Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 56

Thread: HELP!!! L 99 99 99 99 99........

  1. #11
    Member registered user
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    74
    I have the same problem when boot from a 3.8.1 HD install, I follow the same procedure as I did with 3.7, and I install to a standalone HD not shared with Win.

  2. #12
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    272
    Well, I got once that L99 99 99 message with Baltix-Knoppix (Morphix). The reason was very simple: there was no /etc/lilo.conf at all!

    -tapsa-

  3. #13
    Member registered user
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    74
    I did a 2nd time install and it works, strange enough !

  4. #14
    Junior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    24
    Well, I got rid of the L 99... error. I did what jimac said with rewriting the first 446 bytes, and now I get "Invalid Partition Table" whenever I try windows.
    Help?

  5. #15
    Administrator Site Admin-
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,441
    Quote Originally Posted by ssj2kite
    .... now I get "Invalid Partition Table" whenever I try windows....
    The partition table is (was) in the remaining bytes of sector zero. You might try gpart and see if it can recreate your partition table for you.

  6. #16
    Junior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    24
    gpart confuses me @_@ How am I supposed to recreate my partition table?

  7. #17
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sydney/Australia
    Posts
    311
    ssj2kite, Hi ...

    Could you dump the output of,

    ]# cfdisk -Pt /dev/hda

    And place the output between "code" tags please. That will show the current arrangement of how it actually looks, but in a humanised form.

    >>
    I did what jimac said with rewriting the first 446 bytes, and now I get "Invalid Partition Table" whenever I try windows.
    >>

    I guess you mean that you actually edited a "hexedit" file directly with my bootstrap dump ?

    As long as you __only__ copied in the __first__ 446 bytes, it should be OK. If you copyed more than that, you will likely corrupt you existing table as result.

    The output of the above cfdisk command will reveal that though.

    The copying of Windows first stage loader to a floppy should work too.
    To a floppy though, not the hdd, as a full 512 bytes will be being used.

    The best way to have done that edit, would have been to "dd" copy the first sector out to a file, then do the edit, then "dd" copy it back. At least that way you will avoid any hidden newline characters that may arise if you tried to create an ordinary file, then edit it with hexedit.

    And just a 446 byte copy would have been safer than a full 512 byte one. The only other thing would be a possible typo somewhere, possibly the 'active' bit for a table record has been unset some how. And the bios can't find a partition to go to ...

    As well as the cfdisk out put, dump a full 512 byte copy of the first sector. I would be interested to get a direct look at it. Just to see exactly what may be going on.

    To recreate your table, it will involve deleting, then recreating them directly using one of the fdisk tools. So having the correct numbers handy are obviously important in that respect. And it's important to __not__ reformate the associated filesystem(s). As that would kapputen everything.

    I'm suspecting it is just something niggling, rather than major, so those dumps will reveal that.




    jm
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  8. #18
    Junior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    24
    Code:
             ---Starting---      ----Ending----    Start     Number of
     # Flags Head Sect Cyl   ID  Head Sect Cyl     Sector    Sectors
    -- ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----------- -----------
     1  0x80    1    1    0 0xDE  254   63    3          63       64197
     2  0x80    0    1    4 0x07  254   63 1023       64260   156183930
     3  0x00    0    0    0 0x00    0    0    0           0           0
     4  0x00    0    0    0 0x00    0    0    0           0           0

  9. #19
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sydney/Australia
    Posts
    311
    Thanks for the dump,

    My fdisk says that your first partition is typed as a "Del Utility" "0xDE".


    What does a "Del Utility" do !!!!


    I'm not sure how to interpret that, but its' got my __antenna__ up.

    I would be very reluctant to delete/move it, with out knowing just what it __does___. Your vendor should be able to inform on that.

    Your second partition is typed for a "ntfs" system "0x07".

    The table looks fine to me, except for the "Del" thing ???, and having both partitions set "active".

    The start/stop cylinders look ok ...

    You have both partitions set "active" though,

    >>
    1 0x80
    2 0x80
    >>

    You should only require one. Use fdisk or cfdisk to turn hda1 off, and leave hda2 as is.

    In cfdisk, jut use the edit keys to highlight the first partition, then highlight the "[Bootable]" option at the bottom of your screen. Key <enter> to toggle that flag. Then save the changes.


    If that fails, just reverse it. Set the first active, and toggle the second off. But that would seem a bit strange to me.


    As you had a Linux on that disk, you probably have some unused free space now. cfdisk should show that as well.


    jm

  10. #20
    Junior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    24
    Well I already tried setting just 1 active, but that was before I redid the MBR section with the hexeditor.
    And I don't have any free space, because I deleted hb2 (my former knoppix partition) and resized my hda2 (Windows XP partition) back to full size at the same time with Acronis Partition Expert.

    But now I'll try setting only 1 active again.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Dell Poweredge R640 Server | 2x Silver 4114 20 Cores | 192GB | 8x HDD Trays picture

Dell Poweredge R640 Server | 2x Silver 4114 20 Cores | 192GB | 8x HDD Trays

$1939.99



Dell PowerEdge R7525 Server 24X2.5(8XNVME)+H745 2xEPYC 7302 CPU 128G RAM 2x2400W picture

Dell PowerEdge R7525 Server 24X2.5(8XNVME)+H745 2xEPYC 7302 CPU 128G RAM 2x2400W

$3350.00



Dell R730xd 12LFF 2.6Ghz 20-C 128GB H730 2x10G+2x1G NIC 2x1100W 12x Trays Rails picture

Dell R730xd 12LFF 2.6Ghz 20-C 128GB H730 2x10G+2x1G NIC 2x1100W 12x Trays Rails

$721.05



Dell PowerEdge R740XD Server | 2x Gold 6140 | 512GB | H730P | 12x 3.5

Dell PowerEdge R740XD Server | 2x Gold 6140 | 512GB | H730P | 12x 3.5" HDD Tray

$3599.00



Dell PowerEdge R730XD 28 Core Server 2X Xeon E5-2680 V4 H730 128GB RAM No HDD picture

Dell PowerEdge R730XD 28 Core Server 2X Xeon E5-2680 V4 H730 128GB RAM No HDD

$389.99



HP Proliant DL360 Gen9 28 Core SFF Server 2X E5-2680 V4 16GB RAM P440ar No HDD picture

HP Proliant DL360 Gen9 28 Core SFF Server 2X E5-2680 V4 16GB RAM P440ar No HDD

$196.95



Dell PowerEdge R720XD Xeon E5-2680 V2 2.8GHz 20 Cores 256GB RAM 12x4TB picture

Dell PowerEdge R720XD Xeon E5-2680 V2 2.8GHz 20 Cores 256GB RAM 12x4TB

$510.00



Dell PowerEdge R620 Server 2x E5-2660 v1 2.2GHz 16 Cores 256GB RAM 2x 300GB HDD picture

Dell PowerEdge R620 Server 2x E5-2660 v1 2.2GHz 16 Cores 256GB RAM 2x 300GB HDD

$79.19



DELL PowerEdge R730 Server 2x E5-2680v4 2.4GHz =28 Cores 32GB H730 4xRJ45 picture

DELL PowerEdge R730 Server 2x E5-2680v4 2.4GHz =28 Cores 32GB H730 4xRJ45

$284.00



HP ProLiant DL380 Gen9 16SFF 2x E5-2680v4 2.4GHz =28 Cores 64GB P840 4xRJ45 picture

HP ProLiant DL380 Gen9 16SFF 2x E5-2680v4 2.4GHz =28 Cores 64GB P840 4xRJ45

$353.00