LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 08-18-2010, 06:15 AM   #46
saikee
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Distribution: Any free distro.
Posts: 3,398
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 112Reputation: 112

Brains,

The OP is hoping to get to a bootable situation so that the XP can tell him to do a re-activation. The old Xp is not bootable probably due to the way it has been transferred.

If a user migrate the Xp to another PC he/she should only run one system and use the old disk as a back up to comply with the license agreement.

toothandnail,

The OP would not have a problem with the boot files had he/she cloned the whole disk. Not having the boot files and the Xp in the wrong partition are among many things that the Windows has not been properly transferred. The boot files can be rebuilt and even put inside a floppy but Xp must be able to boot to its original drive letter.
 
Old 08-18-2010, 08:07 AM   #47
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 12,542
Blog Entries: 23

Rep: Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943
Hi,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brains View Post
Ummm!
Am I missing something here?
As I see it, you can take an image of Windows 98 and stick it in another system and the OS will replace drivers as needed and boot up. Win XP will not let you do that. Win XP WPA (Windows Product Activation), looks at ten particulars, if three or more change, you need to reactivate and possibly shoot the s.it with a MS representative to try a "wiggle around", and get it activated legally.
I've taken similar models of OEM boxes and transfered a legal XP installation from one to the other by playing with certain hardware components and re-activating, in the end, I end up with two legal installations. BITE ME!.
If your desktop does not have the same components as your laptop, your wasting your time.
Not legal copies. If you own one license then copy to another system while the previous install is valid or operational then the second copy is not legal. If you con a representative or lie to get activation then you have broken the license & the law thus the copy is not legal. I won't bite you but if caught then M$ may take you to court legally & rightful in doing so.

To boast here on LQ of violations openly is not right;

Quote:
excerpt from LQ Rules;

Do not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.
 
Old 08-18-2010, 08:26 AM   #48
saikee
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Distribution: Any free distro.
Posts: 3,398
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 112Reputation: 112
This is exactly what will happen if a Xp user migrates an existing system from one PC to anther.

I have an office Dell D620 laptop from work which I back up to a spare 2.5" hard disk. I have never had a need to boot this backup hard disk except I know it would boot because I used dd to do the cloning. I put this 2.5" disk into a 2.5"-to-3.5" caddy, selected a desktop PC which has a i7-920 quad core CPU and 6Mb ram (so that it is radically different from the Dell laptop), removed its internal disk and inserted the caddy inside. My PC uses mobile racks with which I can freely insert a bare hard disk. To avoid MS messing around with the installed Xp professional version I unplugged the network cable so that my PC had no connection to the Internet. Therefore without access to the Internet my Xp would not get activated accidentally as I am only testing the Xp's behaviour here.

When the PC has been powered up I got the usual Xp booting screen with the bottom bar showing progress.

The Xp then carried the startup script my office had previously installed in every computer (I am using only the back up hard disk in another computer).

It finally reaches the screen asking me to "ctrl+alt+Delete" to begin. I duly complied and entered my office password.

Then the screen display this message

Quote:
This copy of Windows must be activated with Microsoft before you can log on.

Do you want to activate Windows now?
If I choose "no" Xp takes me back to the "ctrl+alt+Delete" to begin and I would be going round an endless loop.

If I choose "yes" I got 3 choices from Xp

(1) Activate over the Internet
(2) Telephone Microsoft Customer Service (to get a long confirmation ID number for activate it myself)
(3) log off

Conclusions

(A) There is no possibility of using my Xp on a different computer without doing a activation and transferring my existing Xp installation to a new PC. Once the XP is activated with the new PC the old installation should not be used as it would contravene with the licensing agreemet.

(B) The XP, or a 100% cloned copy of it, should always boot in the new PC because Xp needs to tell its owner what to do.


One can create a 100% clone of any hard disk sda in another hard disk sdb by the simple command in any Linux terminal
Code:
dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/sdb
and observe the following rules

(i) The targer disk sdb must be eactly the same size(with exact number of sectors and same geometry) or just larger
(ii) A higher speed of cloning is possible with add ing the parameter "bs=32256".
(iii) If the source disk has bad sectors which can terminate dd the adding parameter "noerror" can force dd to continue regardless.
(iv) The source disk is always read and does not change but the target disk is always written and the change is irreversible. Must get this absolutely right! If you can't mnaster this bit then dd can be dangerous for you.

Last edited by saikee; 08-18-2010 at 08:43 AM.
 
Old 08-18-2010, 09:16 AM   #49
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 12,542
Blog Entries: 23

Rep: Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943Reputation: 1943
Hi,

saikee, you are following good practices in that way. You are not running activated single license copies on multiple machines. Brains, admittedly said that he had activated by mischievous methods and boasted as such. Single use means that one single copy to be run actively on the installed machine or may be transferred to another. No concurrency.

 
Old 08-18-2010, 09:46 AM   #50
saikee
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Distribution: Any free distro.
Posts: 3,398
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 112Reputation: 112
Any user running an illegal MS Windows can do only serious damage to his/her work because MS knows every unlicensed Windows as soon as it is using the Internet. An unlicensed operating system will not get the protection from the MS and could suddenly drop dead and the owner would have no idea why. The owner wastes more time and money in salvaging the personal data.

A licensed copy of OS is guaranteed by the vendor and the user can enjoy the regular updates provided.

If a user operates both the activated and the backup copies of the same Xp he/she stands to lose both systems. Is this worthwhile?
 
Old 08-19-2010, 01:37 AM   #51
mowley
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 30

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by toothandnail View Post
In my experience, Windows XP requires at least basic boot files on the first primary partition of the system. While it can be 'installed' to other partitions, it will always look for boot data from that first primary partition. I would be suprised if you are able to boot it without moving it to (hd0,0).Paul.
I started this thread with a question about dual-booting Linux and Windows XP, but I think I have made it clear that I have since been transferring Windows to a single previously empty drive with the system drive (C) in the first partition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saikee View Post
(iv) The source disk is always read and does not change but the target disk is always written and the change is irreversible. Must get this absolutely right! If you can't mnaster this bit then dd can be dangerous for you.
Saikee,
Please explain what is irreversible. What is the danger? Choosing the wrong target disk?
Quote:
Originally Posted by saikee View Post
Brains,

The OP is hoping to get to a bootable situation so that the XP can tell him to do a re-activation. The old Xp is not bootable probably due to the way it has been transferred.

If a user migrate the Xp to another PC he/she should only run one system and use the old disk as a back up to comply with the license agreement.

toothandnail,

The OP would not have a problem with the boot files had he/she cloned the whole disk..........................................
Saikee,
My intention was to use only one of the two systems and to keep the other as a backup disk until the original hard drive fails.
N.B.
I believe I DID clone the whole disk (3 partitions!) using dd as I wrote in post #38 and in other replies. If you do not accept that I did, could you please say why the transferred system is not a 100% replacement? I expect you will say it is because it will not boot (except in Safe Mode) with System files in the first partition of a single drive in another machine, but could there not be other causes for this?
I take it you also believe that validation immediately after creating a backup by a third-party program (such as Acronis) is unreliable, and that the only valid test is successful booting in the same machine where it was created with either dd or Acronis.
I have learned a lot from all the replies, but I have obviously stirred up controversy. Unless someone can recommend doing something different which might succeed (e.g., buy another 2.5" laptop disk to clone to via an external USB HDD) I will accept that what I am trying to do is not possible and not recommended.
 
Old 08-19-2010, 03:27 AM   #52
saikee
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Distribution: Any free distro.
Posts: 3,398
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 112Reputation: 112
mowley,

My post was not directed to you but echo onebuck's sentiment mainly.

