Search Results

Search found 4361 results on 175 pages for 'multivariate partition'.

Page 81/175 | < Previous Page | 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88  | Next Page >

• exFAT to NTFS formatting troubles

  - by user1083734

  I recently ran a chkdsk on 2.5" 230GB SATA HDD but the plug was pulled before the end of the chkdsk and since then it wouldn't boot up. Deciding to scrap all data on the HDD (no longer needed it), I then fitted it into an external HDD caddy and (in diskpart) cleaned the disk, created new partition and volume and tried to format it to NTFS. It couldn't do this on long or short formats and so I went with the less-appreciated alternative - exFAT (I run Win7). It quick formats to exFAT fine but encounters errors during long format. At the moment it is exFAT. Of course I would really like it to be NTFS as I will probably need to use it on Win XP too. Could anyone suggest a method of trying to reformat to NTFS? Do you think that, when chkdsk was interrupted first time, the disk was corrupted and is irretrievable? I find this situation slightly odd, as it HAS formatted to exFAT and DOES seem to work when I copy files across! Also, I CAN use disk management console to create several partitions: e.g. a 50GB partition and then a large 180GB partition. The 50GB and WILL long-format to NTFS but the 180GB will not! I'm thinking hardware fault, but then I notice that it WILL format to exfAT! Much confusion!

  Read the article

• Need to boot into chkdsk from USB on Windows netbook

  - by Gaz Davidson

  While attempting to install Ubuntu on a 32-bit Windows XP netbook, the partition resize operation failed due to inconsistencies in the NTFS filesystem (lesson learned: run chkdsk /f in Windows before trying to resize a partition in Linux). Now the installer only gives the option to replace Windows with Ubuntu, the partition can't be resized in gparted, which displays a red exclamation mark and an error log when you click it. To make matters worse, we're also unable to reboot into Windows to get at chkdsk. We get a BSoD when choosing any of the options (including the DOS recovery console thing). The netbook has no CD-ROM drive, contains no recovery image and our only connection to the Internet is via the hotspot on my mobile device. We don't have Windows recovery CDs, but we do have a USB flash drive. We have a 64-bit laptop running Ubuntu 12.04 and Windows 7 (both 64-bit). So, on to the question: Is anyone aware of a way to get into a DOS recovery console and run chkdsk from a USB disk drive, without having to pirate Windows XP or download hundreds and hundreds of megabytes of crap? If it was my device I'd just flatten it, but it isn't. Please help!

  Read the article

• install Win7 SP1 with bcdedit failing

  - by Albert

  I'm getting the error 0x800F0A12 which is described here. bcdedit says: C:\>bcdedit.exe Der Speicher für die Startkonfigurationsdaten konnte nicht geöffnet werden. Das System kann die angegebene Datei nicht finden. (English: Couldn't open the start configuration. Couldn't find the file.) (off topic: how can I get those messages in English?) I played around and I assume that is because the system partition C:\ is not on the first BIOS disk. There are 4 disks in my PC. On one of them (shown as the 4th in Windows drive manager) contains Windows, whereby the system-reserved NTFS partition is the first primary and the second primary is my main Windows system partition. A few more partitions follow with other (non-NTFS) stuff. I was able to set the first two disks offline (via the Windows drive manager). For the 3rd disk, it says that it cannot set the BIOS 0 disk offline. How can I ignore that and still install SP1? I don't want to rewire/resetup my disks.

