It was about time There is really no need of a traditional installation, it's a bit easier to install one on a completely blank HDD, but once you have the first one on vhd, the installation on a traditional partition can be happily nuked (or dedicated to an os that don't *officilally* support the native boot (say xp/linux/vista/macos)
@acer-5100 Well you half right. . There is pro & cons Backup scenarios, for example Traditional Backup tools, Work with partitions, real one Not partitions hidden in vhdx file So having both traditional partitions And vhdx machines are fine for me
You have yet to fully understand the matter, isn't it? Backup is possibly the main reason to use vhds. Copying ONE file w/o using any unreliable backup SW is too simple for your taste?
The cost if the size. Compare to .. My vhd size at least 20+ gb My local traditional backup is about half of that
Come ON! Compress the FS using the LZX compression (or, better, compress it via the old NTFS compression then apply the LZX one). or , at least use the deduplication on the backup location, so you can do a backup a day say 140GB in a week while taking a little more than 20GB of real storage (following your 20GB example). Just as example those are a small part of my collection of working systems, not virgin ones. The largest are Server 2008 (no LZX support and vhd must be fixed size) and LTSC2019 which includes a couple of Linux distros Using 32 bit systems is even better (obviously). The first of the list is a virgin OS, all others are working systems with all SW I need installed
P.S. I forgot to say that is "mandatory" to set \HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\FsDepends\Parameters\VirtualDiskExpandOnMount to 4. Otherwise the dynamic size vhds (in native mode) will grow to the maximum size on first boot, no matter if they are 90% empty.
I had to re-size them to minimum as they jump into 100+ GB … shrink drive C, than I used this PS command Code: Resize-VHD [-Path] <String[]> [-ToMinimumSize]
I agree with FriedTempe, I also have great problems with the implementation of this certainly very good tool, for which I would also like to express my thanks to you. However, I did not manage to finish anything with it, unfortunately it is too complicated and incomprehensibly structured and I get more color changes than a final positive result. Thanks a lot
Resize vhd itself does almos nothing if the disk is fragmented. Just use a partitioning SW to shrink the partition to its minimum size. (like easeus partition master or minitool) Then use resize-vhd -tominimum size then use optimize-vhd (with unmounted disk) then use the resize-vhd -sizebytes XXGB remount the VHD and enlarge the partition to its maximum (no partitioning sw is needed for that, just use the stock disk manager. Redo the above, when needed.
It would be neat if you mentioned where you particularly got stuck. Otherwise there's no way for me to know how to help your situation.
You`re right Maybe I haven't really understood the point of your tool yet, because basically I don't really know how to get started with it. If I then, no matter which modules I also start, your tool changes first in all possible colors, that irritates me but very much, because I'm always stuck in the same menu, which I operate. At the beginning (I put your tool in a VM on a D:\Partition in the root and started it from there, I already get an error message: "The command "CHCP" is either misspelled or could not be found." Here it goes already and as administrator I have of course also your tool ($haZZam.cmd) If I manage to open your tool and want to start with it (unfortunately I can't explain now what I would start with...if, because I don't get it started anymore) my explanations won't be very helpful to you, sorry for that What do I need in total? Do I need a specific Win11 build, if so which exactly...and should I mount this before or as I've seen it once makes this your tool, and received in the further course then unfortunately error message when mounting, which I can not tell you here unfortunately more. As said, it is very tricky for me to cope with it. Thank you for your support
I like this. I'm old school and want to learn this. Why don't you open a thread covering everything you say? Apologies for the off topic.
Because I'm the kind of user that don't like to spoon, I like to help. If you're interested in the argument just start trying, then if you face some obstacle you have just to ask, and I'll be eager to reply.
Thank you for your explanation, i copied the chcp.exe from my host into your ShaZZam Folder and script starts correct Now i get following input: Code: Non-english host language/locale. -Untested- proceed with extreme caution. Drücken Sie eine beliebige Taste . . Certainly, I would have to run your script in an English-speaking environment. I would like to note that I have set Windows Terminal as the default terminal to start for all Powershell, as well as Command. .
Hi dear friend @berr1sfueller I hope you and yours be weel and healthy in first place. Sorry if my question might be stupid, but can it be used on a Legacy BIOS and non-UEFI machine? Thanks in advanced.
Nope it's UEFI only. Legacy boot is more of a hassle than it's worth anymore. The good news is, if it was made in the last decade it's UEFI based.
I never used native VHDs in UEFI mode, except in one case when I was forced to. Not having to deal with the 4 partitions limit of MBR scheme is one of the advantages of VHDs. But even when you are forced to use GUID physical discs, the VHD can still be formatted using a single MBR partition. Why complicate your life when you can keep it simple?
Switching over to GPT/UEFI was around the time of my foray into virtual disks so I've stuck with the UEFI/VHDX combo and haven't looked back. Over the years there have been a number of vendor locked tablets and net-tops I've used that only allowed booting via EFI binary. On the other hand I haven't used a non-UEFI machine in ages and figured everyone else was in the same boat. As you well know given the recent surge of interest in VHDX-boot this wouldn't be the first time taking an initiated stance on an unapparent trend that became defacto after the fact. Now I could mention how I've been hopeful some of these brainiacs would discover UEFI-boot during this time of renaissance but that does sound a bit pesky. While I whole heartedly agree with your premise of keeping things simple it's always subjective as to what one's implementation of 'simple' might be and frankly to overlook this key point in the way that you have is a gross oversimplification of matters quite far from being so simple! No seriously though to answer your question the idea behind the simplified boot (aka no-choice lol) configuration was to keep the scope of issues down to a minimum which appears to have worked so far.