Win98SE System Restore

for those that are not aware of a program called "System Restore ", which is available in WinMe and XP, I can provice step-by-step for accessing this "utility ".
My question for those familiar with system restore is:
there are 3 or 4 restore dates available for restoring the registry.
I have read somewhere that it is possible to contain at least 10 restore dates.
Can someone provide me with a detailed procedure for adding the additional dates.
If it is possible, it would also benefit those of us that use Sysem Restore.

 

3/4 of the way down this page.

Hope it helps.

 

WE need to clear something up here I believe.

First off this title here refers to 98SE. but the note itself refers to ME and XP. TOTALY different.

Which are you refering to ?

I will speak on SE. If it fits OK. If not that is OK too.

Win98 SE does not have System Restore the same as XP. ( ME I do not know )

SE has what is known as Scanregw and Scanreg /Restore.

If Scanregistry is loading in the startup sequence and Windows is started ( or restarted ) at least once per calander day SE makes backups called RB00X.CAB files. The X stands for 0-5 unless the user has changed the default settings. And if Scanregistry is not loaded it will make none.

This only backs up four files.

Win.ini
System.ini
User Data
System Data.

In SE these have to be restored from DOS.

XP System Restore can be done from within Windows. And contains A LOT more than the SE RB00X.CAB files do.

Lets clear this up.

BillyBob

 

Good Grief

The page that Daizy pointed to has IN RED LETTERS a recommendation to change the number of backups to 14. They must think we are not going to make changes.

To me, myself and I that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Actualy in fact I think it is not a good idea. And add to that a very possible cause for BIG problems.

If I have a Win98 system that I have made no changes ( and Windows hasn't either ) for X number of days that might be OK.

If I have a system that I make changes, add/remove software on today and all is well YESTERDAYS backup is already out of date.

And no later than tomorrow I would be deleting ALL previous RB00X.CAB files, restarting Windows and let it make a new one.

And a 14 day old backup of Win98SE Registry is sure not going to be up to date.

So would someone please be kind enough to tell me what good a 14 day old reg backup would be.

Even in XP PRO. I made a Restore point two days ago. Yesterday I removed some software. Today I added some. Now to me that already makes the two day old RP way, way out of date and USELESS. And I would have A LOT of work to REDO if I used it.

These are my thoughts anyway. With a little SAD experience thrown in.

BillyBob

 

BB......I'm sure you're not insinuating that because you do it one way...it must be the only way? Or necessarily the right way?

princessmandi8 asked for instructions...and they were given.

 

No I certainly am not. I am just trying to bring out some facts that MANY sites ( including Microsoft ) that write about Scanreg/Restore in SE and System Restore in XP do not even mention. At least I have never seen any.

I am just figure out and make some sense out of what good 14 day old backups af Windows 98SE registry would do. Because as I tried to point out that unless you have real problems the one made yesterday or the day before is already out of date.

There may be changes that Windows itself has made behind our backs that we are not even aware of.

Every time you make ANY changes at all it changes the Registry which is made up of the four files that I mention in my previous reply.

Scanregistry/Scanreg /restore in 98SE and System Restore in XP are a fine idea and can be helpful. But if some thought is not given to using them they can also be TROUBLE. Not only can they be used to remove bad changes and put back good ones the REVERSE is also true.

And I do not believe that any reg backup ( or Restore Point in XP )over 5 days old would be useful. Let alone one 14 days old. Especially if you have added/removed software or made settings change etc.

I think a very good example would be.

If I change Video cards and/or Video drivers today and all works well, I sure as heck would not want to be putting back a registry backup that was made YESTERDAY.

Think about it.

BillyBob

 

Daizy,
Thank U. Y\This is what I was looking for.
BillyBob,
I've been calling it System Restore for Win98SE.
BTW, I am an "expert" on a site: www.allexperts.com
I get many questions from people with dire problems on Win 98, that can be helped with what I call System Restore.
When I get their problem, here is my response (and it usually solves the problem for them), I also list the same text below in my web-site (www.irvings-info-page.cityslide.com under Computer Tips)
Here is my respose that I use:

A little background: Microsoft Windows evolved from Win3.0 to 95 to 98 to WinMe (Millennium edition) to XP. A great feature of WinMe and XP was the ability to "repair" itself. This capability is called System Restore, which enables the system to "go back" to a date BEFORE you had a problem.

For those that do not know it, Win98 has the same built-in feature, but unfortunately most users aren’t aware of it, or how to access this feature.

Windows 98 takes periodic snapshots of your system configuration and saves them in a part of the Operating System that can be accessed from the Command Line.
If U want to restore your system:
Start system and keep the Ctrl key held down until the window is gray/white (safe mode) and U see a menu including Normal (1), Safe (3), and Command Line Prompt (5). Choose Command Line Prompt by hitting the 5 key on keyboard.
At the C:\ type in: scanreg /restore (note the space between scanreg and /restore) and press Enter.
The computer should present a list of dates. Choose the most recent date BEFORE you had problems and hit Restore. From there everything should work fine. (U may want to print this for future reference).

 

You're most welcome princessmandi8 . Happy to help.

 

OK let me try again. And if this fails to get my point across then forget it.

I am fully aware of the capabilities of the Registry Backup ( the RB00x.CAB files ) in 98SE. And I also s.c.r.e.w.e.d up once by replacing a bad registry with a worse one yet. So I am also aware of what trouble they can cause if not used properly.

System Restore in ME and XP are something different.

On Monday morning you have 5 to 14 backups of the registry in Win98SE.

Now you decide to remove some software. And some stuff like Norton products take AT LOT OF work. And some of it manual.

OK you get that done. You restart Windows and all seems well.

OK. Now you decided to install a new and different AV program. You do same. Restart Windows and all is well and you decide to keep it.

NOW. at this point in time the EXISTING 5 to 14 RB00x.CAB files CAN BE TROUBLE MAKERS IF USED And should be DELETED and a new one made that reflects the new system setup the way it is now. Not yesterday.

Also if an old one is used the Registry and the actuall files on the HD may not match creating further problems. And all kinds of errors like " Can't find this or that "

In XP the System restore handles this differently.

If you do use one you may not only lose proper Operation of the new Software but all of Norton stuff will be back in. Because when you run a Scanreg /restore in 98SE it replaces in total all four files. That is why it has to be done from DOS.

And if not used properly the System Restore Points in XP can do the same thing.

Now I am not saying anything against the backups being made. Just put some thought into using them and when.

You spend time cleaning up as system I see no sense to even think about restoring an old backup that may well but back all of the stuff you just spent time cleaning out.

Even if you spend time upgrading Windows or IE or what ever and get things working properly, the OLD backups just became trouble if used.

My ideas about backups applys even more so if you have been invaded by some Virus or Trojan or some other undesireable guest. I have seen several users spend time cleaning up after some mess just to restore a backup file and START ALL OVER.

If you install something that does not seem to work well then OK. Go back to yesterday. But once you get new thing installed and working properly make a new backup. Do not wait for Windows.

So my bottom(s) line is ( are )

YES. Backups can get you out of trouble.

But if handled improperly and not kept updated they can also get you into trouble.

BTW. All this talk about SE and the RB00x.CAB files I looked at my wifes' machine with SE on it and there AIN'T not such files. So tomorrow I gotta find out what the heck I did to mess that up. I have a very strong feeling that I got carried away with Startup Cop.

BillyBob

 

BillyBob,
First: let me thank U 4 the efforts expended in this thread. It was helpful.
Second: my so-called System Restore thread was for those of us STILL using 98SE, and presently have no intention to upgrade to XP or buy a new computer. My instructions for System Restore then prove invaluable to get out of a problem that doesn't allow use of computer.
The reason for my original question was that when someone asks me for help in AllExperts, and they only have 2 or 3 days of reg.backups to go back to, and those 3 backups don't help them, I inferred that the problem they were asking me about for help, could be solved if they had more backups, e.g. 8 or 10.

So, I say that we will agree to disagree, and perhaps this thread ought 2 B closed. Yes???

 

That's the one reason for more backups that you asked for earlier in this thread BillyBob. I used to keep 14. I'm fully aware of the problems it can create by using an old registry backup but often times you don't realize you have a problem till it's to late. A certain program that you only use maybe once a week starts acting up and the registry backups are too old to fix it. The problem could be one that reinstalling the program won't fix but restoring a registry will. There's plenty of things in the OS itself that many only use on occasion that can give you trouble, but being you haven't used it for several days it's to late for the registry backup. If I installed some software that quit working because of using an older backup it was no big deal. Reinstall the software and your up and running again. For me it was a way better route than having to reinstall the OS.

princessmandi8
I wouldn't have others do this without being fully aware of what can happen here. Have to be careful when you install windows updates, etc. I personally don't think it's a bad way to go though as long as you're aware of these things.

BillyBob
I'm not trying to say you're wrong here. Just that there may come a time when that older backup can help. Especially if it's been a while since any new programs or that sort of thing were installed.

 

I am not saying that anybody is wrong either. But there are two sides to this story. And now both sides have been aired.

I just tried to bring out the other side of the backup story and suggest that there are times that the old backups do need to be disposed of and new ones made.

This is a side that is very often forgotten and then users wonder where their new software went. Or why it does not run properly.

For example something happened to my ICQ and Links LS Golf. I spent half of the day finding out why and making repaires.

My Wife and I just finished a great game with our Freind in Canada with whom I had no contact with in either ICQ or Golf. All we had was e-mail contact until this afternoon.

Now let me ask you a question.

Would it make any sense on my part to keep yesterdays XP Restore Points that I made JUST in case I needed them ?

All I am trying to say is that the situation at hand can DICTATE whether to or not to use the old backups.

BillyBob

 

In a situation as you described it would make no sense to keep them. But that's one of those situations I'd delete the old ones and start over again. It's something you definitely have to stay on top of no matter how many you keep.

Point well taken.

 

First off thank you Zander for seing my point.

I know I wrote about XP in my previous reply. But I can also relate to Win98 SE.

My Wifes machine was constantly partial booting and then rebooting again and/or booting into the safe mode. It kept saying on the bottom of the boot up screen something about completing the changes. HUH ?? What changes. I had made none.

I did use a scanreg /restore. It did not fix the problem.

So I finally found an error in the swap files setup. HMMM !!!. What swap file ? It was set to ZERO. Who or what caused that error who knows. It could have been a mistake on my part. Something could have gone wrong within Windows itself. Or maybe one of the Kids mext door messed with the machine while using it. I just DO NOT KNOW.

So I made the proper changes. Then looked at the RB00x.cab files. Three out if the five were marked RBD00x.cab ( or however SE marks bad reg files. ) BYE-BYE to all of them. And even if they were all named as being good they were still USELESS as they contained BAD info.

Now five days later I am not seing any reboots or nothing about completeing setup ( or whatever it says ) on the bottom of the bootup screen. The machine is also booting up in less than half the time it was taking.

So again.

The probem at hand. The fix for the problem DICTATES ( or should ) what to do with the backup files.

And I myself believe that that also apply to any backups made by 3rd party software.

Backups are nice and can be usefull. But if the system contains bad info the backup is going to contain the same bad info and put back the same bad info.

They are not a SET AND FORGET ITEM What the backup program sees is what the backup program will record.

Right now I have to be extra careful when making changes in XP Pro. Because it IS NOT making the Restore Points that it is supposed to.

BillyBob

 

TO ALL,
Thanks! I'm glad that I started this thread. It probably helped many others, besides all of the active participants herein.....and gave us all something to consider, make note of, and remember.

 

Something else just crossed my mind that I feel may be relevant. Or more food for thought. Your call .

Lets say we have 10 RB00x.cab files in 98. Or 10 restore points in ME or XP. And no problems within those days.

Today a problem develops. So we go back and restore the 5th day back. Problem seems to go away and all appears to be well again.

Now let me ask this.

How can we be 100% sure that the restored files DOES NOT contain the cause of the problem ?

You may wonder why I ask this question. And if you do you are 100% correct in questioning it. So I will do my best to answer it.

I do not think we honestly can. We just need to hopefully trust that it does not. This is a very big gamble that we do sometimes have to go for broke on. I have done it and lost. ( refer to my previous post ) But also done it and won.

There are times when things do sit WELL HIDDEN in the background for days and do not show their ugly face until we walk the keyboard in a certain way or run a certain program or combination of programs.

Also what I have done WITHOUT thinking. I FORGOT that I had changed VIDEO cards and drivers. OUCH!!!! It is a darn good thing the Scanreg /restore in SE can be run from a floppy boot up.

As Zander correctly stated. This is an area that we must stay on top of constantly.

BillyBob

 

Bit late in coming in here but I use "MaxBackupCopies=15 "

Have I ever needed to go that far back? No I haven't - touch wood!

Do I make backups at the desktop? Yes, I do but these are designated as 'Not Started' and, for all I know, may contain an element which will fail to get me to the desktop. Those that are designated as 'Started' have passed muster once and should do again. The more 'Not Started' the less 'Started' so we should not get carried away with desktop backups with a default set of only five. So, increase MaxBackupCopies.

It's also worth remembering that on a /restore the oldest backup is overwritten with the current so we only have four and not five. This is repeated on using /restore again. We can stop this by including 'BackupCurrentBeforeRestore=0' in scanreg.ini or increase MaxBackupCopies.

OK, we may end up with a reg which is out of date but at least we are at the desktop and we may have our work cut out to get back to plain sailing. If we cannot get to the desktop then whether the registry has changed much of late is rendered academic.

The likelehood of not getting to the desktop with a backup set of 15 must be less than a set of five.

I know of one person who had a corrupt system.ini file and all of the reg backups had corrupt system.ini files. Who knows how long that was going on but with 15 backups maybe one of the oldest may have been 'clean'.

On two occasions in the last three years Windows has chipped in and automatically restored a reg. The current reg was saved as RBBAD.cab. The 'new' reg was only one day old but was very different to the one that fell over. I went into DOS and run scanreg /fix on the rbbad.cab file and made it the 'current' reg. Both times I got back to the desktop with all the changes intact and had no further problems. These two 'failures' were over a year apart and so not related. I never did find out what made them fall over.

BTW we shouldn't use RB per se as they are DOS backups and not compacted - Windows backups are lowercase ie rb. Also rbbad, if it exists, will only ever appear once - a new rbbad will overwrite an old rbbad.

RBD00x.cab.? I am intrigured by this - none of my reg books refer to these and MSKB don't mention them.

If anyone is interested I have an app, written in Power Basic for DOS, whch will restore up to the max allowed backups [99 for goodness sake!] and will also restore a rbbad.cab file for subsequent 'fixing'.

 

RBD00x.cab.?

I believe I said clearly " ( or however SE marks bad reg files ) " I have not had one for so long I had forgotten what they were called.

"MaxBackupCopies=15 "

Mine are at the default 5. But very seldon there are five as I am ALWAYS ( at the present time ) making changes until I get the machine reset up to where I want it.

Just today in Windows 98 SE I changed Anti-Virus software.

I also changed Video cards. Which also meant new Video Drivers.

Now are you saying the I should not have deleted the RB00x.cab files that pre-existed. And made a new one.

A few days ago on the same machine a probelm developed that apparrently started I have NO IDEA when. I fixed it. Again are you saying that I should not have deleted the old backups ?

I may not be too smart but I ain't stupid enough to even GAMBLE on restoring a backup that was made yesterday after either one those changes. Or even the one that Windows made in the morning on that day morning.

And as far as restoring backups goes I have NEVER seen one FIX a problem yet. It just seems to prolong doing do so by temporarily covering it up.

If I were to find a rbbad.cab file I would be doing some SERIOUS investigation into WHY. I would also be doing some serious thinking about what I may have been doing that day. There has to be a reason and more times than not it may be 'Ol BillyBob the user, that caused it.

I repeat and stand firm.

The situation at hand dictates whether to keep or trash the old backups

Oh BTW. I also cahnged Video cards in Windows XP today. ALL PREVOUS Restore point went Bye-Bye.

BillyBob

 

BillyBob

We have a contradiction here. We can only ever have one rbbad.cab file. If one exists and a new one is created the old one is overwritten.

I will assume that you mean via a restart and not via the desktop else the new one will not be a 'Started' variant.

Boy, do you live dangerously! Suppose Windows cannot make a new one. It will then be looking for a backup but it won't find any and you'll be up the Swanee without the proverbial.

At least restart Windows first to make sure we can get to the desktop and then, if you must, delete previous backups.

A rbbad.cab file is created everytime we implement /fix or /opt. Chances are they are not bad. The /fix routine isn't intelligent enough to determine whether it is being run by Windows automatically if it cannot find any backups or the user as a maintenance tool. The /opt switch also designates rbbad because MS are treating a reg with more than 500Kb of wasted space as being bad. I wouldn't call them bad and certainly not one with 400Kb of wasted space and /opt used by me because I didn't want to wait for the system to compact the reg.

The rbbad.cab file to concern us is RBBAD.cab, ie uppercase, because they are created in the DOS environment when the system automatically restores a reg. Of course, we don't need to check this as the giveaway is when the system restores a reg!

I will probably never see my system automatically restore a reg because I've written code to intercept the routine that does this giving me the option to either stay in DOS or go into DOS and try a /fix first rather than the system's weird way of searching for a good backup and only attempting a /fix if it cannot find one.

It is, of course, possible for scanreg to not find any problems with a particular reg and then see the system fall over on restoring that reg. In other words the structure is valid but some of the content may be gibberish. I cannot trap them.

That statement is neccessary but not sufficient.

"I fixed it" - and if you couldn't? "I have NO IDEA when ". So, the 'glitch' may be in the latest backup. It may be in the one before that. The 'glitch' may be of the type which will not get us to the desktop. Suppose a previous backup will. Phew! Good job we kept that. But you didn't. Up the Swanee again!

What if either of the changes caused a problem? A backup will have no evidence of a change.

A friend of mine has the opposite view to yourself. Any problems and he goes running to a /restore. Like you, I'd want to know what caused the problem.

It will fix a problem that has just occurred but it may not fix a problem that has been sitting in the wings waiting to pounce. "Temporarily covering it up" is the point I use with my friend.

You and he are polar opposites. I believe both your views are too extreme and both of you are wrong.

It seems to me that your argument is based solely on a bad experience with a restore. I've never had a bad experience with a restore but I'm not baseing my argument on that.

I will do my utmost to correct a problematic reg which is why I won't let Windows restore automatically. I don't want to restore a reg anymore than you do because my registry is more often very different to a backup but if I have to dump it then so be it. If I have to dump it then I want more than the paltry default five backups.

15 may be over the top. 15 may be more than enough but that is the point - they are more than enough.

In "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" the Cardasians didn't have backups. The station's chief engineer, on the other hand, implemented Starfleet's protocol with two backups. The second backup was in case the first backup went down!

So, I'm a belt and braces person. I've got both ends of the spectrum covered and in between. With computers any other course is reckless. I wouldn't let a Cardasian anyway near my machine.

 

No. You and I do not have a contradiction on that one. because you are correct. I also thought we could only have one.

But somewhere in the regisrtry of that machine was a set of BAD, BAD instructions that told the OS to do it a different way .

Now I ask again. What good would it do me to make the proper repairs and then save what I know darn well is a BAD regisrty ?

It would make no difference if I had 15 of them I do not believe I would have any idea as to which one started the bad set of instructuons.

Actuall I believe that the problems started on that machine with the blackout we had. The power just dipped and came back a couple of times before going completely out. And that is worse than dropping right out.

But but many users depend on Windows doing everything as it is supposed to and when it is supposed to. This does not always happen.

Well I know for sure that the ones I had were not created by them as I have never used either one. So we can rule that cause out.

Absolutely correct. So WHY do I want to save a backup that I know very well may contain some bad instructions ? Especially when I know for sure that the bad info will be in the one made that day before I made corrections ?

I fixed the problem and then got rid of the known to be bad RB00x.CAB files. What is not there Windows can not use either.

And after changing both Video cards and drivers yesterday, it would not be in the best interest of either me or my machine to keep the old backups. ( in either OS ). Just changing drivers I might get away with because they both use the same Nvidia drivers. But just the minute that I plugged in the new and different Vender ( PNY to BFG ) video card it made yesterdays backup already not usefull.

If I had gone from a PNY GeForce to an ATI card ( no longer Nvidia drivers ) then it IS A MUST that I get rid of the old backups so that they do not get used. By me or Windows.

Of course IF Windows worked correctly it would more than likely have installed the ATI as an Unknown device or installed it as a Standard VGA setup, then I would have not been too bad off. Then installing the Nvidai drivers should fix that.

Oh My. " Sittin in the Wings ". I wish I had thought of that in an earlier post. Fits very well.

So you get the probelm fixed and get rid of the old backups so that they do not get used to put the probelm " back in the wings again "

Windows SE and Windows XP are nice. They do do things quite nicely MOST of the time. But on occassion they do mess up and wander off of the straight and narrow path. And if we as users do need checkup on them once in awhile.

BillyBob