In my opinion the most important part of using dd is to know which is the disk to be read and which disk to be written. If that is reversed that you can destroy the very data you want to save. Say if you buy a new hard disk and specify it as the source to mistakenly copy its content onto the original disk then you end up two blank disks in the end! This cannot happen if you use a file copying command but dd copies only the binary bits and doesn't know or care about the hard disk content.

I accept you are doing everything you can but something has gone wrong in your steps. My post #48, of using a bootable Xp in one computer and place it inside another computer, is exactly the task you are performing but it shows a different behaviour.

Perhaps you can post the results of "fdisk -l" here showing the geometries of the original disk and the cloned disk.

Last edited by saikee; 08-19-2010 at 03:30 AM.
 
Old 08-23-2010, 03:00 AM   #53
mowley
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 30

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by saikee View Post
mowley,
I accept you are doing everything you can but something has gone wrong in your steps. My post #48, of using a bootable Xp in one computer and place it inside another computer, is exactly the task you are performing but it shows a different behaviour.
Perhaps you can post the results of "fdisk -l" here showing the geometries of the original disk and the cloned disk.
Saikee,
Here is the info you asked for ( not able to save screenshots):
Source Disk(unchanged from 15/08/2010)
22/08/2010 fdisk –l
Disk /dev/sda: 60.0 GB, 60011642880 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 7296 cylinders
Units=cylinders of 16065*512=8225280bytes
Disk identifier: 0x3ec53ec4
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 + 1 3314 26619673+ 7 NTFS
/dev/sda2 5671 6013 2755147+ 1c HiddenW95Fat32(LBA)
/dev/sda3 6014 7295 10297665 c W95 Fat32LBA)

Target disk
(changed from 15/08/2010)
*2nd transfer to Target disk with dd 0n 18/08 set New Volume as Extended
22/08/2010, fdisk –l
Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862106 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
Units=cylinders of 16065*512=8225280bytes
Disk identifier: 0x3ec53ec4
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 + 1 3314 26619673+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sda2 6014 6013 2755147+ 1c Hidden W95Fat32 (LBA)
/dev/sda3 6014 7296 10305697 f W95 Ext’d(LBA)
/dev/sda5 6014 7296 10305666 b W95 Fat32

Drive Letter change: I notice that "New Volume" (Previously Primary, Drive E) now has become Drive D; HDD Recovery is Hidden.

Also, similar info from GParted:
Source Disk:
Gparted partition list 15/08/2010 before system transfer with dd
Device File system Name Size Unused
/dev/sda1 NTFS Fixed disk 25.39GB 2.23GB boot
Unallocated 18.05GB
/dev/sda2 Fat32 HDD Recovery 2.63GB 198.27MB Hidden, lba
/dev/sda3 Fat32 New Volume 9.83GB 1.70GB lba
Unallocated 7.84GB

Target disk:
Partition list inspected (but not saved) recorded as identical to above immediately after 1st transfer with dd
*2nd transfer to Target disk with dd 0n 18/08 set New Volume as Extended
Target disk Gparted partition list 22/08/2010
Device File system Name Size Unused
/dev/sda1 NTFS Fixed disk 25.39GB 1.59GB boot
Unallocated 18.05GB
/dev/sda2 Fat 32 HDD Recovery 2.63GB 198.27MB Hidden, lba
/dev/sda3 Extended 9.83GB lba
/dev/sda5 Fat32 New volume 9.83GB 1.70GB
Unallocated 409.87GB
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
dual boot fedora & vista - boot error - "GRUB loading stage 2" ans Fedora 1 08-20-2007 04:35 AM
Constant "Resolving host" on linux dual boot system fof3 Linux - Networking 10 07-05-2007 03:20 PM
Grub/Dual boot - Windows partition restored via dd won't boot pazzport Ubuntu 1 01-06-2006 02:29 PM
Dual-boot install: "Could not find kernel image: linux / boot:" JEBBEDIAH C Linux - Newbie 16 02-02-2005 09:25 PM
I Dual Boot, Is there Compatable "Drive imaging" that works with linux joncolby Linux - Software 6 06-21-2004 04:11 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:11 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration