TheBressman
Member
Yep, build 34 worked an absolute charm ! Thanks so much for this great program.
[Download] Vista Hide 'n Seek BETA
- Thread starter mqudsi
- Start date
geoffp
Member
Build 35 worked a treat! I can confirm the following:
The missing boot.ini message on booting WindowsXP has gone (it reappeared after my last post - suspect that the apparent disappearance was an illusion due to the short time it flashed on the screen).
Logical drive F: is now hidden, with the other two logical drives on the extended partition remaining visible in WindowsXP.
Only remaining issue is the list of un-recognised partition table entry warnings caused by the Vista style partitioning - doesn't seem to create any problems, but is just rather messy!
I had not realised how good and easy to use the 're-run' screen would be - the 'workover' of build 35 on top of the original UAC enabled release installation was easy. Confess that I had been a little wary of removing and reinstalling, but I now see that HnS has this situation well covered.
The missing boot.ini message on booting WindowsXP has gone (it reappeared after my last post - suspect that the apparent disappearance was an illusion due to the short time it flashed on the screen).
Logical drive F: is now hidden, with the other two logical drives on the extended partition remaining visible in WindowsXP.
Only remaining issue is the list of un-recognised partition table entry warnings caused by the Vista style partitioning - doesn't seem to create any problems, but is just rather messy!
I had not realised how good and easy to use the 're-run' screen would be - the 'workover' of build 35 on top of the original UAC enabled release installation was easy. Confess that I had been a little wary of removing and reinstalling, but I now see that HnS has this situation well covered.
Last edited:
Sorry Guru,
Don't know what it is about my system that makes it such an excellent bug-finder for your code.
Geoff seemed very happy with b35 but I'm afraid it didn't work for me again.
I'd assume it was just a typo in the coding if Geoff hadn't said it worked for him, but this time it correctly tried to hide partition 4 instead of 3. It just got the disk wrong and tried to hide 1,0 and 1,4 instead of 0,0 and 0,4.
I "reset" out of the boot immediately it said "no such partition to hide" when I saw the 1,4 because I didn't want XP booting with the real partitions unhidden (that's the whole point of the exercise after all).
Then the Vista boot also failed for the same (or opposite) reason "no partition to unhide". But I used the inline boot edit (thanks for that btw) to correct the drive numbers and got back into Vista where I UnHnS'd and am back again with the 2 stage boot.
(thanks as well for the remembered tick in the new iReboot build - I kept meaning to ask for it but it suddenly appeared anyway)
Don't know what it is about my system that makes it such an excellent bug-finder for your code.
Geoff seemed very happy with b35 but I'm afraid it didn't work for me again.
I'd assume it was just a typo in the coding if Geoff hadn't said it worked for him, but this time it correctly tried to hide partition 4 instead of 3. It just got the disk wrong and tried to hide 1,0 and 1,4 instead of 0,0 and 0,4.
I "reset" out of the boot immediately it said "no such partition to hide" when I saw the 1,4 because I didn't want XP booting with the real partitions unhidden (that's the whole point of the exercise after all).
Then the Vista boot also failed for the same (or opposite) reason "no partition to unhide". But I used the inline boot edit (thanks for that btw) to correct the drive numbers and got back into Vista where I UnHnS'd and am back again with the 2 stage boot.
(thanks as well for the remembered tick in the new iReboot build - I kept meaning to ask for it but it suddenly appeared anyway)
OK, let me get this straight.
Build 33/34 hid the wrong extended partition number, but the right drive number.
Build no. 35 hid the right extended partition number, but on the wrong drive?
If so, it's probably a typo in the code afterall.. it's possible because I rewrote the whole section for identifying the driv and partition numbers in like 5 min. or so before uploading the build and rushing out.
If not.... I'll just have to dig a bit deeper. :\
Build 33/34 hid the wrong extended partition number, but the right drive number.
Build no. 35 hid the right extended partition number, but on the wrong drive?
If so, it's probably a typo in the code afterall.. it's possible because I rewrote the whole section for identifying the driv and partition numbers in like 5 min. or so before uploading the build and rushing out.
If not.... I'll just have to dig a bit deeper. :\
geoffp
Member
I thought it strange that b35 worked so well for me, but not for Terry. So had a look at my disk structure again, and was very surprised by why I found:
Disk 0 Primary (0,1) (0,2) (0,3)
Extended (0,4 (0,5) (0,6) (0,7))
Disk 1 Primary (1,1) (1,2) (1,3)
Disk 2 Primary (2,1)
Extended (2,2 (2,5) (2,6) (2,7))
The 'Vista hidden drives' are (0,1) (0,2) and (0,5). The XP boot drive is (2,1).
Disk 0 was partitioned by Vista and Disk 2 by WindowsXP. Why the Logical drives in the extended partition have acquired these numbers on disk 2 is very odd, for as far as I can remember the disk was partitioned without problem and no subsequent changes have been made. However I do have some dim recollection about logical drives in extended partitions always starting at 5 irrespective of the number of Primary partitions - this would fit the disk 2 structure, and it just happens that this is the natural sequence on disk 0.
Since the number sequence problem was on disk 0, I can see that the fix in b35 was right for me. Had it been on disk 2, failure and misery might have ensued...
Not sure if this helps, but I thought the additional data might be useful.
Disk 0 Primary (0,1) (0,2) (0,3)
Extended (0,4 (0,5) (0,6) (0,7))
Disk 1 Primary (1,1) (1,2) (1,3)
Disk 2 Primary (2,1)
Extended (2,2 (2,5) (2,6) (2,7))
The 'Vista hidden drives' are (0,1) (0,2) and (0,5). The XP boot drive is (2,1).
Disk 0 was partitioned by Vista and Disk 2 by WindowsXP. Why the Logical drives in the extended partition have acquired these numbers on disk 2 is very odd, for as far as I can remember the disk was partitioned without problem and no subsequent changes have been made. However I do have some dim recollection about logical drives in extended partitions always starting at 5 irrespective of the number of Primary partitions - this would fit the disk 2 structure, and it just happens that this is the natural sequence on disk 0.
Since the number sequence problem was on disk 0, I can see that the fix in b35 was right for me. Had it been on disk 2, failure and misery might have ensued...
Not sure if this helps, but I thought the additional data might be useful.
Last edited:
Just an update: I haven't given up on this... i actually didn't get a chance to work on it yet because after "rushing out of the house" that day to go (the equivalent of) out-of-state I was snowed out of my house..... Snow plows haven't yet cleared the 2 feet of snow on the only highway connecting the two regions 
Just a note. the discussion of Weather was moved to
Weather Discussion - The NeoSmart Forums
That way we can try and keep the HnS beta talk here.
Weather Discussion - The NeoSmart Forums
That way we can try and keep the HnS beta talk here.
New build coming
OK, I don't think I can get a more-convoluted hard-drive layout than this:
see this pic: The NeoSmart Forums
HnS configuration:
My (working) resulting C:\menu.lst:
I hope this works, because if it doesn't I have no idea what's wrong! :S
OK, I don't think I can get a more-convoluted hard-drive layout than this:
see this pic: The NeoSmart Forums
HnS configuration:
My (working) resulting C:\menu.lst:
Code:
# NeoSmart Technologies' Vista Hide 'n Seek Beta
# DO NOT MODIFY!!! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
timeout 30
default 0
title Microsoft Windows Vista
unhide (hd0,0)
unhide (hd1,4)
unhide (hd1,5)
unhide (hd0,4)
unhide (hd0,5)
find --set-root /BOOTMGR.HNS
makeactive
chainloader /BOOTMGR.HNS
boot
title Windows XP [XP 1 (F:\)]
hide (hd0,0)
hide (hd1,4)
hide (hd1,5)
hide (hd0,4)
hide (hd0,5)
rootnoverify (hd0,1)
chainloader /ntldr
makeactive
boot
title Windows XP [XP 2 (D:\)]
hide (hd0,0)
hide (hd1,4)
hide (hd1,5)
hide (hd0,4)
hide (hd0,5)
map (hd0) (hd1)
map (hd1) (hd0)
rootnoverify (hd1,0)
chainloader /ntldr
makeactive
boot
# All your boot are belong to NeoSmart!I hope this works, because if it doesn't I have no idea what's wrong! :S
Attachments
You guys really make life complicated...is it really so important to split up page file, system files, data etc.??
I guess I'm old fashioned and will have to learn a few things, especially when I buy a new computer.
I've been avoiding the subject of RAID as I don't know the first thing about it, except that the drivers have to be installed before the system or all hell breaks loose....or something like that.
I guess I'm old fashioned and will have to learn a few things, especially when I buy a new computer.
I've been avoiding the subject of RAID as I don't know the first thing about it, except that the drivers have to be installed before the system or all hell breaks loose....or something like that.
Sorry Guru,
You're not going to like this !
Build 36 identical to 35 - still mistakes disk 0 for disk 1
For what it's worth, my Disk 1 (G:\) is my old IDE 120Gb that used to be XP on the previous system but is now pagefile and backup
All other partitions C D H (E F) are on a SATA 500Gb HDD (in that order)
Is it the mix of SATA and IDE that is confusing HnS ? (though I don't know why it got the numbers right in builds prior to 35 ?)
You're not going to like this !
Build 36 identical to 35 - still mistakes disk 0 for disk 1
For what it's worth, my Disk 1 (G:\) is my old IDE 120Gb that used to be XP on the previous system but is now pagefile and backup
All other partitions C D H (E F) are on a SATA 500Gb HDD (in that order)
Is it the mix of SATA and IDE that is confusing HnS ? (though I don't know why it got the numbers right in builds prior to 35 ?)
OK, can you please run the attached file in a command prompt and let me know if it gives the right order?
Sample Output:
Sample Output:
Code:
C:\Users\NeoSmart\Desktop>"Drive Grabber.exe"
\\.\PHYSICALDRIVE0
Disk #0, Partition #0
C:
Disk #0, Partition #1
F:
Disk #0, Partition #2
I: - GRUB partition #4
J: - GRUB partition #5
\\.\PHYSICALDRIVE1
Disk #1, Partition #0
D:
Disk #1, Partition #1
E: - GRUB partition #4
H: - GRUB partition #5Guru,
How do I get the command prompt window to stay open long enough to read the result ?
My system is so lightning fast I don't have time to read it.
ADD
OK so I managed to trawl some ancient DOS memories from the depths of my sub-subconscious and ran it in a way I could see it.
Everything correctly attributed. Though disk 1 comes before disk 0 if that caused previous confusion.
How do I get the command prompt window to stay open long enough to read the result ?
My system is so lightning fast I don't have time to read it.
ADD
OK so I managed to trawl some ancient DOS memories from the depths of my sub-subconscious and ran it in a way I could see it.
Everything correctly attributed. Though disk 1 comes before disk 0 if that caused previous confusion.
Last edited: