Have 2 x 60Gb drives. Drive1 has one NTFS partition on which I have XP. In
addition there are two other FAT32 partitions. Drive2 contains two ext3
partititions and 1 swap (totalling 7GB), followed by three FAT32 partitions.

Prior to installing RH9.0 I always used Drive Image to create backup images
of my main C drive, ie the NTFS partition. However after installing RH9.0,
Drive Image flagged up #116 errors on both drives, on all partitions
starting after cyl 1023. It stated that the LBA address did not match the
CHS address and DI could 'fix' it, the LBA being deemed correct in all
cases.. I allowed DI to do the 'fix' and all now seems OK, both for Linux
and XP.

Oddly, the CHS address given by DI as the start address of all affected
partitions was 16450559. All partitions clearly could not start at the same
address, and I suspect that 16450559 is equivalent to 1024,255,63, in other
words the CHS limit of the bios.

Anyway, Drive Image, like Partition Magic, insists upon a match between LBA
and CHS in each partition table before it can continue. Thus I assume that
the 'fix' was to enter the correct CHS address in each partition table, even
though higher values could not be used by the bios.

But as I understand it, modern systems use the EDD standard (Enhanced Disk
Drive) where only the LBA address are used; the CHS address being
essentially redundant. Thus would I be correct in assuming that the 'fix'
did no more than satisfy Drive Image's need for a match, and should have no
effect upon the operation of XP or Linux? Certainly to date, I have not seen
any adverse effect on either operating system.

Secondly, these 'errors' were introduced during the installation of RH9.0,
my first Linux installation. Prior to the install I created a 7GB
unallocated space at the start of the second drive, then during the
installation I allowed RH9 to create the 3 partitions required
automatically.
This suggests it all has something to do with Disk Druid which Redhat uses.
I have created/resized partitions on numerous occasions using MS's Fdisk or
Partition Magic, and have had no problems at all with either DI or PM. Thus
Disk Druid must do something differently to those other partition managers.
I also find it strange that both drives should be affected in the same way.
I deliberately chose to install RH on drive2 and also boot via floppy in
order that drive1, ie my XP drive, remained untouched. Clearly Disk Druid
does cross drive boundaries, although being told, in my case, to create the
necessary partitions in the unallocated space on hdb. This is a somewhat
worrying characteristic.

This same #116 problem has been discussed several times. It also apparently
occurs after the install of Suse, which I assume also uses Disk Druid during
its install. Many people simply say do not 'fix' in case something gets
screwed up and you risk loss of access to the drives, but if one took that
advice DI or PM could not be used, which is a pity as both are very useful
applications.
Can anyone throw some light on this?