registry repair commands

[dinakar]

in windows 98 we can boot into command prompt only mode and then we can type scanreg/fix and scanreg/restore etc commands for registry recovery in windows 2000 what are the equivalent commands to themm ??
in windows 98 also any other command line tools (dos commands)to recovery of registry or to repair the boot process plz tell me .
thanks in advance

[Paul Komski]

3 links:-

http://www.cse.msu.edu/~xiaoxipe/HowTo/backup_restore_registry.htm

http://www.storageadmin.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=21505

http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=80065128

Do you have a specific problem or is your question just out of interest.

[Sylvander]

And please note that it's important that there be a single space between the "g" and the "/" in "scanreg /restore" and "scanreg /fix".

[dinakar]

Originally posted by Paul Komski
3 links:-

http://www.cse.msu.edu/~xiaoxipe/HowTo/backup_restore_registry.htm

http://www.storageadmin.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=21505

http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=80065128

Do you have a specific problem or is your question just out of interest.
are there any inbuilt registry backup /restore /fix utilities in windows 2000/xp like win98 scanreg /fix /restore

[Paul Komski]

The simple answer is that there is no direct equivalent of scanreg in Win2K/XP.

A "generic" backup of the system registry is created but needs to be accessed using an ERD or the RC. Updated ERDs can be made from the backup utility (which can also be started by typing ntbackup at a command prompt).

"Generic" ERDs can be created from the installation CD but if there have been significant system configuration changes, it is wise to then create an updated ERD using backup; at the same time that this is done an additional backup of the registry is made to the hard disk and it is this that is later accessed by the ERD in the event of a problem requiring a "restore" of the registry.

If you have created an updated ERD it can do three things related to the time the update was made. (1) inspect and repair the startup environment (2) verify Win2K files and replace missing or damaged files
and (3) inspect and repair the boot sector.

The middle link above (and the subsequent pages it links to) outlines much of this much better than I can.

WinXP (also WinME) but not Win2K has a Restore Facility as long as this has been enabled and given enough space to keep the restore points on.

A complete repair installation of both Win2K and WinXP can be made by choosing a new installation from the installation CD and then choosing the Repair Option, when the pc automatically reboots. This is a bit like an "install over" but is much more controlled.

Hope this helps.

[sarasotab]

Microsoft also makes a utility which is a free download called regclean. Regclean works on 98,2000, and XP . It runs from the desktop and autofixes errors, then saves a log and an autorecover file (backup) of the prior registry settings

I have only used it a few times but it has caused no problems and seems to keep the registry in fairly good shape.

Bob Barr

[dinakar]

Originally posted by Paul Komski
3 links:-

http://www.cse.msu.edu/~xiaoxipe/HowTo/backup_restore_registry.htm

http://www.storageadmin.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=21505

http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=80065128

Do you have a specific problem or is your question just out of interest.
i got the utilities of windows nt resource kit but can i use them on windows 2000 plz clarify with brief explnation plz......

[Paul Komski]

You can always try them out but you should get the Win2000 Resource Kit it that is what you want and of which the individual components can be downloaded from HERE (http://www.dynawell.com/support/ResKit/win2k.asp#Registry)

I don't think any of them will do an equivalent Win98 scanreg and the utility called that in the reskit just searches the registry as far as I know.

[Steve]

I think we went through this before, but I just want to mention that the space between the "g" and the "/" is really not nessesary. Works fine without it on my Win98se install. :)

[Sylvander]

Now you've got me confused steve.

I always thought the sky was blue and a space was required after a command name.
I can't remember where I got these ideas from.

"Perhaps from somewhere like this:
http://www.easydos.com/dosindex.html

At the bottom of the page it says:

To be functional, each DOS command must be entered in a particular way: this command entry structure is known as the command's "syntax." The syntax "notation" is a way to reproduce the command syntax in print."

"Command Syntax Elements
1. Command Name
The DOS command name is the name you enter to start the DOS program (a few of the DOS commands can be entered using shortcut names). The DOS command name is always entered first. In this book, the command is usually printed in uppercase letters, but you can enter command names as either lowercase or uppercase or a mix of both.

2. Space
Always leave a space after the command name."

I'm totally prepared to believe that what you say works does in fact work, but I'd like to understand why we are told something only to discover [apparently] that it is not true [or is it?].
Do you understand what gives?

[Steve]

Maybe not everything we read is true. :eek: I tried it twice before I posted. Works real good. Give it a try...:)

[Sylvander]

Yes, I tried it and it does indeed work.

I'll need to keep that in memory as in need of an explanation.

Untill I find one I'll play safe and include spaces where instructed.

Here's a similar type of problem explained:

Rem / :: / ;
Records comments (remarks) in batch files and Config.sys. These are ignored during the execution of the program.
Syntax:
REM [comment]

In Config.sys only:
; [comment]

In batch files (including Autoexec.bat) only:
:: [comment]

Notes:
In Config.sys a semicolon has the same effect as REM. Batch files do not recognize the semicolon and will generally cause an error message about a bad command.

In batch files a double colon has the same effect as REM.
Actually, the double colon creates a label (see GOTO) which has a colon as the first character. Although Command.com recognizes this as a label, GOTO doesn't, and so there is no chance of confusing a label and remark.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
REM has a major limitation (see below) and, because of this, it is preferable to use the alternatives of a semicolon in Config.sys and double colon in batch files).
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Limitations
When parsing a batch file, Command.com does not simply skip any lines beginning with "REM". Instead, it seems to parse the line for recognized commands/files/whatever and then take no action if the line begins with REM. This is not particularly efficient and a large number of REM statements in a batch file can noticeably slow down its execution.
A much more serious problem with REM occurs if the line contains a pipe (|) or redirection (<, >, >>) symbol: everything up to the symbol is ignored BUT the symbol itself and everything following is interpreted as a command line entry - but without the safeguard of syntax checking. This can lead to all sorts of problems - especially when REM is used to temporarily inactivate lines in a batch file. A simple illustration of this can be given by the following:

In a batch file the line:
Echo. | date
pipes an <Enter> to DATE, causing it to display the date and return to the command prompt.
One would expect that preceeding this command with REM whould cause the command to simply be ignored - but only the "Echo." part is. Command.com tries to process the "| date" part and the system hangs waiting for input from a non-existant preceeding command. The only remedy is to close the Dos window or reboot.

Note that having the line:
|date
causes Command.com to simply respond with the message "Syntax error" and return to the prompt.

The way to avoid such problems is to use the double colon rather than REM.

Complicated isn't it?
But it seems there are very good reasons for doing things this way rather than that. I have a policy of sticking to the rules [so far as I can learn them] untill I have a good reason to deviate from them.

[Steve]

Putting a space in works too. I just wanted to point out that you didn't need to. ;)