1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Toshiba Satellite Pro 420 CDT, hard drive problem

Discussion in 'Laptops' started by Leo, Jul 2, 2003.

  1. Leo

    Leo Guest

    The drive is a 20GB IBM travelstar, which used to have Linux on it. I
    now need to install Win98SE; booting from a Win98 floppy and running
    fdisk, the drive only appears to be 16MB. Boot from a Linux floppy and
    the drive is 20GB again!

    I have put the drive into a desktop and was able to use fdisk to
    create a 20GB primary dos partition and format it. Putting the drive
    back into the laptop and running fdisk again to show the partition
    information resulted in a 20GB partition showing, but still displaying
    total disk size as 16MB.

    I have also used the IBM Drive Fitness Test software, which correctly
    identifies the drive as 20GB; the drive passes all tests and has been
    low level formatted and had it's boot sector erased.Various versions
    of fdisk have been tried, but always always with the same result; in
    the laptop the drive is only 16MB.

    The laptop bios is the latest version, not that it makes much
    difference, it doesn't display any drive details anyway.

    I keep thinking that the problem has to be Linux-related, because the
    Linux installation had a 16MB partition on the drive, but I can't
    understand why the laptop is seeing only 16MB when nothing else does.

    Any ideas?
     
    Leo, Jul 2, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Leo

    Quaoar Guest

    Leo wrote:
    > The drive is a 20GB IBM travelstar, which used to have Linux on it. I
    > now need to install Win98SE; booting from a Win98 floppy and running
    > fdisk, the drive only appears to be 16MB. Boot from a Linux floppy and
    > the drive is 20GB again!
    >
    > I have put the drive into a desktop and was able to use fdisk to
    > create a 20GB primary dos partition and format it. Putting the drive
    > back into the laptop and running fdisk again to show the partition
    > information resulted in a 20GB partition showing, but still displaying
    > total disk size as 16MB.
    >
    > I have also used the IBM Drive Fitness Test software, which correctly
    > identifies the drive as 20GB; the drive passes all tests and has been
    > low level formatted and had it's boot sector erased.Various versions
    > of fdisk have been tried, but always always with the same result; in
    > the laptop the drive is only 16MB.
    >
    > The laptop bios is the latest version, not that it makes much
    > difference, it doesn't display any drive details anyway.
    >
    > I keep thinking that the problem has to be Linux-related, because the
    > Linux installation had a 16MB partition on the drive, but I can't
    > understand why the laptop is seeing only 16MB when nothing else does.
    >
    > Any ideas?


    The 420 series BIOS does not support large disks AFIK. This came out of
    the box with what, 1.2GB HD? AIRC, the max HD the BIOS would support
    was 3GB and that was with a BIOS flash. In order to use a 20GB HD, some
    kind of driver overlay is required to get to large partitions. Are you
    sure you are not seeing 2GB and 1.6GB?

    Q
     
    Quaoar, Jul 2, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Leo

    Uwe Graepel Guest

    > The 420 series BIOS does not support large disks AFIK. This came out of
    > the box with what, 1.2GB HD? AIRC, the max HD the BIOS would support
    > was 3GB and that was with a BIOS flash. In order to use a 20GB HD, some


    How was it possible that Linux ran well with all the 20 GB on that machine
    as he mentioned?

    Regards,

    Uwe
     
    Uwe Graepel, Jul 2, 2003
    #3
  4. lets wait till the origional question has been succesfully answered and then
    I might offer the explaination.

    Henry

    "Uwe Graepel" <> wrote in message
    news:bdvf4b$11ese7$...
    > > The 420 series BIOS does not support large disks AFIK. This came out of
    > > the box with what, 1.2GB HD? AIRC, the max HD the BIOS would support
    > > was 3GB and that was with a BIOS flash. In order to use a 20GB HD, some

    >
    > How was it possible that Linux ran well with all the 20 GB on that machine
    > as he mentioned?
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Uwe
    >
    >
     
    Henry B Jobin, Jul 2, 2003
    #4
  5. That is incorrect; the 4xx series, although vintage 1997, does support
    drives larger than 3-4 gigs natively with the latest BIOS. However,
    that doesn't mean that it will go to 20 gigs. I don't know what the
    limit is, however I do know that I've had 6 and 10 gig drives in
    machines from that series with no problems, and not using drive overlay
    software.


    Quaoar wrote:
    > Leo wrote:
    >
    >>The drive is a 20GB IBM travelstar, which used to have Linux on it. I
    >>now need to install Win98SE; booting from a Win98 floppy and running
    >>fdisk, the drive only appears to be 16MB. Boot from a Linux floppy and
    >>the drive is 20GB again!
    >>
    >>I have put the drive into a desktop and was able to use fdisk to
    >>create a 20GB primary dos partition and format it. Putting the drive
    >>back into the laptop and running fdisk again to show the partition
    >>information resulted in a 20GB partition showing, but still displaying
    >>total disk size as 16MB.
    >>
    >>I have also used the IBM Drive Fitness Test software, which correctly
    >>identifies the drive as 20GB; the drive passes all tests and has been
    >>low level formatted and had it's boot sector erased.Various versions
    >>of fdisk have been tried, but always always with the same result; in
    >>the laptop the drive is only 16MB.
    >>
    >>The laptop bios is the latest version, not that it makes much
    >>difference, it doesn't display any drive details anyway.
    >>
    >>I keep thinking that the problem has to be Linux-related, because the
    >>Linux installation had a 16MB partition on the drive, but I can't
    >>understand why the laptop is seeing only 16MB when nothing else does.
    >>
    >>Any ideas?

    >
    >
    > The 420 series BIOS does not support large disks AFIK. This came out of
    > the box with what, 1.2GB HD? AIRC, the max HD the BIOS would support
    > was 3GB and that was with a BIOS flash. In order to use a 20GB HD, some
    > kind of driver overlay is required to get to large partitions. Are you
    > sure you are not seeing 2GB and 1.6GB?
    >
    > Q
    >
    >
     
    Barry Watzman, Jul 3, 2003
    #5
  6. Linux doesnt write or read through the bios i/o calls !

    Henry

    "Uwe Graepel" <> wrote in message
    news:bdvf4b$11ese7$...
    > > The 420 series BIOS does not support large disks AFIK. This came out of
    > > the box with what, 1.2GB HD? AIRC, the max HD the BIOS would support
    > > was 3GB and that was with a BIOS flash. In order to use a 20GB HD, some

    >
    > How was it possible that Linux ran well with all the 20 GB on that machine
    > as he mentioned?
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Uwe
    >
    >
     
    Henry B Jobin, Jul 3, 2003
    #6
  7. Leo

    Leo Guest

    "Henry B Jobin" <> wrote in message news:<zYAMa.973$>...
    > use the command "fdisk/mbr" (without quotes) from DOS command line
    > and then fdisk the drive as you normally would followed by formating. you
    > then will have full capacity.
    >
    > Let us know if it works.
    >
    > Henry
    >



    Thanks for the input so far. I've already tried fdisk/mbr, but
    unfortunately that doesn't work either. As regards bios limitations,
    I'm fairly sure that an earlier install of Win98, prior to the Linux
    install, recognised the whole drive. Also, if it was the bios, why
    16MB?

    Having said that, in the bios there are two options for HDD Mode,
    Enhanced IDE (Normal) and Standard IDE; changing from Enhanced to
    Standard in the bios results in fdisk seeing 504MB instead of 16MB.
    Now, 504MB is the original IDE/BIOS limitation, so that makes sense,
    but the EIDE seeing 16MB doesn't.

    Incidentally, fdisk does ask if LBA should be enabled, which infers
    that it knows that it is a large disk.
     