  Read the article

• NTDS Replication Warning (Event ID 2089)

  - by Chris_K

  I have a simple little network with 3 AD servers in 2 sites. Site A has Win2k3 SP2 and Win2k SP4 servers, site B has a single Win2k3 SP2 server. All have been in place for at least 3 years now. Just last week I started getting Event 2089 "not backed up" warnings (example below) on both of the win2k3 servers. I understand what the message means, no need to send me links to the technet article explaining it. I'll improve my backups. What I'm more curious about is why did I just start getting this message now? Why haven't I been getting it for the past 3 years?!? Perhaps this is related: I recently decommissioned a few other sites and AD controllers (there used to be 3 more sites, each with their own controller). Don't worry, I did proper DCpromo exercises and made sure we didn't lose anything. But would shutting those down possibly be related to why I get this error now? This won't keep me awake at night but I am curious as to what changed... Event Type: Warning Event Source: NTDS Replication Event Category: Backup Event ID: 2089 Date: 3/28/2010 Time: 9:25:27 AM User: NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON Computer: RedactedName Description: This directory partition has not been backed up since at least the following number of days. Directory partition: DC=MyDomain,DC=com 'Backup latency interval' (days): 30 It is recommended that you take a backup as often as possible to recover from accidental loss of data. However if you haven't taken a backup since at least the 'backup latency interval' number of days, this message will be logged every day until a backup is taken. You can take a backup of any replica that holds this partition. By default the 'Backup latency interval' is set to half the 'Tombstone Lifetime Interval'. If you want to change the default 'Backup latency interval', you could do so by adding the following registry key. 'Backup latency interval' (days) registry key: System\CurrentControlSet\Services\NTDS\Parameters\Backup Latency Threshold (days) For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Wubi "drive" failure; mount drive in XP?

  - by 618034

  Hi there, I installed the Wubi distribution of Ubuntu on a separate partition (which is silly, since why do I care if Windows can still manage the partition?) a few months back; it was pretty awesome, until Linux hosed. At this point, I can get Ubuntu to boot if I try really hard through grub, but once it does start, the screen is hosed, so no dice. At this point, I'd like to wipe it all and start over, but I need to get some stuff off the "disk". The Wubi install makes this difficult, since the "disk" is a flat file on an NTFS partition. I've done just about everything I can think of — I renamed the virtual disk .iso, mounted it with VirtualCloneDrive, then used whatever magic EXT3 (EXT4?) readers I could dig up on the Internet to parse the mount — but nothing's working. Can you offer any suggestions? The "disk" is currently in D:\ubuntu\disks\root.iso. Many thanks! (I may be high-latency at the moment, apologies if I don't address follow-ups quickly)

  Read the article

• Why is my filesystem being mounted read-only in linux?

  - by Tim

  I am trying to set up a small linux system based on Gentoo on a VirtualBox machine, as a step towards deploying the same system onto a low-spec Single Board Computer. For some reason, my filesystem is being mounted read-only. In my /etc/fstab, I have: /dev/sda1 / ext3 defaults 0 0 none /proc proc defaults 0 0 none /sys sysfs defaults 0 0 none /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 However, once booted /proc/mounts shows rootfs / rootfs rw 0 0 /dev/root / ext3 ro,relatime,errors=continue,barrier=0,data=writeback 0 0 proc /proc proc rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0 sysfs /sys sysfs rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0 udev /dev tmpfs rw,nosuid,relatime,size=10240k,mode=755 0 0 devpts /dev/pts devpts rw,nosuid,noexec,relatime,gid=5,mode=620 0 0 none /dev/shm tmpfs rw,relatime 0 0 usbfs /proc/bus/usb usbfs rw,nosuid,noexec,relatime,devgid=85,devmode=664 0 0 binfmt_misc /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc binfmt_misc rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0 (the above may contain errors: there's no practical way to copy and paste) The partition at /dev/hda1 is clearly being mounted OK, since I can read all the data, but it's not being mounted as described in fstab. How might I go about diagnosing / resolving this? Edit: I can remount with mount -o remount,rw / and it works as expected, except that /proc/mounts reports /dev/root mounted at / rather than /dev/sda1 as I'd expect. If I try to remount with mount -a I get mount: none already mounted or /sys busy mount: according to mtab, sysfs is already mounted on /sys Edit 2: I resolved the problem with mount -a (the same error was occuring during startup, it turned out) by changing the sysfs and proc lines to proc /proc proc [...] sysfs /sys sysfs [...] Now mount -a doesn't complain, but it doesn't result in a read-write root partition. mount -o remount / does cause the root partition to be remounted, however.

