I'm trying to fix what looks like a corrupt NTFS partition on a HP
Media center PC.
Initial symptoms were that the machine would show the POST screen,
then show a blinking cursor in the upper left and not boot, giving no
errors. F8 will not offer Safe-mode options. I believe the user may
have been improperly restarting the computer when this started.
Pressing F10 at boot will still bring up the HP recovery environment.
The PC will not boot into recovery console from a Windows CD because
it doesn't recognize a valid file system on c:
The Windows installation CD lists the HP Recovery partition as FAT32
as the second partition, but an "unknown" partition with the remaining
balance of the hard drive size. I did not touch the partitions from
here, I was just checking to see if they were still valid.
Booting the machine from the BartPE "Ultimate Boot CD 4 Windows", My
Computer lists Drive C: as "RAW File system" Free / used 0 bytes, and
it lists H: as a the valid HP_Recovery partition.
None of the scandisk tools on the CD will recognize the partition.
Will recognize the partition as "HPFS-NTFS" with the proper volume
name and recognized will recognize the recovery partition as "FAT32
LBA".
I tried running the "Repair MFT" and "Rebuild BS" options.
Currently it lists "Boot sector Status: OK" and "Backup boot sector
status: OK" "Sectors are identical"
When i select Repair MFT it quickly flashes the message "Failed to
open inode: Input/Output error."
Offers to "Fix MFT mirror" I select yes, it responds "MFT mirror
fixed"
Going to "repair BS" it says "Use MFT from 786432, confirm?" I select
yes
"
Sectors per cluster: 8
MFT LCN 786432
MFTMIRR LCN 16
Mft record size: 1024
filesystem size 470206422
MFT LCN 786432
MFTMIRR LCN 16
Mft record size: 1024
clusters_per_mft_record: -10 ???????
Clusters_per_index_record 1
Extrapolated boot sector and current boot sector are identical.
"
If I go into the list feature of TestDisk it will show me the correct
file structure of the partition, and of the couple files I tried using
the copy function on, they copied to the BartPE RAM drive correctly.
However the partition will still not appear to be valid in BartPE or
any other application, even after a reboot.
Is there any other free recovery tools that might let me fix this semi
corrupt NTFS partition?
I think your best bet is to format the partition and do a reinstall of the os.
"throwitout" wrote:
> I'm trying to fix what looks like a corrupt NTFS partition on a HP
> Media center PC.
>
> Initial symptoms were that the machine would show the POST screen,
> then show a blinking cursor in the upper left and not boot, giving no
> errors. F8 will not offer Safe-mode options. I believe the user may
> have been improperly restarting the computer when this started.
>
> Pressing F10 at boot will still bring up the HP recovery environment.
>
> The PC will not boot into recovery console from a Windows CD because
> it doesn't recognize a valid file system on c:
>
> The Windows installation CD lists the HP Recovery partition as FAT32
> as the second partition, but an "unknown" partition with the remaining
> balance of the hard drive size. I did not touch the partitions from
> here, I was just checking to see if they were still valid.
>
> Booting the machine from the BartPE "Ultimate Boot CD 4 Windows", My
> Computer lists Drive C: as "RAW File system" Free / used 0 bytes, and
> it lists H: as a the valid HP_Recovery partition.
>
> None of the scandisk tools on the CD will recognize the partition.
>
> TestDisk:
> http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk
>
> Will recognize the partition as "HPFS-NTFS" with the proper volume
> name and recognized will recognize the recovery partition as "FAT32
> LBA".
>
> I tried running the "Repair MFT" and "Rebuild BS" options.
>
> Currently it lists "Boot sector Status: OK" and "Backup boot sector
> status: OK" "Sectors are identical"
>
> When i select Repair MFT it quickly flashes the message "Failed to
> open inode: Input/Output error."
> Offers to "Fix MFT mirror" I select yes, it responds "MFT mirror
> fixed"
>
> Going to "repair BS" it says "Use MFT from 786432, confirm?" I select
> yes
> "
> Sectors per cluster: 8
> MFT LCN 786432
> MFTMIRR LCN 16
> Mft record size: 1024
>
> filesystem size 470206422
> MFT LCN 786432
> MFTMIRR LCN 16
> Mft record size: 1024
> clusters_per_mft_record: -10 ???????
> Clusters_per_index_record 1
> Extrapolated boot sector and current boot sector are identical.
> "
> If I go into the list feature of TestDisk it will show me the correct
> file structure of the partition, and of the couple files I tried using
> the copy function on, they copied to the BartPE RAM drive correctly.
> However the partition will still not appear to be valid in BartPE or
> any other application, even after a reboot.
>
> Is there any other free recovery tools that might let me fix this semi
> corrupt NTFS partition?
>
>
It is worth using the hard drive manufacturer's test software before you
follow sgopus's good advice. You may as well check the drive.
"throwitout" <throwitout@dodgeit.com> wrote in message
news:3831490e-b193-409d-bc38-de1cdbece4ed@q70g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> I'm trying to fix what looks like a corrupt NTFS partition on a HP
> Media center PC.
>
> Initial symptoms were that the machine would show the POST screen,
> then show a blinking cursor in the upper left and not boot, giving no
> errors. F8 will not offer Safe-mode options. I believe the user may
> have been improperly restarting the computer when this started.
>
> Pressing F10 at boot will still bring up the HP recovery environment.
>
> The PC will not boot into recovery console from a Windows CD because
> it doesn't recognize a valid file system on c:
>
> The Windows installation CD lists the HP Recovery partition as FAT32
> as the second partition, but an "unknown" partition with the remaining
> balance of the hard drive size. I did not touch the partitions from
> here, I was just checking to see if they were still valid.
>
> Booting the machine from the BartPE "Ultimate Boot CD 4 Windows", My
> Computer lists Drive C: as "RAW File system" Free / used 0 bytes, and
> it lists H: as a the valid HP_Recovery partition.
>
> None of the scandisk tools on the CD will recognize the partition.
>
> TestDisk:
> http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk
>
> Will recognize the partition as "HPFS-NTFS" with the proper volume
> name and recognized will recognize the recovery partition as "FAT32
> LBA".
>
> I tried running the "Repair MFT" and "Rebuild BS" options.
>
> Currently it lists "Boot sector Status: OK" and "Backup boot sector
> status: OK" "Sectors are identical"
>
> When i select Repair MFT it quickly flashes the message "Failed to
> open inode: Input/Output error."
> Offers to "Fix MFT mirror" I select yes, it responds "MFT mirror
> fixed"
>
> Going to "repair BS" it says "Use MFT from 786432, confirm?" I select
> yes
> "
> Sectors per cluster: 8
> MFT LCN 786432
> MFTMIRR LCN 16
> Mft record size: 1024
>
> filesystem size 470206422
> MFT LCN 786432
> MFTMIRR LCN 16
> Mft record size: 1024
> clusters_per_mft_record: -10 ???????
> Clusters_per_index_record 1
> Extrapolated boot sector and current boot sector are identical.
> "
> If I go into the list feature of TestDisk it will show me the correct
> file structure of the partition, and of the couple files I tried using
> the copy function on, they copied to the BartPE RAM drive correctly.
> However the partition will still not appear to be valid in BartPE or
> any other application, even after a reboot.
>
> Is there any other free recovery tools that might let me fix this semi
> corrupt NTFS partition?
>
It immediately found my boot sector problem and existing backup. I've tried other software from the web that looks great, but assures me there's no data in a 30 Gb partition I've used for years!
You can try the dtidata.com free partition repair tool.
If you format and reinstall the OS, all of your data will be gone. My bad partition is NOT the winxp partition.
