Hard Drives won't mount

[oldtimer]

Strange stuff happening with my G4 1.25 GHz DP (FW 400) MDD Mac. When I boot into my "OS 9 DAW" volume (OS 9.2.2) all HD volumes mount and are accessible. When I boot into my "OS 9" volume (non-DAW, also OS 9.2.2) only the two OS 9 volumes mount -- the volumes on the other two HDs don't mount, and aren't shown the Apple System Profiler. (Details shown below.)

I've tried rebuilding the desktop and zapping the PRAM. No change. Should I Clear the NV RAM (cmd-opt-n-v)? What else should I try?

Details

ATA Bus 2
  Device 0 - Maxtor 54098UB (38.17 GB)
  Volumes:
    OS 9 (OS 9.2.2) - 4 GB, HFS+
    OS 9 DAW (OS 9.2.2) - 34.17 GB, HFS+

ATA Bus 3
  Device 0 - Seagate ST3320620A (298.09 GB)
  Volumes:
    Leopard (OS 10.5.8 ) - 135 GB, Journaled HFS+
    Data 2 - 130 GB, HFS+
    Scratch - 32.74 GB, HFS+

  Device 1 - Seagate ST3180023A (149.05 GB)
  Volumes:
    Panther (OS 10.3.8 ) - 59.75 GB, Journaled HFS+
    Data 1 - 89.05 GB, HFS+

All volumes have:
Mac OS 9 Drivers
Apple Partition Map

Thanks

[macStuff]

wow thats really bizarre;
the only reason i can think of off the bat, maybe only the first two mount might be because of the 3rd partition's size being over 128GB?

i would have the idea to try shrinking the 135gb partition to a number under 128GB to follow up that first thought... but im still spinnin my wheels on this

i think its been mentioned numerous times around these parts that strange things can occur when u use partitions larger than 128gb with mac os 9; and that its generally reccommended to avoid partitions larger than that when booting mac os 9, i cant think of the threads to link to the original comments, maybe someone else can remember;

anyone else have a theory here?

[oldtimer]

I don't think that it's a partition size issue, since one of the OS 9.2.2 boot volumes ("OS 9 DAW" - 34.17 GB) has no problems mounting and accessing all of the volumes. The "OS 9 DAW" boot volume is the one I've been using for several years running Pro Tools, etc. with never a problem reading from or writing to either "Data 1" (89.05 GB) or "Data 2" (130 GB).

I just started to (re)use the "OS 9" (non-DAW, also OS 9.2.2) boot volume last night, to install Toast Ti 5 from the downloads here, when I noticed this issue. I don't remember having the problem on this boot volume in the past.

Take a close look at what partitions aren't being seen/mounted -- all are on the two physical drives attached to ATA Bus 3.

Getting ready to burn the Mactron Bootable Rescue CD now. Maybe some of the diagnostic tools included there might help me see what is going on.

[ovalking]

As there are no h/w differences between your OS9 systems, I'd be leaning towards a software issue.
What happens if you boot with extensions off I wonder?
Try it with both your OS9 system folders. It might eliminate some odd conflict.

[devils_advisor]

I hope you guys are aware of the fact that mac and die usually put the very last versions of every system crucial file into these images. Maybe thats a pointer in the right direction. Your plain os9 has some outdated stuff on it. Look at the file versions under each of the os9 installations and compare.

[oldtimer]

devils_advisor I believe you are right on target. I looked through my System folders (Root and Control Panels) and spotted some version differences. I quickly looked through the Extensions, spotted similar differences, but haven't created a detailed list yet.

The "OS 9 DAW" volume had more current files, all from either "Mac OS CPU Software 5.9" or "Mac OS 9.2.2 Extras 3.0" which were labeled as "Project 2." Yes, I assigned different labels to items in the System folder when installing OS 9.2.1, then 9.2.2 update, Software Update, Hardware drivers, and DAW/MIDI stuff, to keep track of where the files came from. But I didn't configure a label for, or assign, "Project 2" which is confusing. I wonder where these could have come from?

Any ideas?

Perhaps when I installed OS 10.3.8 on a separate drive? Since the OS 9 DAW partition is first on the hard drive, perhaps the OS 10.3.x installer just updated its System folder, stopped there, and ignored the other OS 9 volume/partition.

I haven't updated any of the files yet. It's getting late (actually, early) and I need some sleep. 

Anyway, here's what I've logged so far. Anything look familiar?