    Leo, Jul 3, 2003
    #7
  8. Leo

    Uwe Graepel Guest


    > Linux doesnt write or read through the bios i/o calls !


    In fact I'm not a Linux specialist at all. So you might be right although it
    sounds pretty strange to me that Linux shll not be bound to the BIOS.
    However, I own a SatellitePro 440CDT which runs excellent with a 20 GB
    toshiba harddrive.

    Regards,

    Uwe
     
    Uwe Graepel, Jul 3, 2003
    #8
  9. Leo

    Leo Guest

    "Quaoar" <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > Leo wrote:
    > > "Henry B Jobin" <> wrote in message
    > > news:<zYAMa.973$>...
    > >> use the command "fdisk/mbr" (without quotes) from DOS command
    > >> line
    > >> and then fdisk the drive as you normally would followed by
    > >> formating. you
    > >> then will have full capacity.
    > >>
    > >> Let us know if it works.
    > >>
    > >> Henry
    > >>

    > >
    > >
    > > Thanks for the input so far. I've already tried fdisk/mbr, but
    > > unfortunately that doesn't work either. As regards bios limitations,
    > > I'm fairly sure that an earlier install of Win98, prior to the Linux
    > > install, recognised the whole drive. Also, if it was the bios, why
    > > 16MB?
    > >
    > > Having said that, in the bios there are two options for HDD Mode,
    > > Enhanced IDE (Normal) and Standard IDE; changing from Enhanced to
    > > Standard in the bios results in fdisk seeing 504MB instead of 16MB.
    > > Now, 504MB is the original IDE/BIOS limitation, so that makes sense,
    > > but the EIDE seeing 16MB doesn't.
    > >
    > > Incidentally, fdisk does ask if LBA should be enabled, which infers
    > > that it knows that it is a large disk.

    >
    > What BIOS rev is flashed on this?
    >
    > Q


    BIOS is 5.40, which is the latest. Before last BIOS upgrade it was
    5.30; the problem was exactly the same and flashing 5.40 hasn't made
    any difference.
     
    Leo, Jul 3, 2003
    #9
  10. In comp.os.linux.misc Uwe Graepel <> wrote:

    >> Linux doesnt write or read through the bios i/o calls !


    > In fact I'm not a Linux specialist at all. So you might be right although it
    > sounds pretty strange to me that Linux shll not be bound to the BIOS.


    No o/s has used the bios for i/o for something like 8 years. What
    strange about it? I think msdos was the last o/s to use the bios for
    i/o.

    > However, I own a SatellitePro 440CDT which runs excellent with a 20 GB
    > toshiba harddrive.


    The sentence is meaningless.

    Peter
     
    Peter T. Breuer, Jul 3, 2003
    #10
  11. In comp.os.linux.misc Uwe Graepel <> wrote:
    >> The sentence is meaningless.


    > same to yours


    My sentence means something. It means that yours is meaningless.
    Therefore your last statement is untrue. Therefore you are lying.

    Peter
     
    Peter T. Breuer, Jul 3, 2003
    #11
  12. Leo

    mjt Guest

    John-Paul Stewart wrote:

    > In order to boot Linux with LILO, you'll need a /boot (or root)
    > partition entirely within the portion of the disk visible to BIOS.


    ..... the magic number is usu within the first 1024 cylinders
    ..
    --
    /// Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer, skydiver, \\\
    \\\ and author: "Inside Linux", "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed" ///
    \\\ http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mtobler/mjt_linux_page.html ///
    The probability of someone watching you is proportional to the
    stupidity of your action.
     
    mjt, Jul 3, 2003
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Yareq
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,836
    Oscar T Grouch
    Jul 2, 2003
  2. no
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    593
  3. Uwe Kotyczka
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    499
    Uwe Kotyczka
    Nov 24, 2003
  4. Xavier Costa
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    985
    Barry Watzman
    Nov 25, 2003
  5. Nick Jackson
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    387
    Barry Watzman
    May 16, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page