Xref: utzoo comp.windows.ms:13247 comp.os.msdos.misc:2260 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!kth.se!ugle.unit.no!nuug!ulrik!ulrik!rodrigol From: rodrigol@ulrik.uio.no (Rodrigo Lopez) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.msdos.misc Subject: Re: unmoveble blocks in Norton Speed disk Message-ID: <1991May30.094549.20959@ulrik.uio.no> Date: 30 May 91 09:45:49 GMT References: <10545@castle.ed.ac.uk> <1991May28.140354.446@sc2a.unige.ch> Sender: news@ulrik.uio.no (Mr News) Reply-To: rodrigol@ulrik.uio.no (Rodrigo Lopez) Organization: University of Oslo Lines: 36 Nntp-Posting-Host: ulrik In article <1991May28.140354.446@sc2a.unige.ch>, fisher@sc2a.unige.ch writes: > In article <10545@castle.ed.ac.uk>, own@castle.ed.ac.uk (O Morgan) writes: > > Some time ago there was some talk (panic) about large chunks of some > > peoples hard disks being highlighted as "unmoveable" when trying to > > unfragment the disk with Norton Speed disk. [...] > > Some executables with "strange" formats are also marked as unmovable. I > noticed this with the self-extracting LHarc version 1.13c (1989), which > could be moved only when renamed to another extention. > > Do windows executables have an unusual structure, which is not recognized by > earlier versions of Norton's SD? If you are running windows 3.0 in 386 enh mode you are probably using a swap disk and more likely, this one is PERMANENT. This means its unmovable and NU SD will identify it as such. A good idea is to get rid of this permanent swap file before optimizing the disk. Then, after optimalization, re-create it. ************************************************************************ **** * RODRIGO LOPEZ SERRANO Biotechnology Centre of Oslo * * Tel: xx-02-958766 Gaustadalleen 21 * * Fax: xx-02-694130 P.B. 1125 Blindern * * 0316 Oslo 3 Norway * * rodrigol@biomed.uio.no * * rodrigol@ulrik.uio.no * ************************************************************************ ****