Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Unetbootin incompatible with USB 3.0 drives?


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 rp88

rp88

  • Members
  • 3,002 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:03:27 PM

Posted 27 May 2016 - 11:42 PM

Ok, just tried to make another live linux drive using Unetbootin, did it just the same way I have previously. Used the linux mint iso file I have saved on my computer(Linux mint MATE 17.3 64 bit), gave the USB I was making the same amount of persistence as I have before and clicked through unetbootin's steps. The only thing different to before was that the USB I was using was a USB 3.0 device, a good quality one, previously I used dirt cheap USB 2.0 one for making live USBs. With one of the USBs I used (a sandisk 32GB USB 3.0 Ultra) unetbootin was really fast to write it's stuff to the drive. I then rebooted but the BIOS clearly didn't detect the USB and booted straight into windows. I tried again with another USb 3.0 stick (a sandisk 16GB Cruzer force), this took much longer to write (about the same time as USB 2.0 sticks took when I've made them). I then tried to boot from it, same problem, it was plugged in, I restarted the system, but it booted straight to windows. It's not my BIOS at fault here, my older linux live USB still boots fine, but neither of the ones I just tried to make will boot.

I'll try making another live USB on a USB 2.0 stick later, it might work, if it does I'll know the problem is with the USB 3.0 drives, if it doesn't I'll know something has changed within windows such that unetbootin can no longer properly create a live USB when it is run.
Has anyone had these sort of problems before?
Thanks

Edited by rp88, 27 May 2016 - 11:42 PM.

Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 MadmanRB

MadmanRB

    Spoon!!!!


  • Members
  • 2,889 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:No time for that when there is evil afoot!
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 28 May 2016 - 12:33 AM

No as I use USB 3 drives and it works fine on my end

You know you want me baby!

Proud Linux user and dual booter.

Proud Vivaldi user.

 

ljxaqg-6.png


#3 dannyboy950

dannyboy950

  • Members
  • 1,338 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:port arthur tx
  • Local time:09:27 AM

Posted 28 May 2016 - 04:57 AM

I have run into problems with this several times. In my case I blame operator error since I really had no idea what I was doing more than system error.

Even to the point of buying and useing new drives.  Most of mine were very old and probably near end of life.


HP 15-f009wm notebook AMD-E1-2100 APV 1Ghz Processor 8 GB memory 500 GB Hdd

Linux Mint 17.3 Rosa Cinamon


#4 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,013 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 28 May 2016 - 05:31 AM

Sometimes on computers with UEFI, rather than BIOS, one cannot even use a USB 3.0 port to reinstall their OS with the recovery media, has to be done on a USB 2.0 port. 

 

rp88, did you try booting into a USB 2.0 port to see it that works? If so, yours are among the affected models & this is getting more common with UEFI. Used to be just a few models, now has expanded to many makes & models. While I have to answer as to why, just know that this is becoming more widespread. 

 

While on my single UEFI based notebook, I can boot an external DVD burner from the USB 2.0 port, can't do the same on USB 3.0. Though I can still use USB 3.0 to burn CD/DVD's, and transfer files to USB 3.0 sticks, this is different from booting from the port. 

 

Which is why I changed the setup from Full UEFI to CSM Mode, no such issues present & can boot from any media. This is not to be confused with Legacy, rather a way to install say, Windows 7 on a UEFI based computer & to make Linux dual booting easier. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#5 Al1000

Al1000

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,613 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:04:27 PM

Posted 28 May 2016 - 09:32 AM

Has anyone had these sort of problems before?


I once made a bootable USB 3.0 stick to see if it would boot my computer from a USB 2.0 port (my pc doesn't have any USB 3.0 ports), and it didn't work. I wouldn't describe that as a "problem" as I didn't think it would work, and was just trying it out as an experiment on the off-chance it did.

Are you using a USB 3.0 port on your computer?

#6 rp88

rp88
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3,002 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:03:27 PM

Posted 30 May 2016 - 06:33 AM

When I wrote linux mint to USB 3.0 sticks with unetbootin they would not boot whether placed in USB 3.0 or 2.0 ports. When I wrote linux to USB 2.0 sticks they booted whether placed in USB 2.0 or 3.0 ports. I have three ports on my machine, two of them 3.0, one of them 2.0. I have tested booting attempts with both USb 3.0 and 2.0 sticks from each port, which port I use doesn't matter, it's whether the sticks are 2.0 or 3.0 that controls whether they boot.

