Transfer Files from Hard Drive to Hard Drive

Hi,
We are trying to copy all Folders and Files from our hard drive on our computer running Windows XP Home to a Western Digital USB 2.0 External Hard Drive for back up purposes.Western Digital advised that we can Tile Vertically and then drag and drop from our HD to the external HD.
We tried this and everything was going OK until we got to the Windows Folder.
When we reached C:\Windows\System32\config in the copy process, we got an error message that the "default" file could not be copied from "config" to "config" because the file is being used by another person or process and whoever is using it should be closed.
Is there any easy way to determine who or what is using this file?
We closed all programs before starting to copy.
We used the "End it All" program to close everything, but we just can't find what other process could be using this "default" file.
Thanks for any suggestions

 

If you don't need the Windows directory/subdirectory and files backed up, just omit copying the C:\Windows directory and all the others "should" copy OK. I think you will always run into that problem as the system is using that file (and probably others) and won't copy it. Another option is to Ghost the on board HD to the external.

 

JohnB is correct. The last time I looked there were 111 files that XP would not allow access to for copying while the system was actively booted.

That's why Drive Image and Ghost sell so much better lately; they boot to their own limited operating system and copy the drive binarily while it isn't active. I prefer Drive Image but to each his own.

The reason I know exactly how many won't copy is I use XXCOPY (Freeware) and its clone command to copy my C: to my F: drive (different physical drives). XXCOPY is kind enough to report each failed copy and continue onward, which gives me a pretty complete backup, minus some 111 Windows XP files that I can live without.

Those folks who dual boot XP and Win9x could boot to Win9x and copy the XP files without any problem, provided they had both of the systems installed on FAT32 partitions. Unfortunately, XP often comes set up on NTFS formatted space. Mine did and I converted it to FAT32 using Partition Magic, but I digress.

Anyway, as JohnB suggests, if you don't really need a bootable copy and can live without those busy files, all the rest of your user data and inactive programs should copy just fine.

Cheers.

 

I agree with all that has been written in reply so far.

As long as you are backing up, why not make it a bootable drive, too? That way, if you do suffer a catastrophic loss (drive failure, total loss ot partition table, etc.), you can simply exchange the drives and be up and running in minutes instead of hours--and, you'll save the days it will take to tweak the system back into the same personalized configuration you had before the crash.

That's about all I have to add to what was written in the above replies. But, there are some other thoughts I will share on backup. Ask yourself these questions:

• What if your computer(s) were lost in a burglary?
• What if lightning or a severe power surge struck while you were making a backup to another hard disk? Both disks would be lost. Remember Murphy's law. I actually was present when that happened to someone.

First, I do a DriveImage backup of my main, bootable partition about once a month or three to another partition. DriveImage will break this backup file into parts of a size of my choice, or it can make it all one big file. I choose to break it into 640-Meg pieces. When the backup is finished, I copy each of these 640-Meg pieces to CD-Rs. Now I have an off-disk backup of my hard disk with all my personalized configurations. All recognized experts agree that backing to removable media is the safest backup. After all, if lightning strikes or you have a severe power surge while a hard disk is connected, you are subject to lose that hard disk where your backups are stored. Then there is the possibility the backup hard disk will fail at the worst possible time--or even that the lightning or power surge will strike while you are running the backup.

The next component of my backup is a 750-Meg Zip drive and a batch file that XCopies all user-created data to that zip drive. I can run that batch file at will by clicking on it whenever I like. I use the /D option in the batch file so that only files that have changed since the last time the backup was run are copied. That way, subsequent backups take typically only a very few seconds. However, I don't rely on myself remembering to run the batch file when needed. Instead, I put it on the Windows Task Scheduler where it is timed to run every two hours, regardless. I have five of the 750-Meg Zip disks and rotate them daily.

My son and I meet for lunch frequently, so about once a month I burn a CD-R copy of what's on one of those Zip disks for storage and safe-keeping at his home. That's what experts call off-site backup.

Now, there aren't many backup systems that are more bullet-proof than that. And, maybe your data isn't that important; but, it is at least good to have a full understanding of the importance of off-disk or off-site backup and why backup to non-removable media isn't safe. In my case, if my office is burglarized or if it burns, I can recover my company data relatively easily.

 

Transfer Files from HD to HD

Hi all,
Thanks for the replies. These replies bring up some further questions that I have.

We have Ghost in our Norton System Works 2002 Pro Edition but I thought I read somewhere where there is a compatibility problem between Ghost and Windows XP. Has anyone heard of this?