  Read the article

• Replicated MongoDB server slower than simple shards

  - by displayName

  I tried to compare the performance of a sharded configuration against a sharded and replicated configuration. The sharded configuration consists of 8 shards each running on three different machines thereby constituting a total of 24 shards. All 8 of these shards run in the same partition on each machine. The sharded and replicated version is 8 shards again just like plain sharding, and all 8 mongods run on the same partition in each machine. But apart from this, each of these three machine now run additional 16 threads on another partition which serve as the secondary for the 8 mongods running on other machines. This is the way I prepared a sharded and replicated configuration with data chunks having replication factor of 3. Important point to note is that once the data has been loaded, it is not modified. So after primary and secondaries have synchronized then it doesn't matter which one i read from. To run the queries, I use an entirely different machine (let's call it config) which runs mongos and this machine's only purpose is to receive queries and run them on the cluster. Contrary to my expectations, plain sharding of 8 threads on each machine (total = 3 * 8 = 24) is performing better for queries than the sharded + replicated configuration. I have a script written to perform the query. So in order to time the scripts, I use time ./testScript and see the result. I tried changing the reading preference for replicated cluster by logging to mongo of config and run db.getMongo().setReadPref('secondary') and then exit the shell and run the queries like time ./testScript. The questions are: Where am i going wrong in the replication? Why is it slower than its plain sharding version? Does the db.getMongo().ReadPref('secondary') persist when i leave the shell and try to perform the query? All the four machines are running Linux and i have already increased the ulimit -n to 2048 from initial value of 1024 to allow more connections. The collections are properly distributed and all the mongods have equal number of chunks. Goes without saying that indices in both configurations are the same.

  Read the article

• Migrating away from LVM

  - by Kye

  I have an Ubuntu home media server setup with 4.5TB split across a few hard-drives (1x3TB, 2x1TB) and I'm using LVM2 to manage the volumes. I have recently added a 60GB SSD to my server, and I wish to use it to house the 'root' partition of my server (which is currently under the LVM group). I don't want to simply add it to the LVM volume group, because (afaik) there's no way to ensure that the SSD will be used for the root filesystem. If I just throw it at the VG, it may be used to house my media, which would defeat the purpose of having the SSD in the first place. I feel that my only solution is to somehow remove my root partition from the LVM setup and copy it across to the SSD. My boot partition is, of course, not part of the LVM group. My disk setup is as follows: 60GB SSD: EMPTY. 1TB HDD: /boot, LVM space. 1TB HDD: LVM space. 3TB HHD: LVM space. I have a few logical volumes. my root (/), a 'media' volume for my media collection, a backup one for my network backups.etc. Does anyone have any advice as to how to go about this? My end goal is to have the 60GB SSD used for my boot and root partitions, with everything else on the 3TB/1TB/1TB hard-drives.

  Read the article

• Windows and file system abstraction - how much does it matter where something comes from?

  - by deceze

  I have come across the following phenomenon and would like to know how leaky Windows' file system abstraction is or if there's something else involved. I partitioned the hard disk of my MacBook Pro and installed Windows 7 (64 bit). The Bootcamp driver package includes file system drivers (right term?) that enable Windows to access the Mac OS HFS+ partition. AFAIK it's a read-only access, but it works. Now, I have some disk images of stuff I usually install, so I grabbed a copy of Daemon Tools to mount them. When I mount an image saved on the HFS+ partition, about two out of three installers on these disks (usually InstallShield) crash with all sorts of weird errors. Most are just gibberish that lead to all sorts of non-solutions on Google, one was "This application is not the right type for your computer, check if you need 32 or 64 bit versions." When moving the image files to another Windows 7 computer on the network and mounting them from the network share, they work fine. My question now is, why do applications behave differently depending on whether the read-only image file, which should be abstracted away through the read-only virtual Daemon Tools drive, is located on a read-only HFS+ partition or on a Windows network share? And I'll just roll this into the question as well since I was wondering: Does the file system of a network share matter? Does the client system need to understand the file system of the share host or is that abstracted away in SMB?

