Island_Boy_77
September 7th, 2006, 00:32 AM
Hi all
After having a scout about the internet for information on this very annoying problem, I am no further along than when I started. I am working on a clean install for a friend. As part of clean installs, I like to make sure that the check disk procedure (scheduled from within windows) is working properly. On this computer, which ONLY has basic SP2 (no patches yet) and drivers loaded, on an SiS-based motherboard with Sempron 2200 and 40GB Seagate HDD, when the computer restarts after going thru the check disk implementation (i.e. My Computer -> Right-click on C: -> Properties -> Tools -> Check Now -> Check both options -> Yes), as soon as the checking procedure starts it cancels. Now here's the interesting bit: if I boot onto the XP Pro SP2 install CD and go into the Recovery Console, I can run chkdsk to my heart's content! Not only that, but (this being the 2nd clean install on this machine in 2 days) each time I run chkdsk from the Recovery Console (using either /P or /R), chkdsk finds and fixes errors on 2 passes, then is clear on the 3rd. One might be forgiven for thinking that that would sort things for the windows-based version, but it doesn't.
The first time this happened on my P4 2.8, I was able to clear things up by going into the recovery console and running chkdsk from there. After that, the windows chkdsk worked as expected.
After the 1st clean install on this Sempron-based system, I noted that (using TuffTest Pro) there was an error on the HDD. So, I did a zero-fill of the whole drive, reformatted and did the 2nd clean install. I was figuring that if there was a REAL bung sector (not just one that needed a zero-fill), that this might be throwing the windows version of chkdsk off it's stride. Since the zero-fill fixed the "sector" problem, that doesn't seem to be the case.
What do you think? The system operates fine, and I can even run boot-time defrags with PerfectDisk (as well as manual chkdsk's thru Recovery Console) - still, it is a problem that needs to be sorted.
Thanks
Peter
:confused:
After having a scout about the internet for information on this very annoying problem, I am no further along than when I started. I am working on a clean install for a friend. As part of clean installs, I like to make sure that the check disk procedure (scheduled from within windows) is working properly. On this computer, which ONLY has basic SP2 (no patches yet) and drivers loaded, on an SiS-based motherboard with Sempron 2200 and 40GB Seagate HDD, when the computer restarts after going thru the check disk implementation (i.e. My Computer -> Right-click on C: -> Properties -> Tools -> Check Now -> Check both options -> Yes), as soon as the checking procedure starts it cancels. Now here's the interesting bit: if I boot onto the XP Pro SP2 install CD and go into the Recovery Console, I can run chkdsk to my heart's content! Not only that, but (this being the 2nd clean install on this machine in 2 days) each time I run chkdsk from the Recovery Console (using either /P or /R), chkdsk finds and fixes errors on 2 passes, then is clear on the 3rd. One might be forgiven for thinking that that would sort things for the windows-based version, but it doesn't.
The first time this happened on my P4 2.8, I was able to clear things up by going into the recovery console and running chkdsk from there. After that, the windows chkdsk worked as expected.
After the 1st clean install on this Sempron-based system, I noted that (using TuffTest Pro) there was an error on the HDD. So, I did a zero-fill of the whole drive, reformatted and did the 2nd clean install. I was figuring that if there was a REAL bung sector (not just one that needed a zero-fill), that this might be throwing the windows version of chkdsk off it's stride. Since the zero-fill fixed the "sector" problem, that doesn't seem to be the case.
What do you think? The system operates fine, and I can even run boot-time defrags with PerfectDisk (as well as manual chkdsk's thru Recovery Console) - still, it is a problem that needs to be sorted.
Thanks
Peter
:confused: