dencorso

No more than a few. As for AMD users, I guess there may be some more users of CPUs from before 2012, though.

That's *NOT* the right attitude at all: when one posts something one deems useful, but then nobody else seems to notice it nor react to it, that content ought to be let stand, nonetheless. We here post to help others, even if we never get any feedback on it, let alone any kudos. To delete the content out of spite for being ignored is very much frowned upon here (even if it's quite typical of the worst the 21st century has brought us: an oversensitive generation).

There actually *IS* a more serious reason to use 8.0 instead of 8.1, for those intending to use the x64 version (most users, nowadays, I'd guess), which cannot be solved by wufuc (because here we aren't talking about any artificial CPU blocks, but of a totally different issue): This summary is provided just to remind people of the described issue, and has been edited (by myself) for clarity and to stress tha some guesses at the time they were originally posted are now known to be facts.

If I'm not mistaken, @Mov AX, 0xDEAD was addressing precisely those DepWalker and CFFExp issues, when he said: So, please, double-check the clean-ups at return time (= the value of x at the RET x instructions), on the functions/procedures you've added.

It actually *is* impossible. That paticular dead horse has been already beaten to a fine pulp, but in case you want to know why, do search MSFN and you'll find plenty about it.

Are you sure you were wearing all the required PPE (*and double-checked it was working right*) before jumping?

And what isn't, nowadays, when dabbling with legacy software?

No real reason, IMO. I do run my 4GB as a single NTFS partition, too. Among other things it avoids using more than one drive letter, which is great! @SamirD, OTOH, loves 2GB partitions, so I'm not surprised by his comment.

Flash 32.0.0.453 is out!

That's warez! Banned on Rule #1!

Well, while trying to do a condensed version of the main points in this vast subject (not all of them present in this thread alone), I realize I lost sight of the main post of my last two posts, which is: "There's a new, untested, generation of My Passport, which now has reached 5GB as their biggest USB external drive offer... so, does the old good WD format tool work with this generation, too?" Although we know older WD My Books and Easystore drives exist in sizes bigger than 5GB, on which the old good WD format tool is known-for-a-fact to work, they're both physically bigger than the My Passports, which are much more portable, so a usable 5GB My Passport ought to be good news to the XP community. In fact, were it not the fact that Brazilian currency lost half its purchasing power since our current president's inauguration, and that Covid-19 ate about half the income of the least affected brazilians (all others lost more than that), I'd already have bought one 5GB My Passport, tested it myself and reported, but that's beyond me at the moment. [The last time I looked, São Paulo City, where I live, has already had 13128 people deceased due to Covid-19, more than most countries in the world will have till the end of this current pandemic. ]. As for the Paragon drive working with internal 4kiB drives, that's a welcome fact I had failed to notice, so thanks for the head's up!

Good to see you around, my friend! I feared the recent (google provoked) problems for access from Eastern Europe were preventing your access, of late. I'm sorry to say but we're still far from solving it completely, because the revenue from ads is sorely needed to keep MSFN going... All best wishes!

Of course! I just tried to change subjects and give a head's up regarding the newish USB 3.0 5 TB My Passport, which is smaller phisically than a My Book but *BIG* bytewise! Yet, I should have said I was trying to steer the thread back to USB external drives. And there is report by @Asp of having created a single 6 TB patition, too. And there's also a report by @SamirD himself, of having changed sucessfully the apparent sector size to 4 kiB on two different 10TB Bestbuy WD Easystore drives, but IIRR, at that time he hadn't tried to format either as a single 10TB partitions... Just before his passing, RLoew was investigating the WD Quick Formatter and he said he had figured out which SCSI commands are used for the "sector size change", but his results also pointed out to the fact that the only HDDs he found that implemented such commands were the external USB WD drives. He also found out, although that's just a curiosity, that the "sector size" might also be set to other values than 4 kiB, but that, in fact, the NT-family OSes can use only 2 kiB (besides 512 bytes and 4 kiB), Yet, his son did not yet find any material about that reseach, which, in fact, may have been all done inside a debugger, so probably only some handwritten notes or text documentation may exist, if any. And no, he also determined that XP (SP1-3) cannot handle internal 4 kiB drives, be them SATA or IDE. Only the USB stacks are able to do that. It's possible that NT-family OSes v. 6.x may do that (10 certaily does), but that's beside the point, of course, since this is the XP forum, after all!

BTW, now (well... actually for some time already) there is a 5 TB WD My Passport available on the market. When (and if) any member here do decide to take the plunge, buy one and reformat it to 4 kiB sectors, please don't forget to tell us about the experience.

Done!

With all due respect: Chredge for Linux? What an oxymoron!

eMule_v0.60a-community was released on Oct10, 2020. Does it work on XP? They say it's now being compiled with VS 2019... so I doubt it. Anyway, I do know for sure eMule_v0.51d-community does work OK with XP SP3. Later edit: It does work on XP, after all!

Flash 32.0.0.445 is out!

Done!

Have you ever heard about binary ninja ? I've never had the opportunity to test it myself, but maybe it can be of help in your project...

Have you read the rules already?

Banned on Rules #1.a/b/d.

That hack is essentially the same we used on XP: by keeping Engine Version 1.1.15800.1, we were able to continue updating up to the *.vdm v. 1.293.2807.0... then the next *.vdm files required a newer engine version and game over it was. But, from that period just before game over, @heinoganda had cobbled up an automated updater that download the the new definitions, replaced the engine by the last one working and put all files in their proper place, therefore helping more people to keep their MSE up-to-date up to game over, and I bet he sure might be able to modify that tool for the Vista community to enjoy the last leg of their MSE/WD more confortably. In case he doesn't ping this theread soon, do send him a PM. I'm sure he'll be delighted to be of help. Ceterum censeo Decimum delendum esse!

If I'm posting this in the wrong place, please do PM me and I'll move it to the right place. the pic below shows MSE v. 4.4.304.0 (this is x86, but the same applies to x64) still working OK and updating by itself on Windows 7 SP1. I don't know whether this is relevant or not for the Vista community, but decide to post just in case. This is the last version that works OK with no nags at all on XP SP3, but nowadays cannot update anymore on XP, due to the required engine version being unable to run on XP... however, the fact that it runs OK on 7 means that even in the case it cannot auto-update on Vista (but I didn't test it on Vista to ascertain whether it can or not auto-update on Vista), it sure should run OK, with no nags at all and support being updated by hand. HTH.

That's the problem: I wasn't stating my preference... what I was is called being ironic! Why is it almost no folks nowadays are able to even detect irony? And no, please, don't answer the above question: it's just a rethorical question. Now, what is literal is that the next post about renaming @roytam1's forked browsers in this will be deleted. That's way off-topic and totally pointless nowadays. So, please, stop. Do stop. Resist useless posting.