Part of the problem you are having is that you are mixing terms. Terms
like 'partition', 'file system', and 'NTFS' are commonly and mistakenly
interchanged. Here is a quick way to look at them to keep it all
straight...
Partition - A box that contains a file system
File system - A method of storing files
NTFS - A type of file system
FAT - A type of file system
If your NTFS is showing up as RAW...that means you have a file system
issue, not a partition issue. So all the fixing that can be done with
Partition Magic or any other partition repair utility will not actually
help you.
You can try running a CHKDSK on your file system as it can fix some of the
issues that will prevent us from mounting a faulty NTFS. However, if that
doesn't help, you are most likely going to need to contact Microsoft or a
regular data recover company.
There are some file system recovery tools out there, but I can't make any
recommendations about them.
Hi, once i had a problem with a corrupted ntfs winxp partition, i could mount it in ubuntu(linux) but I couldn't read the files, I tried to recover windows instalation but it said that there was no format in that partition, so i used a vista disk and entered at the repair section, just asked to recover the disks and that was it, the instalation software from winxp recognized it again and I could recover my system succecsfully
if you don't have vista dvd you can find a cd that has just the recover part on google, try googlin "vista recovery" you should find it.
see ya, hope i could help and sorry for the bad english
The PC will not boot into recovery console from a Windows CD because
it doesn't recognize a valid file system on c:
This is a bit of a hack, but works (done it many times)
Turn off computer and unplug either the HDD power cable or otherwise disconnect it from the motherboard (I find for a SATA drive, unplugging cable from MB easiest).
Start computer with Windows CD in drive and when it starts to boot from when CD, ie us see the Blue screen listing the files currently loading at the bottom, plug the drive back in. (It will boot because it cannot even see your bad HDD)
You will then be able to use a recovery console for fixmbr etc... Sometimes this is all thats needed, and worth a first try, if not repeat the above and:
You will be able to enter the 'Install Windows' section, and format and reinstall windows. Usually if there is more than 1 partition, they still show, just with a RAW filesystem. Do a full format on the drive/partition you are installing windows on.
Getting the data back from a 2nd+ partition is another matter entirely, but can be done depending on a) what messed the filesystem up in the first place and b) If you have another drive to copy any 'undeleted' files to.
And look around for free software that can do this: its out there, and often not inferior to commercial offerings.
Edit: All this is good reason to ALWAYS partition your drive into 2 (or more logical drives). One that only contains ONLY the OS and some program files, put ALL your data (downloads, pics, music, docs whatever) onto the other partition. Then if you need to reformat/reinstall, you dont lose data. And we all know about 'Windows Bloat' som doing a reinstall every 6 months or so is nevver a bad thing and having 2 partitions makes this all so much easier. I dont mean this to infer you dont need to back up the 2nd 'Data' partition regularly to, but it certainly eases the process of reinstalling Windows. Just make sure you make the OS partition atlease 25 Gb.
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 04:24:48 -0500, AGage
<AGage.497gol@no.email.invalid> wrote:
> Edit: All this is good reason to ALWAYS partition your drive into 2 (or
> more logical drives). One that only contains ONLY the OS and some
> program files, put ALL your data (downloads, pics, music, docs whatever)
> onto the other partition. Then if you need to reformat/reinstall, you
> dont lose data.
I completely disagree. That's a very poor reason for putting your data
on a second partition.
It implies that you don't backup your data to external media. It
further implies that you think the need to reformat/reinstall is the
greatest risk to your data. But in fact the greatest risks are
entirely different. What you suggest leaves you susceptible to
simultaneous loss of the original and backup to many of the most
common dangers: hard drive crashes, severe power glitches, nearby
lightning strikes, virus attacks, even theft of the computer.
If your data is important to you, you need to institute a program of
regular backup, and that should be the way you protect your data.
Putting your data on a second partition is a good thing to do for
*some* people, but not for the reason you state.
