qemu and Puppy 2.15CE: 'could not open hard disk image'

[rossnixon]

Hi all,
I downloaded PupWinQE.zip and puppy-215CE-Final.iso
I updated the shortcut paths. I updated the batch file to match the newer iso:
qemu -L . -m 256 -cdrom puppy-215CE-Final.iso -localtime -hda puppy.qcow -boot d -hdb \\.\PhysicalDrive0

I get this error:
qemu: could not open hard disk image '\\.\PhysicalDrive0'
I checked the iso with md5sum, so no problem there.

(Using Windows 98SE, 512MB RAM. QEMU is version 0.8.2)
I posted this on the Qemu forum yesterday, but no answers yet.

[Bruce B]

Hi all,
I downloaded PupWinQE.zip and puppy-215CE-Final.iso
I updated the shortcut paths. I updated the batch file to match the newer iso:
qemu -L . -m 256 -cdrom puppy-215CE-Final.iso -localtime -hda puppy.qcow -boot d -hdb \\.\PhysicalDrive0

I get this error:
qemu: could not open hard disk image '\\.\PhysicalDrive0'
I checked the iso with md5sum, so no problem there.

(Using Windows 98SE, 512MB RAM. QEMU is version 0.8.2)
I posted this on the Qemu forum yesterday, but no answers yet.

I think you can believe the qemu error. You say \\.\PhysicalDrive0 is a hard disk image? If it is, (its name does not imply that it is), the syntax would be:

-hdb PhysicalDrive0 (if that really is the image name and if its in your current directory)

-hdb /location/to/PhysicalDrive0 (if it's in another directory)

how (in what way) do you expect qemu to interpret \\.\ ?

[rossnixon]

Hmm... I just assumed "\\.\PhysicalDrive0" was a literal Qemu parameter.
I changed the iso name inside the batch file, because I got a newer iso, and I placed it in c:\puppy along with Qemu and a few other files.

Do I have to put puppy-215CE-Final.iso into the command string twice?

[Bruce B]

Here's from the qemu manual, which obviously you've read:

CD
The prefered syntax is the drive letter (e.g. `d:'). The alternate syntax `\\.\d:' is supported. `/dev/cdrom' is supported as an alias to the first CDROM drive. Currently there is no specific code to handle removable medias, so it is better to use the change or eject monitor commands to change or eject media.

Hard disks
Hard disks can be used with the syntax: `\\.\PhysicalDriveN' where N is the drive number (0 is the first hard disk). WARNING: unless you know what you do, it is better to only make READ-ONLY accesses to the hard disk otherwise you may corrupt your host data (use the `-snapshot' command line so that the modifications are written in a temporary file).

I do the opposite of you. Puppy is the host and Windows 98 is the guest.

In any case, if you want to include the hard disk as part of the qemu filesystem, you are supposed to make the disk, or at least the partition read only. I don't think you can make the hard disk or partitions read only very easily. How about forgetting incorporating the hard disk as part of the filesystem, until you at least get other things working right?

With a Linux host it is very easy to manipulate data between the virtual hd image and the Linux file system, when qemu is not running. I don't think its so easy with a Windows 98 host.

I think things should work if you drop the -hdb \\.\PhysicalDrive0

Here is your command line after removing -hdb \\.\PhysicalDrive0

Code: Select all

qemu -L . -m 256 -cdrom puppy-215CE-Final.iso -localtime -hda puppy.qcow -boot d 

Breakdown:

qemu means run qemu

-L . means all your qemu files are in the current directory

-m 256 means give 256mb RAM to this instance of qemu

-cdrom puppy-215CE-Final.iso means treat the puppy iso file as an actual cdrom and it is in the current directory

-localtime means use localtime not GMT

-hda puppy.qcow means this is your virtual hard drive and the first hard drive and is in the current directory

-boot d means boot cdrom (the Puppy iso file)

[rossnixon]

No I hadn't read the manual. I just assumed the batch file I had copied from a website was going to work on Windows 98.

I have now got Puppy Linux booting, after dropping "\\.\PhysicalDrive0" which someone from the Qemu forum has just told me is only for Win NT+

Thanks for your help.
Ross

[JaDy]

I wouldn't even try PupWinQE on a Win98 PC. Would be too slow. I use PhysicalDrive0 on my WinXP notebook. No problems as long as I don't try to create folders there. The PUPsave file works fine. Creating other files there sometimes don't show up in WinXP until a re-boot. So, caution is needed but it's fully functional.

I'm the author of PupWinQE. It'd be helpful if requests for help had PupWinQE in the subject so's I can spot it and reply. Luckily, I noticed this message. More luckily, others had helpful ideas.

[rossnixon]

I don't see why a Win 98 PC is necessarily slow. It has been upgraded. Currently running at 3.2 GHz with 512MB RAM.

I dual-boot Win 98 and Ubuntu. But my wife doesn't like Linux, so starting Puppy from the desktop means I can quickly swap between OSes, and don't have to close running programs (well, except for when 512MB is not enough!)

[JaDy]

Oh. That's very different. Nevermind.

[Bruce B]

JaDy,

I was wondering about your eariler comment: "I wouldn't even try PupWinQE on a Win98 PC. Would be too slow."

But like you, I thought never mind.

My experience with Windows goes back to a time when Windows was a toy. Then:

Windows 3.1, Windows 3.1.1, then Windows 95 retail upgrade, then Windows 95 OSR2, then Windows 98SE.

I also have W@K, NT4, and XP

I never did get much into the NT series of Windows.

I never arrived at the conclusion that 98SE was faster than 95 OSR2. I never arrived at the conclusion that NT was faster than the 9x series.

I think the NT series could (should) be faster with dual processors, because the 9x version doesn't support them.

I don't have Windows normally installed per se, I have Windows 98 as a file to run in qemu. I'd rather have Windows 95, but it crashes due to processor speed more than it can handle.

In any event, Windows 98 screams speed running as a guest of Linux.

---------------------

I have a survey questionnaire, which I'd appreciate anyone who wishes to answer, participate in:

Discarding considerations of multiple (dual?) processor support, which Windows version to you consider the fastest?

Here are the basic choices:

Windows 3.xx

Windows 95 retail
Windows 95 OSRx
Windows 98 first edition
Windows 98SE
Windows ME

Windows NT (with whatever service pack)
Windows 2000 (with whatever service pack)
Windows XP (with whatever service pack)
Windows Vista (whatever version)

[JaDy]

Bruce B,

I made the invalid assumption of equating a Win98 system with a PC built in 1998 having insufficient power to run anything in Qemu.

I need to change the advice accompaning PupWinQE to relate to computing power and to note the limitations on PhysicalDrive0.