I also notice that when I've written linux to USB 2.0 sticks with unetbootin and plugged them in while booted in windows, windows thinks them to be faulty sticks and offers to fix them (I ofcourse decline the offer), when I plug in USB 3.0 sticks with linux on them windows sees them as normal USB sticks full of files, when I browsed them I saw them full of various files of the linux operating system. I only did this, plug the USB in whilst already logged into windows after having failed to boot from them, so it wasn't that windows somehow messed them up so they couldn't boot, it was they were somehow unable to boot from the moment of being written. In general I avoid plugging in USB sticks whilst logged into windows once linux is written to them because I know that if windows tries to "fix" them it will probably make them unbootable, but I plugged them in like that after having failed to boot because I thought I ought to take a look at them and see if anything seemed different between them and the USB 2.0 sticks which boot fine.

This is a BIOS based system, not UEFI, atleast within windows msinfo32 tells me that I'm using BIOS not UEFI. My BIOS type calls itself on the BIOS scren "InsydeH20 Setup Utility, Rev . 3.7 , System BIOS Version 6.20, EC version 6.00 ". The system is quite old, this isn't that HP machine I bought in 2015, this is the toshiba machine from 2013 ish, and it uses BIOS not UEFI (as far as I can tell) and certainly doesn't have secure boot. Yes it had windows 8 on when new, and I know that normally windows 8 wouldn't be on a pre-UEFI pre-secureboot system but in my case it seems to be.

I've never tried booting windows from USB media but when I've gone into the recovery environment to restore from system images they were detected whether they were on USb 3.0 or 2.0 media and whichever USb port they plugged into. I'm not sure if that fact provides any insight to you about what my system is like, but it's the closest thing I've ever done to using a "USB 3.0 port to reinstall their OS with the recovery media".

And having this problem with booting from USB 3.0 media I'm concerned about whether I'll be able to boot at all from my USB 3.0 external hard-drive when in a few weeks time I try a proper install of linux (rather than just running from live unetbootin USB sticks as I presently am). I know that it will be a proper installed linux distro on a large drive, not a unetbootin live stick, but if it's my system (as opposed to unetbootin) that has a problem with booting from USB 3.0 media (whichever port they go in) then how will I get that to work?

Thanks

Edited by rp88, 30 May 2016 - 06:43 AM.

Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#7 Al1000

Al1000

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,613 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:04:27 PM

Posted 30 May 2016 - 07:07 AM

If your computer won't boot from USB3.0, I don't see how you could get it to work.

#8 rp88

rp88
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3,002 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:03:27 PM

Posted 30 May 2016 - 07:10 AM

I don't know whether it's unetbootin or my system which won't boot from USB 3.0 sticks? But I don't get why, how do they differ from USB 2.0 sticks other than having faster data transfer speeds? I know that USB 3.0 and 2.0 sticks and ports are forward and backward compatible (either type of USB stick in either type of port will work) for reading and writing files, why not for booting from?
Thanks

Edited by rp88, 30 May 2016 - 07:11 AM.

Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#9 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 5,771 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 30 May 2016 - 10:26 AM

I've never had this problem that I know of, but early on playing with pc's I might not have know this was an issue and just gave up.  What I'm getting to is, it would be interesting to see what would happen if you used UUI instead of Unetbootin?  I would guess some here would already know, a while back cat1092 was suggesting using UUI, and now I don't even use Unetbootin anymore.  It seems to work much better from my usage, but what do I know lol.  I boot USB-3's and 2.0's both from 2.0 ports on my Toshiba with a BIOS type pc.  In fact one of the ports might be a 1.x series I forget.  Or even try Rufus.

 

rp88, I just read sometimes this an issue of the drivers for 3.0 do not load until Windows has started up?  Not sure if that means the drivers for the Port, or drivers for USB 3.0 function.  There are many articles about this if you just google it, and there are many reasons for it to happen also.  Some are suggesting BIOS Update, removing battery and purging system with Power button, setting to Legacy USB Boot, all kinds of stuff.  So you will have to test things out if you need this function.

 

I've also read a while back about some Sandisk not booting like this.  I've been using Lexar and PNY 3.0's and they all boot fine.


