Error using existing VHD file => Fixed in 2.0.4

[Josh]

I installed the latest version of VirtualBox on my Windows XP machine today. The install went well. I chose to create a new virtual machine using an existing vhd I had been using with MS VPC 2007. I adjusted the RAM setting to 1024MB (I have 3GB system RAM on the host XP system). When I boot the machine, I get the error "FATAL: No bootable medium found! System halted."

[aeichner]

Can you attach VBox.log please? I can use a vhd image without problems.

[Josh]

Added the log file.

[aeichner]

This issue should be fixed in the 2.0.2 release.

[Josh]

Installed 2.0.2 and I am now getting "A Disk Read Error Has Occurred".

Attaching log

[aeichner]

Can you please attach the right log file? The one you attached is still from version 2.0.0.

Thank you.

[White Horse]

Vista 2.02 log (Vista Business, circa 2007)

[White Horse]

I just wanted to chime in to say I have the same problem. Since I already saw someone had submitted the bug, I dont need to. So I'll just add my comments here. So here goes:

I tried to use a well-used Virtual PC image. Its called umm... Internet Explorer Application Compatiblity Image. Its dated seventh of february 2007. So yeah... I also get a disk error. One that says disk read error happened, press Ctrl+ Alt+ Del to restart. Except that its stuck- not even press second Ctrl (the one next to AltGr)+ Del will help. Its so badly hosed I cant even shut it down- ACPI power off wont help. Or maybe even shut down. The only one that helps is close virtual machine- gee, thats nice. The only way to close a virtual machine that wont even start due to Suns fault is to do against their recommendations. So I did Close -> Shut down. Then it would be at least closed.

At least in VMware 6.5 RC1 (which is buggy when running Vista, this same image), lets me always suspend it, and it works, foolproof, always. And it does start always- even with the most bizarre bugs you can imagine (it even BSODed once). So even a buggy beta works better than a full release- updated. Though, it may be due to the fact its not "stable". Which would be creepy, because it would mean youre literally punished for using the newest version instead of the stable one. Then choosing stable isnt just peace of mind or whatever it is- its literally necessity.

I dont know why the image sucks so much- maybe its because it dated February 2007, when Vista DID have problems (it doesnt suck, but based on how much I have had with this image, they might have really had problems during the first months.) Lets just say I havent had a single completely error-free boot using ANY of the three products- VMware 6.5 RC1, Virtual PC 2007 SP1, and VirtualBox 2.02. Is it because it doesnt get enough RAM, with only 512 MB? I dont know. Only thing I do know is that XP never needs beyond 1 GB, which I have, and giving it more than 512 MB hoses both my machine and virtual one. In a counterlogical move, giving it more memory actually worsens it. So I have to get more memory to fix the fact that all virtualization apps suck due to not enough memory (and I want XP to run smootly along the virtual machine, thankyouverymuch). Or wait until January 2009 when it expires and Microsoft hopefully makes a better Vista virtual machine with SP1 and all Windows Updates.

Here is my log.

The only weird thing I can stop is that it says its not mountable. And thats after I laboriously read the whole log file, which was more like it was meant to be read by a computer than a human. At least VMWare has readable log files (if you are extremely technically competent and do a lot effort). While they are still so confusing you bother to read them, at least they tell why something went wrong (even if not very helpfully).

00:00:00.887 Devices/piix3ide/0/LUN (level 5) 00:00:00.887 Type <string> = "HardDisk" (cch=9) 00:00:00.887 Mountable <integer> = 0x0000000000000000 (0)

Meanwhile, Virtual PC just works, even if Vista always has randomly changing, new bugs = errors. With Windows Update and installing SP1.

PS. I hope you dont mind the harsh tone of my comment. I am just frustated that after trying it for 3 weeks- it still refuses to run flawlessly- in 3 virtualization apps!

P.PS. Expecting us to read log files that look like processor instructions and other of the most grotty things existing on the PC ought to be a crime. You mention in your in your documentation that it might be useful to read logs. Except that the log is to technical even the most advanced, unafraid user will be confused. Oh, and did I mention if I do read the logs- with massive effort- it doesnt contain anything useful? If we are supposed to read unreadable logs because of "detail" how about at least including enough? VMWare, again, does this. Meanwhile, several applications ship with easy-to-understand logs that are so simple they fill their purpose. How about making them readable? Better yet, why not you make them so easy to undestand even users bad at computers can read them? I guarantee you can make them simpler without losing technical detail, if that is what you are caring about.

[White Horse]

Addendum: When I tried the Vista virtual machine for the first time, it would boot fine (far past disk error...), show the Vista logo (I changed it to the beatiful Aurora), and only then crash with a blue screen of death. 0x24. Every time it would crash with the same error- regardless of any settings, even in Safe mode (even in Safe Mode with Command Prompt!) This isnt normal anymore- Vista just doesnt work that badly- VirtualBox is buggy here.

Yes, that was from a earlier virtual machine i already deleted, far before this one... May even be 2.0, in case which, why does a supposed fix make things even worse? Is the disk reading code in virtualbox buggy?

[Sander van Leeuwen]

Stick to the facts and don't vent your frustration here. Otherwise there's not much we can do for you.

The VBox logs are perfectly fine. We don't expect you to understand them. Sometimes they contain clues as to what went wrong (e.g. disk write errors). The incomprehensible details are there for us.

[Josh]

Replying to aeichner:

Can you please attach the right log file? The one you attached is still from version 2.0.0.

Thank you.

I believe the right file should be attached now.

[Ian]

Same problem here: two VHDs both set to 64GB dynamically expanding, containing ~7GB of data. No indication that VirtualBox doesn't like them, other than the ctrl+alt+del message when you attempt to boot them. Host platform is Vista x64, VirtualBox 2.0.2.

[Paul Bakker]

Same problem for me. Host platform MacOs 10.5.4 Image created by VPC 2007

[Paul Bakker]

Host: MacOS

[aeichner]

This issue should be fixed in the next release.