Welcome, Guest. Please Login
 
  HomeHelpSearchLogin FAQ Radified Ghost.Classic Ghost.New Bootable CD Blog  
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs ? (Read 37501 times)
Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #15 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:07am
 
El_Pescador, it is my understanding that Ghost 8.2 (whether running in Windows XP or Windows PE or BartPE) will not create an image of any partition on which there are open files/handles (i.e., there is no support for “hot imaging”).  If I recall correctly, Brian reported success in using Ghost 8.2 in Windows XP to image non-operating system partitions – although I have not personally tested it.

Chacun à son gout – indeed!
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 

El_Pescador
Übermensch
*****
Offline


Thumbs Up!

Posts: 1605
Bayou Country, USA


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #16 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:45am
 
Pleonasm wrote on Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:07am:
"... If I recall correctly, Brian reported success in using Ghost 8.2 in Windows XP to image
non-operating system partitions
– although I have not personally tested it..."

El_Pescador wrote on Apr 5th, 2006 at 11:24pm:
"... Albeit I did perform Integrity Checks on image files stored on an inactive external HDD after booting from Windows XP Home Edition resident on Active Virtual Drive C: of my Maxtor 120GB SATA MASTER HDD (invoking Ghost 8.2 merely by opening GHOSTRESTORE.EXE on a CD-ROM drive)..."

Hmm - when booting up normally in Windows XP, I wonder if it would make any difference if the USB external HDD was already powered up versus powering up after the boot process was complete. Moreover, when operating normally in Windows XP I wonder if a Ghost 8.2 "partition-to-image" Backup could be generated of one of the Virtual Drives on the external HDD to be sent to the other.  Even more provocative, how about from one of the Virtual Drives on the external HDD thence to a partition on the internal SLAVE HDD.

EP
Cry
 

...
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6336
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #17 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 4:11pm
 
Pleonasm wrote on Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:07am:
If I recall correctly, Brian reported success in using Ghost 8.2 in Windows XP to image non-operating system partitions –


Pleo, I imaged a hidden OS partition. I can't recall if I also imaged a data partition but I'll try to do it today.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6336
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #18 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 5:44pm
 
No problems. Running Ghost32.exe from the HD (in Windows) I imaged a test data partition to another data partition. The image passed the integrity check. I deleted all data on the test data partition and then restored the image to that partition.

No questions were asked by Ghost32 at any stage. It just did it.

From Windows, Ghost32.exe will image data and non-active OS partitions. Nice to know.
 
 
IP Logged
 
El_Pescador
Übermensch
*****
Offline


Thumbs Up!

Posts: 1605
Bayou Country, USA


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #19 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 9:47pm
 
Brian wrote on Apr 6th, 2006 at 5:44pm:
"... No questions were asked by Ghost32 at any stage.  It just did it..."

  • Seems to make no difference whether USB external HDD already powered up versus powering up after the boot process is complete while working with Norton Ghost 8.2 from inside normal Windows XP.
  • Likewise, a Ghost 8.2 "partition-to-image" Backup can be generated of one of the Virtual Drives on one external HDD to be sent to a partition on the internal SLAVE HDD.  Although the process appeared to have been successfully completed - and later the image did pass an Integrity Check - be advised that beforehand the caveat depicted below was displayed.
  • Moreover, a Ghost 8.2 "partition-to-image" Backup can be generated of one of the Virtual Drives on one external HDD to be sent to a distant partition on yet another external HDD.  Again, the process appeared to have been successfully completed - and later the image did pass an Integrity Check - but beforehand a like caveat was displayed.  An attempt to go from one Virtual Drive to another inside the same extended partition on the external HDD proved so glacial in its progress that I aborted it - although it might have worked given sufficient time!

...

EP
Cry
 

...
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6336
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #20 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 10:22pm
 
EP, I'm not familiar with the "Virtual Drives" you are discussing. How are these created?
 
 
IP Logged
 

Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6336
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #21 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:05pm
 
EP, I did my test again and this time I did see Question: (1854). I continued to image, checked and then restored this image successfully.

Maybe I missed seeing the Question: (1854) earlier today but I didn't recall any hiccups when I posted.


PS    Did it again and this time there was NO Question: (1854).
 
 
IP Logged
 
El_Pescador
Übermensch
*****
Offline


Thumbs Up!

Posts: 1605
Bayou Country, USA


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #22 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:43pm
 
Brian wrote on Apr 6th, 2006 at 10:22pm:
"... I'm not familiar with the "Virtual Drives" you are discussing.  How are these created?..."

Since I have been fooling with computers circa 1973 (tab cards and reel-to-reel magnetic tape days), I occasionally lapse into using archaic phrases, i.e., a virtual drive as opposed to a physical drive.  Making things more hazy is failing to reveal that all my internal SLAVE HDDs and external HDDs are configured to have a single extended partition containing one or more logical partitions - on each of my PCs the only physical drive having any primary partitions is the MASTER HDD.  So, right or wrong, when I refer to a 'Virtual Drive', what I really mean is a logical partition within an extended partition which resides on a physical HDD.

BTW, despite advanced warnings about "forced dismounts" a 'Clone Completed Successfully!' message was displayed this evening following a Ghost 8.2 "image-to-partition" Restore while operating normally in Windows XP.  The image source was a logical partition on an internal IDE SLAVE HDD and the destination was a NTFS logical partition on the 120GB Seagate IDE HDD residing in my Bytecc ME-320U2 USB external enclosure.

EP
Cry
 

...
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6336
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #23 - Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:53pm
 
El_Pescador wrote on Apr 6th, 2006 at 11:43pm:
Making things more hazy is failing to reveal that all my internal SLAVE HDDs and external HDDs are configured to have a single extended partition containing one or more logical partitions - on each of my PCs the only physical drive having any primary partitions is the MASTER HDD. 


Same here.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #24 - Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:06am
 
So, to summarize, are the following statements correct:
  • Ghost 8.2 can be run in Windows XP to image and restore any non-operating system partition.
  • Ghost 8.2 can be run in Windows PE (from the Ghost 10 recovery environment CD) or run in BartPE to image and restore any partition, whether or not it contains the operating system.
  • Ghost 8.2 solves most (if not all) “recalcitrant” issues that Ghost 2003 in DOS has with external hard disk drives (USB or FireWire).
If these statements are accurate, then it may be wise to consider incorporating the information into the Radified Guide to Norton Ghost.
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 
El_Pescador
Übermensch
*****
Offline


Thumbs Up!

Posts: 1605
Bayou Country, USA


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #25 - Apr 7th, 2006 at 11:01am
 
Pleonasm wrote on Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:06am:
"... Ghost 8.2 can be run in Windows XP to image and restore any non-operating system partition..."

Thusfar, the above seems to be the case despite the warnings thrown up prior to execution, but those notices do make me uneasy.  Let me stress that none of the partitions involved in my testing to date have resided on my MASTER HDD wherein the Windows XP Home Edition operating system resides.  As a matter of fact, all such partitions - whether source or destination - are logical types contained within their respective extended partitions.

Pleonasm wrote on Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:06am:
"... Ghost 8.2 can be run in Windows PE (from the Ghost 10 recovery environment CD) or run in BartPE to image any partition, whether or not it contains the operating system..."

I consider this an accurate statement without qualification.

Pleonasm wrote on Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:06am:
"... Ghost 8.2 solves most (if not all) “recalcitrant” issues that Ghost 2003 has with external hard disk drives (USB or FireWire)..."

This certainly seems to be the case.  I now consider the Norton Ghost 8.2 components included on the Norton Ghost 10.0 bootable CD to be absolutely indispensable, and in my future operations will supplant Norton Ghost 2003 to a large degree.

EP
Cry
 

...
WWW  
IP Logged
 

Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #26 - Apr 7th, 2006 at 11:29am
 
El_Pescador, regarding the “Question: (1854)” warning that Ghost 8.2 presents, note that it is remarkably similar to the same warning issued by the command “CHKDSK /F” when it dismounts a non-operating system volume before proceeding with the check operation.  Therefore, I do not believe there is any reason to be concerned about the occurrence of this message.
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 
El_Pescador
Übermensch
*****
Offline


Thumbs Up!

Posts: 1605
Bayou Country, USA


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #27 - Apr 7th, 2006 at 3:25pm
 
Pleonasm wrote on Apr 7th, 2006 at 11:29am:
"... regarding the 'Question: (1854)' warning that Ghost 8.2 presents, note that it is remarkably similar to the same warning issued by the command 'CHKDSK /F' when it dismounts a non-operating system volume before proceeding with the check operation.  Therefore, I do not believe there is any reason to be concerned about the occurrence of this message..."

I am hopeful all messages depicted below turn out to be of no concern:

...
...
...
...

EP
Cry
 

...
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6336
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #28 - Apr 7th, 2006 at 3:46pm
 
Pleonasm wrote on Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:06am:
  • Ghost 8.2 can be run in Windows XP to image and restore any non-operating system partition.
  • Ghost 8.2 can be run in Windows PE (from the Ghost 10 recovery environment CD) or run in BartPE to image and restore any partition, whether or not it contains the operating system.
  • Ghost 8.2 solves most (if not all) “recalcitrant” issues that Ghost 2003 in DOS has with external hard disk drives (USB or FireWire).



Pleo, I'd also add
  • Ghost 8.2 can be run in Windows XP to image and restore a hidden operating system partition.


For example, I have two WinXP partitions so I'm able to image and restore each partition without using the Ghost 10 Recovery Environment. Naturally I have to boot to the OS that I don't wish to image or restore.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pleonasm
Übermensch
*****
Offline



Posts: 1619


Back to top
Re: GHOST32.EXE: No More Recalcitrant USB 2.0 HDDs
Reply #29 - Apr 7th, 2006 at 3:49pm
 
El_Pescador, based on your post, Ghost 8.2 appears to work even in the presence of the “Question: (1854)” warning.

One option that you might wish to try is to first manually dismount the source partition (e.g., "D:") that is being imaged using the FSUTIL utility (e.g., "fsutil volume dismount D:").  Theoretically, this ought to correct the situation that is being detected by Ghost 8.2 and thereby circumvent the “Question: (1854)” warning.
 

ple • o • nasm n. “The use of more words than are required to express an idea”
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print