  Read the article

• Cluster FIle System

  - by Ben

  We are looking for to choose a clustered file system for our in house appplication. Let me first highlight my requirement. we have a storage and 2 servers at present.We get the data files from remote servers to our server and on both servers we are running our application to access those data and make a final result as per our requirements. In future may be after 3-4 months, we can add another servers in current cluster pool to handle more data load from remote location data senders. So my requirement is that to integrate same storage partition on 2-3 servers , it might be 4-5 more servers in future, My application read data from storage partition and write back to storage partition. Is there any bottleneck / limitation from RHCS , GFS2 or anything.? We are new with RHCS + GFS and all. Can we have any other better approach or someway to deal with our requirement light way? what is the best OS version for this ? how's RHEL 6.4 64 bit ? please share some case study or some gudie reference as per past experiences with such environnmnets Regards, Ben

  Read the article

• Repairing hard disk when Windows installation disk won't boot

  - by Echows

  I'm trying to recover some data from a faulty hard disk with Windows installed on it (on which Windows won't even boot). I have tried so far: Booting to Ubuntu live USB stick and running ntfsfix (didn't work) Trying to mount the broken partition when running Ubuntu from usb stick (doesn't mount) Running photorec image recovery tool from live Ubuntu (it found some stuff but not the images I was looking for) Now as a last resort I got myself a Windows installation on a USB stick so that I can try fdisk, but the installer doesn't work. The loading screen shows up and then the installer crashes. The installer works fine on other computers. I suspect that the installer is trying to read the hard drive to see if there's something there but when it can't read one partition, it crashes. On Ubuntu, I can mount other partitions except the one I'm interested in so at least the hard drive is not completely dead. So the question is, what options do I have left? To be more specific, my goal is to recover some images from the faulty ntfs-partition on the hard drive. Other than that, I don't care about the contents of the hard disk.

  Read the article

• diskmgmt.msc: Cannot delete volume from USB

  - by Notinlist

  I have an USB drive with about 8GB of size. It has a single partition of size 169MB. Don't know why, I got it that way. I wanted to delete this small (FAT32) partition and create a single NTFS volume on it. First, I noticed that the "Delete volumme" option is disabled (grayed out). I then tried "Change drive letter and paths..." and removed "F:", that way I made sure that there are no open files on it. The "Delete volume" was still disabled. Then I got suspicious, and right clicked on the "Unallocated" area and I noticed that I did not have any useful option. All "New * volume" items are disabled. I exited from diskmgmt.msc, ran a cmd.exe with administrator privileges, ran the diskmgmt.msc from it, same experiences. Why can't i do anything with this disk? I've read some advices about downloading some alternative free software, but I rather not do it if possible. I still hope that Windows 7 Enterprise 64bit alone can reinitialize an USB drive without external help. I also cannot do anything with my other 8GB pendrive. It's all an NTFS volume, I tried to delete it, but the option is disabled here too. Maybe I have some settings somewhere that prevents my from partitioning USB disks. (I have the freedom to remove my D: partition which is the second - not counding the "System reserved" - on my SSD disk.)

