Hello,
Recently my trial expired for Fusion Desktop 6 for Mac, but I need to grab some files from the VM to my host machine. I know this can be done, but when I go to use the VMMounter app thing, I can't find it anywhere, not even downloading the FUSE thing helps at all. Please could someone help me out here?
Thanks in advance
Leon
(I'm using OSX 10.9.3 as the host, and my VM is OSX Snow Leopard Server)
The program only can handle whole/entire virtual disks. What you are trying to mount is a virtual disk for a snapshot.
And the snapshot is locked.
check out Paragon Virtual Disk Mounter for Mac® OS X Beta http://www.paragon-software.com/support/betatesting/vd-mounter-mac-beta/
Best
Thanks for the link but I get this error when trying to mount the image
The program only can handle whole/entire virtual disks. What you are trying to mount is a virtual disk for a snapshot.
And the snapshot is locked.
I'm getting the same error when I did the VM
Actually first I got the error the disk is unreadable, I clicked ignore and now I get that one
take a deep breath.
count to ten, s l o w l y
repeat twice
It's corrupted isn't it haha
the message stated that a portion of the virtual disk is locked, meaning that there exists an .lck associated.
Assuming (dangerous) that VF is not active/started, right/Ctrl click on the VM and select Show package.
Browse down the folder, looking for any .lck folder.
Delete any such.
While you are here, browse for a .vmdk without "-000" in its name, this would be the virtual disk.
I got the same error... however... I decided to do a reboot... and guess what... IT WORKED!!!!
Thank you so much for your help today, you've been fab :3
What you are trying to mount is not a virtual disk.
I have to take issue with this reply being marked as the Correct Answer because not only is not the correct answer, the statement made by ChipMcK, "What you are trying to mount is not a virtual disk.", is categorically erroneous! In the VDMounter Error ".../Virtul Disk -000002.vmdk" is in fact the "Disk DescriptorFile" of the virtual hard disk! If selecting the Virtual Machine Package, it is the disk that's being reported to VDMounter as it queries the .vmx configuration file to see what virtual disk(s) is(are) defined!
I only marked it as correct as the previous reply I already marked as helpful
the message stated that a portion of the virtual disk is locked, meaning that there exists an .lck associated.
Were in that error message did you see it stated "that a portion of the virtual disk is locked, "!? It simply stated "Failed to lock file." and "Cannot open the disk ... or one of the snapshot disks it depends on. Seems that disk is used by another application or already mounted." and although the assumption of the presence of .lck Folders/Files is in all likelihood a correct one nonetheless saying "a portion of the virtual disk is locked" is absurd.
While you are here, browse for a .vmdk without "-000" in its name, this would be the virtual disk.
That should be "-sNNN" e.g., "-s000" as you left out the "s". Additionally all files with the .vmdk extension are the virtual disk(s) although the ones with "-sNNN" (with a twoGbMaxExtentSparse type disk) are the binary extents of the virtual disk while the ones without are the "Disk DescriptorFile" of the virtual disk. They all make up the virtual disk and if by chance one selects the binary extent then VDMounter will respond with... "VDMounter Error" ... "Error 0xa0000e04: Bad virtual disk" which in fact is not then best error message because it is not necessarily true that the virtual disk is bad, it's just that in the case of a non-monolithic disk one didn't select the "Disk DescriptorFile" of the virtual disk! ![]()
I'm not trying to nitpick and firmly believe that in technical issues statements made should be as accurate as possible or if generalizing then annotate!
Had you said something similar to... browse for a .vmdk without "-sNNN" in its name, as this would be the "Disk DescriptorFile" of the virtual disk which is what VDMounter needs to attempt to mount the virtual disk. then I would not have interjected on this point.
Everything has been sorted already I got what I needed
LJFletcher wrote: I only marked it as correct as the previous reply I already marked as helpful
Marking a incorrect reply as correct only serves to confuse others that do not truly understand how things work Answers can be unmarked! ![]()
Everything has been sorted already I got what I needed
I know that however I tend not let erroneous information stand and have interjected more accurate information for others that might come across this thread! ![]()
okie dokie ![]()