Alex, how do you make an external USB 2.0 hard drive bootable? Also since this is a USB external hard drive, I believe I can disconnect it and store it somewhere else if necessary.

Zephyr, if your backup is missing 111 Windows XP files, how do you restore these files if you need to restore your backup?

Thanks again to all for your assistance.

 

jslow, let me explain further since you asked.

The backup I make daily using XXCOPY is incremental and takes less than 60 seconds. I sometimes run it several times daily, as I make important changes to my drive. When XXCOPY made the initial copy, it took 45 minutes. The subsequent incremental copy process takes about 45 seconds. It works in such a way that it adds new files if there are any, updates existing files to reflect the latest changes, and deletes any files in the destination that have been deleted from the source. This is all being applied to the original copy, I don't mean for you to think it's a separate incremental copy. There is only one copy.

As for the problem of the missing Windows files that cannot be copied, I don't really care too much about that since I use Drive Image to burn a complete copy of my C: partition to CD's. That gives me the ability to restore the system with a bootable copy that was made when it was healthy. I rarely need to do that but if a hard drive should fail, I'll be well prepared to load any replacement drive and go righ back to work without any grief. I burn this copy on a weekly basis. It currently takes about an hour to run and occupies 6 CD's. I keep two sets and alternately erase the older set for reuse. I feel comfortable with a weekly schedule but others may choose as they see fit.

My day to day needs for retrieving any archived data that may get accidentally erased are met by the XXCOPY backup. It isn't compressed and files can easily be copied/pasted quickly.

I also use GoBack for a quick and easy recovery from any problems caused by poorly written software that I install/test so I can easily ditch any short term problems and get back to a previous trouble free state and not worry about what files may have been left behind by some poor uninstall. GoBack works well for ditching any viral infection that I may get through carelessness since it allows me to abandon the infection and return to a point where the drive was clean.

All these precautionary methods take up quite a bit of drive space but that's cheap now days and well worth it to have the freedom and peace of mind to operate fearlessly. I have a 40 Gig main drive and a 60 Gig secondary, so for the time being drive space is more than ample. Keeping the XXCOPY backup on the secondary drive gives a further degree of safety from hardware failure and coupled with having Drive Image CD's, I'm pretty well bullet proof.

My total time involvement is roughly one hour/week for the DI CD's plus perhaps 3 minutes/day on average for the incremental. I think it's a bargain.

As for the incompatability issues with Ghost, you'll need to look here and see what they say about your particular equipment.
As I say, I use PQ Drive Image and recommend it over and above Ghost, which I also have and rarely use. Your tastes may differ however.

Either will beat the hell out of having to separately reinstalling the OS and then all individual added software and personal files.

End of Novel.

 

I think everything was covered except the USB problem. Since DriveImage and Ghost both run in DOS mode only, you cannot use a USB drive for your backup of the entire system. The hourly backup/update of user-created data runs in Windows so there is no problem with the USB there.

In any case, even if you did manage to get your full system backup onto the USB drive (there are ways), in the event your primary drive failed, you would still have to remove your backup drive from its USB case and install it into the computer case in place of the current primary drive.

Personally, I think backing up to a non-removable media is a bad idea. If the hard disk's logic board (the little circuit board on the bottom of the drive) goes bad, you still have your good data on good media (the hard disk platters); but, you cannot retrieve the data because the media cannot be removed except by data recovery experts like DriveSavers who require you to send them $600 with the drive, and this is non-refundable and covers the cost of evaluation only and NO data recovery.

My advice is to create a partition on your drive large enough to hold a DriveImage backup of the primary partition. Do a DriveImage backup of the primary partition to the secondary and set DriveImage to break the backup into 640-Meg file fragments. When the backup is finished, boot to Windows and burn a CD of each of those 640-Meg fragments. This way, you have a backup to REMOVABLE media.

This process takes me about an hour or just a little more; but, that's not too bad considering I do it only about every 6- to 8 weeks, any backup process will take nearly that long anyway--and this one, unlike the backup to hard disk, is NOT subject to loss due to drive failure.

Let's take a worst-case scenario, a severe power surge during the backup or a fire or burglary. With your system, you lose everything. With mine, I lose almost nothing.

Question: Why take the chance, especially when both systems take the same amount of time/maintenence, and, the better one may even be cheaper? And, those 111 files you were worried about are copied by DriveImage.