File Version Comparison

File Name	OS 9 DAW	OS 9
System (root)
Classic	9.4*	9.1**
Classic Support	2.2*	1.3.3**
Classic Support UI	2.2*	1.3.1**
Mac OS ROM	10.2.1***	8.7++
Control Panels
Apple Menu Options	1.2*	1.1.9+
Extensions Manager	4.0.8*	4.0.7+
General Controls	8.0.3*	8.0.2+
Internet	1.0.3*	1.0.2+
Keyboard	8.6.2***	8.6+
Monitors	8.6.4***	8.6.3+
Sound	8.5.8***	8.5.6+
Startup Disk	9.2.6*	9.2.2+

Extensions - Not yet documented

* Mac OS 9.2.2 Extras 3.0 (Label as Project 2)
** Mac OS 9.2.1 Extras 1.2
*** Mac OS CPU Software 5.9 (Label as Project 2)
+ Mac OS 9.2.1
++ Mac OS 9.2.2

[FdB]

Is your version of OS 9.2.2 on ATA Bus 2 / Maxtor... an Apple “direct path” version? Or has it been sufficiently updated / replaced by a MacOS9Lives version of 9.2.2? (Tip O' the hat to devils_advisor.)

[oldtimer]

Fury deBongo I did not use any version from this forum, as I didn't even know about this forum until a few weeks ago. 

I created these OS 9.2.2 boot volumes MANY years ago. I don't remember specifically, BUT I probably did this:

• Install Mac OS 9.2.1 from Retail (Boxed) Mac OS 9 CD
• Run Mac OS 9.2.2 Updater downloaded from Apple's web site
• Run Software Update

I either didn't install both OS 9.2.2 boot volumes exactly the same, since there are differences in the version numbers in some of the System files, OR something (else) I installed in the "OS 9 DAW" boot volume updated some of its System files.

[macStuff]

oldtimer;

i appreciate your keen eye + attention for details, but my suggestion is that you spend some time READING the content thats been provided here for your benefit.
literally everything u need is here, and then some.

mac os rom reference/lookup table: https://support.apple.com/kb/TA22055?locale=en_US
your mac os rom version of 8.7 indicates that you patched up to 9.22 using the downloadable 9.22 update, this does not work with the MDD machine as the 9.22 patch update was for the machines that existed prior to dec 2001 - the mdd machines did not yet exist at this time, the number one FAILURE or MISTAKE you can make when using a mac is to try to install an older system install than the mac you are using... literaly EVERY SINGLE MAC EVER CREATED is incompatible with prior existing versions of mac OS. even if it "works" and you can boot up, it is not going to function properly, as you will see for yourself.

my advice: download the proper restore discs that came shipped with the FW400 MDD
and enjoy proper functioning of your MDD computer.

[oldtimer]

macStuff thanks for the assistance. Indeed I have been reading through the copious amount of great information here. But it's impossible to read years and years worth of message posts in just the few weeks since I found this site. Believe me, I'm trying hard to digest it all, spending several hours nearly every night pouring through the message threads. 

Yes, it appears that I did use the 9.2.1 retail installer, then the 9.2.2 updater on the "OS 9" boot volume that doesn't see/mount the 2 other HDs. And per your suggestion, this is most likely why I have this problem.

I do have the original Mac OS installer CDs that came with this MDD FW400 Mac. It installs OS 10.3, and doesn't offer the option to install just OS 9. I just checked. Apparently, when I initially installed OS 10.3 it also installed OS 9.2.2 for "Classic" mode, inside the OS X partition, and I later drag-copied this 9.2.2 System folder onto the "OS 9 DAW" boot volume that does mount all HDs. I say this because I did a quick comparison of these 2 System folders and they seem to be identical.

Would a Mac OS ROM   of 10.2.1 indicate that this is the proper installation of OS 9.2.2 for my MDD Mac?

I appreciate your help. I think I'm finally figuring this out.

[FdB]

oldtimer…

I’m glad you know about the forum now.

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,2109.0.html

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,2580.0.html

Or, read through all the descriptions of the available 9.2.2 files to see which you may prefer:

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/board,62.0.html

Forgive me my tardy comments here and let me be the first to confess that I did make the #1 FAILURE or MISTAKE, as mentioned by macStuff above… however it ended up being a PLUS for me in the long run. (Again, many thanks to GaryN, DieHard, et.al.)

