how long does diskpatch take to run?

[pehoffer]

I've started diskpatch w98dos on a windows xp machine with a dead boot drive. How long should it take for the program to start and for the menu items to come up after selecting "no log files"? I have a full version of diskpatch from 6/2007, but I downloaded the demo version of the w98dos diskpatch tonight so I could use the w98dos instead of freedos because freedos seemed to be hanging up.

Also, it only gives me the option to send log files to a and c. "C" is the dead drive, don't have a floppy drive. I do have a usb stick plugged in - should it give me an option to save the logfiles there?

Thanks.

Phil

[Tom]

After starting the PC from the DiskPatch CD or floppy the main menu should be there in seconds. If things are slow after selecting the target location for the log files at least one of the disks in the system is in bad shape. You should act accordingly: create a disk health report and check that out (or have us check if you like), and/or clone that disk if one is indeed in bad shape.
If you have a USB key that is formatted as FAT or FAT32 it should be accepted as a target location for the log files. Depending on how that USB key is formatted and recognized by the PC it might show up as a C: volume, you should check to see if that is the case before allowing DiskPatch to save it's log files there. You can do so by checking it's contents after having started from the DiskPatch floppy/CD and selecting "Exit" from the main menu; you should now be shown a DOS prompt. Type "Dir x:" (where x is the drive you wish to check before saving log files to it) and see what comes up.

How to create a disk health report:
http://www.diydatarecovery.nl/dp_manual/guide_smartcheck.htm

[pehoffer]

Thanks! I let it run overnight and got the message saying "MBR missing on disk 0. Hit any key" Now its thinking again so I'll let it run while I'm at work today. I'll run a disk health report then too.

[Tom]

If things take THAT long you might as well stop. That's a sign something is very wrong. You should create that disk health report first and then determine what to do next.