From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_05C6_01C5293F.0E2D85B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   I have a couple of guesses.

   If the 80GB was slave then switching it to master and adding a second =
drive would change the BIOS drive assignment and the only way to keep = the
original assignment would be to keep the 80GB as slave.  With the = 80GB as
slave and any drive as master, this too could change the BIOS = drive
assignment.

   With both connected with the 40GB as master and the 80GB as slave, =
the BIOS might try to boot from the 40GB which I would not expect to = work
by default as the 40GB isn't bootable.  If this is the case I would = look
for a BIOS setting to control the drive from which it boots.  Some = BIOSes
have this.

   If the 80GB was not slave originally then what I suggest above =
doesn't make sense.

   There can also be an issue with multiple primary partitions that can =
be resolved by deleting any partitions on the 40GB and creating an =
extended partition with a logical drive.

Rich

  "Glenn Meadows"  wrote in message =
news:4236e8b8$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  I'm not 100% sure of the sequence of events Rich on this one, only got =

  called because things were/are screwed up.

  When I got there, and how things are now, there are 2 drives, and 80 =
gig and=20
  a 40 gig.  The 80 gig is set as MASTER, and the 40 gig as Slave on the =

  primary controller.  They are properly recognized as such in the Bios. =
 The=20
  80 gig WAS the original ONLY disk in the system, it has ONLY one =
partition=20
  (that I'm aware of, it's an eMachine and I don't believe that they use =
a=20
  hidden recovery partition), and it would logically be the Primary =
partition.=20
  The 40 Gig was an older drive that was in their prior eMachine that =
the MB=20
  got whacked (I'm not so sure the HD is good, but that's another =
speculation=20
  at this point).

  Daniel (teen ager who got into this mess) had just successfully =
finished=20
  installing a second Optical drive, a DVDR drive, as the Secondary =
Slave, and=20
  that works OK, shows up as drive E.  Then he figured it would be cool =
to=20
  have the other 40 gig as a second drive in the system.  What is =
unclear=20
  here, is how he might have configured the jumpers on the drives (if he =
had=20
  them in CS position, or not, he doesn't remember).  But, when he got =
the=20
  drive installed, and the system booted, he then had a C, D, E, and F.  =
He=20
  also started getting startup errors about programs not being able to =
be=20
  found on C, that normally started when he logged on (Anti-Virus, and=20
  programs that were installed didn't run (Icons were back to generic, =
and of=20
  course were looking to C to run).  What triggered his brain to STOP =
and ask=20
  questions, is that when he looked at the sizes of the drives, the 40 =
gig=20
  drive was showing up as C, and the 80 gig was now F.  If he then=20
  disconnected the second drive (40 gig), and only had the original =
drive=20
  powered and connected, Windows would go to where the normal login =
"Welcome"=20
  screen would be, but just a small Windows Logo would be there, and the =
logon=20
  screen would never come up.  So, right now, to get the system to boot, =
you=20
  need BOTH drives connected, BUT the two drives are reversed in how the =
OS is=20
  treating them. (I looked long and hard at the bios, and the drives are =

  showing up there in their proper order as Master and Slave).



  --=20

  Glenn M.
  "Rich"  wrote in message news:42366d6b$1{at}w3.nls.net...
     The BIOS is responsible for the identity of the drives.  What is =
unclear=20
  is the order of events here.

     Did the second drive get added them removed from a Windows =
installation=20
  that occured when there was only one drive?

     Was the configuration of the one drive identical before the second =
drive=20
  was added and after the second drive was removed?

  Rich

    "Glenn Meadows"  wrote in message=20
  news:42364da5{at}w3.nls.net...
    OK, WHY does this happen, I've seen it before, don't understand what
    actually causes this to happen.

    A friends child (14) decided to add a second HD to his XPPro =
install, from
    an old computer that they had.

    Somehow, he got the jumpers/connectors bolloxed up, and when the =
system=20
  came
    up and booted, but the drive letters were now swapped.  Even though =
the
    original disk was still Primary master, and the second drive was =
Primary
    Slave, the C drive, was actually the slave drive, and the original =
drive=20
  was
    now listed as drive F. (D and E are CD and DVD-R drive).

    If you remove the second HD, and try to boot the system, it starts =
to=20
  boot,
    then ends up at a Blue Screen (not the BSOD, but a graphical screen =
with=20
  the
    Windows Logo) and never boots.  Both drives have to be connected for =
the
    system to boot, but of course, anything that is in the registry as =
needing
    to start from C, won't start, since it's really on F.

    And, of course, the eMachine ONLY provides a Restore/Nuke CD
    (format/re-install is the only option).

    I believe that the solution is to remove the second HD, boot from a =
real
    WindowsXP CD, go to the Recovery Console, and do a FIXMBR command, =
in that
    the MBR on the primary HD is now farkled.

    But WHY does this happen?  Boot.ini looks correct (there's a =
boot.ini on
    both HD's, btw, from the old computer, which was an XPHome install).

    --=20

    Glenn M.



------=_NextPart_000_05C6_01C5293F.0E2D85B0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   I have a
couple of=20
guesses.
 
   If the
80GB was slave then =
switching=20
it to master and adding a second drive would change the BIOS drive = assignment=20
and the only way to keep the original assignment would be to keep the = 80GB as=20
slave.  With the 80GB as slave and any drive as master, this too = could=20
change the BIOS drive assignment.
 
   With both
connected with =
the 40GB as=20
master and the 80GB as slave, the BIOS might try to boot from the 40GB = which I=20
would not expect to work by default as the 40GB isn't bootable. 
If = this is=20
the case I would look for a BIOS setting to control the drive from which = it=20
boots.  Some BIOSes have this.
 
   If the
80GB was not slave =
originally=20
then what I suggest above doesn't make sense.
 
   There can
also be an issue =
with=20
multiple primary partitions that can be resolved by deleting any = partitions on=20
the 40GB and creating an extended partition with a logical =
drive.
 
Rich
 

  "Glenn Meadows" <gmeadow{at}comcast.net>">mailto:gmeadow{at}comcast.net">gmeadow{at}comcast.net>
wrote =
in message=20
  news:4236e8b8$1{at}w3.nls.net...I'm=20
  not 100% sure of the sequence of events Rich on this one, only got =
called=20
  because things were/are screwed up.When I got there, and how =
things=20
  are now, there are 2 drives, and 80 gig and a 40 gig.  The 80 =
gig is=20
  set as MASTER, and the 40 gig as Slave on the primary =
controller. =20
  They are properly recognized as such in the Bios.  The 80 gig =
WAS the=20
  original ONLY disk in the system, it has ONLY one partition (that =
I'm=20
  aware of, it's an eMachine and I don't believe that they use a =
hidden=20
  recovery partition), and it would logically be the Primary partition. =
The=20
  40 Gig was an older drive that was in their prior eMachine that the MB =
got=20
  whacked (I'm not so sure the HD is good, but that's another =
speculation at=20
  this point).Daniel (teen ager who got into this mess)
had just =

  successfully finished installing a second Optical drive, a DVDR =
drive, as=20
  the Secondary Slave, and that works OK, shows up as drive E.  =
Then he=20
  figured it would be cool to have the other 40 gig as a second =
drive in the=20
  system.  What is unclear here, is how he might have =
configured the=20
  jumpers on the drives (if he had them in CS position, or not, he =
doesn't=20
  remember).  But, when he got the drive installed, and the =
system=20
  booted, he then had a C, D, E, and F.  He also started =
getting=20
  startup errors about programs not being able to be found on C, =
that=20
  normally started when he logged on (Anti-Virus, and programs that =
were=20
  installed didn't run (Icons were back to generic, and of course =
were=20
  looking to C to run).  What triggered his brain to STOP and ask=20
  questions, is that when he looked at the sizes of the drives, the =
40 gig=20
  drive was showing up as C, and the 80 gig was now F.  If he =
then=20
  disconnected the second drive (40 gig), and only had the original =
drive=20
  powered and connected, Windows would go to where the normal login=20
  "Welcome" screen would be, but just a small Windows
Logo would be =
there,=20
  and the logon screen would never come up.  So, right now, to =
get the=20
  system to boot, you need BOTH drives connected, BUT the two drives =
are=20
  reversed in how the OS is treating them. (I looked long and hard =
at the=20
  bios, and the drives are showing up there in their proper order as =
Master=20
  and Slave).--
Glenn M."Rich" <{at}> =
wrote in=20
  message news:42366d6b$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
  =20
  The BIOS is responsible for the identity of the drives.  What is =
unclear=20
  is the order of events
here.   Did the second =
drive get=20
  added them removed from a Windows installation that occured when =
there was=20
  only one drive?   Was the
configuration of the one =
drive=20
  identical before the second drive was added and after the second =
drive was=20
  removed?Rich 
"Glenn Meadows" <gmeadow{at}comcast.net>">mailto:gmeadow{at}comcast.net">gmeadow{at}comcast.net>
wrote =
in message=20
  news:42364da5{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; OK,=20
  WHY does this happen, I've seen it before, don't understand =
what =20
  actually causes this to happen.  A friends
child (14) =
decided to=20
  add a second HD to his XPPro install, from  an old computer =
that they=20
  had.  Somehow, he got the jumpers/connectors
bolloxed up, =
and=20
  when the system came  up and booted, but the drive =
letters were=20
  now swapped.  Even though the  original disk
was still =
Primary=20
  master, and the second drive was Primary  Slave, the C drive, =
was=20
  actually the slave drive, and the original drive
was  now =
listed=20
  as drive F. (D and E are CD and DVD-R
drive).  If you =
remove the=20
  second HD, and try to boot the system, it starts to =
boot,  then=20
  ends up at a Blue Screen (not the BSOD, but a graphical screen with=20
  the  Windows Logo) and never
boots.  Both drives =
have to be=20
  connected for the  system to boot, but of course, anything =
that is in=20
  the registry as needing  to start from C, won't start, since =
it's=20
  really on F.  And, of course, the eMachine
ONLY provides =
a=20
  Restore/Nuke CD  (format/re-install is the only=20
  option).  I believe that the solution is to
remove the =
second HD,=20
  boot from a real  WindowsXP CD, go to the Recovery Console, =
and do a=20
  FIXMBR command, in that  the MBR on the primary HD is now=20
  farkled.  But WHY does this
happen?  Boot.ini looks =
correct=20
  (there's a boot.ini on  both HD's, btw, from the old =
computer, which=20
  was an XPHome install).  --
  Glenn=20
M.

------=_NextPart_000_05C6_01C5293F.0E2D85B0--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5