Post by: ltoolio on January 02, 2004, 08:43:00 AM
| QUOTE (InsideMan @ Dec 20 2003, 01:50 PM) |
Are you on drugs...? That much writing  |
That's a rather bold comment to make from someone who has 14 posts replying to someone who has over 2500 posts.
Reading the stuff here (and in the tutorials section) will answer 99.9% of your questions.
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on January 04, 2004, 09:04:00 PM
Post by: Trevante on January 15, 2004, 03:56:00 PM
Post by: KAC on January 15, 2004, 05:54:00 PM
Post by: CIder on January 23, 2004, 05:45:00 AM
| QUOTE (Trevante @ Jan 16 2004, 01:56 AM) |
| ok just to make sure, if i'm getting a new unformatted HDD that's bigger than 137 gb (let's say 250 gb), can i have one large F drive, or would i need that G drive? |
Just what I was planning on doing. Is this possible?.
Post by: Deezle on January 23, 2004, 07:26:00 AM
| QUOTE (CIder @ Jan 23 2004, 04:45 PM) | ||
Just what I was planning on doing. Is this possible?. |
Of course it's possible. Reading the whole thread would be helpful.
But you should use also a g-drive, because there are problems with very large partitions. At the moment it is assumed, that only partitions >274 GB are affected. But would YOU like to find out if the limit is lower? 
Greetz,
Deezle
Post by: sprkthead2 on January 27, 2004, 10:27:00 AM
| QUOTE (InsideMan @ Dec 20 2003, 01:50 PM) |
| Are you on drugs...? That much writing |
Read...read read
Post by: stealth on January 30, 2004, 10:07:00 AM
| QUOTE (oz_paulb @ Dec 8 2003, 02:16 PM) |
| It's not about FATX, but does list a limit to the # of clusters on FAT32 as: 268435456. That's a 28-bit limit, which (like a 24-bit limit) doesn't make much sense (to me). |
The reason for the 28-bit limit is simple.
fat32 (and fatx32) cluster map entries are 32bit. The high 4bits are reserved. 32-4 = 28.
This means that clusters > 2^28 cannot be addressed by a FAT32 table.
Here's the quote from the MS white paper on the subject:
The high 4 bits of a FAT32 FAT entry are reserved. The only time that the high 4 bits of FAT32 FAT entries should ever be changed is when the volume is formatted, at which time the whole 32-bit FAT entry should be zeroed, including the high 4 bits.
A 24 bit limit doesn't make sense to me though.
Post by: heinrich on January 30, 2004, 10:14:00 AM
| QUOTE (ExxonTsunami @ Jan 15 2004, 09:06 PM) | ||
Just curious to know if you've been able to reproduce any problems during your testing? So far things are going quite well with my nearly full 300GB drive (with F and G partitions). Of course, now that I've said this in a public forum, hard drive corruption is imminent... |
With an F and G drive, you shouldn't have any problems,
Post by: SKllZ on February 02, 2004, 09:28:00 AM
Ive read this whole thread I think I have a good idea on what to do but I want to make sure that Im not going to miss up anything I have a 120 Maxtor hard drive in my Xbox now I already backed up all my games and apps on my computer so I really dont care about reformatting my new 250 WD hard drive since its empty I have a Xecuter 2.3 Pro with Cromwell flashed back on it and I have a copy of Xecuter 4978.03 with LBA48 patch added to it(done by XBTOOLS) and have the slayer 2.5 installer DVD just to give a quick run threw on what Im going to do please tell me if anything is wrong! First Im going to flash my chip with Xecuter 4978.03 with LBA48 reboot to the Slayer installer chose the large hard drive install after that reboot with out the DVD in and everything should be working right?? I thought the Slayer installer installs a new BIOS as well is this true too? Thanks for all the good reply and tips in this whole thread.
Luke
Post by: SKllZ on February 04, 2004, 05:19:00 AM
Now for the good news I still have the receipt for the hard drive and theyre going to replace it! After putting the retail hard drive in I made a evox cd with the Xecuter 4981.06 to flash my bios flashed fine next I put in the WD 250GB hard Drive then put the slayer installer disc in, installed the large hard drive everything with fine booted it back up and drive F: only showed 163GB then I remembered that I had to reformat booted it up again now the F: drive shows 241GB ran the installer again with the Large hard drive option and everything is working fine!
I just wanted to thanks everyone that posted on this thread with out you I would be lost and no be able to get this working, Thanks again.
Luke
Post by: ProfessorTech on April 18, 2004, 09:54:00 PM
Post by: Pillzburydoofus on April 23, 2004, 08:58:00 AM
Post by: bucko on April 24, 2004, 01:35:00 PM
| QUOTE |
Okay.. I just read the last 20 pages of this thing but I see no source code... Have you gotten around to releasing the source code yet? |
Maybe it contains some kind of m$ code?
Post by: greengiant on May 17, 2004, 01:43:00 AM
Post by: heinrich on May 22, 2004, 11:34:00 AM
Post by: rick_spengler on October 11, 2004, 10:24:00 AM
My first problem and most important is that I purchased a 160 gig Western Digital HDD and the X box does not recognize all of this.
Partition 6 recognizes 120.516 gigs
Partition 1 recognizes 4.767 gigs
On the settings menu It says that both F and G drive are enabled.
I do have Flash FXP as well.
Finally the Bios says unknown but the Kernal version is 1.00.4983.67
So my question is this, How do I retrieve the missing area of space without losing my bios or dashboard (being that I dont have a copy of the slayers disc). I dont mind losing games or saves or anything else except the aformentioned items.
Second question as well, not as important as the first. Whenever I turn my chip off I get the green screen of death and I'm unable to load any games or the ms dash directly. Is this what everyone speaks about when they say banned from x-box live? Help.
Aim. RickSpengler
Aol. [email protected]
Post by: Jrzy_GamEr on March 19, 2005, 12:25:00 PM
QUOTE(KiLaHuRtZ @ Sep 1 2003, 07:09 PM)
one quick question. i have a 160GB in my box right now and i want to "unlock" the extra 23GB with your code, however if i just patch the BIOS will i have to re-format my entire drive or will it just boot up normally with the extra 23GB showing up in the F drive. once again i want to add that 23GB to my F partition but i don't want to lose my data either.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: networkBoy on May 06, 2005, 05:54:00 PM
-
If you enable F (to 137gig) & G drives you should be ok.
If you enable F takes rest of drive, you will corrupt your existing data.
Make a backup to be sure in either case.
-nB
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: wup on May 06, 2005, 07:01:00 PM
-
Lol who started up an 8 month old thread again
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Tobb555 on May 06, 2005, 07:22:00 PM
-
thread kinda old isnt it
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 05:55:00 PM
-
All -
Check the main xbox-scene news page for info on the latest version of Xbtool. It supports LBA48 and partition tables.
I thought I'd create a new topic here for feedback (hopefully all success stories), and questions.
REMEMBER: This is 'beta' code - use at your own risk!
Update: Don't choose "Partition 6 Takes Rest of the Drive" if you plan on using an existing drive (with data already on F:) that's > 137GB! This will increase the size of the partition assigned to F:, but since it was formatted while it was in a smaller partition, the FAT structures will not be correct. This will result in data corruption! Only choose this option if you intend to re-format the entire F: partition (or if you're starting with a new drive).
Thanks to NghtShd for his help in incorporating the changes into Xbtool.
Full source code/more info will be released in the next couple of days.
- Paulb
This post has been edited by oz_paulb: Sep 2 2003, 02:50 AM
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 05:56:00 PM
-
Oh, and for those who haven't been following the other thread, "LBA48 support" means support for hard drives larger than 137GB.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: PM5K on September 01, 2003, 06:05:00 PM
-
Congrats, hopefully everything goes well for everyone. Personally I have a 120 and I don't think that I'll be upgrading to anything bigger any time soon. My real concern at this point is not the drive size but the fragmentation, maybe you can look into that, I can only imagine how much worse fragmentation would be on even bigger drives, uploads would slow to a crawl.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Gman22 on September 01, 2003, 06:08:00 PM
-
nicely done...thanks for all your work to the scene...i have a modchip coming soon, and ill be getting a bigger hard drive to back up the games i own...now i can get larger than 137 thanks alot paul
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: bborski on September 01, 2003, 06:21:00 PM
-
just checkin it out, i dont have a new hard drive to test it yet but soon. just a quick question, what does "Ignore Hard Drive Partition Table" mean? i didnt see any thing about it in the documentation
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 06:24:00 PM
-
It's possible to put a partition table on the first sector of the hard drive (I'll document how to do this later).
(the partition table defines the start and size of each of the partitions on the hard drive (example: partition6 is "F:")).
All of the options in Xbtool are for the 'default' partition table that's created at boot-up time. If a partition table is seen on the boot sector of the hard drive, then that one will override the 'default' one.
Normally, this is what you want - it'll allow for 'partition table editors' to be created that'll let you move/resize partitions, etc.
But, if for some reason you screw-up your hard drive's partition table, you can always go back to the 'default' by using Xbtool and selecting 'Ignore hard drive partition table' (and re-burning your flash chip with the new code). This is more of a safeguard than anything else - just in case the hard drive gets messed up.
- Paulb
This post has been edited by oz_paulb: Sep 2 2003, 01:25 AM
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: boxorox on September 01, 2003, 06:12:00 PM
-
Thanks for all your work Paul. I have a 160gb, but I think I'm gonna wait it out a little. It's not quite full yet and I really don't want to start over. However, it is very comforting to know you gave me back 23gb.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 06:18:00 PM
-
Once other apps allow for things to be stored on other partitions (instead of hard-coded "F:" support), you should be able to create a new partition that's just the 23GB after 137GB (assigned to some other drive letter). Then you can store some of your stuff there (without losing your F: drive contents).
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Biznaz on September 01, 2003, 06:20:00 PM
-
from what i've read, can't you just allocate the rest of your 160gb to partition7, leaving partition6(F:) untouched? I was planning on doing this.
to you paul.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Heet on September 01, 2003, 07:16:00 PM
-
As i posted in the other thread, ive ordered a 250 and i'll get it in a few days. Cant believe this was "impossible" to most all this time , and now its reality. Glad to test this.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 07:18:00 PM
-
Yes, the 'key' at this point will be: how do you format the 'extra' partition, and how do you get apps/files/etc onto it? That'll (hopefully) come as existing apps/dashboards start supporting the idea of more partitions.
I'll be releasing some partitioning utilities in the next couple of days (lets you create/edit a partition table on your hard drive). What I've already done (by hand - without these utils) is:
- Write a partition table on the boot sector that describes the current F: (partition6) partition, as well as the new partition7 (that's above 137GB)
- "swapped" the 6/7th partition table entries. Now, F: points to the partition above 137GB (and 'partition7' points to your old F: drive)
- Booted Slayer's EvoX installer, and formatted F: (partition6, which is still pointing to above 137GB)
At this point, I can boot-up, and F: points to an empty partition (above 137GB). I can use it normally, but I don't have access to my 'old' F: partition (although the data is still there, and intact). If I "swap" the 6/7th partition table entries again, and reboot, I can see my old F: drive, but can't see the new one above 137GB.
Again, once apps/dashboards support more partitions, this'll all be much easier.
If you want 100% support for LBA48 right now, it'll require dedicating the entire remainder of the drive to F: (since everything knows about partition6/F: right now).
Once again, just remember that this code is 'beta', so please don't experiment with drives containing data you can't risk losing.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: bborski on September 01, 2003, 07:25:00 PM
-
so when i get a new drive id like it to be just like the one i have now, put the rest of the space in F.
so i have to flash the new bios and then format the new drive?
i dont plan on playing with the partition sizes at all (too much for my head) so when i edit my bios before i flash do i want to check the "Ignore Hard Drive Partion Table" option or not?
im really sorry for all the questions its just that this stuff is so far over my head
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: mrRobinson on September 01, 2003, 07:30:00 PM
-
This should be PINNED and kept updated with progress made....
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 07:33:00 PM
-
I wouldn't check the 'ignore hard drive partition table' option unless you have problems (with a corrupted hard drive boot sector). If you check it, you'll never be able to re-partition your hard drive. You may not want to now, but there may be a reason to in the future. It's probably best to leave your options open.
So, using Xbtool, choose "Partition 6 Takes Rest of the Drive", save your new bios, and put it onto your modchip. Now, you should be able to re-boot the Xbox (with Slayer EvoX installer CD in the drive, for example (or whatever utility you'd normally use)), and it'll see the entire hard drive, ready to format.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 01, 2003, 07:39:00 PM
-
one quick question. i have a 160GB in my box right now and i want to "unlock" the extra 23GB with your code, however if i just patch the BIOS will i have to re-format my entire drive or will it just boot up normally with the extra 23GB showing up in the F drive. once again i want to add that 23GB to my F partition but i don't want to lose my data either.
thanks
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: da_frog on September 01, 2003, 07:06:00 PM
-
never mind i saw above post ^
Can anyone confirm that the xbtool works i believe paulb 101% percent on this and i have had some pretty bad run ins with xbtool and i cant flash and test my xbox (i got tsop) so has anyone really tested it???
btw. like i said i have no doubts in paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: xboxw00t on September 01, 2003, 07:36:00 PM
-
for people having problems with using things like xToolBox etc for sending files, couldn't they patch the xbe and replace another Partition reference with the one they want? such as making Partition5 point to 7? If you needed to manage it you could just select drive 'e' (Even though it'd point to partition7 instead of partition5)?
Just a thought.. This wouldnt work for evolutionx (the strings don't show up) -
But should in Avalaunch (if they don't have a new version soon which I'm sure they will)
Just a thought..
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 01, 2003, 07:41:00 PM
-
Just a note or everyone who is eager and tried this before oz_paulb's last post:
I have a 160gb and chose option to have partition 6 take rest of drive just to see what happened. The good news is that sure enough, I got and extra 20 or so GB!! But all my games, etc that were on partition f: were gone!!
Or were they?
If this happens...DON"T WORRY!! Just reflash your bios with option to use >137gb on partition 7 and all your items will reappear.
I'll have a clean 200gb to try tomorrow, and I'll post results then.
Thanks so much oz_paulb!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 07:44:00 PM
-
Just make sure you don't do anything that could write to F: while it's in this odd state. If you write to it, you could corrupt files that are there (even if they are not visible to you).
But yes, if you don't write to the drive while it's in this state, going back and choosing the suggested option and re-flashing the BIOS will make your old drive F: re-appear.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on September 01, 2003, 07:47:00 PM
-
You still need an app to format partition7. Right now, nothing does.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 01, 2003, 08:00:00 PM
-
thanks for clearing that up paulb, i plan on tossing a 300GB Maxtor in her very soon. just need some $$$. keep up the good work!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 01, 2003, 08:04:00 PM
-
Anyone want to start testing "lockablitiy" of >160gb hard drives and post them in this thread:
Xbox-Scene Online Web Community->Hardware Forums->General Hardware/Technical Chat ->List Of Hard Disks And "lockability"
http://forums.xbox-s...&t=30117&st=300
Just a thought.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: bborski on September 01, 2003, 08:14:00 PM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: (>Stormy<) on September 01, 2003, 10:56:00 PM
-
Does this mean something to anybody? Would this be an ideal drive?
Anywho... thought it was interesting.
Oh... and thank you very much for this gift, very clever
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: GrumpY on September 01, 2003, 11:30:00 PM
-
Is there a way to make another forum for all the "stupid" questions people asked because they didn't read the original topic about drive > 137 Gb.
I really think this topic will be fucked up if pbs reports are coming in the same time that the "practical" questions every man who didn't read the rest will posts again and again.
A message to every one : Please read the FAQ, the threads. all the answers are already available for most of us and let oz_paulb have constructive return of his amazing work !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Blastomy on September 01, 2003, 11:44:00 PM
-
Yeah It means it comes with a controller card for your comp so you can plug it in and see all 200gb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: gabvey on September 02, 2003, 01:49:00 AM
-
gabriel
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 03:51:00 AM
-
An original bios will use LBA28, and doesn't "see" F: (partition6) or any extra partitions.
It should work fine when booting with the original bios - you'll be able to access the 'standard' partitions (C/E/X/Y/Z), but just not the new one(s). Re-booting with the LBA48-enabled bios will make the new partition(s) visible again.
And, again, since this is 'beta', YES - there is risk of data corruption (please wait until more testing has been done if you are concerned about data loss).
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 03:56:00 AM
-
I'd really like to hear back from you on whether/not this is still a problem.
If it is, please give details of exactly how you formatted the drive, whether/not you re-booted after formatting (I don't know if this is important or not), etc.
If you're re-starting by reformatting again, please try copying just one app/game, running it, and (if it works) add a few more apps, try running them, etc. Maybe there's a barrier where data corruption is happening.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: the joker on September 02, 2003, 06:53:00 AM
-
gonan try to make a .3 of avalaunch that had added support for this. Wonder if r0wdy would test that format command.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 07:27:00 AM
-
Will someone please post a list of standard drive letters for the Xbox (including memory card drive letters)? It was posted before (in the super-long 137GB forum, I think).
I think that we should come up with a 'standard' drive letter for "partition7" (and maybe "partition8", ...), as opposed to every app/dashboard coming up with its own letter assignments. I think (the obvious choice of) "G:" is already used by memory cards, so that probably shouldn't be used.
(As I've said before, I think the better long-term solution is to show the user a list of partitions/let them choose, but near-term drive letters are easier).
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: peach_nick on September 02, 2003, 07:57:00 AM
-
Well I used fxp to remove my problemed appz and games from my last post and ftpd over my origanal downloaded appz and they work fine.
Paul,
I am almost positive that i flashed new bios, then formatted with fxp and did not reboot before i dumped my old f drive data over to my box. im sure this had something to do with my problem.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 02, 2003, 08:15:00 AM
-
The memory cards hold "partitions" H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O.
Hope this helps.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Noobicide on September 02, 2003, 08:35:00 AM
-
OK, A: and B: are available as always
I might suggest something here though.
the so called drive letters don't have to be a single letter.
its a carry through from back when you could only make 32MB partitions and would have an ungodly number of them on a 200mb drive (yes there were people who ran fat12 on 200mb drives, usgovt being one of them)
in that situation you would have AA: AB: and so on. (assuming multiple drives in the same system) also for when you mounted a few dozen network shares
in actuality, you can have anything up to IIRC 11 characters as a device name, although it may be longer.
anywho, I've sucessfully tested long device names, and nexgen uses them in 1.0 and my new dash/os project uses similar names:
System: - Xbox dashboard & data files
DVD: - First / Single dvd drive
DVD2: - Second dvd drive
Storage: - 5GB E:
Extended: - Rest of drive to 137GB
Expanded: - Drive above 137GB
It would be nice if someone could post the long device names for the memory cards so they could be mounted on meaningful names ass well such as MU1A: MU3B: and so on.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 02, 2003, 09:04:00 AM
-
C - System Files - Approx. 500MB
D - DVD-ROM
E - Game Saves - Approx. 5GB
F - Media - Rest Of HDD
G - [POSSIBLE PARTITION 7]
H - MU 1A - Approx. 8MB
I - MU 1B - Approx. 8MB
J - MU 2A - Approx. 8MB
K - MU 2B - Approx. 8MB
L - MU 3A - Approx. 8MB
M - MU 3B - Approx. 8MB
N - MU 4A - Approx. 8MB
O - MU 4B - Approx. 8MB
X - Cache - Approx. 750MB
Y - Cache - Approx. 750MB
Z - Cache - Approx. 750MB
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KAC on September 02, 2003, 09:25:00 AM
-
Am I understanding this correctly?
1. You had a 160GB hard drive with 23GB's not being used because of the 137GB
limit.
2. You edited a BIOS using Xbtool and chose the "partition 6 take rest of drive"
option.
3. Flashed your BIOS and found that you now had the full 160GB usage with the
extra 23GB on F: but you couldn't see any of your games.
4. So you reflashed your BIOS again and now all games were visible?
In essence, you just have to flash the BIOS twice to have all the 160GB's recognized with the extra space on F: without messing up any of your existing data?
Please confirm!!!
PS...YOU DA MAN OZ_PAULB!!!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 09:51:00 AM
-
The second time he flashed, he chose a different Xbtool option (Partition 6 up to 137GB / Partition 7 rest of drive). This made Partition6 the same size as it was before LBA48 support was added, so the FAT file structures were valid/everything re-appeared.
After doing this, the extra 23GB is in Partition7 (not part of F:).
Basically, he shouldn't have chosen "Partition 6 takes rest of drive") if he wasn't planning on re-formatting F: (I think he did this before I made that clear).
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: boxorox on September 02, 2003, 10:07:00 AM
-
KAC: He wrote that he reflashed with the option to use >137gb on part 7
It sounds to me like he added the extra space to part 7, after he couldn't see is data in F.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 10:08:00 AM
-
I know you mentioned this before, but what is the likleyhood that the remainder of the 160 gig hdd to be added to partition E, making f showing the full 137gb, and thremainder showing up in E?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 10:19:00 AM
-
so then, basically i can ftp to xbox, copy all my files from the (E) drive, upgrade the bios, and rewite over (E) then transfer back my apps and files to the newly sized (E) partition, and have everything working and seeing all the drives as they were before, except (E) would be larger?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 10:43:00 AM
-
Correct.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 10:44:00 AM
-
i see, damn i would just be happy overwitting the old e partition, but i then can just copy all the stuff from the old e drive and copy over to the new, and leave the other e invisible, unless i really needed it.
Now would this be aproblem going forward with saved games, being saved to the invisible drive.
Of course i would much rather reformat my drive and start from scratch, but this would work till i find the time to do that
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 11:19:00 AM
-
yeah thats what im getting out of this, to me this is woth it, till i have enoug time to reformat and start fresh.
now how would i just do that instead of the simple way reformating?
do i just add the new bios selecting partition 6 up to 137GB/ No partition 7.
would this move the remainder over to E?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 11:43:00 AM
-
sounds great man, either way would be cool, if this is to much on adding that, then no worries, ill just reformat another drive with the large hdd patch to add all in F partition.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 12:25:00 PM
-
Xbtool is a Windows app that takes a bios image (.bin - EvoX D.6, X2 4977/4978, for example), and lets you make changes to it (including now the LBA48 patch). You run this app on windows, and generate a new bios image (.bin). You then need to re-flash your modchip (using whatever method is the normal method for your modchip) in order to get it into your Xbox.
If you don't care about what's on F: (you don't mind losing all data/games/apps on F:), then choose ""Partition 6 takes rest of space" in Xbtool when generating the new bios. Boot your Xbox using the new bios, re-format F:, then reboot again. At this point, you'll have an empty F: drive that uses everything up to the end of your disk (not limited to being below 137GB any more)
If you want to preserve what's on F:, then you should choose "Partition 6 uses up to 137GB / Partition 7 uses rest of drive". That'll leave your F: partition alone. You'll then need to figure out how to format your 'extra' paritition (partition7) and get files onto it. Again, hopefully some of the standard utilities/dashboards will start supporting extra partitions.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: vmehta211 on September 02, 2003, 12:45:00 PM
-
Paul,
I have a WD 160GB hard drive. I was wondering if there was a way to assign the rest (23GB) of space that my xbox cannot see to a drive letter "V:" and then use EvoX's format utility to format the drive? I think these types of questions have been asked and answered before but I am unclear why this is not possible. I want to use the remaining 23GB to store backup games and am not planning on running any apps from this "V:" drive. I will only need to add the addItem.. command to evox.ini to add the games on my "V:" drive to have them show up in Evox's menu.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 12:55:00 PM
-
Is there any way (via an .ini file, etc) to tell EvoX that it should assign drive "V:" to the partition "\Device\Harddisk0\partition7"? That's the biggest stumbling block I can think of - getting EvoX to 'mount' drive "V:" when it starts up (in Xbox, only some of the 'standard' drives get mounted automatically - it's up to apps to mount the rest of them).
It may be possible to have the LBA48-patched bios automagically mount a drive letter (V:, for example) to that partition. In that case, I think the "additem" command may work. But, I don't know if you FTP'd to EvoX if it would show you a drive V: for transferring files, or if the built-in format commands would support V:
Slightly off-topic question: Is EvoX dashboard still actively being developed? I made a couple of posts on their forum (when I was having problems with "ConfigSector", and never got any sort of 'official' response (only other forum readers giving their opinions). Just curious..
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: boxorox on September 02, 2003, 12:58:00 PM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: mattg39 on September 02, 2003, 01:54:00 PM
-
avalaunch is currently working on adding support for partition 7 in the ftp server, file manager, and auto list for games.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 01:57:00 PM
-
That's good news! Hopefully other apps will follow...
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 02:09:00 PM
-
i have an extra 160 gig hdd with some files on it, can i just reflash with new bios through evox, then reformat hdd?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 02:26:00 PM
-
well ill give it a shot through evox to see if it works that way, if not ill go back to traditional methods, ill let u know my results once im done
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 03:10:00 PM
-
get this on xbtool i go to open my bios but all the 1st 2nd 3rd boot sequence are all greyed out, and nothing in there??
anyone encounter this?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 03:48:00 PM
-
oh damn this sucks, i cant even reflash my chip with ozx, evox messed be all up, and no damn external flash either. this is not good
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 04:21:00 PM
-
yes it was with that, i am now trying everything i can to go back to the 4977 bios, however when i reformated my hdd i was getting 155 gig on the f drive, however when i do reboot xbox hangs and gives me error code(13) dash failure..crazy. no now if trying a few diff things to go back to normal
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 04:31:00 PM
-
i have tried everything to get that large hdd to bios to boot up, for some reason it will not boot on my box, maybe im doing something wrong when i make the bios, but splash screen and color come up, but no x2 shows up. i even went back to the 4977 bios 1 meg size on an x2.2 lite +(test subject by the way) and still no go
i load up xbtool, select the bios i want, make a 1meg file, then save to the name i create, then reflash chip, i am going to try an zero out the drive next and start completely fresh
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 05:10:00 PM
-
im using hdd prepare, it reeds the extra large hdd till i have to reboot then it doesnt work any longer
is slayers the only one thats works correctly??
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: qadmin on September 02, 2003, 06:27:00 PM
-
2 questions:
Are there size limitations for this type of addressing?
What is the maximum size of a drive that could be used?
Thanks again to Paul and all!!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: qadmin on September 02, 2003, 06:51:00 PM
-
Thanks Paul, for your quick response and continuing lessons!!
Keep up the great works!!!
-Q
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 06:57:00 PM
-
I was just taking a look at the EvoX (dashboard) code (to see if I could get it to handle a drive "G:" (partition7)).
I noticed that when they check to see if a drive exists, they do a raw sector read of the *hard coded* beginning sector of that partition, to see if there is a "FATX" at the beginning (to see if there is a valid filesystem there).
What this means is: it'll be difficult to move 'standard' partitions (C/E/X/Y/Z) to other areas of the drive (like above 137GB), because EvoX will be looking at the 'standard' location for those drives. Also, moving the start of the F partition to anything higher/different could cause problems (EvoX may not find it).
I think this is just the initial check to see if it should bother 'mounting' the drive. After that, it passes the partition #/drive letter to IoCreateSymbolicLink() (letting the kernel take care of everything else).
This also could mean that EvoX will have problems formatting drives that aren't at their 'standard' locations. My experience says that this isn't the case - I formatted an F: drive that started above 137GB, and it didn't corrupt my 'old' F: drive.
So, just be careful when doing things with EvoX right now (formatting partitions/etc).
If I make progress, I may be releasing a patch to EvoX (since the developers don't seem to be supporting it any more).
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:08:00 PM
-
my steps for faluire
i flash chip with ozx using the 4977 bios
boot up auto slayers v2.1 format lg hdd
shows 155 gig on f drive.
then load on evox, reboot, then wlla
no more files, all drives show zero again, x2 doesnt show up on boot up
any idea what is happening
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:16:00 PM
-
by the way the error code i get after rebooting if i let it go long enough is (13) no dash can be launched
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 07:24:00 PM
-
Another couple of things to try:
1. Use non-LBA48 bios, follow the same steps. You won't have 155GB free on F:, but see if things work after rebooting
2. Use LBA48 bios, but tell it the option that says "partition6 uses up to 137gb / no partition7", and follow the same steps. This should be identical to a non-LBA48 bios.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:25:00 PM
-
okay when i reboot leaving slayers in the dvd drive, it all goes back to zeros
i am using a maxtor 160 gig dimond max ultraplus 9 8meg cache 7200 rpm
havnt tried any evox d.6 bios, been using 4978.03, and 4977 bios, seems to be flashed fine, just not taking the large hdd patch, works fine on regular hdd
I have a 200 gig WD special edition i could try this on another day.
but maxtor is what i would prefer
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:26:00 PM
-
should i maybe zero out this drive, and start from like a retail drive?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 02, 2003, 08:25:00 PM
-
I have to agree that EvoX is going down the shitter. I currently use it, but I am thinking of switching to the XBMP as my main dashboard. My question is since you have to map the drives in the config.xml file, could I just map drive "G"
<map>G:,Harddisk0Partition7</map>
and have it work?
Thanks Paul.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: goan_trance on September 02, 2003, 08:28:00 PM
-
Hi Paul. Quick question re: using Xbtools.
I'm having a little trouble with it right now.
I loaded (clicked on "open") my *.bin file into xbtool, checked off the lba048 option, and chose "use rest of HD for partition 6".
I then clicked on "save as", and saved the file. When I tried opening the "revised" bios file in xbtools, at the top of the screen it said "unknown kernel" as opposed "bios 4976.02", and the lba048 options I had selected did not show up (the option was unmarked and that part of the window was greyed out).
What am I doing wrong?
I disregarded this, and tried to flash my chip with the "new" bios.bin file, and was unsuccessful...it gave me the following error:
"unflashable....bios error".
Kindly let me know how to rectify.
Thanks in advance for getting back to people quickly re: their questions.
Goan.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 08:56:00 PM
-
I've never really messed with XBMP, so I don't know the answer to that.
If there's a place with "F:" and "partition6" in a .ini script somewhere, you should be able to create another one with "G:" and "partition7".
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 08:58:00 PM
-
To tell you the truth, I'm not an expert on Xbtool. I've only used it recently, and for specific uses (just to do quick testing of the LBA48 patches).
I'd suggest you email the Xbtool author (xbtool at alltel.net). He's also been checking into these forums, so he may be able to answer here.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 09:00:00 PM
-
I think I should have some patches for EvoX (to support G: drive) in the next couple of days.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Heet on September 02, 2003, 10:17:00 PM
-
there isnt a guarentee yet if thats what your lookin for. Im sure as hell gonna test it tho.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 02:05:00 AM
-
okay this hdd was in my working xbox with bios 4977 in it, i decided i wanted to try this. now after the 4977 bios flash with lg hdd doesnt work, then i can reflash with bios 4977 regular flash works great just no extra hdd size.
4977 and 4978.03 are not working for me on a version 1.0 xbox.
if anyone has a successfull x2 bios with the large hdd update please post on xbox NG
thanks
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 02:45:00 AM
-
only thing i can think of is that maybe im using xbtool incorrect?
i open xbtool
open my 1 meg bios
change a couple thingd=s
set lba48 to take rest on partition 6
then save bios
burn to cdrw
load ozx flash
do the swap
then it shuts down
when booting back up colors are changed, slayers auto is in there, so it boots up drives read zero, i reformat then drives f reads 155 gig.
i shut down wait about 2 mins, reboot goes into loading without any cdrw or dvdr in no (x2 shows up under the xbox logo. then it just freezez.
i reboot with slyers back in hdd reads all zeros again.
so just maybe im using xbtool incorrect, but all seems to be self exlanitory.
please let me know the steps people have done, so as this will probably help many others as well
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 04:34:00 AM
-
paul check ur pm
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: the joker on September 03, 2003, 06:59:00 AM
-
SITE FORMAT g: should work in avalaunch 0.47.3, but I haven't actually had the possibillity to test it, since I'm lacking of great drives.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 03, 2003, 07:45:00 AM
-
oz_paulb,
Please explain to a fairly noob...
I have been able to do this succesfully using the have partition 6 use all remaining space option.
People seem fairly concerned about getting another partition (G perhaps) to read apps properly. What is the big advantage of this? Or is it more that people want to know for the sake of knowledge.
I had planned on installing all my >137gb hds in the same manner as my first, but if there would be an advantage to using 2 partitions (F and G), I will hold off.
Thanks again!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 03, 2003, 09:04:00 AM
-
I see no real advantage to having F: and G: partitions if you are installing to a new drive. You can use sub-directories to separate/organize things if you're just trying to keep things separate.
The real reason for adding G: is for people who have already formatted their >137GB drive using a pre-LBA48 bios, and have lots of apps/data already loaded onto it. It's not currently possible to make drive F: "grow" to the larger space, unless you re-format it (which would require re-installing everything on F:).
The G: option lets people get the extra space, while leaving their F: partition intact.
Even for brand-new installs onto a large (>137GB) drive, people may want F: + G: if they think they may need to boot an old (pre-LBA48) bios in the future. The old bios wouldn't know about G:, but at least it could use the F: drive without problems (assuming all of F: is below 137GB).
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 12:52:00 PM
-
hey paul sorry had a sales call today, however i sent u both the original x2 bios and the modded bios, please if at all possible email me either 4977 updated bios, or preferably the 4978.03 bios
thanks
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 02:28:00 PM
-
hey nightshade, actually, when i converted the 4977 bios and the 4978.03 bios i got unsupported bios kernal on both, however i can flash okay, but it doesnt keep, so as a quick fix i had to load dominnion x bios.
let us know when any of the x2 bios can be used.
also so u know what i am doing
open xbtool
open bios x2_4977.bin
make changes to color way i want, add lba48 rest on partition 6
save then reflash
then doesnt work
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 03, 2003, 05:58:00 PM
-
Here's a link showing some screenshots of EvoX dash with G: (partition7) support:
http://forums.xbox-s...ST&f=16&t=98828
I think I'll be releasing a patch to EvoX in the next day or so.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 04, 2003, 04:26:00 AM
-
I've confirmed that this was a pre-release version of the Xbtool/LBA48 code (with known bugs) that was causing juan the problems he was seeing. I'm actually relieved by this fact - it tells me that there isn't a big/unknown problem with the officially released LBA48 code.
As NghtShd suggests, getting the released version of xbtool should solve your problems.
Edit: Oops - maybe I spoke too soon (I haven't had my coffee yet). I think the released Xbtool may also have this problem with X2 4977) I'll take some time to verify this/talk to NghtShd about a possible new release of Xbtool.
Edit2: I really should have coffee before making posts like this: the 'released' version of Xbtool is in fact OK/does not have any known problems with X2 4977. Ignore my 'Edit:' comment above.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 04:48:00 AM
-
ill post my results once im done
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 05:37:00 AM
-
actually 1 last question for you, when i do make my new bios, do i need to add the info to evox.ini? or not even worry about it?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: cgladue on September 04, 2003, 06:32:00 AM
-
...
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: cgladue on September 04, 2003, 06:34:00 AM
-
I can see my entire 200GB and i love you for it hehe
i thought this day would never come but thats why i bought a larger HDD in the first place, it was only a matter of time untill someone figured this thing out... YAY!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 10:33:00 AM
-
hey guys i been reading alot of people saying once they upgrade there bios to the 4977 with lba48 bios that they loose the IGR. Is this a bug, or something that needs to be looked into?
I know when i used dominion x bios no IGR was available, but thats just the bios
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 12:34:00 PM
-
okay 4977bios is working 100% with large hdd patch.
I think i realized what i was doing, when u download xbtool, there are 2 folders that have the exe for the program, i was going into the 2nd folder which had all the older .dll files, amongst other pre-release.
went to 1st xbtool, loaded everything just fine
great job all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: NizZ8 on September 04, 2003, 06:43:00 PM
-
Worked great for me!... thanks! here's the lowdown of muh shizzle for reference:
Xbox v1.0
x2.1lite+
160gig Maxtor L01p160
Showing 156gigs avail on F:
..
Process.
1.)Ozflash on xbox
2.)xbtool
*Using Version - XBtool_1.0.8b8
*Opened 4977 bios
*All default settings, (cept for 48lba)
*checked LBA 48 Support
*checked ignore hard drive partion
*changed option to have parition 6 take everything
*Reformatted all of the drives, and wahoo i'm up an running.
Thanks Paul!.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 05, 2003, 04:03:00 AM
-
You chose the "partition 6 takes rest of drive" option in Xbtool? (You're sure you didn't choose "partition 6 takes up to 137gb / ..."?)
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: cgladue on September 05, 2003, 04:25:00 AM
-
i have the 4978.03 release of the X2 BIOS and now my IGR dosnt work correctly... it just goes to a black screen. should i go back to the 4977 release for the time being ? is anyone else getting this ?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Hath on September 05, 2003, 08:10:00 AM
-
i downloaded latest version of xbtool. the drop down menu on the lba48 support only has one choice...i have a new 200 gig hdd, not formated....so ide like to throught the rest of the space on "F" any advice. I assume i just check "put rest on partition 6" but again i dont have that option on the pull down screen in xbtool.
thanks for the help
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Deezle on September 05, 2003, 08:51:00 AM
-
Open the pull down menu! To the right of the only option you can see, are two tiny buttons. Use them to make your choice!
Greetz,
Deezle
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 09:16:00 AM
-
O.K. I'm trying to take the plunge.
I have a 160GB. I do not want to disrupt my F part. I do wish to add G.
I am using 4976.02.
I have XBtool open right now, do I select "Ignore Harddrive Partition Table"?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Jaboo on September 05, 2003, 09:29:00 AM
-
, thanks so much!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: |MonKey| on September 05, 2003, 09:29:00 AM
-
if it works for you, im at a total loss of why this isn't working for me...
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: NizZ8 on September 05, 2003, 09:33:00 AM
-
boxorox: PaulB needs to release a patch still if you want to utliize the G drive in Evox..
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 09:42:00 AM
-
I want to just add G for everything over my existing partitions.
Can anyone tell me if I should select "Ignore hard drive partitions" on XBtool?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: cgladue on September 05, 2003, 09:44:00 AM
-
no, select partion6 up to 137GB / partition7 takes the rest
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 09:52:00 AM
-
Thanks, I know that already. There is another selectable box, besides that, that is called "Ignore hard drive partitions".
I don't think I should select it but I want to be sure.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: paperchas on September 05, 2003, 11:32:00 AM
-
I got my 200g WD to work. Everything runs fine. paulB, your work is greatly appreciated.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: jaskjok on September 05, 2003, 11:37:00 AM
-
boxorox: It says "Ignore Hard Drive Partition Table" and if you don't understand what it means then you probably won't ever use it. So it doesn't really matter which one you choose, just leave it in default value.
Ozpaulb: Could you release some info how to hex-edit own partition tables to HD?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KAC on September 05, 2003, 11:47:00 AM
-
Dude, don't feel bad, I missed that too. That drop down arrow is small and the scroll arrows to select the options is even smaller. Especiall with 1280 x 1024 resolution set on my pc.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KAC on September 05, 2003, 11:50:00 AM
-
BenJeremy said he will support the G drive in the next MXM release as well as formatting of that drive but as of right now, neither MXM nor Evox supports it....YET!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: fizgig10 on September 05, 2003, 11:54:00 AM
-
Paul,
Thanks for this great new hack! I have a homebrew 29 wire mod that I'm updating today from an old bios version to a more current one (4977) and I'd like to put the large hard drive support on it as well since it's a pain to reopen my xbox and get to the mod.
My hd is a 120gig at the moment but I anticipate changing over to a 300 in the near future hence adding the large hd support.
My question is, will enabling lba48 create a problem for me when I use it with my 120gig? When I made the 4977 bios I chose the "Partition 6 takes up the rest of the drive" option as I don't need drive G on my existing small HD and the new HD when I buy it.
Again, thanks for the great new feature.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 05, 2003, 12:38:00 PM
-
The "ignore hard drive partition table" option won't affect anything until we start seeing programs that write a partition table to the hard drive (since I'm the one who is defining the partition table format, I assume those programs won't come out until I release info on it).
As I've said before, I personally feel that you should NOT check the 'ignore' option. If you don't have a partition table on your hard drive (which NOBODY (other than myself) has right now), then it won't have any effect. If, in the future, some 'partition editor' program comes out that allows you to edit/move/resize partitions on your hard drive, the 'default' option in the LBA48 bios is to pay attention to those changes. I think that the 'default' option should be the 'normal' option: pay attention to any (possible) paritition table on the hard drive (allows most flexibiilty).
If you check the 'ignore' option, then any changes/additions made to the hard drive's boot-sector partition table will be ignored. This means that if a 'partition editor/resizer/etc' were to be released in the future, your bios wouldn't recognize those changes.
I think the only reason to 'check' this option is if you've written a 'bogus/garbage' partition table to your hard drive's boot sector. 'Checking' this option is a safeguard - no matter what (bogus) info is written to your hard drive's boot sector, it will be ignored/the 'default' partitioning will be used. Again, it really should only be an issue if you've written a 'bogus' partition table to your hard drive.
But, as I said, since NO partition table tools have been released yet, it really makes no difference (for now) what you select for this option (since there is no hard drive partition table, it will always just use the built-in/'default' partition table - no matter what you 'check' on this option).
I hope this clarifies things.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 05, 2003, 12:43:00 PM
-
If your hard drive is < 137GB, then my LBA48 patches should have NO effect (other than allowing for partition tables, which default to the same as EvoX).
Once 'enabled', my LBA48 code still uses LBA28 commands to the IDE device unless the sector number of the hard drive is >= 0x10000000. Since drives <= 137GB don't have sector #'s that high, then everything will remain LBA28 (old style), and should be 100% compatible with existing drives.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 12:49:00 PM
-
No pressure Paul.
People a just getting antsy. You're doing a great job and you're working alot faster than anyone could possibly ask you to.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: fizgig10 on September 05, 2003, 01:37:00 PM
-
Paul,
Thanks for the reply and I thought I'd check in with my findings... I used the 4977 bios with the "Partition 6 takes up the rest of the drive" option.
I installed it into my xbox with 120gig hard drive and all is well. I copied a new game to the drive and I'm able to run it from there no problem.
So, no problems over here. Now I gots to get me a 300gig drive. Who needs to save up to buy a house anyways...
-Matt
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: IonBlade on September 05, 2003, 10:58:00 PM
-
Quick question (I've skimmed both the other thread and this one, but may have missed it if it was mentioned): regarding the cutstom drive partition table: does this mean that we could potentially (when the tools are out there) have two partitions for c: and two partitions for e:, one set of which would be unchanged from retail and at the normal positions and one set of which would be loaded when the mod was enabled? That way, when we disabled our mods, even if the new Live did a check for homebrew saves, they wouldn't be there since they'd be on a different partition that wasn't currently mounted as e:.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Dirkbox on September 06, 2003, 05:18:00 AM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 06, 2003, 07:37:00 AM
-
Yes, it will be possible to do this.
It doesn't mean that MS can't detect the situation, though, since they can read the partition table, too.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on September 06, 2003, 11:23:00 AM
-
I sure have. I patched 4977 and used Avalaunch to format the G drive. Paul is working on a patch for evox, but until then, i'm using avalaunch as my default dash.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 06, 2003, 10:22:00 PM
-
is there away to format the G in avaluanch without formatting the other partitions?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: elfey1 on September 07, 2003, 11:59:00 AM
-
well im damn glad i didnt go out and get that 120GB drive i was gonna get.
Does this work on all versions of the xbox (1.1), modchip (mines a x-ecuter 2 lite), and dashboard(evo-x 1.8.3752)
Sorry if this has been covered but im very conscious of screwing up cus i seem to be so damn good at it.
Thanx
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: StormLord on September 07, 2003, 04:28:00 PM
-
It should work with no problems, just use NghtShd's XBtool Beta 1.0.8b9 to edit the BIOS (I suggest using X2 4977).
------------
Thanks Paul for the great work and Thanks NghtShd for the BIOS tools!! Great work Guy's!!!
Just a few things noticed from converting from LBA24 to LBA48 on a 160 Gig HD, and am not sure if its the LBA "thing" or a FATX "thing" that making some differences.
The first thing I noticed when I "rebuilt" my HD using Slayer's 2.1 installer was that with the new large F drive (i.e. not making a G drive) the file name lengths seem to have been shortened (i.e. was able to install the playlists that were up to 43 characters long on the old system, but now can only use 31 character long names).
some Example
02 International Space Cadet Groove (128k).sc
06 ungkar dotnet We came from NORWAY (160k).sc
02 Andreas Winamp bara fÿr (192k).sc <-wont install because of ÿ, but was able to on old LBA24
I dont know if this is from the LBA48 or if the FATX truncates files name lengths more when the HD space becomes larger
Second thing was I noticed was the apps dont seem to be reading the larger drive correctly. (I know the app developers need to correct this for their apps, I am just posting this out of curiosity on why they all read the same space differently)
some Example
Evox v1.8.3752 say's ~155 GB <- this has to be wrong
Px HDD v1.2a say's ~145 GB
DVD2XBOX v0.4.3 say's ~140 GB
Nexgen v095 say's ~148 GB
Media X Menu v 0.9n4 say's ~147 GB
Avalaunch v0.47.4 wont load
BoXplorer V0.96 say's ~ 148GB
I do believe that they all should be reading 148GB
Thanks again Paul and NghtShd for all your hard work, Its very much appreciated!!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: GuySmily on September 07, 2003, 05:00:00 PM
-
I'm pretty sure that I am unable to use many non-alphanumeric characters (- and _ work, but many others won't even let me upload), and that I am limited to 31 character names, and I'm not using the lba 48 patch (only have 120gig drive).
Does EvoX give space in gigabytes? You may be looking at 155.xxx.xxx.xxx bytes. Divide it by 1024^3 and you get ~144gigs.. It looks like it would give you the same as px hdd. It certainly does look like the apps are all doing something wrong, since they give different reports. It's probably in the calculations..
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 07, 2003, 05:48:00 PM
-
It doesn't make sense to me that going to a larger hard drive size will change the allowed lengths/characters in filenames.
Note that FATX has a limit of 42 characters in a filename. This shouldn't change on larger drives.
Filenames in the FATX directory are terminated/padded-out with 0xff characters. That happens to be the same value as the "ÿ" character. So, that could explain why you can't have that character in a filename. It wouldn't explain why it would have worked in the past, though.
What if you try copying/creating the same files on drive E:? There should be no difference between E: and F: as far as filenames go.
As GuySmily pointed out, "GB" is computed differently by different apps. 1GB according to hard drive manufacturers is 1,000,000,000 bytes. In 'binary', 1GB is actually 1,073,741,824 bytes. That would explain some of the differences (EvoX vs others), but not all of the variations shown by the others.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: stormace on September 08, 2003, 03:20:00 AM
-
Sorry for double posting, but can people post their 200GB hd up here? Model # and lockable or not. Looking to upgrade now.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: cgladue on September 08, 2003, 04:33:00 AM
-
i have a Maxtor Diamondmax 200GB 7200rpm 8mb Cache lockable
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: elfey1 on September 08, 2003, 06:37:00 AM
-
ive aquired both of the items that you mentioned (the 4977 bios and XBtool) ive unrarred the bios and obviously i end up with a .bin file, when i try to open it up in XBtool a msg box appears saying "kernel extraction failed. See logfile for more information." does anyone know what is happening?
Cheers
-elfey1
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: elfey1 on September 08, 2003, 08:58:00 AM
-
ive PM'd you with a couple of questions i have.
Cheers
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KAC on September 08, 2003, 11:28:00 AM
-
Thanks gggie, I was wondering this exact thing.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: StormLord on September 08, 2003, 09:52:00 PM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: hotzenplotz on September 10, 2003, 06:41:00 AM
-
I am having some problems with the patch. I installed a new Samsung SP1604N into my xbox. I then tried to patch an evolution-x bios (it was one with a color and no-animation hack if that matters, Evox.D6) with xbtool. I wanted to use just drive f so i took that option. I then saved the bios and flashed my chip. When I now boot with Slayers 2.1 Installer-Cd i still do not see the whole 160gb. I then tried rebuilding the harddrive - no success. The option "format only drive f:" didn't help either. I used the just released xbtool version 1.0.8b11.
Now something that wonders me: if i re-open the same Bios that i just patched before again with xbtool, the patches i made specifically for the hdd part are not saved. It now has the "ignore hd partition table" option checked (i am certain that i did not check this) and it is set to "partition 7 takes up rest" (i am again certain i did not check this when first patching the file).
Is this just a bug in the bios-reading part of xbtool or did he really patch the whole bios incorrectly ?
//edit:
well, i now tried an xecuter4677-bios and still i dont have the full 160. Or at least it doesnt show them in the drive overview. Am I missing something simple?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: NghtShd on September 10, 2003, 08:21:00 AM
-
Yeah, it's a bug in reading back the BIOS options. I forgot to adjust that when I moved the LBA48 code to a higher address.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: streaker68 on September 10, 2003, 03:49:00 PM
-
I had the same thing occur for me. I put in a Maxtor 160 GB and It only shows 129GB in slayer's. When I open the bios up in XBTool it show that I wanted to put extra space in partition 7, which is not acurate. Also the "ignore HD partition table is selected" is enabled. I understand there is a bug there, but should that prevent my drive from exceeding 129GB?
Thanks
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: hotzenplotz on September 11, 2003, 05:27:00 AM
-
I have now tried 3 different bios versions, all with the same result. I think the next thing I will do is try an older version of xbtool, maybe that helps. Any help or tips would be great.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: NghtShd on September 11, 2003, 05:44:00 AM
-
Ok, LBA48 was still broken in b11. Sorry about that, but I it worked for me. However, my drive is 100GB so I can't test > 137GB support.
I think I've really got it fixed now. I sent the a BIOS to someone to test for me and he reported that everything works. I'm just make some last minute checks and then I release b12 today. If anyone wants to test a new XBtool build you can email me at xbtool at alltel dot net. I may get confirmation from someone else that it's working, in which case I'll go ahead and do the release. If you mail be before the b12 release I'll send you a copy to try.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: gcoghlan on September 12, 2003, 05:47:00 AM
-
xbtool-108b12 did the trick for me. Previously (with xbtool108b11 and X2 4977) my Seagate 160Gb was only showing 137Gb, now 155Gb. Yeah Yeah.....Now comes the Maxtor 300Gb!!!!!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: isoz_ on September 14, 2003, 11:10:00 AM
-
Its great now the harddrive capacity has been extended but can someone tell me what the limit is now or can i get a 300 gig harddrive and will i get most of it to use or is it still limited. also i would like if there are anyone out there that can recommend bigger hardrives that are working for them for example from 200 gigs upwards.( sorry people but 120 is not enough now)
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Jester6 on September 14, 2003, 11:42:00 PM
-
Any word yet if this works with the audio or font exploits?? Thanks.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: ColdSun on September 14, 2003, 11:44:00 PM
-
The new limit I believe would be around 2.2 Tera. But I could be wrong. I have a Maxtor 300GB and get the full 300GB
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: isoz_ on September 15, 2003, 11:54:00 PM
-
hey cold sun, thx for the reply.
but can people post what harddrives over 200 to 300 to get also there lockability and there price . also if it makes to much noise etc as i want to buy a big 300 gig now.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: fldude2k1 on September 17, 2003, 02:18:00 PM
-
I am having trouble getting Partition G to have any space. I am using a bios modified with it haveing partition 7 takes up rest of the space. I also have the newest evox running and drive G use on. I tried formatting it, but it doesnt seem to work. It keeps staying at 0 bytes, partition G that is. Whats going on? I tried formatting through evox and through FTP, unless I did it wrong. Any ideas?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: juan23 on September 18, 2003, 10:30:00 AM
-
isoz,
if you go to www.pricewatch.com you will find the largest ido hdd for sale right now is 320 gigs from maxtor, they are 5400 rpm, for 297.00, and of course hdd pricing does go down from there.
$297 EIDE 320GB
$215 - EIDE 250GB
$168 - EIDE 200GB
$142 - EIDE 180GB
$109 - EIDE 160GB
$84 - EIDE 120GB
$85 - EIDE 100GB
these are current pricing as of 9/18/03
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: mrRobinson on September 19, 2003, 05:23:00 PM
-
seagate just made a 100GB platter... very cool so i'd expect 400GB drives with 4 platters on the market within a few months.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: carlosv13 on September 21, 2003, 07:14:00 PM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: fff on September 22, 2003, 06:16:00 AM
-
ok, this is my first post on this forum (I'm french so excuse my english please)
well, I've used xbtool 1.01b16 to edit my bios 4976.02 to support LBA48. I choosed partition 6 takes rest of the drive because I'have a 80Go HD currently but I'll install a 180 Go in the week. I flashed with evox. It worked fine but now when I'm booting the screen hangs on the blue X xith xecuter 2 written.
My xbox worked fine with 4976_02 bios and the only change I've made is adding LBA48 support. I don't understand why it hangs up now. I tried to boot from HDD and from a DC-RW but it always hans up...
Please help me if you've already seen this problem..
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: MadInsane on September 24, 2003, 12:11:00 AM
-
ANYONE have some more info on this man's question?? I am wondering the same exact thing...
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Ace25 on September 25, 2003, 08:55:00 PM
-
Ok, I just wanted to say a HUGE THANKS to oz_paulb, NghtShd, and all the others that made this possible. I don't technically know how you did it, but I am in awe and gratitude towards all you guys. This to me is one of the biggest acheivements in the history of Xbox modding. Today I successfully installed a Maxtor 320Gig HD, evox shows F: as having 307Gigs free!!! Simply amazing! Thanks a million!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: fff on September 26, 2003, 11:18:00 AM
-
Is it possible to add LBA48 patch into a 256Ko bios or is it only for 1Mo bios?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: SilntBob on September 26, 2003, 02:29:00 PM
-
oz_paulb:
At the beginning of this thread I saw you mention that you would be releasing some partitioning tools, but I have not seen any of those. If they have been released, what are they called?
What I am trying to do is to split the extra space between my F and G partitions (6 and 7) I don't care if I have to reformat to do that...that is okay,
But I would like to have approx 70GBs for each partition. The reason for this is I want to let linux take my F partition and then use the G partition for other FATX related things.
How would I go about doing this? If there are no tools available, is there a way to do it manually?
Thanks.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: incansun on September 26, 2003, 03:23:00 PM
-
LOL, Mad respect! Btw, does anyone have any info on how to add these bios' on to slayers cd, so that I can easily re-Flash my bios via the cd alone? I know that I can edit the config file and what not, just looking for anyone that has the command lines already built in. Let us know, thanks!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: incansun on September 26, 2003, 04:10:00 PM
-
Well, I havent searched yet for an update on reconfiguring the evox.ini file on slayer's. I just decided to do it myself, let me know if I made a mistake- here it is. Let me know if this will work. thanks in advance. To save room on this thread, I annotated the .ini file to include the new LBA.bin
Section "7) FLASH XBOX v1.X ON-BOARD TSOP OR MOD CHIP"
{
Line "--- W A R N I N G! ---",1
Line "-- THIS CAN KILL YOUR MOD / XBOX! --",1
Section "I understand the risks and & I want to continue"
{
Line "-- COULD KILL BOX & YOUR MOD CHIP! --",1
Item "7-0) Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on existing HDD LBA ONLY
Item "7-1) Flash 256k Onboard TSOP Bios on NEW HDD LBA Only
Line "------------------------------------",2
Item "7-2) Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on new HDD LBA
Item "7-3) Flash 256K onboard Tsop on existing HDD LBA
Line "- Needs Both Bridge Points on MB!-",1
}
Line "- Read TSOP Tutorials First! -",1
}
Line "------------------------------------",2
Section "8) EEPROM MANAGEMENT"
{
Line "--- W A R N I N G! ---",1
Line "-- USE AT YOUR OWN RISK! --",1
Item "8-1) ConfigMagic FINAL (V1.X EEProm Editing)","D:SYSTEMALLConfigMagicdefault.xbe"
Line "--------------------------",1
}
Line "------------------------------------",2
Section "9) NTSC <-> PAL VIDEO MODE SWITCHER"
{
Line "--- W A R N I N G! ---",1
Line "-- USE AT YOUR OWN RISK! --",1
Item "NTSC <-> PAL VIDEO MODE SWITCHER","D:SYSTEMALLfAppsNTSC-PALdefault.xbe"
Line "--------------------------",1
}
Line "------------------------------------",2
Item "10) Identify Your BIOS/Mod Chip","D:SYSTEMALLfAppsBiosCheckdefault.xbe"
Line "------------------------------------",2
Item "11) System Settings",@9
Item "12) Power Off Xbox",@10
}
[Action_10]
Info "REBUILD LARGE HDD for v1.X 4920"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Preparing V1.X 4920 Large HDD..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
copy "SYSTEMALLc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLe" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEAPP" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMALLdebian" "e:"
[Action_30]
Info "REBUILD RETAIL HDD for v1.X 4920"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Preparing V1.X 4920 Retail HDD..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
#Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
copy "SYSTEMALLc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALL1.X4034" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLe" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILAPP" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLdebian" "e:"
[Action_50]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP,EvoX,Apps on Large HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP, EvoX & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMLARGEc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEAPP" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
[Action_51]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP,EvoX,Apps on Retail HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP, EvoX & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMRETAILc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILAPP" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
[Action_52]
Info "INST/UPG EvoX on Any HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upgrading EvoX..."
copy "SYSTEMLARGEc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
[Action_53]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP & Apps on Large HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEAPP" "f:"
[Action_54]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP & Apps on Retail HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILAPP" "e:"
[Action_60]
Info "FULL Format of RETAIL XBOX HDD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Warning "This will erase ALL data on the HD!"
Progress "Formatting..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
#Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
[Action_61]
Info "FULL Format of UPGRADED XBOX HDD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Warning "This will erase ALL data on the HD!"
Progress "Formatting..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
[Action_62]
Info "RESTORE RETAIL XBOX HD TO FACTORY"
Warning "Use This on Original HD ONLY!"
Progress "Restoring V1.X Retail HDD..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
#Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
copy "SYSTEMALLc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLe" "e:"
[Action_63]
Info "Formatting F: on XBOX 1.X HDD"
Warning "This will erase ALL data on F: Drive!"
Progress "Formatting F: ..."
Format f:
[Action_70]
Info "Ready To Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on existing HDD ONLY LBA support"
Info "With X2_4977_1024k_exist retail drive lba"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Info "BIOS Write Enable points MUST be bridged"
Info "Unit Must be operating without a Mod Chip"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_1024k_exist retail drive lba.bin"
[Action_71]
Info "Ready To Flash 256k Onboard TSOP Bios on NEW HDD LBA support"
Info "With X2_4977_256k_new retail drive lba"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_256k_new retail drive lba.bin"
[Action_72]
Info "Ready To Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on new HDD LBA support"
Info "With X2_4977_1024k_new retail drive lba MultiVer IGR"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Info "BIOS Write Enable points MUST be bridged"
Info "Unit Must be operating without a Mod Chip"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_1024k_new retail drive lba.bin"
[Action_73]
Info "Ready To Flash 256K onboard Tsop on existing HDD LBA support"
Info "X2_4977_256k_exist retail drive lba MultiVer IGR"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_256k_exist retail drive lba.bin"
I included the new bios under the appropriate folder.. I know this is probably noob shit but I was wondering If I could use this to flash an existing TSOP w/4977? I mean, can I use this to Re-Flash an existing TSOP flash? Will it erase first than add the new bios?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Dante_Ali on September 27, 2003, 07:49:00 AM
-
I am also very interested in this...
Let me explain. ShAllax has just released a new version of Gentoox Home 2.1, which comes integrated with Stardust. The really cool thing about this new version is that it lets you reformat your F partition as a 'native' Linux filesystem (such as ext2/3 or reiserfs). The first thing you'll notice is that this makes it MUCH FASTER than installing it on E or F - it's a world of difference .
The downside of all this is that it needs the F drive for all of this - and as much as I love Linux, I would still like to have my F drive left intact so that I can still run emulators and such. At first I was thinking of maybe using two harddisks on the Xbox and having one of them solely dedicated to Linux and one for normal Xbox usage but of course it would be much better if some sort of tool were to be released that lets us specify our own preferred size for each of the Xbox partitions. I've searched the forums for a way to specify the size for Xbox partitions but so far I've found absolutely nothing. It seems that Evox' 'disk.bin' dictates the size of the C, E, X, Y and Z partitions and then allocates all space that is left to the F drive / G drive.
Ideally I would like to reformat my F drive and have it take up approximately 5 or 6 gigs while the G drive would take up the rest. This way I can install Gentoox on the F drive using the 'Native install' and still use the G drive for everything else. Or perhaps the other way round - if a new version of Gentoox were to be released with G drive support, then it would make sense to have a 5 / 6 Gb G: partition and have the F drive take up the rest.
I really hope that there will be a solution sometime in the future. Even a few pointers on how to do this manually would be of great interest to me - I don't care if I screw anything up in the process, that comes par for the course
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: sxmen on September 27, 2003, 11:41:00 PM
-
i heard that for alot of people that put 120gig and up the xbox get to hot , i am thinking about installin 120 but am very scared , can someone tell me what is the best to keep the xbox cool.has anyone in here had that problem
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: sxmen on September 28, 2003, 12:27:00 AM
-
is is true if you install a 120 gig 5200 it will not over heat
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: tester123 on September 28, 2003, 10:03:00 AM
-
Oh yeah, this is the F'n the shit! Thanks to oz_paulb!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Ace25 on September 28, 2003, 10:27:00 AM
-
ok, found my first problem...
I installed a Maxtor 320Gig drive, Evox M7 bios with LBA Patch. F: drive uses remaining space.
It all formatted fine, evox showed 307Gigs free on clean format. Now Evox and FlashFXP show I have 35Gigs free after a couple days of xfering files.. but it will no longer FTP files, I get "553 Requested action not taken". Is it not showing the correct space on the HD and it may actually be full? Or maybe a max directory limitation? Any thoughts?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: desertboy on September 28, 2003, 11:08:00 AM
-
see my sig for cooling tips for the deaf.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Ace25 on September 28, 2003, 02:48:00 PM
-
Well, that small problem I mentioned above just turned into a much bigger one. I was copying just a couple of movie files over, then when I rebooted my XBox, now there are no more games or emulators. I FTP into the XBox and now under games all I have is a (negative) -2Gig file named "b" and under emulators I have a "#" symbol and that is it.. somehow all the data of F:/games and F:/Emulators got corrupted... ugh.. that was 3 days work down the tubes.. now to try a different approach and make F: 137Gig and G: the rest. I am really starting to think it was a file or directory amount limitation. Can someone verify that?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: RobwDav on October 02, 2003, 04:16:00 PM
-
question. I'm using Slayer's.........and I'm bout to a 160 in. If I do this, then run xtoolbox, to reformat the F, and THEN move all the apps/games/ems etc in the f: on my 120, will if function properly? ......apps such as dvd2xbox etc.
Sorry if this has been covered, I guess I got lost in all the responses....and okay, perhaps a little zealous.
Thanks,
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: goulcatcher on October 02, 2003, 05:14:00 PM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: RobwDav on October 02, 2003, 05:20:00 PM
-
Good look GC, btw......where is a step by step for this.....(I'm at work) ....is it fairly self explanatory, once you've opened xtool?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on October 03, 2003, 04:56:00 AM
-
The only way to add support for a second hard drive (other than a physical switch solution) is to replace the DVD drive with a hard drive (only 2 drives can exist on the IDE cable at one time).
I believe it's possible to modify the kernel to support 2 hard drives instead of hard drive + DVD. Several people have shown interest in this.
It's possible, although I think the changes to the kernel will be much more complicated than the (simple) changes to support LBA48.
At some point, I'll take a closer look at the kernel to see how much work would really be involved. I'm very busy with my real job right now, so I haven't had much time to work on Xbox stuff lately.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: schmiew1 on October 03, 2003, 09:03:00 AM
-
Hi Paul
May have a small problem I have installed my 300GB drive today. I have modified my bios to support the LBA48 etc and flashed no problems.
Formatted the drive and yep 291GB' s free on drive f:. The problem I now have is when I use Xbox2DVD to copy eveything across again it keeps frezzing and I have to power off the XBOX. If I use version 0.4.5 the app hangs. If I use the latest 0.4.6 it will run and start to copy everything across but hangs everytime.
Any Ideas ????
Cheers
Steve
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on October 03, 2003, 11:05:00 AM
-
Sorry - I've never used Xbox2DVD. I suppose it could be a problem with that program, or it could be a problem with the LBA48 patch.
Have you tried another program (like the "px hdd loader' program)?
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: isoz_ on October 04, 2003, 09:47:00 AM
-
with it being fine please any one help answer this?
thx
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: schmiew1 on October 04, 2003, 10:31:00 AM
-
and here to you
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: TheDark on October 11, 2003, 03:53:00 AM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: gamarsedge on October 12, 2003, 10:57:00 PM
-
man someone needs to make a slayer 2.2 and add all these new apps on
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: overkill on October 19, 2003, 06:18:00 PM
-
Hey Ace25,
I was wondering if doing the F: and G: partions worked out for you. I installed an xbox 2 days ago with a maxtor 300 gig drive with the large F: partion and as soon as i get towards the last few gigs it starts to corupt files. (Things start to dissapear) I've done this process twice now.
I used Evox M7 Bios patched with xbtool v1.09.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: BroChaos on October 22, 2003, 11:34:00 AM
-
can someone explain how to install a new 250gb hard drive?
i'm confused about when i patch my bios, and what programs to use to prepare the hard drive. thanks.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Deezle on October 24, 2003, 07:05:00 AM
-
Thanks in advance for your answer!
Greetz,
Deezle
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: BroChaos on October 26, 2003, 09:59:00 AM
-
i just put in a 250 wd, and i'm gonna fill it up today. i've also been wondering about the success people have been having. i hope it's one of those situations where only the people with problems come here, and the ones that have success don't bother...
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: JohnyBlaze on October 26, 2003, 10:46:00 AM
-
All of the Maxtor 320GB hard drives have been recalled, apparently they are ALL failing. It's not you or LBA48, its the drive itself. Big fuckup by Maxtor!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: ExxonTsunami on October 26, 2003, 08:15:00 PM
-
Just a followup to my previous post. I gave up on the "one huge F" concept and went with F & G. SlaYer's installer supports this configuration out-of-the-box and I think that things just work better all around this way.
After doing this, Xebian installed just fine on my F partition, so I'm pretty sure it's installer was just confused by the >137GB size of the partition. Xebian also sees G just fine after the install, which is interesting because it is also >137GB.
One remaining problem I've noticed is that dvd2xbox doesn't recognize my G partition. I've got it enabled in the xml file, but I'm wondering if the fact that my G partition is >137GB is confusing it? The directories in the xml file are definitely set right.
Just trying to contribute to the knowledge base...
Update: the dvd2xbox problem was a bug in dvd2xbox 0.4.9 that was fixed in 0.5.0.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: BroChaos on October 27, 2003, 08:22:00 AM
-
hey guys, i think i messed this up. can someone confirm?
put in new hard drive, built new large drive with slayers, connected to ftp, transferred new bios, flashed new bios (with partition 6 takes rest of drive checked). when i rebooted, my f drive size was correct. i started transferring stuff back to f:, but then i remembered that i didn't format f: after i rebooted with the new bios.
i need to format f: again, right?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: TRIDENT624 on October 27, 2003, 09:05:00 AM
-
Tutorial?
I just bought my second Xbox...it's a ver. 1.0, bought used at EB Games..my first box has a 120 gig Maxtor (locked)...I want to put in a 250 gig Maxtor in my second one...is there a tut. anywhere on what you need and what you need to do to use a 250 gigger? This is great that you guys found a way to get pass the 137 barrier .....also is anyone streaming movies wirelessly using 54G...I'm thinking about upgrading my 802.11b wireless network so I can stream movies to my newest Xbox in my bedroom (about 30 feet from computer). Has anyone used the DLINK 802.11G gaming bridge? any thoughts....
Thanks...
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: ExxonTsunami on November 02, 2003, 07:47:00 AM
-
Well, so far so good. I've filled almost all of F and half of G and everything still seems to be working fine. I'll try to fill up G when I get a chance and see if things go awry.
Note that I generally boot Xebian and use scp to transfer files to F and G. I put more faith in the Linux getting large drive support right than homebrew ftp servers (case in point, the ftp server in the new evox dash is totally hosed for any client other than some obscure Windows app).
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: BroChaos on November 02, 2003, 05:59:00 PM
-
well, i've had mine running for a week now. 250 wd. 240 total, 80 still left. all games seem to be working fine, no issues at all. really pleased with everything. patch works great. running mxm as dash. 4977 bios. x2.1. v1.1 xbox.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on November 05, 2003, 08:57:00 PM
-
Ive been using this since avalaunch first added support for partition7 (almost 2 full months now), on my maxtor 160gig drive, no problems at all.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Ace25 on November 07, 2003, 08:07:00 AM
-
I put the Maxtor 320Gig in mine. At first I went with 1 big F: drive, but when I reached around 280Gigs filled it mysteriously corrupted the entire HD and I had to reformat (I highly suspect a file and/or directory limitation of FATX, but no proof). After redoing the Bios to F:=137G G:=179G I have COMPLETELY filled up both partitions to under less than 100megs free on each, and so far working flawless for the last month. Although the Autoscan of f:/games and g:/games on bootup takes quite a bit longer when you have 120+ for it to search through.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: TheButcherJB on November 09, 2003, 03:04:00 PM
-
I just used the LBA48 featured with my 160gb maxtor 5400rpm harddrive and it works fine.
I have a V1.0 motherboard and used the Slayer install disc if anyone was wondering.
SLAYER RULES ALL!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 09, 2003, 09:35:00 PM
-
just ordered my 300GB Maxtor, i found out in previous installs (not sure if bug in xbtool or lba48) if you have an .xbe file name for your dash longer than 8 characters in the bios it causes the dash to hang on boot and/or even a boot disc will sometimes hang or "jitter". A good sign is if it takes for ever for your dash to load. I've tried this only with x2 4977 and with both F takes rest and G takes rest on a 250 gig hdd, after i changed the .xbe's to <=8 characters everythign worked fine (very odd) not sure if this may hinder the use of the 300 gig hdd's. you may want to check this, also if anyone can confirm the FULL use of a 300gig hdd is working fine with F takes rest, please let us know.
EDIT: PAUL you may want to see this not sure if it is a problem with the big hdd's but i found this out from maxtor about their big hdd's
MaXLine II Nearline PATA Hard Disk Drive Family:
CAPACITIES:
MODEL ACT CYLs HDS SECT MAX CYLS GB CAPACITY
5A250J0 486,344 16 63 16,383 250GB
5A300J0 588,422 16 63 16,383 300GB
NOTE: NEVER enter more than 16,383 cylinders in the system BIOS. This may potentially cause data loss.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 09, 2003, 10:27:00 PM
-
Ace25
when you had your hdd as one big f, about how many folders in the root dir F:| would you say you had (rough estimate) as will run a check with dummy directories to test and see if i get corruption when i hit a certain number.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 10, 2003, 12:33:00 PM
-
hhmmm, i'm going to bet there isn't a limitation because i noticed someone else had a problem very close to yours. what kind of xbox version do you have, BIOS, dash etc.?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Kontra on November 11, 2003, 08:01:00 AM
-
Ace, or anyone else with this problem
If you could please look at this, and tell me if its similar to yours. And what you did to fix it?
I currently have a Maxtor II 300Gb Harddrive installed LB48 enabled, all space to partition F, after format i was allocated to 291.xxx.ect ive recently filled the drive with 14.900.xxx.ect space free. Whenever I try to copy anything else over to it, it will cancel the transfer as if it was full. Then also cause corruption on my drive.
Your problem seemed fimiliar to mine, from what I understand you allocated the extra space to G partition? and that seemed to fix your problem? No corruption? And allowed you to use all the space?
Anyone else have any thoughts to this? causes or fixes? id prefer to use F drive only, but if it takes using the G partition then thats what it takes.
thanks
[email protected]
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: luma on November 11, 2003, 09:37:00 AM
-
Does anybody have any word on a recall of the 320gb? I'm just now experiencing this very same problem and I'm wondering if I'll have to send my drive back.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Ace25 on November 11, 2003, 01:15:00 PM
-
Bah, BS on the recall. After setting up the F: AND G: drive I have not had a single problem with my 320Gig. I have filled up the drive now almost entirely (less than 10megs free on both F and G) and it has been working PERFECT.
But yes, seems to be a limit around 280Gigs on drives as that is exactly where I got to on one big F drive before it started acting full and then data corruption.
Edit: ok, wanted to be 100% sure so I just called Maxtor at 1-800-2Maxtor and asked 3 different reps if there were any recalls on the 320Gig drives and all 3 stated NO. There are no problems with the 320gigs beyond what any other maxtor drive may experience.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: luma on November 11, 2003, 01:33:00 PM
-
i also spoke to maxtor and had the same answer. my concern then is that this isn't a maxtor issue, but rather an lba48 patch issue. paulb - you still reading this thread? does any of this make sense?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Ace25 on November 11, 2003, 01:37:00 PM
-
I already spoke with Paulb via PMs and he told me this is NOT a LBA48 issue and he thinks it may be a FATX issue. I absolutely agree with his conclusion. What I can't seem to find is documentation on FATX and how it works, file and/or directory limitations, etc. Anyone else have anything on FATX?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 11, 2003, 02:41:00 PM
-
i agree Ace25, maybe if we cannot find info on FATX is there a way we can impliment a different type of file system? Possibly FAT32?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: luma on November 11, 2003, 03:11:00 PM
-
hey ace - what dashboard are you using? i'm using ava 48 and i'm wondering if that might have anything to do with it.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Ace25 on November 11, 2003, 04:06:00 PM
-
I use Evox as my dash and tried 3 different versions and all ended up getting corrupted, so its not a Dashboard related problem since your using Ava and still had the same issue.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: mark876543 on November 11, 2003, 07:51:00 PM
-
I'm happy to see this patch but I'm having a hard time getting success. I patched x24977 w/ xbtool, trying first the 6&rest-on-7 option, and used slayers 2.5. When booting off slayers disc the sizes look good but in HDD Loaderv2.1a it shows only 120GB still and only partition 6, no way to see partition 7 or load to it. If I just put game folders there using ftp will they work I wonder? So then I tried reflash to put all in F. And rebuilt drive in slayers again. I thought the box was fried for awhile I couldnt even boot. Reflashed back and it works again like the first time. I think I'll reload all the games and see if maybe the 120GB size report in HDDLoader is just in error. Any ideas? On my box it seems the all-in-partition-6 option doesn't work, and I'm not sure how to work with partition 7.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Cutriss on November 13, 2003, 06:21:00 AM
-
I mentioned this in the non-stickied thread, but 280GB is right at 2^38. Is it possible that FATX has an addressing limit of 38-bit-size partitions?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 13, 2003, 11:38:00 PM
-
if someone has the time, you could fill the hdd with 1gb files one by one and see exactly where is starts to "crash". this may help to point us in the right direction where to look for such a limitation.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 14, 2003, 09:25:00 PM
-
well, sucessfully got my 300GB maxtor in. I did an F and a G since there seems to be a problem with a full F. also did a glowing controller port mod with some LED's.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 01:09:00 PM
-
This is very possible, as anyone 'in the know' know's, there are limits to the # of files on a partition. Unfortunately, the xbox, and the FATX filesystem is more an 'extension' of fat32 that allows longer filenames. The XDK docs only give limited documentation on FATX as the devs of games dont really need to worry about these problems. I think it is safe to assume that the limits are the same as FAT32.
FAT32 supports the follow:
4,177,920 TOTAL files on a "volume" (a partiton, this means 4.1 million for EACH of the drives C E F G X Y Z)
65,534 files/subfolders PER folder. This means your F:Games folder can only have a max of 65 thousand files. IE: 65 games with 1,000 files each. Of course, games vary greatly in this, Project Gotham Racing 2 is over 10,000 files, while other games have less than 10.
Now, in my F:Games folder, I currently have 107,867 files in 5771 subfolders. I have not noticed any problems with games. Does this mean that there arent any? I dont know, I havent played through every game 100% to know that they are problem free.
Even assuming that they are all ok, thats only in ~116gig of space, someone with a 320gig drive, which gives them close to 300gig on F would mean, with the same ratio of files:space, would have 278,966 files, which if there was a limit around there, I would guess it to be around the 256,000 mark (i know, this # is not exact, but I'm typing as im thinking, so just stfu )
As stated above, the limits for FAT32 are more strict as far as filename length, as well as total partition size, and # of files, this would be taking a step backwards.
Also, please 'newbs', if you dont really understand what is being said here, please dont respond, just wait and see where everyone gets with this problem.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 01:29:00 PM
-
EDIT4: Talked to TJ from avalaunch, and it seems that the limit of files per 1 folder is 4096, and that is in the FS.
Soo, it seems we are reaching the peak usuage of the FATX FS, and without another one heavily in the works, the only thing that I can think of as a temp solution would be to create more partitions. Not the most efficient as far as space utilization, but there really isnt anything left to do.
EDIT5: the above is now confirmed.
The above is © 2000-2003 MS Corporation. All rights reserved.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 02:57:00 PM
-
From what a I remember, the current patch for LBA48 will look on the hard drive for a partition table, so in reality, there is the possibility for a "partition magic" for the xbox. I dont have the skills to do write this, I im not sure if there is any active xbox dev that does, that has the time. I know BenJeremy has suggested that this could cause problems with dashboards....I'll PM him and ask him to check out this thread.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 03:23:00 PM
-
Also, for anyone who wants to check their # of files/folder, you can use boxplorer, "check free space" will return the above values.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: BenJeremy on November 16, 2003, 04:18:00 PM
-
The problem with LBA48 and some programs, such as dashboards, that are set up to initialize G: (Partition 7) is with X2 BIOSes, which seem to fill the P7 info with something that causes the system to hang when trying to initialize P7 (G:). This, for some reason, does not happen on the Evo-X BIOSes.
In MXM, for example, I now look at the size of F:, and unless it's EXACTLY the size expected in a G:-enabled setup (around 129GB), it does not initialize G:. Fiddling with the partition table size of F: would hose that method up badly (but I did provide a way to hardcode the G: initialization)
So basically, messing around with the partition tables to adjust the size of F: with a G: makes life a bit more difficult for dashboard and utility apps.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: SilntBob on November 23, 2003, 02:41:00 PM
-
heinrich,
I started a separate thread a month or so ago, asking paulb about a similar issue
The thread is here:
http://forums.xbox-s...T&f=41&t=108657
I was wanting to make custom partition tables to assist with doing some custom Linux work. But the same reasoning could still apply here.
The one important thing to note, is that a "Partition Magic" for the xbox is much more difficult than a "fdisk" for the xbox. A Partition Magic like application would need the ability to not only modify partition size, but it would have to be able to intelligently consolidate and relocate data to facilitate partition resizing. That is a big first step.
It seems that building custom partition tables is achievable. paulb had included some code for me, but I do not have enough xbox coding experience to make it work. The code is in the thread above.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on November 24, 2003, 02:04:00 AM
-
Thanks SilntBob
One thing though, team xecuter decided to leave out the part of paul's lba48 code that looked at partition0 in their 4979.xx bios, so any type of 'partition magic' would not be compatible with that bios.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: EncryptedBytes on November 25, 2003, 10:17:00 AM
-
Rather than breaking a chunk of disk off for another partition, it'd make more sense to code support for loading ROMs from multiple directories in the emulator. An emulator could read roms from maybe 4 directories, then merge the list together for display to the user...
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: CaliSurfer008 on December 04, 2003, 07:20:00 PM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: CaliSurfer008 on December 06, 2003, 11:27:00 PM
-
I am expecting to get a Western Digital 250gig in sometime hopefully before Christmas and will be using it in my xbox. From what I've read, looks like I will use F & G partitions althought I would really like to just create 1 large F Partition...but looks like files start gettings corrupted
I'll letcha know!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Cutriss on December 07, 2003, 11:15:00 AM
-
It's not that it's a partitioning scheme they designed *for* the Xbox, so much as one they adapted from FAT32 to meet the Xbox's needs. Therefore, allowing for a 4TB partition is futureproofing.
Well, not all your partitions must be primary. You can have three primary and one extended with multiple logical volumes, which I suspect is the case here (not necessarily three primary, but that logical volumes are being used). Logical volumes are constructed using a linked list, so that the partition table of each knows how big it is, and how big the remainder of the extended partition is (and where it starts). You can't do direct access to logical volumes - You have to get the head of the extended partition, and then jump ahead through each partition table until you find the correct one.
Well, that's the thing. There is no *one* size, unless there's *also* an addressing limit in the partitioning system (my assertion, which heinrich seems to disagree with). A lot of the people I'd read reports of having trouble with their partitions didn't have problems until they passed around the 280 GB mark, which is just at 2^38.
If there *isn't* an addressing limit, then you can't really say that there is a hard ceiling on drive sizes, since the problem isn't tied to how large your files are, but rather how many of them you have.
Agreed. There's no reason, other than shortsightedness, that apps should be developed that need to be "patched" later to support the G: drive, or any other drive for that matter. Apps should be drive/directory agnostic.
This is a point that I strongly disagree with Xport about.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on December 07, 2003, 11:57:00 AM
-
BenJeremy -
You say that some dash's have problems when they "initialize" G:/Partition7. Is it that they have a problem when G: doesn't exist (a non-LBA48 or non-G: setup)? The bios/kernel is returning 'garbage' size/location info for the invalid partition, causing problems?
If that's the case, there are ways to discover whether/not LBA48 is installed, and which partitions are valid (using DeviceIOControl commands). Of course, it's not documented anywhere (it's stuff in my LBA48 source, which I haven't gotten around to 'officially' releasing yet), but it's something do-able.
BTW, I've hesitated on releasing my LBA48 stuff because I wanted to first 'clean up' the code and add some comments/documentation. Because of my job, I haven't had any time to mess with Xbox stuff. So, I think I'll go ahead and release the code 'as is' - it may be helpful to some developers out there.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on December 07, 2003, 12:18:00 PM
-
My thoughts on ~280GB limitation:
As I've said from the beginning, LBA48 allows for partitions up to about 2TB, but I suspect that there are FATX limitations that make the max partition size smaller. But, it should be possible to create as many partitions you like - each smaller than the FATX limitation - with no problems. The LBA48 code supports more than just partition6/partition7 (F:/G:). I forget the number - maybe 4-6 more partitions are allowed in the current code (this could be increased - up to (I think) either 10 or 20 partition limit (per drive) in the kernel).
I suspect that the FATX limitation is in the FAT (File Allocation Table). This table is at the start of the drive, and gets initialized at format time. As you add files, the space they take up gets marked in the FAT.
There are at least 2 different 'types' of FAT tables on a FATX system (FATX16/FATX32). One is for smaller partitions, another for larger. At the time of formatting the partition, the FAT 'type' is chosen and the FAT table is initialized with entries for each 'cluster' on the partition.
So, the FAT table must be of the right 'type', and must have enough entries for (total size of partition / size of 'cluster').
According to this page: Xbox Linux FATX info
a 'cluster' on the Xbox is always 512 bytes. So, the FAT table must be large enough to hold (total partition size / 512) entries. Each FATX32 entry is 4 bytes (32bits), so the FAT table byte size would be: ((total partition size / 512) * 4) bytes.
If someone has a way of dumping a formatted disk, they could confirm that a newly formatted FATX partition on a large (> 280GB) drive is large enough for the partition. Keep in mind that it's possible that the utility/utilities used to format the drive are at fault - not an underlying filesystem problem. This would be the best scenario, since that can easily be fixed. I haven't read the entire thread: is there a common format utility used in all cases of 'corruption'? Keep in mind that some format utilities (Slayer's, for example) make use of EvoX's own format code (so multiple utilities could really all be the same one).
Another possibility: the max size of a 'cluster #'. On older FAT systems, as drives grew larger, the size of a cluster was increased. Part of the reason for this was that there was a max cluster # size (16 bits, I think, so 65535 max clusters). If cluster sizes are made larger, then 65535 clusters represents a larger amount of hard drive space.
The Xbox-Linux doc I referred to above says that the cluster size is fixed @ 512 bytes. Maybe we're hitting a max cluster # limit. If so, then maybe it'll be possible to figure out how to get FATX to use a larger cluster size. I really doubt this, but since (I think) there are some 'undefined/unknown' fields in the FATX partition header, we may find that one of these values can be tweaked to use larger cluster sizes.
The negative side for larger cluster sizes means that the minimum file size now increases (a 1 byte file on FATX now takes 512 bytes of space - it would take more space if the cluster size is bigger). This means that if you've got lots of small files, you end up wasting lots of drive space. This is the big trade-off on increasing cluster size. But, it's what people have lived with on older FAT systems - we may have to live with it on FATX (assuming we can figure out how to make it use larger clusters).
My job has kept me very busy lately - no real time for any Xbox experimentation. I also don't have a drive large enough to reproduce these problems (I have a 200GB which works fine). I'll try to offer input/help on this issue, but I can't promise that I'll be able to dedicate much time on it.
I hope this is helpful.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Cutriss on December 07, 2003, 04:35:00 PM
-
That's why you could temporarily create 4 GB FAT partitions until MS rolled out FAT32 - by increasing the cluster size, the net addressable space increases, but reduce system efficiency (since complete clusters are transferred on a read, and as you mention, a 16385 byte file would use 32768 bytes in 2 clusters).
2^24 = 16.7M clusters (16777216)
16.7M clusters * 16384 bytes/cluster = 274877906944 bytes, or 274 GB.
Perhaps a 24-bit addressing range on clusters.
So, a proper test would be to see first if the cluster size is modifiable in the partition table (and format it accordingly, though I don't think any Xbox utilities currently have an adjustable cluster size in formatting options), and then fill it with 1 GB dummy files, and see if it can be reliably used beyond 274 GB.
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on December 07, 2003, 04:46:00 PM
-
I agree with your #'s, and think it should be tested.
It does seem odd to me that there would be a 24-bit limit on # of clusters. The old 16-bit limit made sense (size of 'int' on 16-bit computers), but the next logical limitation would be 32-bits.
It's definitely worth trying. As you said, existing format utilities probably don't deal with changing cluster sizes. Increasing the cluster size (always a power of 2, I believe) would decrease the overall size of the FAT (since the # of FAT entries would decrease). That would change where the 'root' directory is placed on the partition.
I took a quick look at the kernel code that reads the 'FATX' header. It does look like it tries to use the cluster size specified in the header (at least it loads it from the header into another structure). I haven't followed the code through far enough to see if it's used throughout - I suspect it is.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on December 08, 2003, 04:16:00 AM
-
I just ran across this page:
http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
It's not about FATX, but does list a limit to the # of clusters on FAT32 as: 268435456. That's a 28-bit limit, which (like a 24-bit limit) doesn't make much sense (to me).
But, it shows that a 24-bit cluster # limit in FATX may be true.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: oz_paulb on December 10, 2003, 07:36:00 PM
-
Update: I've ordered a 320GB Maxtor drive (should have it sometime next week).
I can't promise that I'll be able to spend too much time on this (very busy @ work right now), but I'll do some testing to see if I can figure out where the ~280GB limit comes from.
I'll update this thread with any findings.
- Paulb
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Cherry on December 11, 2003, 05:59:00 AM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: FoxRacR17 on December 18, 2003, 07:49:00 PM
-
Ok, i've been reading this thread, and i'm getting a new maxtor 200 Gig hard drive, will i have this problem with data curruption if i select in my 4979.06 bios to have one large partition 6? or do i have to go with a G: and F: drive? If its important, i got a chameleon LE P&E chip. Thanks!
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: InsideMan on December 19, 2003, 10:31:00 AM
-
Ok, I was told to come here, I got my chip yesterday I'm waiting for my PC then I'll be able to burn my Xecuter BIOS and EvoX Dashboard onto discs and put them on my coming Hard Drive 300GB. But what do I need what do I do?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: heinrich on December 20, 2003, 12:29:00 AM
-
read the last 18 pages?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: InsideMan on December 20, 2003, 09:50:00 AM
-
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: mhr_54 on December 20, 2003, 07:21:00 PM
-
Where do you get XBTool? I can't seem to find it on the X-S site, or is it supposed to be on this site?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: mhr_54 on December 20, 2003, 07:26:00 PM
-
. I mean, why can't all of these features just be put into Evox or something?
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: jacobesterque on December 24, 2003, 06:35:00 AM
-
so here is my situation:
i have a 160gb hard drive. my current bios only supports up to 137gb, so in essence i have lost 23gb. now i know i can reflash my chip to accept the rest of the lost 23gb and either add it to the f: drive or just create a 23gb g: drive (which i dont want to do). fortunately i have a backup of my xbox f: drive on my pc. i also know that if i reflash my chip with the 137gb + support and i already have stuff on my f: drive, it will screw it up (which i dont mind because i have a backup of it on my pc). my question is, in order to reformat the f: drive to accept my newly 137gb + support bios, do i reformat my f: drive via slayers evox auto-installer before i reflash my chip, or do i reflash my chip first and then reformat my new f: drive?
tank you
-
Title: Lba48 Support Released (beta)!
Post by: Reaper527 on December 24, 2003, 06:39:00 AM
-
i would imagine you would have to flash your chip first then format your F partition. otherwise you would format your F partition, it would still be unable to recognize past 137, then you would flash and have to format again. just my reasoning, i don't know 100%
Post by: networkBoy on May 06, 2005, 05:54:00 PM
If you enable F takes rest of drive, you will corrupt your existing data.
Make a backup to be sure in either case.
-nB
Post by: wup on May 06, 2005, 07:01:00 PM
Lol who started up an 8 month old thread again
Post by: Tobb555 on May 06, 2005, 07:22:00 PM
QUOTE
Sep 1 2003, 05:25 PM
thread kinda old isnt it
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 05:55:00 PM
Check the main xbox-scene news page for info on the latest version of Xbtool. It supports LBA48 and partition tables.
I thought I'd create a new topic here for feedback (hopefully all success stories), and questions.
REMEMBER: This is 'beta' code - use at your own risk!
Update: Don't choose "Partition 6 Takes Rest of the Drive" if you plan on using an existing drive (with data already on F:) that's > 137GB! This will increase the size of the partition assigned to F:, but since it was formatted while it was in a smaller partition, the FAT structures will not be correct. This will result in data corruption! Only choose this option if you intend to re-format the entire F: partition (or if you're starting with a new drive).
Thanks to NghtShd for his help in incorporating the changes into Xbtool.
Full source code/more info will be released in the next couple of days.
- Paulb
This post has been edited by oz_paulb: Sep 2 2003, 02:50 AM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 05:56:00 PM
- Paulb
Post by: PM5K on September 01, 2003, 06:05:00 PM
Post by: Gman22 on September 01, 2003, 06:08:00 PM
Post by: bborski on September 01, 2003, 06:21:00 PM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 06:24:00 PM
| QUOTE (bborski @ Sep 2 2003, 02:45 AM) |
| just checkin it out, i dont have a new hard drive to test it yet but soon. just a quick question, what does "Ignore Hard Drive Partition Table" mean? i didnt see any thing about it in the documentation |
It's possible to put a partition table on the first sector of the hard drive (I'll document how to do this later).
(the partition table defines the start and size of each of the partitions on the hard drive (example: partition6 is "F:")).
All of the options in Xbtool are for the 'default' partition table that's created at boot-up time. If a partition table is seen on the boot sector of the hard drive, then that one will override the 'default' one.
Normally, this is what you want - it'll allow for 'partition table editors' to be created that'll let you move/resize partitions, etc.
But, if for some reason you screw-up your hard drive's partition table, you can always go back to the 'default' by using Xbtool and selecting 'Ignore hard drive partition table' (and re-burning your flash chip with the new code). This is more of a safeguard than anything else - just in case the hard drive gets messed up.
- Paulb
This post has been edited by oz_paulb: Sep 2 2003, 01:25 AM
Post by: boxorox on September 01, 2003, 06:12:00 PM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 06:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (boxorox @ Sep 2 2003, 03:12 AM) |
| Thanks for all your work Paul. I have a 160gb, but I think I'm gonna wait it out a little. It's not quite full yet and I really don't want to start over. However, it is very comforting to know you gave me back 23gb. |
Once other apps allow for things to be stored on other partitions (instead of hard-coded "F:" support), you should be able to create a new partition that's just the 23GB after 137GB (assigned to some other drive letter). Then you can store some of your stuff there (without losing your F: drive contents).
- Paulb
Post by: Biznaz on September 01, 2003, 06:20:00 PM
to you paul.
Post by: Heet on September 01, 2003, 07:16:00 PM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 07:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (Biznaz @ Sep 2 2003, 03:20 AM) |
| from what i've read, can't you just allocate the rest of your 160gb to partition7, leaving partition6(F:) untouched? I was planning on doing this. :beer: to you paul. |
Yes, the 'key' at this point will be: how do you format the 'extra' partition, and how do you get apps/files/etc onto it? That'll (hopefully) come as existing apps/dashboards start supporting the idea of more partitions.
I'll be releasing some partitioning utilities in the next couple of days (lets you create/edit a partition table on your hard drive). What I've already done (by hand - without these utils) is:
- Write a partition table on the boot sector that describes the current F: (partition6) partition, as well as the new partition7 (that's above 137GB)
- "swapped" the 6/7th partition table entries. Now, F: points to the partition above 137GB (and 'partition7' points to your old F: drive)
- Booted Slayer's EvoX installer, and formatted F: (partition6, which is still pointing to above 137GB)
At this point, I can boot-up, and F: points to an empty partition (above 137GB). I can use it normally, but I don't have access to my 'old' F: partition (although the data is still there, and intact). If I "swap" the 6/7th partition table entries again, and reboot, I can see my old F: drive, but can't see the new one above 137GB.
Again, once apps/dashboards support more partitions, this'll all be much easier.
If you want 100% support for LBA48 right now, it'll require dedicating the entire remainder of the drive to F: (since everything knows about partition6/F: right now).
Once again, just remember that this code is 'beta', so please don't experiment with drives containing data you can't risk losing.
- Paulb
Post by: bborski on September 01, 2003, 07:25:00 PM
so i have to flash the new bios and then format the new drive?
i dont plan on playing with the partition sizes at all (too much for my head) so when i edit my bios before i flash do i want to check the "Ignore Hard Drive Partion Table" option or not?
im really sorry for all the questions its just that this stuff is so far over my head
Post by: mrRobinson on September 01, 2003, 07:30:00 PM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 07:33:00 PM
| QUOTE (bborski @ Sep 2 2003, 03:49 AM) |
| so when i get a new drive id like it to be just like the one i have now, put the rest of the space in F. so i have to flash the new bios and then format the new drive? i dont plan on playing with the partition sizes at all (too much for my head) so when i edit my bios before i flash do i want to check the "Ignore Hard Drive Partion Table" option or not? im really sorry for all the questions its just that this stuff is so far over my head |
I wouldn't check the 'ignore hard drive partition table' option unless you have problems (with a corrupted hard drive boot sector). If you check it, you'll never be able to re-partition your hard drive. You may not want to now, but there may be a reason to in the future. It's probably best to leave your options open.
So, using Xbtool, choose "Partition 6 Takes Rest of the Drive", save your new bios, and put it onto your modchip. Now, you should be able to re-boot the Xbox (with Slayer EvoX installer CD in the drive, for example (or whatever utility you'd normally use)), and it'll see the entire hard drive, ready to format.
- Paulb
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 01, 2003, 07:39:00 PM
thanks
Post by: da_frog on September 01, 2003, 07:06:00 PM
Can anyone confirm that the xbtool works i believe paulb 101% percent on this and i have had some pretty bad run ins with xbtool and i cant flash and test my xbox (i got tsop) so has anyone really tested it???
btw. like i said i have no doubts in paulb
Post by: xboxw00t on September 01, 2003, 07:36:00 PM
Just a thought.. This wouldnt work for evolutionx (the strings don't show up) -
But should in Avalaunch (if they don't have a new version soon which I'm sure they will)
Just a thought..
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 01, 2003, 07:41:00 PM
I have a 160gb and chose option to have partition 6 take rest of drive just to see what happened. The good news is that sure enough, I got and extra 20 or so GB!! But all my games, etc that were on partition f: were gone!!
Or were they?
If this happens...DON"T WORRY!! Just reflash your bios with option to use >137gb on partition 7 and all your items will reappear.
I'll have a clean 200gb to try tomorrow, and I'll post results then.
Thanks so much oz_paulb!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 01, 2003, 07:44:00 PM
| QUOTE (phoenix-lizard @ Sep 2 2003, 04:41 AM) |
| If this happens...DON"T WORRY!! Just reflash your bios with option to use >137gb on partition 7 and all your items will reappear. |
Just make sure you don't do anything that could write to F: while it's in this odd state. If you write to it, you could corrupt files that are there (even if they are not visible to you).
But yes, if you don't write to the drive while it's in this state, going back and choosing the suggested option and re-flashing the BIOS will make your old drive F: re-appear.
- Paulb
Post by: heinrich on September 01, 2003, 07:47:00 PM
| QUOTE (xboxw00t @ Sep 1 2003, 11:36 PM) |
| for people having problems with using things like xToolBox etc for sending files, couldn't they patch the xbe and replace another Partition reference with the one they want? such as making Partition5 point to 7? If you needed to manage it you could just select drive 'e' (Even though it'd point to partition7 instead of partition5)? Just a thought.. This wouldnt work for evolutionx (the strings don't show up) - But should in Avalaunch (if they don't have a new version soon which I'm sure they will) Just a thought.. |
You still need an app to format partition7. Right now, nothing does.
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 01, 2003, 08:00:00 PM
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 01, 2003, 08:04:00 PM
Xbox-Scene Online Web Community->Hardware Forums->General Hardware/Technical Chat ->List Of Hard Disks And "lockability"
http://forums.xbox-s...&t=30117&st=300
Just a thought.
Post by: bborski on September 01, 2003, 08:14:00 PM
Post by: (>Stormy<) on September 01, 2003, 10:56:00 PM
Does this mean something to anybody? Would this be an ideal drive?
Anywho... thought it was interesting.
Oh... and thank you very much for this gift, very clever
Post by: GrumpY on September 01, 2003, 11:30:00 PM
I really think this topic will be fucked up if pbs reports are coming in the same time that the "practical" questions every man who didn't read the rest will posts again and again.
A message to every one : Please read the FAQ, the threads. all the answers are already available for most of us and let oz_paulb have constructive return of his amazing work !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: Blastomy on September 01, 2003, 11:44:00 PM
| QUOTE ((>Stormy<) @ Sep 2 2003, 01:56 AM) |
| I thought that this was very funny in light of recent discoverys... Western Digital 200GB Internal drive look at the ATA/100* interface part of the descript. "[Ultra ATA/100 interface*] *Includes Promise Technology Ultra ATA/100 card to break the 137.0GB barrier found on many PCs." Does this mean something to anybody? Would this be an ideal drive? Anywho... thought it was interesting. Oh... and thank you very much for this gift, very clever |
Yeah It means it comes with a controller card for your comp so you can plug it in and see all 200gb
Post by: gabvey on September 02, 2003, 01:49:00 AM
gabriel
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 03:51:00 AM
| QUOTE (gabvey @ Sep 2 2003, 10:49 AM) |
| This is really an impressive work. Many thanks Paul ! I have a question about xboxlive. In order to reach xboxlive, I disable the my modchip, using the original bios on the main board. Therefore this bios will use lba32 to manage the disk. Is there any risk of data corruption ? I didnt fully understand the partition table stuff. Will the orginal bios be able to deal with this table ? I think that I'm gonna buy a new drive soon gabriel |
An original bios will use LBA28, and doesn't "see" F: (partition6) or any extra partitions.
It should work fine when booting with the original bios - you'll be able to access the 'standard' partitions (C/E/X/Y/Z), but just not the new one(s). Re-booting with the LBA48-enabled bios will make the new partition(s) visible again.
And, again, since this is 'beta', YES - there is risk of data corruption (please wait until more testing has been done if you are concerned about data loss).
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 03:56:00 AM
| QUOTE (peach_nick @ Sep 2 2003, 06:47 AM) |
| Ok, thanks to Paul for the kernal. I got my 160 WD to be fully recognized. but........... I copied my f to my computer before flashing and reformating partition 6 with fxp and then dumped my f back after i had the drive fully recognized. When i tried to run any of my games or appz none ran the loading screen just stuck, every thing else seems to be fine. I'm gonna try to ftp over the original appz(not from backed up drive) 2morrow and see what happens then. if any body can help me out it would be appreciated. |
I'd really like to hear back from you on whether/not this is still a problem.
If it is, please give details of exactly how you formatted the drive, whether/not you re-booted after formatting (I don't know if this is important or not), etc.
If you're re-starting by reformatting again, please try copying just one app/game, running it, and (if it works) add a few more apps, try running them, etc. Maybe there's a barrier where data corruption is happening.
- Paulb
Post by: the joker on September 02, 2003, 06:53:00 AM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 07:27:00 AM
I think that we should come up with a 'standard' drive letter for "partition7" (and maybe "partition8", ...), as opposed to every app/dashboard coming up with its own letter assignments. I think (the obvious choice of) "G:" is already used by memory cards, so that probably shouldn't be used.
(As I've said before, I think the better long-term solution is to show the user a list of partitions/let them choose, but near-term drive letters are easier).
- Paulb
Post by: peach_nick on September 02, 2003, 07:57:00 AM
Paul,
I am almost positive that i flashed new bios, then formatted with fxp and did not reboot before i dumped my old f drive data over to my box. im sure this had something to do with my problem.
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 02, 2003, 08:15:00 AM
Hope this helps.
Post by: Noobicide on September 02, 2003, 08:35:00 AM
I might suggest something here though.
the so called drive letters don't have to be a single letter.
its a carry through from back when you could only make 32MB partitions and would have an ungodly number of them on a 200mb drive (yes there were people who ran fat12 on 200mb drives, usgovt being one of them)
in that situation you would have AA: AB: and so on. (assuming multiple drives in the same system) also for when you mounted a few dozen network shares
in actuality, you can have anything up to IIRC 11 characters as a device name, although it may be longer.
anywho, I've sucessfully tested long device names, and nexgen uses them in 1.0 and my new dash/os project uses similar names:
System: - Xbox dashboard & data files
DVD: - First / Single dvd drive
DVD2: - Second dvd drive
Storage: - 5GB E:
Extended: - Rest of drive to 137GB
Expanded: - Drive above 137GB
It would be nice if someone could post the long device names for the memory cards so they could be mounted on meaningful names ass well such as MU1A: MU3B: and so on.
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 02, 2003, 09:04:00 AM
D - DVD-ROM
E - Game Saves - Approx. 5GB
F - Media - Rest Of HDD
G - [POSSIBLE PARTITION 7]
H - MU 1A - Approx. 8MB
I - MU 1B - Approx. 8MB
J - MU 2A - Approx. 8MB
K - MU 2B - Approx. 8MB
L - MU 3A - Approx. 8MB
M - MU 3B - Approx. 8MB
N - MU 4A - Approx. 8MB
O - MU 4B - Approx. 8MB
X - Cache - Approx. 750MB
Y - Cache - Approx. 750MB
Z - Cache - Approx. 750MB
Post by: KAC on September 02, 2003, 09:25:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I have a 160gb and chose option to have partition 6 take rest of drive just to see what happened. The good news is that sure enough, I got and extra 20 or so GB!! But all my games, etc that were on partition f: were gone!! Or were they? If this happens...DON"T WORRY!! Just reflash your bios with option to use >137gb on partition 7 and all your items will reappear. |
Am I understanding this correctly?
1. You had a 160GB hard drive with 23GB's not being used because of the 137GB
limit.
2. You edited a BIOS using Xbtool and chose the "partition 6 take rest of drive"
option.
3. Flashed your BIOS and found that you now had the full 160GB usage with the
extra 23GB on F: but you couldn't see any of your games.
4. So you reflashed your BIOS again and now all games were visible?
In essence, you just have to flash the BIOS twice to have all the 160GB's recognized with the extra space on F: without messing up any of your existing data?
Please confirm!!!
PS...YOU DA MAN OZ_PAULB!!!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 09:51:00 AM
| QUOTE (KAC @ Sep 2 2003, 06:25 PM) | ||
Am I understanding this correctly? 1. You had a 160GB hard drive with 23GB's not being used because of the 137GB limit. 2. You edited a BIOS using Xbtool and chose the "partition 6 take rest of drive" option. 3. Flashed your BIOS and found that you now had the full 160GB usage with the extra 23GB on F: but you couldn't see any of your games. 4. So you reflashed your BIOS again and now all games were visible? In essence, you just have to flash the BIOS twice to have all the 160GB's recognized with the extra space on F: without messing up any of your existing data? Please confirm!!! PS...YOU DA MAN OZ_PAULB!!! |
The second time he flashed, he chose a different Xbtool option (Partition 6 up to 137GB / Partition 7 rest of drive). This made Partition6 the same size as it was before LBA48 support was added, so the FAT file structures were valid/everything re-appeared.
After doing this, the extra 23GB is in Partition7 (not part of F:).
Basically, he shouldn't have chosen "Partition 6 takes rest of drive") if he wasn't planning on re-formatting F: (I think he did this before I made that clear).
- Paulb
Post by: boxorox on September 02, 2003, 10:07:00 AM
| QUOTE (KAC @ Sep 2 2003, 06:25 PM) | ||
Am I understanding this correctly? 1. You had a 160GB hard drive with 23GB's not being used because of the 137GB limit. 2. You edited a BIOS using Xbtool and chose the "partition 6 take rest of drive" option. 3. Flashed your BIOS and found that you now had the full 160GB usage with the extra 23GB on F: but you couldn't see any of your games. 4. So you reflashed your BIOS again and now all games were visible? In essence, you just have to flash the BIOS twice to have all the 160GB's recognized with the extra space on F: without messing up any of your existing data? Please confirm!!! PS...YOU DA MAN OZ_PAULB!!! |
KAC: He wrote that he reflashed with the option to use >137gb on part 7
It sounds to me like he added the extra space to part 7, after he couldn't see is data in F.
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 10:08:00 AM
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 10:19:00 AM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 10:43:00 AM
| QUOTE (NghtShd @ Sep 2 2003, 07:40 PM) |
| I don't think oz_paul means overwrite E:. Basically, your old E: would still be there, just invisible. The new E: partition (consisting of the +137GB area) would replace it. If you switched back to a non LBA48 BIOS your old E: would return. |
Correct.
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 10:44:00 AM
Now would this be aproblem going forward with saved games, being saved to the invisible drive.
Of course i would much rather reformat my drive and start from scratch, but this would work till i find the time to do that
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 11:19:00 AM
now how would i just do that instead of the simple way reformating?
do i just add the new bios selecting partition 6 up to 137GB/ No partition 7.
would this move the remainder over to E?
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 11:43:00 AM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 12:25:00 PM
| QUOTE (goan_trance @ Sep 2 2003, 09:10 PM) |
| Paul, I currently have a 250Gb drive in my xbox. I bought this mistakenly when I modded my xbox, as I was unaware of the 137Gb limitation re: the modchip. I currently have data on the harddrive (backed up game, etc.) which is not vital, but I'd rather keep if possible. (I have a second copy elsewhere as well). Thanks for the LBA048 patch...really helpful in terms of unlocking my harddrive's full space. I currently have Evox installed on my xbox, and it is recognizing the 137Gb max....just a few questions: 1) I've downloaded xbtool (the new release)....do I just unzip it , burn it as an iso, and load it into my xbox, or do I need to reflash my mochip or something? 2) Let's say I don't care about the current info on the HD....do I still choose "Partition 6 takes rest of space"? 3) I am assuming once (2) is done, it will show the remainder HD space under F: ....do I need to do anything else besides reformatting F:? Thanks. Let me know. Goan. |
Xbtool is a Windows app that takes a bios image (.bin - EvoX D.6, X2 4977/4978, for example), and lets you make changes to it (including now the LBA48 patch). You run this app on windows, and generate a new bios image (.bin). You then need to re-flash your modchip (using whatever method is the normal method for your modchip) in order to get it into your Xbox.
If you don't care about what's on F: (you don't mind losing all data/games/apps on F:), then choose ""Partition 6 takes rest of space" in Xbtool when generating the new bios. Boot your Xbox using the new bios, re-format F:, then reboot again. At this point, you'll have an empty F: drive that uses everything up to the end of your disk (not limited to being below 137GB any more)
If you want to preserve what's on F:, then you should choose "Partition 6 uses up to 137GB / Partition 7 uses rest of drive". That'll leave your F: partition alone. You'll then need to figure out how to format your 'extra' paritition (partition7) and get files onto it. Again, hopefully some of the standard utilities/dashboards will start supporting extra partitions.
- Paulb
Post by: vmehta211 on September 02, 2003, 12:45:00 PM
I have a WD 160GB hard drive. I was wondering if there was a way to assign the rest (23GB) of space that my xbox cannot see to a drive letter "V:" and then use EvoX's format utility to format the drive? I think these types of questions have been asked and answered before but I am unclear why this is not possible. I want to use the remaining 23GB to store backup games and am not planning on running any apps from this "V:" drive. I will only need to add the addItem.. command to evox.ini to add the games on my "V:" drive to have them show up in Evox's menu.
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 12:55:00 PM
| QUOTE (vmehta211 @ Sep 2 2003, 09:45 PM) |
| Paul, I have a WD 160GB hard drive. I was wondering if there was a way to assign the rest (23GB) of space that my xbox cannot see to a drive letter "V:" and then use EvoX's format utility to format the drive? I think these types of questions have been asked and answered before but I am unclear why this is not possible. I want to use the remaining 23GB to store backup games and am not planning on running any apps from this "V:" drive. I will only need to add the addItem.. command to evox.ini to add the games on my "V:" drive to have them show up in Evox's menu. |
Is there any way (via an .ini file, etc) to tell EvoX that it should assign drive "V:" to the partition "\Device\Harddisk0\partition7"? That's the biggest stumbling block I can think of - getting EvoX to 'mount' drive "V:" when it starts up (in Xbox, only some of the 'standard' drives get mounted automatically - it's up to apps to mount the rest of them).
It may be possible to have the LBA48-patched bios automagically mount a drive letter (V:, for example) to that partition. In that case, I think the "additem" command may work. But, I don't know if you FTP'd to EvoX if it would show you a drive V: for transferring files, or if the built-in format commands would support V:
Slightly off-topic question: Is EvoX dashboard still actively being developed? I made a couple of posts on their forum (when I was having problems with "ConfigSector", and never got any sort of 'official' response (only other forum readers giving their opinions). Just curious..
- Paulb
Post by: boxorox on September 02, 2003, 12:58:00 PM
Post by: mattg39 on September 02, 2003, 01:54:00 PM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 01:57:00 PM
| QUOTE (mattg39 @ Sep 2 2003, 10:54 PM) |
| avalaunch is currently working on adding support for partition 7 in the ftp server, file manager, and auto list for games. |
That's good news! Hopefully other apps will follow...
- Paulb
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 02:09:00 PM
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 02:26:00 PM
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 03:10:00 PM
anyone encounter this?
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 03:48:00 PM
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 04:21:00 PM
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 04:31:00 PM
i load up xbtool, select the bios i want, make a 1meg file, then save to the name i create, then reflash chip, i am going to try an zero out the drive next and start completely fresh
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 05:10:00 PM
is slayers the only one thats works correctly??
Post by: qadmin on September 02, 2003, 06:27:00 PM
Are there size limitations for this type of addressing?
What is the maximum size of a drive that could be used?
Thanks again to Paul and all!!
Post by: qadmin on September 02, 2003, 06:51:00 PM
Keep up the great works!!!
-Q
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 06:57:00 PM
I noticed that when they check to see if a drive exists, they do a raw sector read of the *hard coded* beginning sector of that partition, to see if there is a "FATX" at the beginning (to see if there is a valid filesystem there).
What this means is: it'll be difficult to move 'standard' partitions (C/E/X/Y/Z) to other areas of the drive (like above 137GB), because EvoX will be looking at the 'standard' location for those drives. Also, moving the start of the F partition to anything higher/different could cause problems (EvoX may not find it).
I think this is just the initial check to see if it should bother 'mounting' the drive. After that, it passes the partition #/drive letter to IoCreateSymbolicLink() (letting the kernel take care of everything else).
This also could mean that EvoX will have problems formatting drives that aren't at their 'standard' locations. My experience says that this isn't the case - I formatted an F: drive that started above 137GB, and it didn't corrupt my 'old' F: drive.
So, just be careful when doing things with EvoX right now (formatting partitions/etc).
If I make progress, I may be releasing a patch to EvoX (since the developers don't seem to be supporting it any more).
- Paulb
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:08:00 PM
i flash chip with ozx using the 4977 bios
boot up auto slayers v2.1 format lg hdd
shows 155 gig on f drive.
then load on evox, reboot, then wlla
no more files, all drives show zero again, x2 doesnt show up on boot up
any idea what is happening
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:16:00 PM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 07:24:00 PM
| QUOTE (oz_paulb @ Sep 3 2003, 04:21 AM) | ||
I assume you're using a CD/DVD with Slayer's installer? After you format, what if you re-boot and leave the CD in the drive? Does it still show 155GB free? Have you tried a different BIOS (I've done pretty thorough testing on EvoX D.6)? I don't remember if you mentioned it before: what is your hard drive manufacturer/model/etc? - Paulb |
Another couple of things to try:
1. Use non-LBA48 bios, follow the same steps. You won't have 155GB free on F:, but see if things work after rebooting
2. Use LBA48 bios, but tell it the option that says "partition6 uses up to 137gb / no partition7", and follow the same steps. This should be identical to a non-LBA48 bios.
- Paulb
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:25:00 PM
i am using a maxtor 160 gig dimond max ultraplus 9 8meg cache 7200 rpm
havnt tried any evox d.6 bios, been using 4978.03, and 4977 bios, seems to be flashed fine, just not taking the large hdd patch, works fine on regular hdd
I have a 200 gig WD special edition i could try this on another day.
but maxtor is what i would prefer
Post by: juan23 on September 02, 2003, 07:26:00 PM
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 02, 2003, 08:25:00 PM
<map>G:,Harddisk0Partition7</map>
and have it work?
Thanks Paul.
Post by: goan_trance on September 02, 2003, 08:28:00 PM
I'm having a little trouble with it right now.
I loaded (clicked on "open") my *.bin file into xbtool, checked off the lba048 option, and chose "use rest of HD for partition 6".
I then clicked on "save as", and saved the file. When I tried opening the "revised" bios file in xbtools, at the top of the screen it said "unknown kernel" as opposed "bios 4976.02", and the lba048 options I had selected did not show up (the option was unmarked and that part of the window was greyed out).
What am I doing wrong?
I disregarded this, and tried to flash my chip with the "new" bios.bin file, and was unsuccessful...it gave me the following error:
"unflashable....bios error".
Kindly let me know how to rectify.
Thanks in advance for getting back to people quickly re: their questions.
Goan.
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 08:56:00 PM
| QUOTE (KiLaHuRtZ @ Sep 3 2003, 05:25 AM) |
| I have to agree that EvoX is going down the shitter. I currently use it, but I am thinking of switching to the XBMP as my main dashboard. My question is since you have to map the drives in the config.xml file, could I just map drive "G" <map>G:,Harddisk0Partition7</map> and have it work? Thanks Paul. |
I've never really messed with XBMP, so I don't know the answer to that.
If there's a place with "F:" and "partition6" in a .ini script somewhere, you should be able to create another one with "G:" and "partition7".
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 08:58:00 PM
| QUOTE (goan_trance @ Sep 3 2003, 05:28 AM) |
| Hi Paul. Quick question re: using Xbtools. I'm having a little trouble with it right now. I loaded (clicked on "open") my *.bin file into xbtool, checked off the lba048 option, and chose "use rest of HD for partition 6". I then clicked on "save as", and saved the file. When I tried opening the "revised" bios file in xbtools, at the top of the screen it said "unknown kernel" as opposed "bios 4976.02", and the lba048 options I had selected did not show up (the option was unmarked and that part of the window was greyed out). What am I doing wrong? I disregarded this, and tried to flash my chip with the "new" bios.bin file, and was unsuccessful...it gave me the following error: "unflashable....bios error". Kindly let me know how to rectify. Thanks in advance for getting back to people quickly re: their questions. Goan. |
To tell you the truth, I'm not an expert on Xbtool. I've only used it recently, and for specific uses (just to do quick testing of the LBA48 patches).
I'd suggest you email the Xbtool author (xbtool at alltel.net). He's also been checking into these forums, so he may be able to answer here.
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on September 02, 2003, 09:00:00 PM
| QUOTE (KiLaHuRtZ @ Sep 3 2003, 05:25 AM) |
| I have to agree that EvoX is going down the shitter. |
I think I should have some patches for EvoX (to support G: drive) in the next couple of days.
- Paulb
Post by: Heet on September 02, 2003, 10:17:00 PM
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 02:05:00 AM
4977 and 4978.03 are not working for me on a version 1.0 xbox.
if anyone has a successfull x2 bios with the large hdd update please post on xbox NG
thanks
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 02:45:00 AM
i open xbtool
open my 1 meg bios
change a couple thingd=s
set lba48 to take rest on partition 6
then save bios
burn to cdrw
load ozx flash
do the swap
then it shuts down
when booting back up colors are changed, slayers auto is in there, so it boots up drives read zero, i reformat then drives f reads 155 gig.
i shut down wait about 2 mins, reboot goes into loading without any cdrw or dvdr in no (x2 shows up under the xbox logo. then it just freezez.
i reboot with slyers back in hdd reads all zeros again.
so just maybe im using xbtool incorrect, but all seems to be self exlanitory.
please let me know the steps people have done, so as this will probably help many others as well
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 04:34:00 AM
Post by: the joker on September 03, 2003, 06:59:00 AM
Post by: phoenix-lizard on September 03, 2003, 07:45:00 AM
Please explain to a fairly noob...
I have been able to do this succesfully using the have partition 6 use all remaining space option.
People seem fairly concerned about getting another partition (G perhaps) to read apps properly. What is the big advantage of this? Or is it more that people want to know for the sake of knowledge.
I had planned on installing all my >137gb hds in the same manner as my first, but if there would be an advantage to using 2 partitions (F and G), I will hold off.
Thanks again!
Post by: oz_paulb on September 03, 2003, 09:04:00 AM
| QUOTE (phoenix-lizard @ Sep 3 2003, 04:45 PM) |
| oz_paulb, Please explain to a fairly noob... I have been able to do this succesfully using the have partition 6 use all remaining space option. People seem fairly concerned about getting another partition (G perhaps) to read apps properly. What is the big advantage of this? Or is it more that people want to know for the sake of knowledge. I had planned on installing all my >137gb hds in the same manner as my first, but if there would be an advantage to using 2 partitions (F and G), I will hold off. Thanks again! |
I see no real advantage to having F: and G: partitions if you are installing to a new drive. You can use sub-directories to separate/organize things if you're just trying to keep things separate.
The real reason for adding G: is for people who have already formatted their >137GB drive using a pre-LBA48 bios, and have lots of apps/data already loaded onto it. It's not currently possible to make drive F: "grow" to the larger space, unless you re-format it (which would require re-installing everything on F:).
The G: option lets people get the extra space, while leaving their F: partition intact.
Even for brand-new installs onto a large (>137GB) drive, people may want F: + G: if they think they may need to boot an old (pre-LBA48) bios in the future. The old bios wouldn't know about G:, but at least it could use the F: drive without problems (assuming all of F: is below 137GB).
- Paulb
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 12:52:00 PM
thanks
Post by: juan23 on September 03, 2003, 02:28:00 PM
let us know when any of the x2 bios can be used.
also so u know what i am doing
open xbtool
open bios x2_4977.bin
make changes to color way i want, add lba48 rest on partition 6
save then reflash
then doesnt work
Post by: oz_paulb on September 03, 2003, 05:58:00 PM
| QUOTE (oz_paulb @ Sep 3 2003, 07:51 AM) |
| Just a quick note: I've got EvoX dashboard mounting drive G: at startup, and it displays as a drive letter when I FTP to my Xbox. "AutoAddItem=G:HDDLoader" works in the EvoX.ini file. My G: drive was already formatted (I did it by hand), so that made things easier. I'll work on getting EvoX to support formatting G: next. But, it's time for bed now... it'll have to wait until after work tomorrow. - Paulb |
Here's a link showing some screenshots of EvoX dash with G: (partition7) support:
http://forums.xbox-s...ST&f=16&t=98828
I think I'll be releasing a patch to EvoX in the next day or so.
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on September 04, 2003, 04:26:00 AM
| QUOTE (NghtShd @ Sep 4 2003, 07:27 AM) | ||
juan, Might I ask where you got the 4977 BIOS from? It appears that someone may have leaked a BIOS patched with a test build. I would suggest you get a fresh copy of x2 4977 and patch that. My next XBtool release will fix problems like this and will also fix the problem with BIOSes patched for LBA48 not being recognized when reloaded into xbtool. If you get a fresh copy of x2 4977 it should work. If not the email me at xbtool at alltell dot net. The BIOS will not be recognized after being patched for LBA48 until I get this next xbtool release out, but so long at you start with a good 4977 it should be ok. (As an alteneative to downloading a fresh copy of 4977, you could unchecking LBA48 and saving the file, then reload it and patch it for LBA48.) I'll probably get 1.0.8b8 out tonight or in the morning. |
I've confirmed that this was a pre-release version of the Xbtool/LBA48 code (with known bugs) that was causing juan the problems he was seeing. I'm actually relieved by this fact - it tells me that there isn't a big/unknown problem with the officially released LBA48 code.
As NghtShd suggests, getting the released version of xbtool should solve your problems.
Edit: Oops - maybe I spoke too soon (I haven't had my coffee yet). I think the released Xbtool may also have this problem with X2 4977) I'll take some time to verify this/talk to NghtShd about a possible new release of Xbtool.
Edit2: I really should have coffee before making posts like this: the 'released' version of Xbtool is in fact OK/does not have any known problems with X2 4977. Ignore my 'Edit:' comment above.
- Paulb
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 04:48:00 AM
ill post my results once im done
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 05:37:00 AM
Post by: cgladue on September 04, 2003, 06:32:00 AM
Post by: cgladue on September 04, 2003, 06:34:00 AM
I can see my entire 200GB and i love you for it hehe
i thought this day would never come but thats why i bought a larger HDD in the first place, it was only a matter of time untill someone figured this thing out... YAY!
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 10:33:00 AM
I know when i used dominion x bios no IGR was available, but thats just the bios
Post by: juan23 on September 04, 2003, 12:34:00 PM
I think i realized what i was doing, when u download xbtool, there are 2 folders that have the exe for the program, i was going into the 2nd folder which had all the older .dll files, amongst other pre-release.
went to 1st xbtool, loaded everything just fine
great job all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: NizZ8 on September 04, 2003, 06:43:00 PM
Xbox v1.0
x2.1lite+
160gig Maxtor L01p160
Showing 156gigs avail on F:
..
Process.
1.)Ozflash on xbox
2.)xbtool
*Using Version - XBtool_1.0.8b8
*Opened 4977 bios
*All default settings, (cept for 48lba)
*checked LBA 48 Support
*checked ignore hard drive partion
*changed option to have parition 6 take everything
*Reformatted all of the drives, and wahoo i'm up an running.
Thanks Paul!.
Post by: oz_paulb on September 05, 2003, 04:03:00 AM
| QUOTE (|MonKey| @ Sep 5 2003, 08:12 AM) |
| HELP... i have a 160G Maxtor 5400 RPM ATA133 HD... X2.0 Lite mod chip... BIOS 4977 original, which i loaded, and added LBA support. i flashed BIOS, rebooted with Slayers, formated and still have 129G F drive :/ i went through all this with a buddy and he can't figure it out either, he's been successful 3 times now but i can't get mine to go! i lost all my xbox games for this... and my PC drive, long story... please, if someone know's what i can do that be great. |
You chose the "partition 6 takes rest of drive" option in Xbtool? (You're sure you didn't choose "partition 6 takes up to 137gb / ..."?)
- Paulb
Post by: cgladue on September 05, 2003, 04:25:00 AM
Post by: Hath on September 05, 2003, 08:10:00 AM
thanks for the help
Post by: Deezle on September 05, 2003, 08:51:00 AM
Greetz,
Deezle
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 09:16:00 AM
I have a 160GB. I do not want to disrupt my F part. I do wish to add G.
I am using 4976.02.
I have XBtool open right now, do I select "Ignore Harddrive Partition Table"?
Post by: Jaboo on September 05, 2003, 09:29:00 AM
, thanks so much!
Post by: |MonKey| on September 05, 2003, 09:29:00 AM
Post by: NizZ8 on September 05, 2003, 09:33:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| There's no need to modify evox.ini if you're only going to use drive F:. If you want to add drive G:, you'll have to wait until I've released my patched version of the EvoX dashboard (with G: support). |
boxorox: PaulB needs to release a patch still if you want to utliize the G drive in Evox..
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 09:42:00 AM
| QUOTE (boxorox @ Sep 5 2003, 06:16 PM) |
| O.K. I'm trying to take the plunge. I have a 160GB. I do not want to disrupt my F part. I do wish to add G. I am using 4976.02. I have XBtool open right now, do I select "Ignore Harddrive Partition Table"? |
I want to just add G for everything over my existing partitions.
Can anyone tell me if I should select "Ignore hard drive partitions" on XBtool?
Post by: cgladue on September 05, 2003, 09:44:00 AM
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 09:52:00 AM
| QUOTE (cgladue @ Sep 5 2003, 06:44 PM) |
| no, select partion6 up to 137GB / partition7 takes the rest |
Thanks, I know that already. There is another selectable box, besides that, that is called "Ignore hard drive partitions".
I don't think I should select it but I want to be sure.
Post by: paperchas on September 05, 2003, 11:32:00 AM
Post by: jaskjok on September 05, 2003, 11:37:00 AM
Ozpaulb: Could you release some info how to hex-edit own partition tables to HD?
Post by: KAC on September 05, 2003, 11:47:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| thank you for making me look and feel like a fool.......sometimes i amaze myself at how dumb i am. sorry and thank you. |
Dude, don't feel bad, I missed that too. That drop down arrow is small and the scroll arrows to select the options is even smaller. Especiall with 1280 x 1024 resolution set on my pc.
Post by: KAC on September 05, 2003, 11:50:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| QUOTE There's no need to modify evox.ini if you're only going to use drive F:. If you want to add drive G:, you'll have to wait until I've released my patched version of the EvoX dashboard (with G: support). boxorox: PaulB needs to release a patch still if you want to utliize the G drive in Evox.. I think I may beable to do it with MXM. |
BenJeremy said he will support the G drive in the next MXM release as well as formatting of that drive but as of right now, neither MXM nor Evox supports it....YET!
Post by: fizgig10 on September 05, 2003, 11:54:00 AM
Thanks for this great new hack! I have a homebrew 29 wire mod that I'm updating today from an old bios version to a more current one (4977) and I'd like to put the large hard drive support on it as well since it's a pain to reopen my xbox and get to the mod.
My hd is a 120gig at the moment but I anticipate changing over to a 300 in the near future hence adding the large hd support.
My question is, will enabling lba48 create a problem for me when I use it with my 120gig? When I made the 4977 bios I chose the "Partition 6 takes up the rest of the drive" option as I don't need drive G on my existing small HD and the new HD when I buy it.
Again, thanks for the great new feature.
Post by: oz_paulb on September 05, 2003, 12:38:00 PM
| QUOTE (boxorox @ Sep 5 2003, 06:52 PM) | ||
Thanks, I know that already. There is another selectable box, besides that, that is called "Ignore hard drive partitions". I don't think I should select it but I want to be sure. |
The "ignore hard drive partition table" option won't affect anything until we start seeing programs that write a partition table to the hard drive (since I'm the one who is defining the partition table format, I assume those programs won't come out until I release info on it).
As I've said before, I personally feel that you should NOT check the 'ignore' option. If you don't have a partition table on your hard drive (which NOBODY (other than myself) has right now), then it won't have any effect. If, in the future, some 'partition editor' program comes out that allows you to edit/move/resize partitions on your hard drive, the 'default' option in the LBA48 bios is to pay attention to those changes. I think that the 'default' option should be the 'normal' option: pay attention to any (possible) paritition table on the hard drive (allows most flexibiilty).
If you check the 'ignore' option, then any changes/additions made to the hard drive's boot-sector partition table will be ignored. This means that if a 'partition editor/resizer/etc' were to be released in the future, your bios wouldn't recognize those changes.
I think the only reason to 'check' this option is if you've written a 'bogus/garbage' partition table to your hard drive's boot sector. 'Checking' this option is a safeguard - no matter what (bogus) info is written to your hard drive's boot sector, it will be ignored/the 'default' partitioning will be used. Again, it really should only be an issue if you've written a 'bogus' partition table to your hard drive.
But, as I said, since NO partition table tools have been released yet, it really makes no difference (for now) what you select for this option (since there is no hard drive partition table, it will always just use the built-in/'default' partition table - no matter what you 'check' on this option).
I hope this clarifies things.
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on September 05, 2003, 12:43:00 PM
| QUOTE (fizgig10 @ Sep 5 2003, 08:54 PM) |
| Paul, Thanks for this great new hack! I have a homebrew 29 wire mod that I'm updating today from an old bios version to a more current one (4977) and I'd like to put the large hard drive support on it as well since it's a pain to reopen my xbox and get to the mod. My hd is a 120gig at the moment but I anticipate changing over to a 300 in the near future hence adding the large hd support. My question is, will enabling lba48 create a problem for me when I use it with my 120gig? When I made the 4977 bios I chose the "Partition 6 takes up the rest of the drive" option as I don't need drive G on my existing small HD and the new HD when I buy it. Again, thanks for the great new feature. |
If your hard drive is < 137GB, then my LBA48 patches should have NO effect (other than allowing for partition tables, which default to the same as EvoX).
Once 'enabled', my LBA48 code still uses LBA28 commands to the IDE device unless the sector number of the hard drive is >= 0x10000000. Since drives <= 137GB don't have sector #'s that high, then everything will remain LBA28 (old style), and should be 100% compatible with existing drives.
- Paulb
Post by: boxorox on September 05, 2003, 12:49:00 PM
| QUOTE (oz_paulb @ Sep 5 2003, 09:39 PM) | ||
I hope to release this info in the next couple of days (YES, I know I keep saying 'in the next couple of days', but I've been busy @ work/haven't had time to finalize this stuff). - Paulb |
No pressure Paul.
People a just getting antsy. You're doing a great job and you're working alot faster than anyone could possibly ask you to.
Post by: fizgig10 on September 05, 2003, 01:37:00 PM
Thanks for the reply and I thought I'd check in with my findings... I used the 4977 bios with the "Partition 6 takes up the rest of the drive" option.
I installed it into my xbox with 120gig hard drive and all is well. I copied a new game to the drive and I'm able to run it from there no problem.
So, no problems over here. Now I gots to get me a 300gig drive. Who needs to save up to buy a house anyways...
-Matt
Post by: IonBlade on September 05, 2003, 10:58:00 PM
Quick question (I've skimmed both the other thread and this one, but may have missed it if it was mentioned): regarding the cutstom drive partition table: does this mean that we could potentially (when the tools are out there) have two partitions for c: and two partitions for e:, one set of which would be unchanged from retail and at the normal positions and one set of which would be loaded when the mod was enabled? That way, when we disabled our mods, even if the new Live did a check for homebrew saves, they wouldn't be there since they'd be on a different partition that wasn't currently mounted as e:.
Post by: Dirkbox on September 06, 2003, 05:18:00 AM
Post by: oz_paulb on September 06, 2003, 07:37:00 AM
| QUOTE (IonBlade @ Sep 6 2003, 07:58 AM) |
| oz_paulb, first, congratulations on pulling off the "impossible" Quick question (I've skimmed both the other thread and this one, but may have missed it if it was mentioned): regarding the cutstom drive partition table: does this mean that we could potentially (when the tools are out there) have two partitions for c: and two partitions for e:, one set of which would be unchanged from retail and at the normal positions and one set of which would be loaded when the mod was enabled? That way, when we disabled our mods, even if the new Live did a check for homebrew saves, they wouldn't be there since they'd be on a different partition that wasn't currently mounted as e:. |
Yes, it will be possible to do this.
It doesn't mean that MS can't detect the situation, though, since they can read the partition table, too.
- Paulb
Post by: heinrich on September 06, 2003, 11:23:00 AM
| QUOTE (boxorox @ Sep 5 2003, 05:55 PM) |
| Has any one recovered their 23gb of a 160gb drive yet. (in the form of a G partition) |
I sure have. I patched 4977 and used Avalaunch to format the G drive. Paul is working on a patch for evox, but until then, i'm using avalaunch as my default dash.
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on September 06, 2003, 10:22:00 PM
Post by: elfey1 on September 07, 2003, 11:59:00 AM
well im damn glad i didnt go out and get that 120GB drive i was gonna get. Does this work on all versions of the xbox (1.1), modchip (mines a x-ecuter 2 lite), and dashboard(evo-x 1.8.3752)
Sorry if this has been covered but im very conscious of screwing up cus i seem to be so damn good at it.
Thanx
Post by: StormLord on September 07, 2003, 04:28:00 PM
| QUOTE (elfey1 @ Sep 7 2003, 08:59 PM) |
| i followed this post (or one very similar) a month or two ago, and it didnt seem like it was ever gonna happen. well im damn glad i didnt go out and get that 120GB drive i was gonna get. Does this work on all versions of the xbox (1.1), modchip (mines a x-ecuter 2 lite), and dashboard(evo-x 1.8.3752) Sorry if this has been covered but im very conscious of screwing up cus i seem to be so damn good at it. Thanx |
It should work with no problems, just use NghtShd's XBtool Beta 1.0.8b9 to edit the BIOS (I suggest using X2 4977).
------------
Thanks Paul for the great work and Thanks NghtShd for the BIOS tools!! Great work Guy's!!!
Just a few things noticed from converting from LBA24 to LBA48 on a 160 Gig HD, and am not sure if its the LBA "thing" or a FATX "thing" that making some differences.
The first thing I noticed when I "rebuilt" my HD using Slayer's 2.1 installer was that with the new large F drive (i.e. not making a G drive) the file name lengths seem to have been shortened (i.e. was able to install the playlists that were up to 43 characters long on the old system, but now can only use 31 character long names).
some Example
02 International Space Cadet Groove (128k).sc
06 ungkar dotnet We came from NORWAY (160k).sc
02 Andreas Winamp bara fÿr (192k).sc <-wont install because of ÿ, but was able to on old LBA24
I dont know if this is from the LBA48 or if the FATX truncates files name lengths more when the HD space becomes larger
Second thing was I noticed was the apps dont seem to be reading the larger drive correctly. (I know the app developers need to correct this for their apps, I am just posting this out of curiosity on why they all read the same space differently)
some Example
Evox v1.8.3752 say's ~155 GB <- this has to be wrong
Px HDD v1.2a say's ~145 GB
DVD2XBOX v0.4.3 say's ~140 GB
Nexgen v095 say's ~148 GB
Media X Menu v 0.9n4 say's ~147 GB
Avalaunch v0.47.4 wont load
BoXplorer V0.96 say's ~ 148GB
I do believe that they all should be reading 148GB
Thanks again Paul and NghtShd for all your hard work, Its very much appreciated!!
Post by: GuySmily on September 07, 2003, 05:00:00 PM
Does EvoX give space in gigabytes? You may be looking at 155.xxx.xxx.xxx bytes. Divide it by 1024^3 and you get ~144gigs.. It looks like it would give you the same as px hdd. It certainly does look like the apps are all doing something wrong, since they give different reports. It's probably in the calculations..
Post by: oz_paulb on September 07, 2003, 05:48:00 PM
| QUOTE (StormLord @ Sep 8 2003, 01:28 AM) | ||
It should work with no problems, just use NghtShd's XBtool Beta 1.0.8b9 to edit the BIOS (I suggest using X2 4977). ------------ Thanks Paul for the great work and Thanks NghtShd for the BIOS tools!! Great work Guy's!!! Just a few things noticed from converting from LBA24 to LBA48 on a 160 Gig HD, and am not sure if its the LBA "thing" or a FATX "thing" that making some differences. The first thing I noticed when I "rebuilt" my HD using Slayer's 2.1 installer was that with the new large F drive (i.e. not making a G drive) the file name lengths seem to have been shortened (i.e. was able to install the playlists that were up to 43 characters long on the old system, but now can only use 31 character long names). some Example 02 International Space Cadet Groove (128k).sc 06 ungkar dotnet We came from NORWAY (160k).sc 02 Andreas Winamp bara fÿr (192k).sc <-wont install because of ÿ, but was able to on old LBA24 I dont know if this is from the LBA48 or if the FATX truncates files name lengths more when the HD space becomes larger Second thing was I noticed was the apps dont seem to be reading the larger drive correctly. (I know the app developers need to correct this for their apps, I am just posting this out of curiosity on why they all read the same space differently) some Example Evox v1.8.3752 say's ~155 GB <- this has to be wrong Px HDD v1.2a say's ~145 GB DVD2XBOX v0.4.3 say's ~140 GB Nexgen v095 say's ~148 GB Media X Menu v 0.9n4 say's ~147 GB Avalaunch v0.47.4 wont load BoXplorer V0.96 say's ~ 148GB I do believe that they all should be reading 148GB Thanks again Paul and NghtShd for all your hard work, Its very much appreciated!! |
It doesn't make sense to me that going to a larger hard drive size will change the allowed lengths/characters in filenames.
Note that FATX has a limit of 42 characters in a filename. This shouldn't change on larger drives.
Filenames in the FATX directory are terminated/padded-out with 0xff characters. That happens to be the same value as the "ÿ" character. So, that could explain why you can't have that character in a filename. It wouldn't explain why it would have worked in the past, though.
What if you try copying/creating the same files on drive E:? There should be no difference between E: and F: as far as filenames go.
As GuySmily pointed out, "GB" is computed differently by different apps. 1GB according to hard drive manufacturers is 1,000,000,000 bytes. In 'binary', 1GB is actually 1,073,741,824 bytes. That would explain some of the differences (EvoX vs others), but not all of the variations shown by the others.
- Paulb
Post by: stormace on September 08, 2003, 03:20:00 AM
Post by: cgladue on September 08, 2003, 04:33:00 AM
Post by: elfey1 on September 08, 2003, 06:37:00 AM
| QUOTE (StormLord @ Sep 8 2003, 01:28 AM) | ||
It should work with no problems, just use NghtShd's XBtool Beta 1.0.8b9 to edit the BIOS (I suggest using X2 4977). |
ive aquired both of the items that you mentioned (the 4977 bios and XBtool) ive unrarred the bios and obviously i end up with a .bin file, when i try to open it up in XBtool a msg box appears saying "kernel extraction failed. See logfile for more information." does anyone know what is happening?
Cheers
-elfey1
Post by: elfey1 on September 08, 2003, 08:58:00 AM
Cheers
Post by: KAC on September 08, 2003, 11:28:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| (also, for anyone worrying about speed issues with the 300gb Maxtors (because they are 5400rpm/2mb cache drives), I have noticed no speed difference, with loading times or anything else, between my new Maxtor drive and my old 7200rpm 120gb drive -- i've played KOTOR on both drives (a game with a lot of loading screens), and if there is a difference in load times, I haven't been able to tell) |
Thanks gggie, I was wondering this exact thing.
Post by: StormLord on September 08, 2003, 09:52:00 PM
Post by: hotzenplotz on September 10, 2003, 06:41:00 AM
Now something that wonders me: if i re-open the same Bios that i just patched before again with xbtool, the patches i made specifically for the hdd part are not saved. It now has the "ignore hd partition table" option checked (i am certain that i did not check this) and it is set to "partition 7 takes up rest" (i am again certain i did not check this when first patching the file).
Is this just a bug in the bios-reading part of xbtool or did he really patch the whole bios incorrectly ?
//edit:
well, i now tried an xecuter4677-bios and still i dont have the full 160. Or at least it doesnt show them in the drive overview. Am I missing something simple?
Post by: NghtShd on September 10, 2003, 08:21:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Now something that wonders me: if i re-open the same Bios that i just patched before again with xbtool, the patches i made specifically for the hdd part are not saved. It now has the "ignore hd partition table" option checked (i am certain that i did not check this) and it is set to "partition 7 takes up rest" (i am again certain i did not check this when first patching the file). Is this just a bug in the bios-reading part of xbtool or did he really patch the whole bios incorrectly ? |
Yeah, it's a bug in reading back the BIOS options. I forgot to adjust that when I moved the LBA48 code to a higher address.
Post by: streaker68 on September 10, 2003, 03:49:00 PM
Thanks
Post by: hotzenplotz on September 11, 2003, 05:27:00 AM
Post by: NghtShd on September 11, 2003, 05:44:00 AM
I think I've really got it fixed now. I sent the a BIOS to someone to test for me and he reported that everything works. I'm just make some last minute checks and then I release b12 today. If anyone wants to test a new XBtool build you can email me at xbtool at alltel dot net. I may get confirmation from someone else that it's working, in which case I'll go ahead and do the release. If you mail be before the b12 release I'll send you a copy to try.
Post by: gcoghlan on September 12, 2003, 05:47:00 AM
Post by: isoz_ on September 14, 2003, 11:10:00 AM
Post by: Jester6 on September 14, 2003, 11:42:00 PM
Post by: ColdSun on September 14, 2003, 11:44:00 PM
Post by: isoz_ on September 15, 2003, 11:54:00 PM
but can people post what harddrives over 200 to 300 to get also there lockability and there price . also if it makes to much noise etc as i want to buy a big 300 gig now.
Post by: fldude2k1 on September 17, 2003, 02:18:00 PM
Post by: juan23 on September 18, 2003, 10:30:00 AM
if you go to www.pricewatch.com you will find the largest ido hdd for sale right now is 320 gigs from maxtor, they are 5400 rpm, for 297.00, and of course hdd pricing does go down from there.
$297 EIDE 320GB
$215 - EIDE 250GB
$168 - EIDE 200GB
$142 - EIDE 180GB
$109 - EIDE 160GB
$84 - EIDE 120GB
$85 - EIDE 100GB
these are current pricing as of 9/18/03
Post by: mrRobinson on September 19, 2003, 05:23:00 PM
Post by: carlosv13 on September 21, 2003, 07:14:00 PM
Post by: fff on September 22, 2003, 06:16:00 AM
well, I've used xbtool 1.01b16 to edit my bios 4976.02 to support LBA48. I choosed partition 6 takes rest of the drive because I'have a 80Go HD currently but I'll install a 180 Go in the week. I flashed with evox. It worked fine but now when I'm booting the screen hangs on the blue X xith xecuter 2 written.
My xbox worked fine with 4976_02 bios and the only change I've made is adding LBA48 support. I don't understand why it hangs up now. I tried to boot from HDD and from a DC-RW but it always hans up...
Please help me if you've already seen this problem..
Post by: MadInsane on September 24, 2003, 12:11:00 AM
| QUOTE (fldude2k1 @ Sep 17 2003, 11:18 PM) |
| I am having trouble getting Partition G to have any space. I am using a bios modified with it haveing partition 7 takes up rest of the space. I also have the newest evox running and drive G use on. I tried formatting it, but it doesnt seem to work. It keeps staying at 0 bytes, partition G that is. Whats going on? I tried formatting through evox and through FTP, unless I did it wrong. Any ideas? |
ANYONE have some more info on this man's question?? I am wondering the same exact thing...
Post by: Ace25 on September 25, 2003, 08:55:00 PM
Post by: fff on September 26, 2003, 11:18:00 AM
Post by: SilntBob on September 26, 2003, 02:29:00 PM
At the beginning of this thread I saw you mention that you would be releasing some partitioning tools, but I have not seen any of those. If they have been released, what are they called?
What I am trying to do is to split the extra space between my F and G partitions (6 and 7) I don't care if I have to reformat to do that...that is okay,
But I would like to have approx 70GBs for each partition. The reason for this is I want to let linux take my F partition and then use the G partition for other FATX related things.
How would I go about doing this? If there are no tools available, is there a way to do it manually?
Thanks.
Post by: incansun on September 26, 2003, 03:23:00 PM
| QUOTE (boxorox @ Sep 2 2003, 09:58 PM) |
| Paul: I'm still holding off, but when I do decide to recover my 23gb, I am considering naming the 7th partion "Paul" in your honor. Once again, thanks for sticking with this. |
LOL, Mad respect! Btw, does anyone have any info on how to add these bios' on to slayers cd, so that I can easily re-Flash my bios via the cd alone? I know that I can edit the config file and what not, just looking for anyone that has the command lines already built in. Let us know, thanks!
Post by: incansun on September 26, 2003, 04:10:00 PM
Section "7) FLASH XBOX v1.X ON-BOARD TSOP OR MOD CHIP"
{
Line "--- W A R N I N G! ---",1
Line "-- THIS CAN KILL YOUR MOD / XBOX! --",1
Section "I understand the risks and & I want to continue"
{
Line "-- COULD KILL BOX & YOUR MOD CHIP! --",1
Item "7-0) Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on existing HDD LBA ONLY
Item "7-1) Flash 256k Onboard TSOP Bios on NEW HDD LBA Only
Line "------------------------------------",2
Item "7-2) Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on new HDD LBA
Item "7-3) Flash 256K onboard Tsop on existing HDD LBA
Line "- Needs Both Bridge Points on MB!-",1
}
Line "- Read TSOP Tutorials First! -",1
}
Line "------------------------------------",2
Section "8) EEPROM MANAGEMENT"
{
Line "--- W A R N I N G! ---",1
Line "-- USE AT YOUR OWN RISK! --",1
Item "8-1) ConfigMagic FINAL (V1.X EEProm Editing)","D:SYSTEMALLConfigMagicdefault.xbe"
Line "--------------------------",1
}
Line "------------------------------------",2
Section "9) NTSC <-> PAL VIDEO MODE SWITCHER"
{
Line "--- W A R N I N G! ---",1
Line "-- USE AT YOUR OWN RISK! --",1
Item "NTSC <-> PAL VIDEO MODE SWITCHER","D:SYSTEMALLfAppsNTSC-PALdefault.xbe"
Line "--------------------------",1
}
Line "------------------------------------",2
Item "10) Identify Your BIOS/Mod Chip","D:SYSTEMALLfAppsBiosCheckdefault.xbe"
Line "------------------------------------",2
Item "11) System Settings",@9
Item "12) Power Off Xbox",@10
}
[Action_10]
Info "REBUILD LARGE HDD for v1.X 4920"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Preparing V1.X 4920 Large HDD..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
copy "SYSTEMALLc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLe" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEAPP" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMALLdebian" "e:"
[Action_30]
Info "REBUILD RETAIL HDD for v1.X 4920"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Preparing V1.X 4920 Retail HDD..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
#Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
copy "SYSTEMALLc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALL1.X4034" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLe" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILAPP" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLdebian" "e:"
[Action_50]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP,EvoX,Apps on Large HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP, EvoX & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMLARGEc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEAPP" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
[Action_51]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP,EvoX,Apps on Retail HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP, EvoX & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMRETAILc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILAPP" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
[Action_52]
Info "INST/UPG EvoX on Any HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upgrading EvoX..."
copy "SYSTEMLARGEc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLSkins" "c:"
[Action_53]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP & Apps on Large HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "f:"
copy "SYSTEMLARGEAPP" "f:"
[Action_54]
Info "INST/UPG XBMP & Apps on Retail HD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Progress "Inst/Upg XBMP & Apps..."
copy "SYSTEMALLf" "e:"
copy "SYSTEMRETAILAPP" "e:"
[Action_60]
Info "FULL Format of RETAIL XBOX HDD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Warning "This will erase ALL data on the HD!"
Progress "Formatting..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
#Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
[Action_61]
Info "FULL Format of UPGRADED XBOX HDD"
Warning "Make sure you have a full HD backup!"
Warning "This will erase ALL data on the HD!"
Progress "Formatting..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
[Action_62]
Info "RESTORE RETAIL XBOX HD TO FACTORY"
Warning "Use This on Original HD ONLY!"
Progress "Restoring V1.X Retail HDD..."
ConfigSector "disk.bin"
Format c:
Format e:
#Format f:
Format x:
Format y:
Format z:
copy "SYSTEMALLc" "c:"
copy "SYSTEMALLe" "e:"
[Action_63]
Info "Formatting F: on XBOX 1.X HDD"
Warning "This will erase ALL data on F: Drive!"
Progress "Formatting F: ..."
Format f:
[Action_70]
Info "Ready To Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on existing HDD ONLY LBA support"
Info "With X2_4977_1024k_exist retail drive lba"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Info "BIOS Write Enable points MUST be bridged"
Info "Unit Must be operating without a Mod Chip"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_1024k_exist retail drive lba.bin"
[Action_71]
Info "Ready To Flash 256k Onboard TSOP Bios on NEW HDD LBA support"
Info "With X2_4977_256k_new retail drive lba"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_256k_new retail drive lba.bin"
[Action_72]
Info "Ready To Flash 1MB onboard TSOP BIOS on new HDD LBA support"
Info "With X2_4977_1024k_new retail drive lba MultiVer IGR"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Info "BIOS Write Enable points MUST be bridged"
Info "Unit Must be operating without a Mod Chip"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_1024k_new retail drive lba.bin"
[Action_73]
Info "Ready To Flash 256K onboard Tsop on existing HDD LBA support"
Info "X2_4977_256k_exist retail drive lba MultiVer IGR"
Info "Once Complete the Xbox will self Reset"
Warning "If Uncertain, Turn Off Xbox to Abort!"
flashbios "SYSTEMALLBiosX2_4977_256k_exist retail drive lba.bin"
I included the new bios under the appropriate folder.. I know this is probably noob shit but I was wondering If I could use this to flash an existing TSOP w/4977? I mean, can I use this to Re-Flash an existing TSOP flash? Will it erase first than add the new bios?
Post by: Dante_Ali on September 27, 2003, 07:49:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| oz_paulb: At the beginning of this thread I saw you mention that you would be releasing some partitioning tools, but I have not seen any of those. If they have been released, what are they called? What I am trying to do is to split the extra space between my F and G partitions (6 and 7) I don't care if I have to reformat to do that...that is okay, But I would like to have approx 70GBs for each partition. The reason for this is I want to let linux take my F partition and then use the G partition for other FATX related things. How would I go about doing this? If there are no tools available, is there a way to do it manually? |
I am also very interested in this...
Let me explain. ShAllax has just released a new version of Gentoox Home 2.1, which comes integrated with Stardust. The really cool thing about this new version is that it lets you reformat your F partition as a 'native' Linux filesystem (such as ext2/3 or reiserfs). The first thing you'll notice is that this makes it MUCH FASTER than installing it on E or F - it's a world of difference .
The downside of all this is that it needs the F drive for all of this - and as much as I love Linux, I would still like to have my F drive left intact so that I can still run emulators and such. At first I was thinking of maybe using two harddisks on the Xbox and having one of them solely dedicated to Linux and one for normal Xbox usage but of course it would be much better if some sort of tool were to be released that lets us specify our own preferred size for each of the Xbox partitions. I've searched the forums for a way to specify the size for Xbox partitions but so far I've found absolutely nothing. It seems that Evox' 'disk.bin' dictates the size of the C, E, X, Y and Z partitions and then allocates all space that is left to the F drive / G drive.
Ideally I would like to reformat my F drive and have it take up approximately 5 or 6 gigs while the G drive would take up the rest. This way I can install Gentoox on the F drive using the 'Native install' and still use the G drive for everything else. Or perhaps the other way round - if a new version of Gentoox were to be released with G drive support, then it would make sense to have a 5 / 6 Gb G: partition and have the F drive take up the rest.
I really hope that there will be a solution sometime in the future. Even a few pointers on how to do this manually would be of great interest to me - I don't care if I screw anything up in the process, that comes par for the course
Post by: sxmen on September 27, 2003, 11:41:00 PM
Post by: sxmen on September 28, 2003, 12:27:00 AM
Post by: tester123 on September 28, 2003, 10:03:00 AM
Post by: Ace25 on September 28, 2003, 10:27:00 AM
I installed a Maxtor 320Gig drive, Evox M7 bios with LBA Patch. F: drive uses remaining space.
It all formatted fine, evox showed 307Gigs free on clean format. Now Evox and FlashFXP show I have 35Gigs free after a couple days of xfering files.. but it will no longer FTP files, I get "553 Requested action not taken". Is it not showing the correct space on the HD and it may actually be full? Or maybe a max directory limitation? Any thoughts?
Post by: desertboy on September 28, 2003, 11:08:00 AM
| QUOTE (sxmen @ Sep 28 2003, 08:41 AM) |
| i heard that for alot of people that put 120gig and up the xbox get to hot , i am thinking about installin 120 but am very scared , can someone tell me what is the best to keep the xbox cool.has anyone in here had that problem |
see my sig for cooling tips for the deaf.
Post by: Ace25 on September 28, 2003, 02:48:00 PM
Post by: RobwDav on October 02, 2003, 04:16:00 PM
Sorry if this has been covered, I guess I got lost in all the responses....and okay, perhaps a little zealous.
Thanks,
Post by: goulcatcher on October 02, 2003, 05:14:00 PM
Post by: RobwDav on October 02, 2003, 05:20:00 PM
Post by: oz_paulb on October 03, 2003, 04:56:00 AM
| QUOTE (Tailwind @ Oct 3 2003, 01:32 PM) |
| Well Paul, YOU'RE THE MAN! One question with this new developement I've not seen yet in allllllllll the replies. Maybee this is a newbie question and therefor not asked before, but still I dare to ask it :P With the 137GB limit overcome is it possible to use 2 harddrives at the same time? The reasons are clear: - Defrag issues are less because of splitting your data over 2 drives. - The 2nd drive will be external so no heating issues. - Data loss in case of failures will be less. Maybe the 2nd drive can be made as the G drive with all the available space? In this case you would have something like: One 120 GB harddisk (the one most people already have) |---> with the C / E / F / X / Y / Z partitions. One new external build 300 GB harddisk |---> with the new G partition of the hole 300GB Is this technically possible or is this still a limitation in the hardware / chipset of the XBOX??? Maybee a interesting thought, maybee a stupid question :rolleyes: ... |
The only way to add support for a second hard drive (other than a physical switch solution) is to replace the DVD drive with a hard drive (only 2 drives can exist on the IDE cable at one time).
I believe it's possible to modify the kernel to support 2 hard drives instead of hard drive + DVD. Several people have shown interest in this.
It's possible, although I think the changes to the kernel will be much more complicated than the (simple) changes to support LBA48.
At some point, I'll take a closer look at the kernel to see how much work would really be involved. I'm very busy with my real job right now, so I haven't had much time to work on Xbox stuff lately.
- Paulb
Post by: schmiew1 on October 03, 2003, 09:03:00 AM
May have a small problem I have installed my 300GB drive today. I have modified my bios to support the LBA48 etc and flashed no problems.
Formatted the drive and yep 291GB' s free on drive f:. The problem I now have is when I use Xbox2DVD to copy eveything across again it keeps frezzing and I have to power off the XBOX. If I use version 0.4.5 the app hangs. If I use the latest 0.4.6 it will run and start to copy everything across but hangs everytime.
Any Ideas ????
Cheers
Steve
Post by: oz_paulb on October 03, 2003, 11:05:00 AM
| QUOTE (schmiew1 @ Oct 3 2003, 06:03 PM) |
| Hi Paul May have a small problem I have installed my 300GB drive today. I have modified my bios to support the LBA48 etc and flashed no problems. Formatted the drive and yep 291GB' s free on drive f:. The problem I now have is when I use Xbox2DVD to copy eveything across again it keeps frezzing and I have to power off the XBOX. If I use version 0.4.5 the app hangs. If I use the latest 0.4.6 it will run and start to copy everything across but hangs everytime. Any Ideas ???? Cheers Steve |
Sorry - I've never used Xbox2DVD. I suppose it could be a problem with that program, or it could be a problem with the LBA48 patch.
Have you tried another program (like the "px hdd loader' program)?
- Paulb
Post by: isoz_ on October 04, 2003, 09:47:00 AM
with it being fine please any one help answer this?thx
Post by: schmiew1 on October 04, 2003, 10:31:00 AM
and here to you
Post by: TheDark on October 11, 2003, 03:53:00 AM
Post by: gamarsedge on October 12, 2003, 10:57:00 PM
Post by: overkill on October 19, 2003, 06:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (Ace25 @ Sep 28 2003, 11:48 PM) |
| Well, that small problem I mentioned above just turned into a much bigger one. I was copying just a couple of movie files over, then when I rebooted my XBox, now there are no more games or emulators. I FTP into the XBox and now under games all I have is a (negative) -2Gig file named "b" and under emulators I have a "#" symbol and that is it.. somehow all the data of F:/games and F:/Emulators got corrupted... ugh.. that was 3 days work down the tubes.. now to try a different approach and make F: 137Gig and G: the rest. I am really starting to think it was a file or directory amount limitation. Can someone verify that? |
Hey Ace25,
I was wondering if doing the F: and G: partions worked out for you. I installed an xbox 2 days ago with a maxtor 300 gig drive with the large F: partion and as soon as i get towards the last few gigs it starts to corupt files. (Things start to dissapear) I've done this process twice now.
I used Evox M7 Bios patched with xbtool v1.09.
Post by: BroChaos on October 22, 2003, 11:34:00 AM
i'm confused about when i patch my bios, and what programs to use to prepare the hard drive. thanks.
Post by: Deezle on October 24, 2003, 07:05:00 AM
Thanks in advance for your answer!
Greetz,
Deezle
Post by: BroChaos on October 26, 2003, 09:59:00 AM
Post by: JohnyBlaze on October 26, 2003, 10:46:00 AM
| QUOTE (Ace25 @ Sep 28 2003, 10:48 PM) |
| Well, that small problem I mentioned above just turned into a much bigger one. I was copying just a couple of movie files over, then when I rebooted my XBox, now there are no more games or emulators. I FTP into the XBox and now under games all I have is a (negative) -2Gig file named "b" and under emulators I have a "#" symbol and that is it.. somehow all the data of F:/games and F:/Emulators got corrupted... ugh.. that was 3 days work down the tubes.. now to try a different approach and make F: 137Gig and G: the rest. I am really starting to think it was a file or directory amount limitation. Can someone verify that? |
All of the Maxtor 320GB hard drives have been recalled, apparently they are ALL failing. It's not you or LBA48, its the drive itself. Big fuckup by Maxtor!
Post by: ExxonTsunami on October 26, 2003, 08:15:00 PM
After doing this, Xebian installed just fine on my F partition, so I'm pretty sure it's installer was just confused by the >137GB size of the partition. Xebian also sees G just fine after the install, which is interesting because it is also >137GB.
One remaining problem I've noticed is that dvd2xbox doesn't recognize my G partition. I've got it enabled in the xml file, but I'm wondering if the fact that my G partition is >137GB is confusing it? The directories in the xml file are definitely set right.
Just trying to contribute to the knowledge base...
Update: the dvd2xbox problem was a bug in dvd2xbox 0.4.9 that was fixed in 0.5.0.
Post by: BroChaos on October 27, 2003, 08:22:00 AM
put in new hard drive, built new large drive with slayers, connected to ftp, transferred new bios, flashed new bios (with partition 6 takes rest of drive checked). when i rebooted, my f drive size was correct. i started transferring stuff back to f:, but then i remembered that i didn't format f: after i rebooted with the new bios.
i need to format f: again, right?
Post by: TRIDENT624 on October 27, 2003, 09:05:00 AM
I just bought my second Xbox...it's a ver. 1.0, bought used at EB Games..my first box has a 120 gig Maxtor (locked)...I want to put in a 250 gig Maxtor in my second one...is there a tut. anywhere on what you need and what you need to do to use a 250 gigger? This is great that you guys found a way to get pass the 137 barrier
.....also is anyone streaming movies wirelessly using 54G...I'm thinking about upgrading my 802.11b wireless network so I can stream movies to my newest Xbox in my bedroom (about 30 feet from computer). Has anyone used the DLINK 802.11G gaming bridge? any thoughts....Thanks...
Post by: ExxonTsunami on November 02, 2003, 07:47:00 AM
| QUOTE (isoz_ @ Nov 2 2003, 12:05 PM) |
| all i want is a simple answer please i need to hear success stories |
Well, so far so good. I've filled almost all of F and half of G and everything still seems to be working fine. I'll try to fill up G when I get a chance and see if things go awry.
Note that I generally boot Xebian and use scp to transfer files to F and G. I put more faith in the Linux getting large drive support right than homebrew ftp servers (case in point, the ftp server in the new evox dash is totally hosed for any client other than some obscure Windows app).
Post by: BroChaos on November 02, 2003, 05:59:00 PM
Post by: heinrich on November 05, 2003, 08:57:00 PM
Post by: Ace25 on November 07, 2003, 08:07:00 AM
| QUOTE (isoz_ @ Nov 2 2003, 03:05 AM) |
| has any body had any success getting a larger harddrive to work |
I put the Maxtor 320Gig in mine. At first I went with 1 big F: drive, but when I reached around 280Gigs filled it mysteriously corrupted the entire HD and I had to reformat (I highly suspect a file and/or directory limitation of FATX, but no proof). After redoing the Bios to F:=137G G:=179G I have COMPLETELY filled up both partitions to under less than 100megs free on each, and so far working flawless for the last month. Although the Autoscan of f:/games and g:/games on bootup takes quite a bit longer when you have 120+ for it to search through.
Post by: TheButcherJB on November 09, 2003, 03:04:00 PM
I have a V1.0 motherboard and used the Slayer install disc if anyone was wondering.
SLAYER RULES ALL!
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 09, 2003, 09:35:00 PM
EDIT: PAUL you may want to see this not sure if it is a problem with the big hdd's but i found this out from maxtor about their big hdd's
MaXLine II Nearline PATA Hard Disk Drive Family:
CAPACITIES:
MODEL ACT CYLs HDS SECT MAX CYLS GB CAPACITY
5A250J0 486,344 16 63 16,383 250GB
5A300J0 588,422 16 63 16,383 300GB
NOTE: NEVER enter more than 16,383 cylinders in the system BIOS. This may potentially cause data loss.
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 09, 2003, 10:27:00 PM
when you had your hdd as one big f, about how many folders in the root dir F:| would you say you had (rough estimate) as will run a check with dummy directories to test and see if i get corruption when i hit a certain number.
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 10, 2003, 12:33:00 PM
Post by: Kontra on November 11, 2003, 08:01:00 AM
If you could please look at this, and tell me if its similar to yours. And what you did to fix it?
I currently have a Maxtor II 300Gb Harddrive installed LB48 enabled, all space to partition F, after format i was allocated to 291.xxx.ect ive recently filled the drive with 14.900.xxx.ect space free. Whenever I try to copy anything else over to it, it will cancel the transfer as if it was full. Then also cause corruption on my drive.
Your problem seemed fimiliar to mine, from what I understand you allocated the extra space to G partition? and that seemed to fix your problem? No corruption? And allowed you to use all the space?
Anyone else have any thoughts to this? causes or fixes? id prefer to use F drive only, but if it takes using the G partition then thats what it takes.
thanks
[email protected]
Post by: luma on November 11, 2003, 09:37:00 AM
| QUOTE (JohnyBlaze @ Oct 26 2003, 07:46 PM) | ||
All of the Maxtor 320GB hard drives have been recalled, apparently they are ALL failing. It's not you or LBA48, its the drive itself. Big fuckup by Maxtor! |
Does anybody have any word on a recall of the 320gb? I'm just now experiencing this very same problem and I'm wondering if I'll have to send my drive back.
Post by: Ace25 on November 11, 2003, 01:15:00 PM
But yes, seems to be a limit around 280Gigs on drives as that is exactly where I got to on one big F drive before it started acting full and then data corruption.
Edit: ok, wanted to be 100% sure so I just called Maxtor at 1-800-2Maxtor and asked 3 different reps if there were any recalls on the 320Gig drives and all 3 stated NO. There are no problems with the 320gigs beyond what any other maxtor drive may experience.
Post by: luma on November 11, 2003, 01:33:00 PM
Post by: Ace25 on November 11, 2003, 01:37:00 PM
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 11, 2003, 02:41:00 PM
Post by: luma on November 11, 2003, 03:11:00 PM
Post by: Ace25 on November 11, 2003, 04:06:00 PM
Post by: mark876543 on November 11, 2003, 07:51:00 PM
Post by: Cutriss on November 13, 2003, 06:21:00 AM
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 13, 2003, 11:38:00 PM
Post by: KiLaHuRtZ on November 14, 2003, 09:25:00 PM
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 01:09:00 PM
| QUOTE (Ace25 @ Nov 11 2003, 05:37 PM) |
| I already spoke with Paulb via PMs and he told me this is NOT a LBA48 issue and he thinks it may be a FATX issue. I absolutely agree with his conclusion. What I can't seem to find is documentation on FATX and how it works, file and/or directory limitations, etc. Anyone else have anything on FATX? |
This is very possible, as anyone 'in the know' know's, there are limits to the # of files on a partition. Unfortunately, the xbox, and the FATX filesystem is more an 'extension' of fat32 that allows longer filenames. The XDK docs only give limited documentation on FATX as the devs of games dont really need to worry about these problems. I think it is safe to assume that the limits are the same as FAT32.
FAT32 supports the follow:
4,177,920 TOTAL files on a "volume" (a partiton, this means 4.1 million for EACH of the drives C E F G X Y Z)
65,534 files/subfolders PER folder. This means your F:Games folder can only have a max of 65 thousand files. IE: 65 games with 1,000 files each. Of course, games vary greatly in this, Project Gotham Racing 2 is over 10,000 files, while other games have less than 10.
Now, in my F:Games folder, I currently have 107,867 files in 5771 subfolders. I have not noticed any problems with games. Does this mean that there arent any? I dont know, I havent played through every game 100% to know that they are problem free.
Even assuming that they are all ok, thats only in ~116gig of space, someone with a 320gig drive, which gives them close to 300gig on F would mean, with the same ratio of files:space, would have 278,966 files, which if there was a limit around there, I would guess it to be around the 256,000 mark (i know, this # is not exact, but I'm typing as im thinking, so just stfu
)| QUOTE |
| i agree Ace25, maybe if we cannot find info on FATX is there a way we can impliment a different type of file system? Possibly FAT32? |
As stated above, the limits for FAT32 are more strict as far as filename length, as well as total partition size, and # of files, this would be taking a step backwards.
Also, please 'newbs', if you dont really understand what is being said here, please dont respond, just wait and see where everyone gets with this problem.
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 01:29:00 PM
EDIT4: Talked to TJ from avalaunch, and it seems that the limit of files per 1 folder is 4096, and that is in the FS.
Soo, it seems we are reaching the peak usuage of the FATX FS, and without another one heavily in the works, the only thing that I can think of as a temp solution would be to create more partitions. Not the most efficient as far as space utilization, but there really isnt anything left to do.
EDIT5: the above is now confirmed.
| QUOTE |
| The maximum number of files and subdirectories per directory is 4,096. However, any directory with more than 768 files is going to give slower file access than a directory with 768 files or less, due to the technique that the Xbox file system uses to store directory listings. Additionally, directories are not sorted, so it requires an O(n) search to find and open a file. The more files in a directory, the longer it takes to open a file in that directory. |
The above is © 2000-2003 MS Corporation. All rights reserved.
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 02:57:00 PM
Post by: heinrich on November 15, 2003, 03:23:00 PM
Post by: BenJeremy on November 16, 2003, 04:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (heinrich @ Nov 15 2003, 06:57 PM) |
| From what a I remember, the current patch for LBA48 will look on the hard drive for a partition table, so in reality, there is the possibility for a "partition magic" for the xbox. I dont have the skills to do write this, I im not sure if there is any active xbox dev that does, that has the time. I know BenJeremy has suggested that this could cause problems with dashboards....I'll PM him and ask him to check out this thread. |
The problem with LBA48 and some programs, such as dashboards, that are set up to initialize G: (Partition 7) is with X2 BIOSes, which seem to fill the P7 info with something that causes the system to hang when trying to initialize P7 (G:). This, for some reason, does not happen on the Evo-X BIOSes.
In MXM, for example, I now look at the size of F:, and unless it's EXACTLY the size expected in a G:-enabled setup (around 129GB), it does not initialize G:. Fiddling with the partition table size of F: would hose that method up badly (but I did provide a way to hardcode the G: initialization)
So basically, messing around with the partition tables to adjust the size of F: with a G: makes life a bit more difficult for dashboard and utility apps.
Post by: SilntBob on November 23, 2003, 02:41:00 PM
I started a separate thread a month or so ago, asking paulb about a similar issue
The thread is here:
http://forums.xbox-s...T&f=41&t=108657
I was wanting to make custom partition tables to assist with doing some custom Linux work. But the same reasoning could still apply here.
The one important thing to note, is that a "Partition Magic" for the xbox is much more difficult than a "fdisk" for the xbox. A Partition Magic like application would need the ability to not only modify partition size, but it would have to be able to intelligently consolidate and relocate data to facilitate partition resizing. That is a big first step.
It seems that building custom partition tables is achievable. paulb had included some code for me, but I do not have enough xbox coding experience to make it work. The code is in the thread above.
Post by: heinrich on November 24, 2003, 02:04:00 AM
One thing though, team xecuter decided to leave out the part of paul's lba48 code that looked at partition0 in their 4979.xx bios, so any type of 'partition magic' would not be compatible with that bios.
Post by: EncryptedBytes on November 25, 2003, 10:17:00 AM
Post by: CaliSurfer008 on December 04, 2003, 07:20:00 PM
Post by: CaliSurfer008 on December 06, 2003, 11:27:00 PM
I'll letcha know!
Post by: Cutriss on December 07, 2003, 11:15:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Still, I wonder what the maximum partition size is? We know that LBA48 supports a large disk, but the filesystem has to support it as well... Files are generally accessed using an offset from the start of the partition - So, now that the drive supports over 137GB; the question becomes will the filesystem support it. If I was MS, why create a filesystem that can handle 4TB per partition when I know the BIOS *will* never support it and I'm only putting in a 10GB drive max? |
| QUOTE |
| Now, assuming that we have a limitation in the partition size imposed by FATX; what is the limit on the number of partitions that we can create? I thought that IDE only supports 4 primary partitions, but we have already exceeded that - of course these are probably not your typical primary partitions... We are at 7 partitions, but do partitions 8, 9, & 10 also work? |
| QUOTE |
| With all the knowledge and smart people here, I'm sure that somebody will calculate the actual max partition size - a post up above already mentioned the maximum files and directories that a single directory can hold... |
If there *isn't* an addressing limit, then you can't really say that there is a hard ceiling on drive sizes, since the problem isn't tied to how large your files are, but rather how many of them you have.
| QUOTE |
| As Paul mentioned a long time ago, we need to get away from hard coding partions and assuming drive letters... this should either be something that the BIOS provides to the applications or a standard partition table that defines the drive letters and partitions for each application. |
This is a point that I strongly disagree with Xport about.
Post by: oz_paulb on December 07, 2003, 11:57:00 AM
| QUOTE (BenJeremy @ Nov 17 2003, 02:18 AM) | ||
The problem with LBA48 and some programs, such as dashboards, that are set up to initialize G: (Partition 7) is with X2 BIOSes, which seem to fill the P7 info with something that causes the system to hang when trying to initialize P7 (G:). This, for some reason, does not happen on the Evo-X BIOSes. In MXM, for example, I now look at the size of F:, and unless it's EXACTLY the size expected in a G:-enabled setup (around 129GB), it does not initialize G:. Fiddling with the partition table size of F: would hose that method up badly (but I did provide a way to hardcode the G: initialization) So basically, messing around with the partition tables to adjust the size of F: with a G: makes life a bit more difficult for dashboard and utility apps. |
BenJeremy -
You say that some dash's have problems when they "initialize" G:/Partition7. Is it that they have a problem when G: doesn't exist (a non-LBA48 or non-G: setup)? The bios/kernel is returning 'garbage' size/location info for the invalid partition, causing problems?
If that's the case, there are ways to discover whether/not LBA48 is installed, and which partitions are valid (using DeviceIOControl commands). Of course, it's not documented anywhere (it's stuff in my LBA48 source, which I haven't gotten around to 'officially' releasing yet), but it's something do-able.
BTW, I've hesitated on releasing my LBA48 stuff because I wanted to first 'clean up' the code and add some comments/documentation. Because of my job, I haven't had any time to mess with Xbox stuff. So, I think I'll go ahead and release the code 'as is' - it may be helpful to some developers out there.
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on December 07, 2003, 12:18:00 PM
As I've said from the beginning, LBA48 allows for partitions up to about 2TB, but I suspect that there are FATX limitations that make the max partition size smaller. But, it should be possible to create as many partitions you like - each smaller than the FATX limitation - with no problems. The LBA48 code supports more than just partition6/partition7 (F:/G:). I forget the number - maybe 4-6 more partitions are allowed in the current code (this could be increased - up to (I think) either 10 or 20 partition limit (per drive) in the kernel).
I suspect that the FATX limitation is in the FAT (File Allocation Table). This table is at the start of the drive, and gets initialized at format time. As you add files, the space they take up gets marked in the FAT.
There are at least 2 different 'types' of FAT tables on a FATX system (FATX16/FATX32). One is for smaller partitions, another for larger. At the time of formatting the partition, the FAT 'type' is chosen and the FAT table is initialized with entries for each 'cluster' on the partition.
So, the FAT table must be of the right 'type', and must have enough entries for (total size of partition / size of 'cluster').
According to this page: Xbox Linux FATX info
a 'cluster' on the Xbox is always 512 bytes. So, the FAT table must be large enough to hold (total partition size / 512) entries. Each FATX32 entry is 4 bytes (32bits), so the FAT table byte size would be: ((total partition size / 512) * 4) bytes.
If someone has a way of dumping a formatted disk, they could confirm that a newly formatted FATX partition on a large (> 280GB) drive is large enough for the partition. Keep in mind that it's possible that the utility/utilities used to format the drive are at fault - not an underlying filesystem problem. This would be the best scenario, since that can easily be fixed. I haven't read the entire thread: is there a common format utility used in all cases of 'corruption'? Keep in mind that some format utilities (Slayer's, for example) make use of EvoX's own format code (so multiple utilities could really all be the same one).
Another possibility: the max size of a 'cluster #'. On older FAT systems, as drives grew larger, the size of a cluster was increased. Part of the reason for this was that there was a max cluster # size (16 bits, I think, so 65535 max clusters). If cluster sizes are made larger, then 65535 clusters represents a larger amount of hard drive space.
The Xbox-Linux doc I referred to above says that the cluster size is fixed @ 512 bytes. Maybe we're hitting a max cluster # limit. If so, then maybe it'll be possible to figure out how to get FATX to use a larger cluster size. I really doubt this, but since (I think) there are some 'undefined/unknown' fields in the FATX partition header, we may find that one of these values can be tweaked to use larger cluster sizes.
The negative side for larger cluster sizes means that the minimum file size now increases (a 1 byte file on FATX now takes 512 bytes of space - it would take more space if the cluster size is bigger). This means that if you've got lots of small files, you end up wasting lots of drive space. This is the big trade-off on increasing cluster size. But, it's what people have lived with on older FAT systems - we may have to live with it on FATX (assuming we can figure out how to make it use larger clusters).
My job has kept me very busy lately - no real time for any Xbox experimentation. I also don't have a drive large enough to reproduce these problems (I have a 200GB which works fine). I'll try to offer input/help on this issue, but I can't promise that I'll be able to dedicate much time on it.
I hope this is helpful.
- Paulb
Post by: Cutriss on December 07, 2003, 04:35:00 PM
That's why you could temporarily create 4 GB FAT partitions until MS rolled out FAT32 - by increasing the cluster size, the net addressable space increases, but reduce system efficiency (since complete clusters are transferred on a read, and as you mention, a 16385 byte file would use 32768 bytes in 2 clusters).2^24 = 16.7M clusters (16777216)
16.7M clusters * 16384 bytes/cluster = 274877906944 bytes, or 274 GB.
Perhaps a 24-bit addressing range on clusters.
So, a proper test would be to see first if the cluster size is modifiable in the partition table (and format it accordingly, though I don't think any Xbox utilities currently have an adjustable cluster size in formatting options), and then fill it with 1 GB dummy files, and see if it can be reliably used beyond 274 GB.
Post by: oz_paulb on December 07, 2003, 04:46:00 PM
It does seem odd to me that there would be a 24-bit limit on # of clusters. The old 16-bit limit made sense (size of 'int' on 16-bit computers), but the next logical limitation would be 32-bits.
It's definitely worth trying. As you said, existing format utilities probably don't deal with changing cluster sizes. Increasing the cluster size (always a power of 2, I believe) would decrease the overall size of the FAT (since the # of FAT entries would decrease). That would change where the 'root' directory is placed on the partition.
I took a quick look at the kernel code that reads the 'FATX' header. It does look like it tries to use the cluster size specified in the header (at least it loads it from the header into another structure). I haven't followed the code through far enough to see if it's used throughout - I suspect it is.
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on December 08, 2003, 04:16:00 AM
| QUOTE (oz_paulb @ Dec 8 2003, 02:46 AM) |
| It does seem odd to me that there would be a 24-bit limit on # of clusters. The old 16-bit limit made sense (size of 'int' on 16-bit computers), but the next logical limitation would be 32-bits. |
I just ran across this page:
http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
It's not about FATX, but does list a limit to the # of clusters on FAT32 as: 268435456. That's a 28-bit limit, which (like a 24-bit limit) doesn't make much sense (to me).
But, it shows that a 24-bit cluster # limit in FATX may be true.
- Paulb
Post by: oz_paulb on December 10, 2003, 07:36:00 PM
I can't promise that I'll be able to spend too much time on this (very busy @ work right now), but I'll do some testing to see if I can figure out where the ~280GB limit comes from.
I'll update this thread with any findings.
- Paulb
Post by: Cherry on December 11, 2003, 05:59:00 AM
Post by: FoxRacR17 on December 18, 2003, 07:49:00 PM
Post by: InsideMan on December 19, 2003, 10:31:00 AM
Post by: heinrich on December 20, 2003, 12:29:00 AM
| QUOTE (InsideMan @ Dec 19 2003, 02:31 PM) |
| Ok, I was told to come here, I got my chip yesterday I'm waiting for my PC then I'll be able to burn my Xecuter BIOS and EvoX Dashboard onto discs and put them on my coming Hard Drive 300GB. But what do I need what do I do? |
read the last 18 pages?
Post by: InsideMan on December 20, 2003, 09:50:00 AM
Post by: mhr_54 on December 20, 2003, 07:21:00 PM
Post by: mhr_54 on December 20, 2003, 07:26:00 PM
. I mean, why can't all of these features just be put into Evox or something?
Post by: jacobesterque on December 24, 2003, 06:35:00 AM
i have a 160gb hard drive. my current bios only supports up to 137gb, so in essence i have lost 23gb. now i know i can reflash my chip to accept the rest of the lost 23gb and either add it to the f: drive or just create a 23gb g: drive (which i dont want to do). fortunately i have a backup of my xbox f: drive on my pc. i also know that if i reflash my chip with the 137gb + support and i already have stuff on my f: drive, it will screw it up (which i dont mind because i have a backup of it on my pc). my question is, in order to reformat the f: drive to accept my newly 137gb + support bios, do i reformat my f: drive via slayers evox auto-installer before i reflash my chip, or do i reflash my chip first and then reformat my new f: drive?
tank you
Post by: Reaper527 on December 24, 2003, 06:39:00 AM
| QUOTE (jacobesterque @ Dec 24 2003, 04:35 PM) |
| so here is my situation: i have a 160gb hard drive. my current bios only supports up to 137gb, so in essence i have lost 23gb. now i know i can reflash my chip to accept the rest of the lost 23gb and either add it to the f: drive or just create a 23gb g: drive (which i dont want to do). fortunately i have a backup of my xbox f: drive on my pc. i also know that if i reflash my chip with the 137gb + support and i already have stuff on my f: drive, it will screw it up (which i dont mind because i have a backup of it on my pc). my question is, in order to reformat the f: drive to accept my newly 137gb + support bios, do i reformat my f: drive via slayers evox auto-installer before i reflash my chip, or do i reflash my chip first and then reformat my new f: drive? tank you |
i would imagine you would have to flash your chip first then format your F partition. otherwise you would format your F partition, it would still be unable to recognize past 137, then you would flash and have to format again. just my reasoning, i don't know 100%