Correct format for EMBRM?

User discussion and information resource forum for BootIt Next Generation

Correct format for EMBRM?

Postby sigi » Mon Apr 23, 2012 8:12 am

When looking into the properties of the EMBRM I found out that there is a special format "223/DFh". But FAT-16 or FAT-32 appear to be also possible EMBRM formats.

Which EMBRM formats exist and what are the key factors for the selection of the correct format?
Intel Core i3 540 | 2 SATA-HDD with 640 GB each | Win7 Pro x64
sigi
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Correct format for EMBRM?

Postby Bob Coleman » Mon Apr 23, 2012 10:08 am

I can only partially answer this, but I'm pretty sure that "223/DFh" is an artificial designation just to explicitly identify what the partition is and also to prevent the partition from being accessed by windows if one wants to use the value for that. I'm fairly sure that the partition is actually a FAT-16 partition. In fact, if the partition is designated FAT-16, it's contents can be seen and changed from within Windows and everything continues to work from a BING standpoint (provided one doesn't do something foolish like delete a required file). In the partition properties, "223/DFh" and FAT-16 can be swapped at will with no adverse effects.
Bob Coleman
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Correct format for EMBRM?

Postby TeraByte Support » Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:08 pm

it's the same as type 6 but it's case sensitive and yes the side affect is
that it should be hidden to the OS that doesn't know that "type" of
partition.

"Bob Coleman" wrote in message news:2100@public.bootitng...

I can only partially answer this, but I'm pretty sure that "223/DFh" is an
artificial designation just to explicitly identify what the partition is and
also to prevent the partition from being accessed by windows if one wants to
use the value for that. I'm fairly sure that the partition is actually a
FAT-16 partition. In fact, if the partition is designated FAT-16, it's
contents can be seen and changed from within Windows and everything
continues to work from a BING standpoint (provided one doesn't do something
foolish like delete a required file). In the partition properties,
"223/DFh" and FAT-16 can be swapped at will with no adverse effects.

TeraByte Support
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 3:37 pm

Re: Correct format for EMBRM?

Postby sigi » Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:30 pm

Where do I find the definition of "type 6" and what is the meaning of the warning "The file system id should be 14" in the attached screenshot?
Attachments
EMBRM properties.jpg
EMBRM properties.jpg (38.12 KiB) Viewed 3902 times
Intel Core i3 540 | 2 SATA-HDD with 640 GB each | Win7 Pro x64
sigi
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Correct format for EMBRM?

Postby sigi » Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:58 am

I found the answers to my last posting myself because I experimented a little with EMBRM formats and by doing so happened to find the solution to another longstanding problem treated in http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ucf/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=491.

I got the following BING responses upon setting the different EMBRM formats:
6_6h FAT-16.png
6_6h FAT-16.png (10.17 KiB) Viewed 3897 times

12_Ch FAT-32.png
12_Ch FAT-32.png (10.19 KiB) Viewed 3897 times

223_DFh BootIt EMBRM.png
223_DFh BootIt EMBRM.png (9.75 KiB) Viewed 3897 times


The first number ist obviously the file system id or "type" as it was called in the previous posting.
I tried to set the EMBRM format to types 6, 11, 12, 14 and 223 but was only allowed to attach screenshots of three of them here. Out of those 5 formats only the types 14 and 223 did not contain warnings.

I decided to set mine to 223, upgraded with my installation diskette and got rid of all the problems treated in the above quoted thread, which I obviously encountered because my EMBRM format had for whatever reason been set to type 6.
Intel Core i3 540 | 2 SATA-HDD with 640 GB each | Win7 Pro x64
sigi
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 6:59 pm


Return to BootIt Next Generation