In this case… I’d backup/copy/clone that Maxtor data with OS 9 and OS 9 DAW to another (external?) drive. Then wipe/erase/reformat that Maxtor and install “new & improved”  OS 9.2.2 available here. (Might want to DL and make that Install CD before W/E/F.)

Now, not being a DAW sort of individual (“I just do eyes” -graphics), is it necessary to partition for OS 9 AND OS 9 DAW? Or, can DAW apps (etc.), happily reside within a single "partition" OS 9 boot drive, harmoniously? (No pun intended.) Perhaps there are advantages that I’ve absolutely no concept of, me not being DAW-inclined. (I like my OS 9.2.2 on its’ own segregated drive, unencumbered or endangered by possible conflicts arising from anything else, even the oft-dreaded OS X.)

Whatever the case, the OS 9.2.2 from here will provide the latest, most current advancements over the Apple (direct) 9.2.2 variety of the OS. And, it just might even easily “cure that what ails ya”! (Perhaps, even if you just install it on the partition currently occupied by your original Apple (sourced) OS 9.2.2.

Afterwards, as is more possible with OS 9, you can simply move apps and necessary files back to your newly formatted and clean-installed, OS 9 drive/partition(?) from your (external?) backup. Then when asked from within OS X (looking for OS 9), to run “Classic” from… well, you have that answer.

Anyway, finally there’s my two cents. Anyone else concur? Detractors?

Didn’t have the original install disks for my MDD, and your problems don’t seem to arise from your basic MDD install (it’s your OS 9.2.2.).

AND, if you’d like a little comic-relief... from my own hair-pulling mistake(s), see the following:

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,3813.msg25479.html#msg25479

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,3799.0.html

And a Happy New Year to you… and er’body else!     ⌘+Y

[oldtimer]

Hey Fury, yes I have read everything I could find here about OS 9.2.2, and have downloaded the 2 Universal 9.2.2 installers (ISO image and drag install). These are great resources, as is the Instant DAW download. These were created with the same install & restore CDs that came with my 1.25 GHz DP MDD FW400. That is exactly what I have installed on my "good" OS 9.2.2 partition. I messed up when installing the "bad" 9.2.2 partition. I don't know why I did this -- a test, curiosity? I created BOTH 9.2.2 partitions way back in 2003 2007. I've used the "good" 9.2.2 for many years, running an expanded Pro Tools Mix system, without issue. Obviously, I never did use the "bad" 9.2.2 until recently.

I just recently got back into making music, after several years of health/medical issues, including 3 years of blindness, which was recently corrected with double cataract surgery, thanks to finally getting health insurance through Obama Care. Prior to that my health insurance had been cancelled, and nobody would cover me because I has high risk due to my pre-existing conditions.

Anyway, yes there are very good reasons to keep your DAW OS 9 boot partition's system folder lean and mean, and only install the apps directly related to your DAW (and MIDI) work process. Control Panel and Extension conflicts are the #1 cause of crashes, errors, etc. when running a DAW. This may be more of an issue when running Pro Tools hardware and software than with other DAWs. I don't know.

I call myself oldtimer because I've been using Macs and Pro Tools since 1997. You can read my member introduction here http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,1991.msg28278.html#msg28278. I've set up Pro Tools on several different Macs through the years, starting with OS 7.6.1 on a PTP 250 (Mac clone) and multiple external SCSI HDs. Prior to that I used PC-based DAWs  with digital multitrack tape (Tascam), and analog multitrack tape before that way back in the 1970s-1980s. I performed on stage in several bands through the years as well -- that's how I was able to buy a lot of this stuff.

I learned about how to set up Pro Tools and the Mac OS from friends who were long time music pros from Nashville, LA, NY, etc., and from one of the main software gurus at Waves (the plugin developer). Yes, I've been around the block a time or two and generally know my way around this stuff. So it was embarrassing to be "scolded like a child" in this public forum. 

My significant other uses her Mac for graphics editing and design, desktop publishing, writing, etc. Yes, the work process is different -- critical calibration of video display vs. critical accuracy of audio processes -- which means different control panels and extensions (and potential conflicts) in OS 9. I think that Mac OS X has been a major improvement for pro-level work environments for video, graphics, and music/audio. But some things, at least in MIDI/music, are still better in OS 9.

Wow, that was a long rant. I just felt like I had to get some things off my chest, and out in the open. I'll rant no more! Only short posts in the future. 