Edited by pcpunk, 30 May 2016 - 11:08 AM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#10 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,013 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 31 May 2016 - 03:56 AM

rp88, what you may need to do, and be sure it's plugged in while Windows is running first, reboot to the BIOS, and move the USB stick to the top of devices to boot from. If not there, then normal boot will resume. 

 

Once you have moved the USB 3.0 stick to the top, then reboot & see what happens. 

 

I always use Universal USB Installer for this type of thing, and there's the option to create Persistence. Completely portable, I keep a copy in all of my Windows Document folders to create bootable USB sticks. Note that some sticks aren't bootable, you may need to check your model's details for this. Or the site where purchased, and read the reviews. If a lot are saying it's not bootable, then it's likely not, sometimes the OEM will come in with an apology letter saying this. Yet it should be made prominent that this is the case before purchase, so that we can make a wise decision. 

 

http://www.pendrivelinux.com/universal-usb-installer-easy-as-1-2-3/

 

And that's why when I do create recovery media on a USB stick, will always use the USB 2.0 models, slower, yet more reliable, and still a lot faster than DVD's (especially an entire recovery set). I use USB 3.0 sticks only for storage, because it's faster, though many are hardly any faster than USB 2.0, even on a USB 3.0 port. Because of a recent experience with a Lexar USB stick, won't purchase the brand again, among the slowest that I have. Glad that I only lost $2.14 on the 8GiB USB 2.0 model, a promo for Crucial customers only at the holidays. Though when empty, I have to admit, saved my backside on my HP dc5800, was able to use the HP formatting tool, plus some (Win98 files?) & the BIOS code to flash at startup of the computer, had to enter the command in a certain manner or all was toast, it worked. :thumbup2:

 

Unfortunately, since using that HP USB Format tool, 'Lexar' no longer shows when plugged in, just 'USB drive'. Don't know how to revert to defaults, and don't know if a disk image would had helped, the boot code was likely wiped out. 

 

At any rate, saved my PC, which I have close to $200 in total. :)

 

Yet am not going to purchase a pack of two 32GiB Lexar USB sticks at Costco for $19.99 (was $29.99 a few months back, then dropped to $24.99). Probably good for storage only, and I have enough of these, 2-3 unopened, not to count a 32GiB Samsung Pro SDHC card that reads at 90MB/sec & writes at 80MB/sec, if inserted in USB 3.0 card reader & port (or used in camera/camcorder, it's intended purpose). I'll continue to use my USB 2.0 sticks for Linux installs or Live distros with persistence, and for the unopened Samsung, may purchase a new digital camera & use in it, our last one was bought in 2008 or so, 8 years ago. Surely by now, the MP has increased from 8.1, probably has doubled, and will likely have to pay no more (around $90). :P

 

Cat


Edited by cat1092, 31 May 2016 - 04:04 AM.

Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#11 Mike_Walsh

Mike_Walsh

    Bleepin' 'Puppy' nut..!!


  • Members
  • 1,318 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:King's Lynn, UK
  • Local time:04:27 PM

Posted 31 May 2016 - 06:15 PM

I've got the same problem with my 'big rig'; an old Compaq Presario desktop PC. I don't use the single PCIe slot for a graphics card (the onboard ATI Xpress200 chip works perfectly for my needs), so I've installed a USB 3.0 adapter card. I use this with my external Seagate Expansion drive for high-speed file transfers, as I move some fairly large files around on a regular basis.....this is of far more use to me. 

 

I decided to try the same experiment with a USB 3.0 flash drive, using a 'frugal' install of one of my Puppies. Plugging it into one of the adapter card's ports, the install itself went blazingly fast.....around 3 mins, compared to the normal 8-10 it usually takes. But upon trying to boot from it, it bypassed the BIOS selection for USB HDD-0, and went straight to my usual Grub4DOS menu for the Pups on the internal hard drive.

 

Plugging it back into one of my USB 2.0 ports, it booted up as normal.....though rather faster, which proves that USB 3.0 sticks will give higher data transfer rates through a USB 2.0 standard port. But it definitely won't boot from the adapter card's ports. I've been told on another forum that the chips on an adapter card aren't set-up to recognise BIOS commands; this may be the problem in my particular case.

 

 

I've also read a while back about some Sandisk not booting like this.  I've been using Lexar and PNY 3.0's and they all boot fine.