  Read the article

• Recover data from Dynamic Disk (MBR) bigger than 2TB

  - by Helder

  Here is the situation: Promise Array FastTrak TX4310 with 3 disks (750 GB each) in RAID5. This comes to around 1500 GB of data. Last week I had the idea of expanding the RAID with an additional 750 GB disk. This would bring the volume to around 2250 GB. I plugged the disk and used the Webpam software to do the RAID expansion. However, I didn't count with the MBR 2TB limit, as I didn't remembered that the disk was using MBR instead of GPT and I didn't check it prior to the expansion. After a couple of days of expansion, today when I got home, the disk in Windows disk manager showed the message "Invalid disk" and when I try to activate it, it says "The operation is not allowed on the Invalid pack". From what I figured, the logical volume on the RAID expanded, and passed that info to the Windows layer and I ended up with an "larger than 2TB" MBR disk. I'm hopping that somehow I can still recover some data from this, and I was wondering if I can "rewrite" the MBR structure back to the 1500 GB partition size, so I can access the partition in Windows. Right now I'm doing an "Analyse" with TestDisk, as I hope the program will pickup the old 1500 structure and allow me to somehow revert back to it. I think that even though the Logical Drive in the RAID is bigger than the 2TB, I can somehow correct the MBR to show the 1500 GB partition again. I had a similar problem once, and I was able to recover the data using a similar method. What do you guys think? Is it a dead end? Am I totally screwed because there is the extra RAID layer that I'm not counting? Or is there other way to move with this? Thanks all!

  Read the article

• Unable to load Windows after using EasyBCD to Reset bcd [duplicate]

  - by johnny

  This question already has an answer here: How can I repair the Windows 8 EFI Bootloader? 9 answers My windows installation was working perfectly fine until i clicked "Reset BCD" in EasyBCD in Windows 8. After clicking that EasyBCD told me to add Win 8 entry via Add Entry Menu so i did. After restart, win 8 would not start. Neither would recovery F11. Attempts i made to Restore : Ran boot-repair from ubuntu live cd several time. Used Win8 system recovery disc created via virtualbox with win 8 preview iso. Automated repair from Win8 system recovery disc Ran following commands from cmd started from Win8 system recovery disc bootrec /fixmbr Result : Success message bootrec /rebuildbcd Result : after hitting (Y) "The requested system device cannot be found" System refresh started from Win8 system recovery disc gives error that device is locked. System reset started from Win8 system recovery disc gives error that required partition or device is missing or not accessible. Used automated repair from EasyRE disc. It gave success message. Used Fix boot problem from Macrium reflect winPE repair disc. Copied Recovery partition to usb. Booting from usb gave this error Your PC needs to be repaired. Error Code : 0XC000000f Press Enter to try again Press F8 for Startup Settings F8 & Enter does nothing I cannot install WIn7 or Win 8, error it gives : "windows cannot be installed on this disk. The selected disk is of the GPT partition style."

  Read the article

• break Folder Protection, Folder Guard Lock or Folder in Windows XP?

  - by SonyAdi

  when I'm making a new partition by the partition magic. Then all of a sudden power failure. Unfortunately because my computer is not equipped with UPS (Power supply Uniterruptible), my computer finally died, too. When power is restored, I tried to turn on the computer. Suddenly my computer can not boot normally into windows. Option through safemode and others all I've tried. The result fails, can not boot at all, into safe mode also can not. And I know the cause. Partition Magic did not finish the work and stopped in the middle of the road and cause the transfer of data files or stopped, finally file2 any default windows were destroyed as well. Unfortunately my important data I store in my document. Finally, I take my hard drive to a friend. Hopes to open a computer hard drive through friend, at least I could save my important data, and then I can install window again by reformatting my hard drive is first. I read the hard drive in explorer my friend, complete with their data, but the data of my important data in my document can not get to go because it requires administrator privileges or the original user's default start my windows (my computer) to open my document folder tersebut.Ini actually very similar to the work or Folder Protection Folder Guard. result I was disappointed and almost desperate to get back my important data is. how do i break Folder Protection, Folder Guard Lock or Folder in Windows XP?

  Read the article

• While using an ntfs smb share for mac users, do symbolic links and extended attributes work?