[macStuff]

lol scolded like a child..
sorry, that was meant to drive that fact home for all who are reading.. not to put u on the spot

i personally learned my lesson back in 2014 and these days i do not use any g3/g4 mac unless i have at least one partition running the original os install issued by apple with the mac at time of purchase.

if you have the proper restore discs for the Dual processor 1.25ghz MDD, it should include
a combination install of both os9.22 + Jaguar 10.2, even though the machine will initially boot osx following the install/restore procedure. i have a similar single processor version of the 1.25 MDD (from 2003?) so ive done the install and know from firsthand experience.

but if u want the lazy fix, if you use the universal install from this forum (first link provided by fury de bongo) then you should have no problems creating a proper 100% stable install on an MDD machine.

[oldtimer]

if you have the proper restore discs for the Dual processor 1.25ghz MDD, it should include
a combination install of both os9.22 + Jaguar 10.2

Yes, I have the DVD that shipped with my FW400 MDD Mac. Mine is one of the later FW400 MDDs -- January 2004, with the copper heat sink and upgraded PSU. The DVD (2003, v1.0, 691-4681-A) contains Mac OS 10.3 (Panther), Mac OS 9.2.2, AHT 2.0.2. This is the same DVD that can be downloaded here: http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,3266.0.html

This is indeed where I installed the "good" OS 9.2.2 from.

[macStuff]

yes and it works because it has the proper versions of files for your computer
(including mac os rom 10.2.1)

the actual manufacturing date is IRRELEVANT
the only date that matters is the RELEASE DATE (introduction date) of the make/model
so while its interesting to read that your machine was actually assembled in january of 2004,
this has no bearing on which original disc is applicable/perfect match for your machine

ie: u would need a disc from june 2003 or later, rather then january 2004 or later
if you have a proper dual processor MDD, the introduction date for this seems to be back in August of 2002

but, as noted on the single processor 2003 MDD page on everymac,
it says its a re-released version of the August 2002 MDD.
so basically any installer after august 2002, should function ok on your machine.. as far as i understand it
 

[oldtimer]

yes and it works because it has the proper versions of files for your computer
(including mac os rom 10.2.1)

the actual manufacturing date is IRRELEVANT
the only date that matters is the RELEASE DATE (introduction date) of the make/model
so while its interesting to read that your machine was actually assembled in january of 2004,
this has no bearing on which original disc is applicable/perfect match for your machine

ie: u would need a disc from june 2003 or later, rather then january 2004 or later
if you have a proper dual processor MDD, the introduction date for this seems to be back in August of 2002

but, as noted on the single processor 2003 MDD page on everymac,
it says its a re-released version of the August 2002 MDD.
so basically any installer after august 2002, should function ok on your machine.. as far as i understand it

Come on macStuff, quit treating me like I'm some sort of idiot. I understand all of this stuff. No need to preach to the choir. Who the heck are you trying to impress?

I was just trying to point out that I had a later version of the MDD software install & restore DVD that Included Mac OS 10.3, and not the older version that included OS 10.2 as you stated, just in case others who read this message thread might be interested.

And going back to your earlier scolding, preaching, condescending meassage to me:

i appreciate your keen eye + attention for details, but my suggestion is that you spend some time READING the content thats been provided here for your benefit.

I searched this forum for anything related to "hard drives won't mount" and found nothing applicable. It was only when I started comparing the file versions and dates on the 2 different OS 9.2.2 installs that I realized what the problem was. So it was my "keen eye + attention for details" that led to my understanding and solution, and NOT your posts.

It's people like you who tend to chase new members like me away. So if you can't be helpful without being condescending, please refrain from replying to my posts. You don't impress me, and I doubt that you impress many others either.

[macStuff]

honestly? this is ridiculous;
did the oldtimer have a few too many on new years eve?? or what???

its unfortunate you are perceiving my messages in that way,
i have no intention of scolding anyone, or coddling any children either for that matter. my only interest in partaking in discussions on this website is INFORMATION, and solving problems that plague people from being able to use mac os9 productively, and contributing to discourse + conversation that results in exposing real conflicts + problems that can be duplicated + documented + therefore avoided + sidestepped.

im not using capitol letters to indicate SHOUTING as many do.. if you read any posts from diehard he also tends to use bold + capitalization, not as a way of condescending but as a way of highlighting or putting emphasis upon key points, why would i be wasting my time here writing to you if being a jerk was my only goal?  im not here to grandstand or put anyone on the spot, nor do i care about impressing anyone, TRUST ME! lol

my focus was on highlighting information that in my opinion could be easily overlooked and/or confused, im sorry you took offense, i have zero intentions in communicating with anyone who is going to get overly-emotional and make accusations of being condescending, what i said what was for your benefit, yes, but moreso for the benefit of anyone and everyone else reading the site. as there are many other people here other than yourself with similar goals as yourself and everyday people make many obvious mistakes over and over by overlooking the basics, alot of people who consider themselves "mac experts" can still find themselves making mistakes. thats why its always good to revisit the basics in my opinion;

i wont respond to any of your questions in the future as i have precisely ZERO INTEREST in this type of interaction. perhaps i should have bolded for emphasis instead of CAPITALIZED, i will try to learn from my mistakes;

good luck with everything,
happy new year all.
as for me, i would like to try not to let one bad apple ruin the bunch;
but, maybe its time to visit some different websites;
have a happy 2018;

[devils_advisor]

yes and it works because it has the proper versions of files for your computer
(including mac os rom 10.2.1)

the actual manufacturing date is IRRELEVANT
the only date that matters is the RELEASE DATE (introduction date) of the make/model
so while its interesting to read that your machine was actually assembled in january of 2004,
this has no bearing on which original disc is applicable/perfect match for your machine

ie: u would need a disc from june 2003 or later, rather then january 2004 or later
if you have a proper dual processor MDD, the introduction date for this seems to be back in August of 2002

but, as noted on the single processor 2003 MDD page on everymac,
it says its a re-released version of the August 2002 MDD.
so basically any installer after august 2002, should function ok on your machine.. as far as i understand it

Come on macStuff, quit treating me like I'm some sort of idiot. I understand all of this stuff. No need to preach to the choir. Who the heck are you trying to impress?

I was just trying to point out that I had a later version of the MDD software install & restore DVD that Included Mac OS 10.3, and not the older version that included OS 10.2 as you stated, just in case others who read this message thread might be interested.

And going back to your earlier scolding, preaching, condescending meassage to me:

i appreciate your keen eye + attention for details, but my suggestion is that you spend some time READING the content thats been provided here for your benefit.

I searched this forum for anything related to "hard drives won't mount" and found nothing applicable. It was only when I started comparing the file versions and dates on the 2 different OS 9.2.2 installs that I realized what the problem was. So it was my "keen eye + attention for details" that led to my understanding and solution, and NOT your posts.

It's people like you who tend to chase new members like me away. So if you can't be helpful without being condescending, please refrain from replying to my posts. You don't impress me, and I doubt that you impress many others either.

Oldtimer, im sorry about your experience here. This is all just impatience. We get you up and running.

[macStuff]

listen guys; this is really an unfortunate misunderstandng;
the term "that escalated quickly" comes to mind

when i said the following:

appreciate your keen eye + attention for details, but my suggestion is that you spend some time READING the content thats been provided here for your benefit.
literally everything u need is here, and then some.

i meant what i said and was being 100% genuine, i was impressed by his effort to effectively communicate the pertinent details, when i saw his post i was surprised in a good way. most of the time people who come on macos9lives cant be bothered to even type a few paragraphs let alone explicitly outline all the detailed info that he did; hes probably the most detail oriented new user/poster on this site of all time! i was not being condescending at all! theres no ill-will coming from me, judging from the date + time of the replies + the change in attitude, how could i not think; woah, did this guy go on a bender and now hes taking it out on me?? how did things go from "thanks for the help" to "stop treating me like an idiot!"

his comments here:

macStuff thanks for the assistance. Indeed I have been reading through the copious amount of great information here. But it's impossible to read years and years worth of message posts in just the few weeks since I found this site. Believe me, I'm trying hard to digest it all, spending several hours nearly every night pouring through the message threads. 

totally true.. i get it.. it is almost impossible to digest it all in one night, let alone a month or even a year
but think about it.. why would i be trying to figure out which restore cd he needed if i was trying to be an asshole??? your perception of me and my words is way way way way way off its the holidays and i was writing my responses inbetween helping my family + having company over..

im not on here to be social + hold hands and sing fucking kumbaya in some sort of "inner circle"
 i was trying to figure out which mdd restore cd he had vs which cd he needed; because i was pretty damn sure my restore cd did not have panther on it.. but now that i think of it i think i confused it for the quicksilver restore cd.

ive smoked alot of pot in the last year ok? so fucking kill me.
by the sounds of it, some of u guys desperately need to smoke one and fuckin relax. jeeeez