on it with a FAT32 system
partition partition partition partition partition partition partition
partition partition
Then Xcopy to the 32 GB partitionon the new 1,000,000 GB hard drive!

You should try XXcopy. It's really good.

We tell you all 32 GB partition for win98

We care not of the size of the Hard Drives

Do you know you can only have one partition on a Hard Drive

I think you can have 4 primary partitions on a hard drive, or 3
primary partitions and one extended one.

And one Extended on the same Hard Drive
But you can have Log up to X

Yes, I know that.

Partition C:\
Extended Log1 D:\
Log 2 E:\
Log 3 F
Log 4 G
Log 5 H
Log 6 I
UP TO
Log 23 x:\

"Sunny" wrote in message
nd.com...

The 32Gb limit can easily be overcome :
http://jacquesbron.com/blog/general/...under-windows/

On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 02:08:07 -0400, Paul wrote:

I think there is something slightly off, about the resolution setting,
but I can't find any tool on that particular distro, to tell me what
resolution is being used. The "xdpyinfo" tool is missing. As is
"xrandr".

You might open a terminal and try "xwininfo". Be sure some portion of
your Linux desktop is visible and click on that when prompted to click
on a window. The information will contain the correct width but the
height doesn't take the panels (taskbars) into account. To get their
heights you can xwininfo again and click on some unused area of each
taskbar.

boomer wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 02:08:07 -0400, Paul wrote:

I think there is something slightly off, about the resolution setting,
but I can't find any tool on that particular distro, to tell me what
resolution is being used. The "xdpyinfo" tool is missing. As is
"xrandr".

You might open a terminal and try "xwininfo". Be sure some portion of
your Linux desktop is visible and click on that when prompted to click
on a window. The information will contain the correct width but the
height doesn't take the panels (taskbars) into account. To get their
heights you can xwininfo again and click on some unused area of each
taskbar.


The entire set of X tools are missing :-(

That particular environment is dedicated to a fixed function,
and the emphasis is on keeping the boot CD size to a minimum.
So you don't get 700MB of goodies with it. It's got X for
the desktop, but none of the usual tools. So no xwininfo or
xeyes or xclock or the like.

Paul

On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 01:45:22 -0400, Paul wrote:

boomer wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 02:08:07 -0400, Paul wrote:

I think there is something slightly off, about the resolution setting,
but I can't find any tool on that particular distro, to tell me what
resolution is being used. The "xdpyinfo" tool is missing. As is
"xrandr".

You might open a terminal and try "xwininfo". Be sure some portion of
your Linux desktop is visible and click on that when prompted to click
on a window. The information will contain the correct width but the
height doesn't take the panels (taskbars) into account. To get their
heights you can xwininfo again and click on some unused area of each
taskbar.


The entire set of X tools are missing :-(

That particular environment is dedicated to a fixed function, and the
emphasis is on keeping the boot CD size to a minimum. So you don't get
700MB of goodies with it. It's got X for the desktop, but none of the
usual tools. So no xwininfo or xeyes or xclock or the like.

Paul

In that case, I'd examine /var/log/Xorg.0.log. Also, if xwininfo doesn't
have any dependencies that aren't already there, you might be able to
extract just that one file from the package and copy it to the VM or run
it from a CD or flash drive. I just checked the size and the binary is
only 23k on my system.

boomer wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 01:45:22 -0400, Paul wrote:

boomer wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 02:08:07 -0400, Paul wrote:

I think there is something slightly off, about the resolution setting,
but I can't find any tool on that particular distro, to tell me what
resolution is being used. The "xdpyinfo" tool is missing. As is
"xrandr".
You might open a terminal and try "xwininfo". Be sure some portion of
your Linux desktop is visible and click on that when prompted to click
on a window. The information will contain the correct width but the
height doesn't take the panels (taskbars) into account. To get their
heights you can xwininfo again and click on some unused area of each
taskbar.


The entire set of X tools are missing :-(

That particular environment is dedicated to a fixed function, and the
emphasis is on keeping the boot CD size to a minimum. So you don't get
700MB of goodies with it. It's got X for the desktop, but none of the
usual tools. So no xwininfo or xeyes or xclock or the like.

Paul

In that case, I'd examine /var/log/Xorg.0.log. Also, if xwininfo doesn't
have any dependencies that aren't already there, you might be able to
extract just that one file from the package and copy it to the VM or run
it from a CD or flash drive. I just checked the size and the binary is
only 23k on my system.


Thanks. I've give /var/log/Xorg.0.log a try, the next time I have it
fired up. There's bound to be some explanation in there, as to what
it's up to.

Paul

In message om, Bill
Blanton writes:
[]
VPC will run on XP Home, apparently with no problems, but is officially
unsupported.
[]
VPC additions is a software package that runs as a service in the
virtual OS, and allows for some host to guest integration.


Thanks.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Dogs come when they're called.
Cats have answering machines and may get back to you." - Phil Musiak

In message ,
writes:
[]
Use FAT. Why use NTFS for ANYTHING? If you encounter an error on a
FAT partition, you can retrieve everything unless the hard drive
itself fails. If you crash a NTFS partition, kill ALL your data
goodbye, because there is no way to retrieve anything.

Heck, on a FAT partition, you can just stick in a DOS bootdisk and
access all your data. Why make life complicated when there is no
advantage whatsoever to using NTFS. Even if your drive access is a
tiny bit faster with NTFS, is this worth losing everything? I always
tell people who format NTFS that they damn well better backup their
hard drive at least twice every hour, because if a NTFS installation
fails, IT'S OVER.....

Although I feel happier in FAT, the above is just not true; I recently
helped someone with a Vista system on which the HD began to fail. When
popped into an external housing, I was able to access most of the
original files, on two different machines (my XP one, and the original
rebuilt onto its new HD from its recovery DVDs). [And yes, the HD was
definitely failing, it wasn't just file system corruption. SMART
etcetera.]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Dogs come when they're called.
Cats have answering machines and may get back to you." - Phil Musiak

On 10/19/2010 00:17, Philo Pastry wrote:

And as Quirke says, under FAT you can have a mis-match between the
file-size as recorded in the FAT vs the length of the file-chain, and
for which is easily fixable.

Only easily fixable if the file is not fragmented, or the second FAT has
not been updated, otherwise you'll have to search the disk for any
non-contiguous clusters.

[snip]

NTFS is more than journalling. There's the organizational structure or
pattern as to how you store files and directories, and there's the event
or transaction-monitoring and logging operations above that. You could
theoretically have journalling performed on a FAT32 file structure.

Microsoft is apparently considering it for their exFAT format. Not
really transaction logging as in NTFS, but using the second FAT as the
record to roll back to.


http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/7613738.html

On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:47:21 -0500, "Hot-Text"
wrote:

mm wrote in message I'll say this. At first when win98FE crashed, I would
find files that were missing

It's the Hard Drive going bad,

I gather that is a possibility given the symptoms. But you say it
like it's a certainty. It definitely wasn't the case in the example I
gave. There was a bug in one program I used, where I save outgoing
messages, but they weren't really saved until I closed the program or
closed the outbox. I complained to the author and at first he didnt'
believe me, but later he believed me and he fixed it.

Not the Software win 98 FE .... the Hard
Drive crashed,

There was no harddrive crash. Thanks anyhow.

To save your win 98 FE and stop the files from missing....
You would need to get a new Hard Drive make one 32 GB partition on it with
a FAT32 system
And Xcopy the 98 FE to the new Hard Drive is the only way to stop the lost
of create!

That How you do the repair to the Hard Drive,

True!

"mm" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:47:21 -0500, "Hot-Text"
wrote:

mm wrote in message I'll say this. At first when win98FE crashed, I would
find files that were missing

It's the Hard Drive going bad,

I gather that is a possibility given the symptoms. But you say it
like it's a certainty. It definitely wasn't the case in the example I
gave. There was a bug in one program I used, where I save outgoing
messages, but they weren't really saved until I closed the program or
closed the outbox. I complained to the author and at first he didnt'
believe me, but later he believed me and he fixed it.

Not the Software win 98 FE .... the Hard
Drive crashed,

There was no harddrive crash. Thanks anyhow.

To save your win 98 FE and stop the files from missing....
You would need to get a new Hard Drive make one 32 GB partition on it
with
a FAT32 system
And Xcopy the 98 FE to the new Hard Drive is the only way to stop the lost
of create!

That How you do the repair to the Hard Drive,