Huh! Could also be part of my problem; I always use SanDisks..! (They're the easiest to get hold of here in the UK, as almost everybody and his dog seems to stock them...)

 

Mike.  :wink:


Edited by Mike_Walsh, 31 May 2016 - 06:21 PM.

Distros:- Multiple 'Puppies'..... and Anti-X 16.1

My Puppy BLOG ~~~  My Puppy PACKAGES

Compaq Presario SR1916UK; Athlon64 X2 3800+, 3 GB RAM, WD 500GB Caviar 'Blue', 32GB Kingspec PATA SSD, 3 TB Seagate 'Expansion' external HDD, ATI Radeon Xpress 200 graphics, Dell 15.1" pNp monitor (1024 x 768), TP-Link PCI-e USB 3.0 card, Logitech c920 HD Pro webcam, self-powered 7-port USB 2.0 hub

Dell Inspiron 1100; 2.6 GHz 400FSB P4, 1.5 GB RAM, 64GB KingSpec IDE SSD, Intel 'Extreme' graphics, 1 TB Seagate 'Expansion' external HDD, M$ HD-3000 'Lifecam'.

 

KXhaWqy.gifFQ8nrJ3.gif

 

 


#12 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,013 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 01 June 2016 - 04:01 AM

 

 

Huh! Could also be part of my problem; I always use SanDisks..! (They're the easiest to get hold of here in the UK, as almost everybody and his dog seems to stock them...)

 

I have three of this brand, two 4GiB models dating back to 2009 with the U3 software & padlock protection, and a 8GB one with padlock protection w/out U3 (believe this was abandoned), yet the padlock protection still works. 

 

Not the fastest drives I have, yet among the most reliable, my next, USB drive purchase, suggested by raw, will be one of the Extreme models, probably the 64GB model that's very fast, have plenty of 32GB models, three unopened. The 64GB SanDisk would be opened as soon as it arrives. :)

 

If I were considering 128GiB, may as well purchase a $10 metal case & a 120GiB Samsung 850 EVO on promo for $55-60 or so, would come out better & faster (128GiB USB sticks are costly), and use some type of encryption software to lock things down. Maybe VeraCrypt. or even TrueCrypt, no one has proven it was unsafe, though the anonymous founders of the project dropped out after a successful security audit, but EOL of XP was looming, and Vista Business/Ultimate, as well as 7 Ultimate & anything with W8 ending in Pro, has BitLocker. So they decided with the EOL of XP, that the project was ending. What they didn't consider are that with many OEM PC's, BitLocker can be buggy, as I had enabled it, created & wrote down the password, and printed the 64 bit key, as well as saved on a folder in an external, and BitLocker could not open the USB stick, no matter what I done. Fortunately, I had some forethought & imaged the USB stick before encryption, and was able to format using the HP USB USB Format tool, and restored my backup. Though could had also formatted with a partition tool & possibly the inbuilt Windows one (what a joke for security! :P). 

 

However, this doesn't imply in the least that TrueCrypt isn't safe for USB sticks, can all but promise that no script kiddie can crack it's protection, two years after abandoning the project, which VeraCrypt picked up. For enterprise, of course VeraCrypt is the better option, just saying that for Home users, if one 'loses' a USB stick, the data is protected, anyone who uses the stick will have to format first. 

 

Unfortunately, that's an issue yet to be addressed, no matter how free (or expensive) the encryption software claims to be, there's nothing to prevent formatting with common tools to reuse, though still one cannot access any data, it's forever safe. Someone would become filthy wealthy if a software were created that would detect the drive's security status & refuse to format & reuse. In essence, that's like one stealing & still benefitting, if there were a way to stop this, people would be less likely to steal encrypted drives, as it would be useless. 