  - by scape

  We have a majority of mac users but we'd rather support their file sharing using a Windows server with an ntfs drive, or at least a Linux server with ext3. We've had trouble, much trouble, utilizing the OS X server software and after the years are now looking to abandon it. What's mostly holding us back is the fact that the mac users very often utilize symbolic links and other special features that exist for an HFS+ partition. The shared locations are mostly primary storage and not just used as an archive storage location. While there is an option to create symbolic links under ntfs, I'm curious if there is anything I need to look out for if I were to move the files over to a new partition that's hosted from a Windows server from the HFS+ partition; in addition, how well creating a symbolic link from a mac might work. I am also worried about windows backup software and if it will ruin these special sym links, and how placing permissions on sub-folders will work. Alternatively I could remotely backup the files using a mac and Bru, nonetheless I still want to get away from mac server for hosting the shares.

  Read the article

• how do I fix a wrong UUID in grub.cfg?

  - by mozerella

  I run Debian Wheezy alone on my PC and I recently copied the root partition to another with rsync as I found that worked well (I also know about dd and ddrescue but they leave unusable space on the new partition). I generated a new random UUID for the new partition with sudo tune2fs -U random /dev/hda9 and also updated fstab / and /home entries. Then as I know so little about GRUB I used a gui (GRUB Customizer) to probe for the new OS and add an entry to GRUB and the MBR -it makes an /etc/grub.d entry then updates GRUB. On startup, the GRUB list contains the new OS (on sda9) but it boots the first OS (which I copied from -sda5). /boot/grub/grub.cfg contains the new debian OS but it looks like this set root='(hd0,msdos9)' search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set=root 64662470-0e58-4dfd-90ac-43227d773556 linux /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-2-amd64 root=UUID=cc3bca0d-aee4-4b9c-95c2-57212cc36d4d ro quiet initrd /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-2-amd64 the 1st uuid is of sda9, but the 2nd uuid there is of sda5. I can change the 2nd uuid at startup (with E) and it boots sda9. So how can I get grub.cfg corrected so that the sda9 GRUB list entry boots from sda9 permanently?

  Read the article

• virtual machines, dual booting and data disks on SSD

  - by stevemarvell

  This is in planning, so if I've got the strategy wrong, please let me know. There are multiple questions here, but I think they all degenerate to the same answers. The hardware is a laptop with a single SSD. I'm trying to not lose the performance of the SSD. I plan a native dual booting Windows (plus cygwin) and Linux machine which is my BYOD and represents the development environment. I keep the codebase on a shared partition (though sometimes this is an external thunderbolt SSD) which can be natively "mounted" by whichever OS is in operation. I boot into one or the other environments depending on the task in hand. Sometime I have to develop with windows tools, but generally, Linux is my preferred development environment. It would be ideal if I could VM the other OS and run either in either. I'm going to assume, because I've not found a sensible VM based solution, that I have get samba involved to share the code partition between VMs. Is this going to blow my SSD performance in the VM? The client also supplies me with a VM for the target environment, usually linux. This is not often suited to development and is used for testing only. I normally keep two copies of this, one as a sandbox and one which I deploy to using the client's preferred method. I keep these VM snapshots on the shared partition. The latter is interacted with over the network and so has no disk sharing requirements. However, it would be useful for the sandbox to be able to "mount" the code base from the natively running OS. Is this samba or nfs again, depending on the native OS? Am I missing a trick which allows this to all work smoothly with all four environments running at once without loosing the SSD performance?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu via Wubi refuses to show up in boot menu

  - by Redandwhite

  I'm in this strange situation: I have 3 partitions, one for Vista (C), one for Windows 7 (D), and one 10GB partition (E). At least that's how my original OEM Vista partition sees them. The primary OS that I boot into everyday is Windows 7. The situation is that for some reason it sees the Windows 7 partition (its own) as drive C, the 10GB one as (D) and the Vista one as (E). I've successfully used the Wubi installation before on Vista, but now it simply doesn't work. Ubuntu just does not show up in the boot menu, no matter what I try to do. I'm running out of ideas. I heard it doesn't really play well with Windows 7 either. I set it to Vista compatibility mode and that didn't work, I also tried installing it from Vista itself and that didn't work either for some reason. Any ideas what I should try? If anyone is about to suggest EasyBCD, please underline the command-line instructions I'm gonna need to follow. Thanks.