> And we all know about 'Windows Bloat' som doing a
> reinstall every 6 months or so is nevver a bad thing
I completely disagree with this too. The only people who need to do
that--even if much less often than every six months--are those people
who do a poor job of maintaining and protecting their systems. With a
modicum of care, it should never be necessary to reinstall Windows (XP
or any other version). I've run Windows 3.0, 3.1, WFWG 3.11, Windows
95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, and now
Windows 7, each for the period of time before the next version came
out, and each on two or more machines here. I never reinstalled any of
them, and I have never had anything more than an occasional minor
problem.
Reinstalling may not be a bad thing but it's unnecessary and it's
typically a great deal of work, if you've invested any time in
configuring Windows and your applications the way you want them.
> and having 2
> partitions makes this all so much easier. I dont mean this to infer you
> dont need to back up the 2nd 'Data' partition regularly to,
On the contrary, that's exactly what your statement above ("Then if
you need to reformat/reinstall, you dont lose data") implies. With a
good program of backup in place, even if you do need to
reformat/reinstall, you don't lose data.
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Well Ken,
I agree with Agage, & disagree with a number of your assertions.
1. For the reasons Agage outlines, It IS a good idea to have a seperate DATA partition.
I have worked on hundreds & hundreds of client sites & seen this as a standard procedure in a number of large-scale companies. More to the point, I have seen the BENEFITS of this policy - as outlined by Agage - dozens of times. Of equal import, is the fact that I have never seen any downside to this policy.
So, let's review:
There is no downside & a number of upsides.
Explain again, on what basis you disagree with a standard practice of seperate partitions of OS & Data????
2. Ken: 'Tt implies that you don't backup your data to external media. It
further implies that you think the need to reformat/reinstall is the
greatest risk to your data.'
Neither of these assertions have any logical foundation, and are unfounded at best, and fatuous, at worst!!! How a person decides to arrange their filesystem has noimpact whatsoever on what sort of data protection / backup policy they have. The two items are unrelated.
3. Ken: 'I completely disagree with this too. The only people who need to do
that--even if much less often than every six months--are those people
who do a poor job of maintaining and protecting their systems. With a
modicum of care, it should never be necessary to reinstall Windows (XP
or any other version). '
Firstly, Define a 'modicom of care'. At the moment, this is mere rhetoric.
Secondly, are you denying the existence of 'Windows Bloat'?!?!?!
How many service packs have there been to Windows XP & Vista?!?!?!
To state that it 'should never be necessary to reinstall Windows' is patently absurd - I remember one Windows Update which wrecked the OS; there was a Microsoft Knowledge Base article which RECOMMENDED reinstalling the Operating System. Let me repeat that: the MICROSOFT Knowledge Base article on the MICROSOFT WEBSITE RECOMMENDED reinstalling the Operating System.
Thirdly - although I am on slightly thinner ground here - Windows 98 used DOS & one great feature was the scanreg /fix command & switch - this enabled you to 'keep the registry "clean"' - there is no such utility provided by Microsoft. Ah, Onecare may be of assistance & Sysinternals' stuff is good... Let me clarify - there is no inbuilt registry health monitoring & repairing software. System Restore is a partial solution - but it does not optimise windows performance.
The vast majority of computer users are Windows users - myself included - but the fact that Micosroft are the pre-eminent OS provider does not alter the fact that they - on several occasions - released some very mediocre product - which had not gone through adequate Beta testing.
In addition, it seems the discussion has progressed away from that of the
original subject line of the thread to that of registry health....
I just wanted to make an observation / comment on that point....
Win98's Scanreg.exe (& scanregw.exe) worked well as a daily registry backup
& restore utility.
However, when it came to using the "optimize" and "fix" options, I found it
to be highly destructive to the registry, often leaving Windows unbootable!
When it comes to the registry, most usernet users seem to believe that
registry "bloat" is a myth and that reg-cleaner utilities are, at best, all
so much (and I quote) "snake oil" !!
