Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Discussions about using Windows guests in VirtualBox.
Post Reply
Sephiroth
Posts: 4
Joined: 7. Apr 2012, 20:43
Primary OS: Debian other
VBox Version: OSE Debian
Guest OSses: 98SE, XP, 7
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Contact:

Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Post by Sephiroth »

I am using VirtualBox OSE under Debian Squeeze, 2.6.32-5-686. It installed properly and all is well. I can create a VM, setup a dynamic or static size disk, then things go downhill. Every time I format the virtual disk using the standard "format c: /v:System" command, I get over 2.7 million bad sectors. At first I thought that this was due to the dynamic disk, but it does it even on a fixed size disk. What gives? Is there some option to emulate bad sectors I need to disable? The real disk is fairly new and has been checked by the manufacturer's disk tool and it has no bad sectors.
mpack
Site Moderator
Posts: 39134
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: VirtualBox+Oracle ExtPack
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Post by mpack »

No, there is no option to simulate bad sectors. Typically a bad sector would indicate a write error on the host. What filesystem does the host partition (where the VDI is located) use? And how much free space is left on that partition?
Sephiroth
Posts: 4
Joined: 7. Apr 2012, 20:43
Primary OS: Debian other
VBox Version: OSE Debian
Guest OSses: 98SE, XP, 7
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Contact:

Re: Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Post by Sephiroth »

The host being Debian uses ext4. My /home partition is around 140GB and of that I have 129GB free. I should note that I was trying to install Windows 98SE. I have read that 9X has poor or no support. My whole purpose for trying VBox was to switch 100% to Linux, but be able to play the hundreds of DOS/9X titles I own, as well as the modern XP and newer titles. XP seems to be fine.

Still, prior to installing 98SE, I will boot System Rescue CD, zero my virtual disk using 'dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=512', then create an aligned partition, set it as FAT32 and mark it bootable, boot from the 98SE disk (yes, I legally own multiple copies of 95 and 98SE), get to a DOS prompt, and try formatting. I always get bad sectors. Is this normal for 9X?
squall leonhart
Posts: 312
Joined: 21. Apr 2010, 10:39
Primary OS: MS Windows 7
VBox Version: VirtualBox+Oracle ExtPack
Guest OSses: Windows XP, 8, 10, Android x86

Re: Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Post by squall leonhart »

Sephiroth wrote:The host being Debian uses ext4. My /home partition is around 140GB and of that I have 129GB free. I should note that I was trying to install Windows 98SE. I have read that 9X has poor or no support. My whole purpose for trying VBox was to switch 100% to Linux, but be able to play the hundreds of DOS/9X titles I own, as well as the modern XP and newer titles. XP seems to be fine.

Still, prior to installing 98SE, I will boot System Rescue CD, zero my virtual disk using 'dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=512', then create an aligned partition, set it as FAT32 and mark it bootable, boot from the 98SE disk (yes, I legally own multiple copies of 95 and 98SE), get to a DOS prompt, and try formatting. I always get bad sectors. Is this normal for 9X?
windows 98 cannot address a file system larger than 20GB without running into issues.

so if the vdi is larger than this, reduce it.
mpack
Site Moderator
Posts: 39134
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: VirtualBox+Oracle ExtPack
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Post by mpack »

squall leonhart wrote:windows 98 cannot address a file system larger than 20GB without running into issues.
I assume by "Windows 98" you really mean FAT32. Really? I haven't heard of that constraint. Can you provide a reference?
squall leonhart
Posts: 312
Joined: 21. Apr 2010, 10:39
Primary OS: MS Windows 7
VBox Version: VirtualBox+Oracle ExtPack
Guest OSses: Windows XP, 8, 10, Android x86

Re: Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Post by squall leonhart »

mpack wrote:
squall leonhart wrote:windows 98 cannot address a file system larger than 20GB without running into issues.
I assume by "Windows 98" you really mean FAT32. Really? I haven't heard of that constraint. Can you provide a reference?
Well im going by the limited information provided here, First edition 98 has a number of known storage device issues not experienced on SE or Windows ME with drives larger than 15GB.

another possibility is false errors
The ScanDisk tool included with Microsoft Windows 95 and Microsoft Windows 98 is a 16-bit program. Such programs have a single memory block maximum allocation size of 16 MB less 64 KB. Therefore, The Windows 95 or Windows 98 ScanDisk tool cannot process volumes using the FAT32 file system that have a FAT larger than 16 MB less 64 KB in size. A FAT entry on a volume using the FAT32 file system uses 4 bytes, so ScanDisk cannot process the FAT on a volume using the FAT32 file system that defines more than 4,177,920 clusters (including the two reserved clusters). Including the FATs themselves, this works out, at the maximum of 32 KB per cluster, to a volume size of 127.53 gigabytes (GB).
Sephiroth
Posts: 4
Joined: 7. Apr 2012, 20:43
Primary OS: Debian other
VBox Version: OSE Debian
Guest OSses: 98SE, XP, 7
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Contact:

Re: Virtual disk always has bad clusters?

Post by Sephiroth »

I stated 98SE, as in, Second Edition, so the original release does not apply. Also, I have used 98SE on drives up to 40GB without issues. My drive is 10GB fixed. The virtual disk, that is. XP installed and plays nicely, now I just need 98SE to work.
Post Reply