  Read the article

• VirtualBox doesn't see raw partitions

  - by smbear

  What I want to achieve is to set up virtual machine with VirtualBox. Host OS is Windows 7 Home Premium, guest will be (k)Ubuntu 12.04 on a raw partition. The first problem is that when I issue following command: VBoxManage.exe internalcommands listpartitions -rawdisk \\.\PhysicalDrive0 I get following result: Number Type StartCHS EndCHS Size (MiB) Start (Sect) 1 0xee 0 /0 /1 1023/254/63 715404 1 I'm guessing that VirtualBox is unable to see my partitions. If I use diskpart tool, then all partitions are listed correctly (note Polish language version of Windows): DISKPART> select disk 0 Obecnie wybranym dyskiem jest dysk 0. DISKPART> list partition Partycja ### Typ Rozmiar Przesuniecie ------------- ---------------- ------- ------------ Partycja 1 System 200 MB 1024 KB Partycja 2 Zarezerwowany 128 MB 201 MB Partycja 3 Podstawowy 139 GB 329 MB Partycja 5 Nieznany 4883 KB 140 GB Partycja 6 Podstawowy 50 GB 140 GB Partycja 7 Podstawowy 484 GB 190 GB Partycja 4 Odzyskiwanie 24 GB 674 GB Additional note: my PC is using EFI to boot OS. Basing on the results listed above, I believe that: I messed up with my partition table. Something is wrong with VirtualBox. Can anyone help with this issue?

  Read the article

• How do I repartition an SDHC card in Windows?

  - by Peter Mortensen

  How do I repartition an SDHC card (4 GB or more)? Do I need third-part tools or Linux (a live CD solution would be OK)? In Windows' Disk Management the option Delete Partition is dimmed out: I can reformat the card as FAT32, copy files to and from the card and even change the file system to NTFS using the command line command CONVERT, but not repartition it. The article How to Partition an SD Card in Windows XP talks about using "a Windows enabler program" which sound rather dubious to me. I have tried to change from “Optimize for quick removal” to “Optimize for performance”. The option to format as NTFS appeared, but the Delete Partition option is still dimmed out. Platform: Windows XP 64-bit SD card reader: USB 2.0 device, LogiLink® CR0005C Cardreader 3,5' USB 2.0 intern 54-in-1 mit USB Front Kingston 16 GB SDHC card, speed class 4. (It could be formatted as FAT32 and successfully used in a 4 GB ReadyBoost setup (Windows 7).) I have also tried on different versions of Windows and with different cards with the same result: Kingston 4 GB SDHC card, speed class 4 (the one shown in the screenshot) Transcend 2 GB (not marked as SDHC, but SD) Windows 7 32-bit (albeit with a somewhat an older card reader) and Windows XP 32-bit on an EliteBook 8730w

  Read the article

• NTFS frequent corruption when writing many small files, index $I30 error

  - by david sedai

  I'm running Windows 7 Ultimate on a laptop with a 500G HDD, and had all partitions formatted as NTFS. I do a lot of programming and LaTeX typesetting, both of these involves a large amount of reading/writing/deleting to a lot of small files, such as C++ library headers or LaTeX packages. The problem is that frequently, when there is a large number of writing to files, the partition being written to often corrupts, the chkntfs e: returns dirty, where e: is the partition being written. I've re-formatted the drive, I've contacted the laptop manufacturer and had the HDD checked, the HDD is not faulty, there are no bad sectors, and I've tried a brand new HDD, to no avail, and the other partition on the same physical drive doesn't have this issue. I'm pretty sure that it's no hardware related. I've searched the Microsoft support pages, one page http://support.microsoft.com/kb/982018 provides an update for Advanced Format Disks, which I've already installed. The chkntfs log shows $130 index errors. I'm at a loss here. Can anyone help? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Removing a device in "removed" state from Linux software RAID array