 

At any rate, I agree with Mike_Walsh, SanDisk produces some really good drives, they also have some SSD models that carries a 10 year warranty, in addition to some more affordable that has 5 years of warranty protection. By that time, one's likely going to move onto something else anyway, and use these as nice USB drives within $10 metal USB 3.0 cases. Chances are, that even those with the 5 year warranty will outlive any HDD, just read the specs of one & it'll show, 1.5 to 2.0 hours of time between failures or MTBF (mean time between failure)

 

Even if ran 100 years, that would be 876,000 hours (24x100=8760 (one year) x100. That's quite some time before 1.5 million hours are reached, let along 2.0 million. This is how hardware lasting time is measured, which isn't done with all components, yet the power supply or PSU is an example of this. There's some that has a 100,000 MTBF (same as the SSD's), only some low quality PSU's overstates their actual lifespan by far, though typically 100,000 hours are the MBTF. Still that's precisely 4166.6667 days or 11.41 years. Which with a Gold rated PSU, is fantastic & will generally outlive the major components of the build. :)

 

Unfortunately, even though many USB sticks has a 'lifetime' warranty, many doesn't provide the MTBF number. So we just take their 'Lifetime' warranty & hope for the best. BTW, just because it says Lifetime, that doesn't mean a replacement on & on, it's often limited to one replacement only during the ownership. So if an expensive SanDisk 64GiB model, it may be best not to muck it up with Linux installs. Unless one is planning a Full install of the OS on the USB stick (root, swap & /home). It's not the best choice to use with Unetbootin or similar software, because the drive becomes formatted (usually many times). 

 

If it were a low cost USB stick I'd do it, but not a SanDisk Extreme, all of that formatting will shorten the stick's lifespan, and it's too good of a model for this purpose. There are lower cost SanDisk USB sticks that'll meet the need, those between the 4GiB & 16GiB range. :)

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#13 rp88

rp88
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3,002 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:03:27 PM

Posted 03 June 2016 - 12:34 PM

Post #9, trying a live USB making method other than unetbootin to see if this is a unetbootin issue or an issue with my machine's ability to boot from USB 3.0... Good idea indeed, thanks. I'll go ahead and initially just try installing linux to my USB 3.0 external HDD, I'll see if that boots, if it does I shouldn't be needing to use live media much more. If it doesn't I'll see about other ways of making live USb sticks, thanks for pointing this thought out. It seems so obvious now you mention it but as someone new to using live media I really hadn't thought of it. It might be something to do with sandisk too, that's also a plausible possibility. One thing I know is it's definitely not the ports, by PNY brand USB 2.0 (and while it lasted my no brand cheap USB 2.0)sticks happily booted in any port, whether the port was a 2.0 or 3.0 port(as seen from the colour of the plastic bit in the port blue for 3.0).

Post#10:
I do have my BIOS setup to have the USb ports as the top choice, the first place for the system to look to boot from, but I set this while no USB was plugged in. That too is a good idea, your "try checking the BIOS order by going into BIOS but do it while the stick is in" proposal.

Post#10:
In general though aren't all USB sticks the same, as in why should some brands be bootable and others not? what is different about those that are and aren't.

Edited by rp88, 03 June 2016 - 12:34 PM.

Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#14 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 5,771 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:11:27 AM

Posted 03 June 2016 - 03:01 PM

rp, I don't know this to be your problem and we might be getting closer to the answer here, but here is one of many that has had this problem with sandisk.  It looks like you are really following suggestions so you may succeed where others have not.

https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=192092


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#15 Mike_Walsh

Mike_Walsh

    Bleepin' 'Puppy' nut..!!


  • Members
  • 1,318 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:King's Lynn, UK
  • Local time:04:27 PM

Posted 03 June 2016 - 05:13 PM

@rp88, pcpunk:-

 

This looks like it could be an explanation for why these won't boot from USB 3.0...

 

Only thing that makes sense to me.

 

 

Mike.  :wink:


Distros:- Multiple 'Puppies'..... and Anti-X 16.1

My Puppy BLOG ~~~  My Puppy PACKAGES

Compaq Presario SR1916UK; Athlon64 X2 3800+, 3 GB RAM, WD 500GB Caviar 'Blue', 32GB Kingspec PATA SSD, 3 TB Seagate 'Expansion' external HDD, ATI Radeon Xpress 200 graphics, Dell 15.1" pNp monitor (1024 x 768), TP-Link PCI-e USB 3.0 card, Logitech c920 HD Pro webcam, self-powered 7-port USB 2.0 hub

Dell Inspiron 1100; 2.6 GHz 400FSB P4, 1.5 GB RAM, 64GB KingSpec IDE SSD, Intel 'Extreme' graphics, 1 TB Seagate 'Expansion' external HDD, M$ HD-3000 'Lifecam'.

 

KXhaWqy.gifFQ8nrJ3.gif

 

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users