Scandisk on every startup

Computer is shutting down fine (nothing unusual running in the backround) but Scandisk runs on every start. Any suggestions?

Thanks in advance!

 

Begin with cleanup.

Do not be intimidated by the following just do them exactly step by step.

Cleanups
These are for 95 98 ME only!

Boot to DOS (not shutdown to DOS). While booting hit F8 to startup menu. Chose "command prompt only ".

Type these commands exactly hit enter at the end (do not type the notes that are in parenthesis like this).

del c:\*.swp (may get file not found, is ok)
del c:\windows\*.swp
deltree c:\windows\shelli*.*
deltree c:\windows\temp\*.* (answer yes to all) "ALL "
deltree c:\windows\tempor~1\*.*
deltree c:\windows\history\*.*
deltree c:\windows\spool\printers\*.*

When this is completed type

scandisk /all /autofix

Then reboot to full windows and do a full Windows scandisk with surface scan. Then defrag.

Mike

 

Harry:
Scandisk Runs after Normal Shutdown

Mike:
Some easy reading on why Autofix on Scandisk is not a good option.

Whenever I get a chance, I advocate not using this option on the initial run, so that you get a chance to see any errors detected before Scandisk "tries" to "fix" them. And, as the link explains, the default options as not good!.

I have seen frequent posts where it is obvious that Scandisk has mangled the disk directory, deleted files or corrupted files; and I have personally seen it turn an entire drive into CHK files.

 

Look here.

 

He may have two problems here!

1. Scandisk on startup

2. Scandisk does not complete

I already knew about the first.

I also know about /autofix. In this case I think it is called for. I might know what how to interpet and what to do but would most others.

That is the reason I asked him to run a full Windows scandisk on reboot. If he has a real problem the Windows scan will tell him more!

Mike

 

Mike

1. I don't see anything here about scandisk not completing.

2. I am confused about what you say about autofix. If you appreciate the fact that it can "potentially" do damage, then why recommend it. Especially if you suspect disk problems.

As well you say "I might know what how to interpet and what to do but would most others ".
I don't see why that is relevant. If he runs with autofix off, and is asked to ignore any errors found, and post the messages back here, then you/me/we can guide him in the best direction.

3. "If he has a real problem the Windows scan will tell him more! "

And, if he runs with Autofix (which he presumably will, after being asked to use this at the DOS level), it will be potentially too late!!

And, if he chooses to run with logging off, he won't even be able to go back and review what scandisk "fixed ".

 

Right you are about not completing, confused that with Remunds2000 who i was posting to at almost same time.

Guess I am getting tired!
But I never said anything about damage.

In my many years as a programer and Systems Aalyst I have had scandisk find many problems.

1. Lost clusters

2. Crosslinks

3. Physical HD damage

In almost all cases nothing was damaged or was recoverable anyway.

Based on the fact he said everything else was OK I felt from experience that this would be OK! Had he had a more severe problem then an autofix would not have been reccomended.

But he can leave off the autofix if he wants.

Mike

 

Mike:

I didn't mean to sound too harsh in my post. And if I did, I apologize. The "damage" that I mentioned was in regard to Scandisk doing the damage if allowed to run in Autofix mode.

Any time I see an issue with scandisk not running, or someone "seemingly" having disk issues, I am loath to recommend a scandisk with autofix.

As I indicated, I have seen a harddisk damaged after a scandisk run that used the option autofix and turn lost clusters into files. As a result of fat/disk directory damage, scandisk viewed the entire drive as being Lost Clusters and turned everything into CHK files. Twas not a pretty sight.

You indicate that you have seen CrossLinked files and "nothing was damaged or was recoverable anyway ". Unfortunately, you may not have looked hard enough.

In the case of crosslinked files, the default setting is to Delete. This means that any files involved would be deleted. And, if you chose the Make Copies option, then one of the files involved would be OK, and all the rest would be corrupted.
With crosslinks, there is always one file that is OK, and, if the other files involved are "textual" in nature (DOC/TXT/etc), then a large portion of the file can be recovered.
Regardless, to be safe, all files involved in crosslinked should be verified, and restored if necessary.

And, if you review the link I posted, there are many other file errors that are NOT fixed. They are just made to "go away ", and in the process of doing this, the files involved are left in a corrupted state, and will eventually cause a failure of some type.

 

Saw the exact same you describe myself more than once.

I sat for 30 minutes recovering recovering and still it was not salvageable.

Chances are the one you speak of was the same. Even without the /autofix all that would be done is answer yes a few hundred times. The type of error you speak of is damage that spans both copies of the FAT.

I read your link and have been familiar with these "possible consequences ".

My opinion scandisk is better than most people give it credit. Usually if scandisk can not fix it it was gone anyway.

What do you think the chkdsk included with 2K and XP does. It does a autofix. NTFS or FAT32.

I have had Spinrite in 3 versins now I have 50. I have used it to salvage HD's but in every case if scandisk could not salvage the data it could not either.

Anyway back to HARPOST. Whats happening?

You need to run the scandisk either with oor without the /autofix.

Mike

 

Maybe I am alone here, but I NEVER run scandisk if Windows is running.
How can it work correctly with running apps ?
I do not believe, from experience, that it suspends running apps.
I have a modified C:\Windows\DosStart.bat file which includes a "Choice" option to run Scandisk in DOS.

Here's the DosStart lines for my two physical drives ...

