Restore of Windows does not return 8.3 second names

Question

I've put this one through to EMC's support but I'm also posting it here to see how you guys can compete! We have an issue with some DR testing to bring a production box into support. The client is W2K SP4 with Nw 7.1.2; the server is Solaris 8 with Nw 7.1.3 We have an application called Clarify which is a 16 bit application; its installed names are long names, but the entries in the registry reference these files using their 8.3 form. Prior to restore we can do a dir ??????~1.* and return an entry for the file using its 8.3 name. A full system restore returns the same registry entries and files; however when we do a dir ??????~1.* no entry is returned for file(s). As a result of this the Clarify app is not being restored correctly. Amending the registry entires to long names allows us to run the app successfully. Customer has been told by EMC in the past on a similar issue that to get around this problem they need to create the registry key 'Disable 8.3 file name creation' with value of 1; in the original configuration it has been set to 0; restored key is also 0. We have set the value to 1 prior to restore, then after restore set the restored key back to 1. Problem still remains with the same symptoms. In our original testing this key was not created.

ble1 · Accepted Answer

I remember this issue. I found some notes and MS article we used was Q176014 (talks only about NT).

However we had another case with win2k and then we had to use "fsutil file setshortname full_filename short_filename" as workaround... not sure what caused it, but it end up at MS too.

I know with 7.3 you can control this 8.3 directly from NW as there is an option for that.

Check also following and registry key associated:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/121007

Message was edited by: hcrvelin

DavidHampson · Answer

I checked the links and the manual - the support for 8.3 format in 7.3 only applies to XP and Windows 2003 - there is a disclaimer saying support for 8.3 format is not supported due to O/S limitations. Since it is a 16 bit app it could be that updating the registry entries will not allow it to function correctly anyway.

I've put this back to the system owners to decide what they want to do!

NetWorker

Was this post helpful?