 

Alex

Question... for those who are less gifted.
You suggest.. Image Copy to HD to CDRW. Can one "image" direct to CDRW, instructing 640mg file breaks? I'm sorry if I missed the answer if you previously said no to this.
Thanks
Dennis

If yes... Because process provides site/off site copies?

 

Yeah, I burn directly to disks using DriveImage 2002. If sizes automatically.

Also be aware that the latest Ghost (Ghost2003) claims to work with some USB drives.

 

Zephyr
Is reading minds also one of talents!!

 

Caveat: DriveImage does not work with all CD burners in DOS mode. I personally went through 7 CD-R burners before I found one that would work with DriveImage in DOS mode.

As for CD rewritable disks, they too are unreliable after four or so uses. For that reason I use only CD-Rs.

 

Alex Qoute
As for CD rewritable disks, they too are unreliable after four or so uses. For that reason I use only CD-Rs..... end quote.

My burner has firmware for error correction/reporting (slower burning) option,
which I use (data backup only). I do ask myself what is sensible re-use for CDRW disks.

 

Considering the superior reliability factor of CD-R and the fact that I get them for twenty cents each, I don't consider CD-RW a viable alternative.

 

My own experience has not paralleled yours Alex. I'm using CD-RW's with 50 previous uses and they still work fine. I occasionally run the program in "Verify" mode (takes 50% longer) and they pass with flying colors. Occasionally, I even test the set by restoring the partition immediately after imaging it, they work flawlessly.

On the other hand, the one time my image failed to restore was from a CD-R. I just figured since thay were designed primarily for audio, I was dumb to place my data on them. I think it was just a fluke.

Go Figure. I don't deny that your method is the safest, but just wanted to let you know my experiences. The disks are so cheap, I wouldn't reuse them if they didn't work well. I get them for 13¢ each so the cost isn't a factor.

I think the CD-RW quality has improved quite a bit since the inception and they may be much more reliable for reuse now.

 

Hi.

On writing cds of any type you might consider this procedure.

Most manufacturers of the drives test to see the max write speed the new drive will take then drop the speed a little for legal reasons and sell the drives based on the dropped speed.

When writing a cd most programs will allow you to set the write speed. Always drop it a little. If your drive will write at 12X, drop it to 10X, or better to 8X, and write it at that speed. The write will have a much much higher percentage of success. The problem isn't whether the write will take or not but that ALL the written surface is good. Each and every byte.

Another way to test if a write is good, is to get a program that will compare multiple directories and files, such as "Beyond Compare" by Scootersoftware.com and you can compare all the files on the cd with all the files on the hdd without having to rewrite them back to your hdd. This will certify that all the files were written successfully.

 

2 Points !/?

If one were to run XXCOPY from the recovery console would that allow copying the active windows files? Or - If system were dual boot ( Xp & Xp or Win2K & Xp) could XXCOPY be run on the inactive windows partition?

RE: CDRW - reliable or not.

I do a bunch of interactive CD's - Flash/shockwave, HTML & powerpoint. When "mastering" on of these I often burn several revisions before all the bugs are out. I use CDRW for this. After 3 or 4 burnings I begin to experiance about a 30% failure rate. When I say failure I mean the disk is not readable and will not complete a "blanking" or "erase CDRW ". - 5% fail on the first burn. This is with top quality branded media from multible sources.

I don't trust CDRW farther than I can throw it, which happens all too often!

 

Yes, that was my point exactly. You can dual boot and copy XP in the inactive mode, but if you're dual booting Win9x, you'll have to have XP installed on a FAT32 partition in order to be able to see it.

Now you could dual boot two versions of XP, both in NTFS format and copy the inactive one fully, placing it on any other media of either format. That sounds like too much work to me. I could justify a dual boot XP/Win9x though.

As for booting to the recovery Console for the XXCOPY process of copying the inactive drive, that wouldn't work since I have been brought to understand that not ALL files are available there. Furthermore, I don't think the Recovery Console operates in the 32-bit mode, which XXCOPY requires in order to fully handle long filenames correctly. You could use XXCOPY16, which is approved for that mode but the results would be disappointing at best.

As for your poor experiences with Cd-RW reuse, I am left wondering why that has never happened to me. I just keep reusing them and have never thrown one away yet. I have an HP CD-Writer cd16e and use Nero software for general purpose burning and Drive Image 2002 for backup imaging. I can only wonder if your drive or software may be the issue. I must say, if everyone had your experience, they wouldn't be selling many CD-RW's.