  - by Sahasranaman MS

  My workstation has two disks(/dev/sd[ab]), both with similar partitioning. /dev/sdb failed, and cat /proc/mdstat stopped showing the second sdb partition. I ran mdadm --fail and mdadm --remove for all partitions from the failed disk on the arrays that use them, although all such commands failed with mdadm: set device faulty failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device mdadm: hot remove failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device or address Then I hot swapped the failed disk, partitioned the new disk and added the partitions to the respective arrays. All arrays got rebuilt properly except one, because in /dev/md2, the failed disk doesn't seem to have been removed from the array properly. Because of this, the new partition keeps getting added as a spare to the partition, and its status remains degraded. Here's what mdadm --detail /dev/md2 shows: [root@ldmohanr ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md2 /dev/md2: Version : 1.1 Creation Time : Tue Dec 27 22:55:14 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Used Dev Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Intent Bitmap : Internal Update Time : Fri Nov 23 14:59:56 2012 State : active, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Name : ldmohanr.net:2 (local to host ldmohanr.net) UUID : 4483f95d:e485207a:b43c9af2:c37c6df1 Events : 5912611 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 18 - spare /dev/sdb2 To remove a disk, mdadm needs a device filename, which was /dev/sdb2 originally, but that no longer refers to device number 1. I need help with removing device number 1 with 'removed' status and making /dev/sdb2 active.

  Read the article

• Dual Boot Installing Ubuntu 12.04 with Windows 7 (64) on a non UEFI system fails

  - by Randnum

  I cannot seem to install the correct boot loader for a non-UEFI firmware system. I'm trying to install Ubuntu 12.04 and Windows 7 (64) which are technically compatible with GPT but for windows only if the firmware is UEFI enabled. My system uses the old BIOS system and does not support UEFI. Therefore, whenever I finish my Ubuntu install and try to install Windows I get a "cannot install to GPT partition type" error. Even if I use Gparted to format a special NTFS file format for windows it can't handle the GPT partition style because it doesn't have UEFI. But my ubuntu install always forces GPT during installation and never asks if I want to install the old BIOS style MBR instead. How do I resolve this? Both OS's will install fine on their own the problem is when I try to install the second OS it doesn't recognize any of the other's partitions and tries to rewrite it's own on top of the other. I've tried both OS's first and always run into the same problem. Since there is no way to make Windows recognize GPT without upgrading my Motherboard how do I tell Ubuntu to use the old BIOS MBR on install? Do I have to download a special Ubuntu with a specific grub version? or should I manaually configure my partition somehow to force it not to use GPT? Thank you,

  Read the article

• What should I encrypt in Debian during install?

  - by ianfuture

  I have seen various guides and recommendations on web about how best to do this but nothing that clearly explains the best way and why. So I understand there is a need for part of Debian during install to be un-encrypted on its own partition to allow it to boot. Most info I have seen is call this /boot and set the boot flag. Next I believe the best approach is to create another partition out of all the rest of the disk space, encrypt this, then on top of that create a LVM and then within the LVM create my various partitions , name them , select size, and file system type. Can I include /swap in the encrypted LVM part ? Is this approach sound? If so what are the partitions I should use (this is going to be a minimal server install with a view to install as and when what I need for a dev server)? Finally how does the installer know what to put in each partition I define ? I appreciate there are more than one question but any help and suggestions would be appreciated. If further clarification is needed please mention in the comments . Thanks.. Ian

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88  | Next Page >