But, as with Win98, the NT-based registry (NT4, 2K, XP, Vista & Win7) does
need to be backed-up and, as you pointed out, there is no equivalent to
[Scanreg.exe] in XP.
But, with a little searching and re-searching, it's relatively easy to
learn where the NT-based registry is physically distributed and how to make
back-ups of those files that make it up.
One [free] utility that teaches you about how to do this, by understanding
it's operation, is ERUNT.exe(#1) (google : "ERUNT download").
On XP registry maintenance ; there is little that any responsible PC
advisor can say, as anyone using a commercial reg-cleaning app puts the
working functionality of their system at risk by using one.
Personally I do believe in the progressive handicap of the ongoing increase
in registry sizes due to installing then uninstalling applications that
then don't bother to clean their many reg-entries on departure.
Though I have found the old Win98 [regclean.exe] program(#2) still works
with XP and has been very useful in trawling for truly orphaned registry
entries. I have, to date, not seen it ever try to delete any currently
valid reg-values.
"glks" <glks.4o5ou8@no.email.invalid> wrote in message
news:glks.4o5ou8@no.email.invalid...
>
> Well Ken,
> I agree with Agage, & disagree with a number of your assertions.
>
> 1. For the reasons Agage outlines, It IS a good idea to have a seperate
> DATA partition.
> I have worked on hundreds & hundreds of client sites & seen this as a
> standard procedure in a number of large-scale companies. More to the
> point, I have seen the BENEFITS of this policy - as outlined by Agage -
> dozens of times. Of equal import, is the fact that I have never seen any
> downside to this policy.
> So, let's review:
> There is no downside & a number of upsides.
>
> Explain again, on what basis you disagree with a standard practice of
> seperate partitions of OS & Data????
>
> 2. Ken: 'Tt implies that you don't backup your data to external media.
> It
> further implies that you think the need to reformat/reinstall is the
> greatest risk to your data.'
>
> Neither of these assertions have any logical foundation, and are
> unfounded at best, and fatuous, at worst!!! How a person decides to
> arrange their filesystem has noimpact whatsoever on what sort of data
> protection / backup policy they have. The two items are unrelated.
>
> 3. Ken: 'I completely disagree with this too. The only people who need
> to do
> that--even if much less often than every six months--are those people
> who do a poor job of maintaining and protecting their systems. With a
> modicum of care, it should never be necessary to reinstall Windows (XP
> or any other version). '
>
> Firstly, Define a 'modicom of care'. At the moment, this is mere
> rhetoric.
> Secondly, are you denying the existence of 'Windows Bloat'?!?!?!
> How many service packs have there been to Windows XP & Vista?!?!?!
>
> To state that it 'should never be necessary to reinstall Windows' is
> patently absurd - I remember one Windows Update which wrecked the OS;
> there was a Microsoft Knowledge Base article which RECOMMENDED
> reinstalling the Operating System. Let me repeat that: the MICROSOFT
> Knowledge Base article on the MICROSOFT WEBSITE RECOMMENDED reinstalling
> the Operating System.
>
> Thirdly - although I am on slightly thinner ground here - Windows 98
> used DOS & one great feature was the scanreg /fix command & switch -
> this enabled you to 'keep the registry "clean"' - there is no such
> utility provided by Microsoft. Ah, Onecare may be of assistance &
> Sysinternals' stuff is good... Let me clarify - there is no inbuilt
> registry health monitoring & repairing software. System Restore is a
> partial solution - but it does not optimise windows performance.
>
> The vast majority of computer users are Windows users - myself included
> - but the fact that Micosroft are the pre-eminent OS provider does not
> alter the fact that they - on several occasions - released some very
> mediocre product - which had not gone through adequate Beta testing.
>
> Remember Windows Vista?!
>
> GLKS
>
>
Fix corrupt NTFS partition? 
Linear Mode
