jaywallen

Shrink, Yeah, sorry I'm no help. I'm not too adventurous these days. I will keep an eye open, though, and I'll let you know if I come up with anything. Regards, Jim

Shrink, Sorry, but I've never considered doing that. I'm sure it's possible. You might do a search on the forum using the term "bootable CD" to see what turns up. Obviously you could create a bootable CD and place the standard ERD files on it, and you could go one better by actually copying all of the registry hives to the CD, too. But by the time you go this far, you're probably expending enough time and effort to just make "ghosting" a more viable alternative. 1/2 Baked, I hope to hear that you've found the patch and that things are looking up. Regards, Jim

Which OS? If Win9X, then I think it's USER.DAT and SYSTEM.DAT. If W2K, the registry consists of several hives: DEFAULT, SAM, SECURITY, SOFTWARE, SYSTEM, USERDIFF, and SYSTEM.ALT. Regards, Jim

Hi, This sounds like the SYSTEM hive of your registry is getting whacked as you shut the machine down. There are known issues with fast processors killing Windows 2000 while the controller is still trying to write the hive data back to the drive. Since I only work with slow systems, I don't know exactly where you'll find the patch, but I think it's hanging out at Microsoft, or perhaps Intel, somewhere. I've heard, but cannot confirm personally, that the patch just slows the shutdown process to the point where the hive doesn't get corrupted. Hope someone who actually knows about this will jump in here to help you. Regards, Jim Ooops! Forgot to answer your first question. Create an ERD by starting NTBACKUP from the Start | Run dialog. There's a "Emergency Repair Disk" button on the "Welcome" tab of the main program window. When you creae the disk, check the option to have Windows back up your registry to the repair directory. Doing a repair ain't the ticket, though. You should be able to get W2K to run for you without farkling itself. I'll keep my fingers crossed. Please post back with developments. [This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 06 February 2001).]

Very interesting. Naming conventions suggest caching of some type, don't they? I just took a quick look on TechNet and didn't find anything other than the folder's aforementioned use as the location for the encrypted file system's temporary files. But it obviously gets used under FAT32 as well. I'm trying not to be ambitious, but my curiosity may force me to do some research. Regards, Jim

CUViper: That's interesting. (I've never tried anything but NTFS under W2K.) But I know that the function I mentioned is at least one of the functions of this directory structure. I suppose it may have others as well. Or, perhaps, it's just sitting there in the FAT32 system like an appendix, a useless organ? Are you able to access the folder, or just see it? Mugen C: I wouldn't remove it. If you can get access to it, you might rename it. Seems safer. If something bad happens you can boot to the recovery console (if you have it installed) and rename it back. I run a dual boot W2K / W2K all NTFS system. When I'm booted up into one partition, I can access the folder in the OTHER partition, but not the same-named folder in the currently booted partition. I mean I can't even READ it logged in as Administrator with Adminstrator as System invoked. What file system are you using? If you click on the folder what happens? [This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 31 January 2001).]

SysInternals has a free utility called PageDefrag which will defrag the pagefile ("swap" file) and the registry hives at boot time. http://www.sysinternals.com/ O&O Defrag (shareware version) will also defrag the MFT and meta-data. http://www.oosoft.de/index-e.html Regards, Jim Regards, Jim

I believe the sole purpose of that directory structure is for the Encrypted File System to use as a sort of scratch pad where it stores temporary files during the encryption process and during the key ring creation process.

That's good news. Hope to hear that this condition continues. Regards, Jim

Pupstah, Yes, that's true. If you had the setting checked to reboot in response to a system failure, that's what it would do. Since you didn't mention a BSOD in your original message, I just took it for granted that you meant a reboot "out of the blue", so to speak. My bad. ;-) That type of random reboot is usually due to memory errors or power supply issues in my experience, hence my suggestion to back off on the clock speed. If you get a BSOD I'd like to see what it was. Also, have you checked the Event Viewer for error messages, just in case there's a hint of something in there that happens just before these BSODs? Sometimes you can get a clue from those logs. Regards, Jim

Pupstah, I wouldn't rule out overclocking just yet. I think W2K is much less tolerant of timing issues that arise out of overclocking than Win9X. Why don't you try running at "warp 1" in W2K and testing to see if the random reboot goes away. I know it's not what you want to hear, but I think it's the likely cause. I've seen eight overclocked dual-boot systems personally so far that ran Win9X or WinME flawlessly (or as flawlessly as those operating systems allow) but which either rebooted or blue-screened in W2K. (The BSODs were apparent driver failures that went away as soon as the overclocking ceased.) Regards, Jim

Glad I could be helpful. It's not something that happens often. Regards, Jim

Lars, The defragger that comes with W2K is a limited version of Executive Software's Diskeeper NT defragger. There are some types of files (page files, MFT, etc.) which it CANNOT defrag. The commercial version can defrag those files by performing what's called a boot-time defrag. But even it cannot defragment all Windows meta-data. I believe O&O Defrag can defrag everything, also Norton Speed Disk and Raxco's Perfect Disk. They all have advantages and disadvantages. And they all cost extra bucks. But you can download trial versions. I tried all of the ones I've mentioned, except for Speed Disk. I have attitude problems about Peter Norton and Symantec. But Microsoft also specifically states in the MSKB that the method Speed Disk uses (or perhaps used at one time?) for defragging the MFT on-the-fly is not a good thing. On the other hand many people swear by it, and it's reputed to be the fastest. Diskeeper NT has a lot of useful features, but it won't defrag all meta-data. I found Perfect Disk to be buggy on my system with some annoying interface issues. O&O Defrag has performed perfectly for me. YMMV. That's why downloading the demos and trying them is a good idea. WARNING: Install only ONE of these puppies at a time! Before proceeding to your next demo version, uninstall the previous, which should put you back to the standard W2K defragger. If you tell us the names of the fragmented files, we may be able to tell you whether or not it's normal for them to be fragmented. Regards, Jim

I use NetSwitcher to handle network settings for twelve locations on my notebook. It's here: http://www.netswitcher.com/ It's shareware (about $10). It's dead easy to use. Just set up a profile in W2K and tell NetSwitcher to save it. You can tell NetSwitcher to query you at shutdown time to see if you're going to a different locale. If you are, you just point to the right configuration, and the next time you boot the machine comes up prepared for that network. Symantec has a package called Mobile Essentials that does the same thing in a fancier way for several times the price. I've never bothered with it, but I know some people who like it. Hope this helps. Regards, Jim

Lars, What OS (NT4 / W2K) and what defragger are you running? What are the names of the fragmented files? Regards, Jim

Hi, Thomas. The "System Idle Process" in W2K isn't the same as a third party utility, and I doubt that it's a source of any trouble on your system. I also believe that it would be a "bad thing" to shut it down. I think it keeps track of available CPU cycles for the other processes. There should be one system idle process for each CPU in the system. I looks like you have another problem though. If you have a "setup.exe" running all the time that might mean that an installation process has failed to complete. That is something that needs to be taken care of right away because it a) may be contributing to your idle temp issue (What does the CPU column show beside setup.exe and beside System Idle Process?), and it will probably interfere with or prevent future software installations. It is probably not enough to kill it now because it will probably be restarted the next time you boot the system. Did you just install something? If you crank up REGEDT32.EXE and look in these keys HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnceEx HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Runonce do you see any entries. There should be none, unless you have the remainder of an installation pending. Have you seen any error messages about a failed or incomplete install? Regards, Jim

Yup. I only mentioned that method because miku said "any way other than using a program". As for me, I like my plain old Windows folders just the way they are. But then I'm a man of simple tastes. Regards, Jim

Hi, miku. There's a way, other than using a third party program. Don't know how useful it will be for your particular purposes, but you can find it at this link - http://www.pcforrest.freeserve.co.uk/driveico.htm Regards, Jim

Hi, Ralf! Seems like we hang out in a lot of the same places! You already know my opinion, so I'll just keep my yap shut! Regards, Jim

I'm afraid I'm clueless. If it's stuff that doesn't matter to the allocation scheme in MFT then I'd look at stuff like whether or not the 8.3 filename convention was turned off for the partition. I say "stuff like", but offhand I can't think of anything else to even consider. I would be willing to bet that, since the output text says that it's nothing to worry about, it probably really is nothing to worry about. After all, Windows is chock full of all sorts of dire warnings about stuff that doesn't matter for a hill of beans, in addition to all the warnings about the stuff that does matter. I've looked around for a while to see if I can find anything else about this chkdsk message, and I haven't found a blooming thing. Will be most interested to see if anything turns up. Regards, Jim

You're gonna love this. (I know that I would feel MUCH better if someone told me this.) Direct quote from Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional Resource Kit: ---- begin quote ---- Error Message: CHKDSK detected minor inconsistencies on the drive. Explanation: Chkdsk found file system inconsistencies on the volume which do not affect file system usage. User Action: No user action is needed. The inconsistencies can be safely ignored. ---- end quote ---- Cool, huh? If I saw that error I would hear a little voice screaming in the back of my skull, "Then why the H*LL did they even bother with the stupid error message???" And that's the ONLY information I could find about that error message ANYWHERE. I've never seen it before. Is the system W2K or NT4? FAT32 / FAT / NTFS? Do you see the error if you perform chkdsk /f /r or do you see it only with the /v switch? You've got me curious. Regards, Jim

Swedie: You're welcome! CUViper: Tee-hee! That's why we owe it to as many other users as possible to double-click on their Task Manager window when they ain't lookin'! (Serves 'em right for lookin' the other way when someone has physical access to their systems!) -- So ask me how I found out about it... Regards, Jim

I may be mistaken, but I would think that the risk of a PageDefrag read / write problem with the registry hives immediately following the running of chkdsk would be infinitesimal -- especially if the partition is NTFS. Anyway, hope you get it set up to your liking! Regards, Jim

You're welcome. BTW, have you actually seen PageDefrag causing errors? That would be most peculiar! I would definitely investigate that further because I'd think it would be indicative of registry corruption. Regards, Jim

Hi, Just start up your Task Manager. In the periphery of the window just double-click. (You probably got to this interface setting by accidentally double-clicking while you were trying to choose a tab. It's a toggle.) Hope this helps. Regards, Jim [ January 01, 2001: Message edited by: jaywallen ]