:begin
CHOICE Scandisk ? YN
IF errorlevel 2 GOTO Next01
IF errorlevel 1 GOTO Scan
:Scan
Scandisk C: /autofix /nosave /nosummary /nolost
Scandisk D: /autofix /nosave /nosummary /nolost
:Next01

A restart in DOS mode allows me this scandisk option, and for
a long time. has kept my disks problem free.
A CTRL + ALT + DEL then reboots to Windows.

regards

 

Hi Merlin

The Windows scandisk is definately smarter than the dos one. Probably don't close all but these would only be a few of the tens of thousands of files on your disk.

And with the debate about autofix in this thread I would say that your solution is good because it prompts you to for what to do.

But reccomend that you not do the /autofix if you suspect a real physical HD problem or a problem where the OS is reporting things like missing files etc.

Although if you have HD to fail and both FATS are damaged you will loose anyway.

But really you should run Windows scandisk ever so often.

What I am trying to say is the /autofix is ok if you have a physically good drive and the OS is running propery.

Mike

 

I am quite ready to believe you Mike but you do not tell me why I should !

How do you mean "smarter" ? How did you compare the two ?

Since Windows 98 is DOS based, we run the same program anyway, albeit, I prefer the safer DOS background for it.

regards

 

I used to have a link to a site that gave the differences 2-3 yrs ago.

Cain't find it now. But some of the things besides a deeper testing of the surface, greater use of CRC, are Longfilename support, invalid dates and times.

There were a couple more but I don't remember.

But certain errors with the DOS scandisk and it will tell you it could not repair and to run the windows scandisk.

I never said that you should stop using DOS scandisk, only that ever so often use the windows version. Just to keep the DOS ver. honest! Won't hurt anything anyway.

Mike

 

I know you never said that, but you still have not told us why you
think a Windows scandisk is better than a DOS scandisk.

Why use the Windows version ?

If this is an area you are not too sure of, I am sure we all understand.
regards

 

Scandsk.exe can't handle files with paths longer than 66 characters. Scandskw.exe has no such limitation.

Scandskw.exe is more versatile in batch files that run in Windows, e.g., you can use a command line such as:

start /w scandskw.exe c: /n

That allows scandisk to run without interruption by pausing any further batch command line executions until it finishes and does not require user interaction so the batch file can be allowed to finish. This is a very handy difference for folks running automated programs.

That will not work with the dos version (scandsk.exe) since many of the switches and error codes are not available in dos.

There are other pros and cons, such as applications running in Windows, that may favor one version over the other but those are widely known issues.

 

First, window 98 is "really" not dos based. If it were, you would never get true 32 bit addressing.

As for the Windows scandisk being better, I'm not really sure. If you look at Scandiskw, you will note that it is really small in comparison to Scandisk.exe, making me believe it is nothing more than the GUI. I know that under the skins the 2 use the same dll, dskmaint.dll which I think is the one that does all the "magic ".
One thing that it can do, that the dos based one can not, is to use the second FAT if needed for recovery purposes.

Scandisk can run fine in a windows environment because it is doing nothing more than "skip" through the fat and disk directories. It is not going anywhere near the files themselves. So, it just needs to "lock" these while it has them active, and it somehow is montoring if they change, which is why you get restarts when a background program is writing to the drive.

I will leave you with a recent experience with scandisk finding crosslinked files on my PC AND there was absolutely nothing wrong with my drive.
It was happening due to a weak/failing cmos battery.
Needless to say, if I was using the default scandisk settings, it would have deleted many of my files.

Even on a perfectly stable disk drive, I would still not run with Autofix. I do not expect to find errors anyways, with the exception of a few lost clusters if I have had programs shutdown on me, or I did the shutting down.

So, if there are in fact any errors found, I want to look at them first, to understand the implications, before I let a piece of software "try" to fix them.

Remember, if scandisk could really fix all problems, there would not be an option to turn on or off.

At the end of the day, it is obviously a personal choice. But I have seen real life examples of damage done, and many threads where the culprit causing the damage was obviously scandisk.

 

We always need to remember and consider that MicroSoft originally bought the scandisk program from Norton. That may give some folks pause.

 

Merlin

YOUR QUOTE
I know you never said that, but you still have not told us why you
think a Windows scandisk is better than a DOS scandisk.
UNQUOTE


MYQUOTE
Cain't find it now. But some of the things

besides a deeper testing of the surface,

greater use of CRC,

are Longfilename support,

invalid dates and times.

There were a couple more but I don't remember.

But certain errors with the

DOS scandisk

and it will tell you it could not repair and to run

the windows scandisk.
UNQUOTE

That is why!

Mike

Yes yes Whit that was one of the things I was trying to remember the 2nd FAT. But the link I had mentioned another difference or 2. I just don't remember them. I think it was knowledgebase item.

 

One of the reasons it would suggest this, is because the Windows version can use both FATs to attempt recovery, whereas the DOS version only uses the primary one.

CRC???
Are you sure scandisk does any CRC checking? This would imply that it reads every piece of a file in order to calculate a CRC value for it. And, once calculated it has nothing to compare it to since CRC is not stored anywhere.

"Deeper testing of the surface "???
What does this mean?
If you want to perform more rigorous surface testing, the recommendation is to increase the NumPasses parameter in Scandisk.ini and run Scandisk /Custom from a DOS prompt.

 

Great debate Mike & WhitPhil, but don't forget Harry he might not be a expert like you and just would like to know how to get his problem fixed.
My 2 cents are, take the safest way for you, in my case "No auto fix" and the link that WhitPhil posted to Microsoft explaining the fast shutdown worked for me some time ago it gives you a 2 second time delay enough time for windows to write to your HD.
And please by all means follow Mike and WhitPhil's discussion, we all learn something from it.
hawk22