teddy123

when I install windows98se and it is about to start in windows mode it stops with a message that it can't find/load KRNL386.EXE ("Det gick inte att hitta eller ladda den nödvändiga filen KRNL386.EXE Åtkomst nekad. Tryck på valfri tangent för att fortsätta...") First I thought it could be some irq-conflict or something with my SoundBlasterLive PCI-card so I removed it, but I get the same error anyway :-( what can be the problem/what shall I do? I have an ASUS M2V motherboard I have 2GB memory and did the system-ini changing for that during the install (adding MaxPhysPage=3FE00 after [386Enh] and MinFileCache=100000 and MaxFileCache=100000 after [vcache] in system.ini as mentioned in http://www.msfn.org/board/computer_win98_t101341.html I allso tried MaxPhysPage=3C000 instead) I have ASUS Geforce7600GS/512MB I have disabled the onboard Realtec HD Sound, Attansic Gbit network, and the Marwell SATA, and allso disabled SATA in the main settings. I am installing Windows98se on first partition on the second harddisk (I have winXP on the first disk, and ubuntu on partition5 on second disk, and grub as bootmenu and they work without problem) when I had the SB Live! card in PCI slot 3, it got IRQ 10 according to the info bios shows at boot (winXP says it have PCI IRQ 18)

what is worrying me is a little comment at the end of Microsoft Knowledge Base article Q253912 (about cache size and more than 512MB memory): "This problem may occur more readily with Advanced Graphics Port (AGP) video adapters because the AGP aperture is also mapped to addresses in the system arena. For example, if Vcache is using a maximum cache size of 800 MB and an AGP video adapter has a 128-MB aperture mapped, there is very little address space remaining for the other system code and data that must occupy this range of virtual addresses" and a little earlier in the text: "The Windows 32-bit protected-mode cache driver (Vcache) determines the maximum cache size based on the amount of RAM that is present when Windows starts. Vcache then reserves enough memory addresses to permit it to access a cache of the maximum size so that it can increase the cache to that size if needed. These addresses are allocated in a range of virtual addresses from 0xC0000000 through 0xFFFFFFFF (3 to 4 gigabytes) known as the system arena. On computers with large amounts of RAM, the maximum cache size can be large enough that Vcache consumes all of the addresses in the system arena, leaving no virtual memory addresses available for other functions such as opening an MS-DOS prompt (creating a new virtual machine)." ...will that mean that if my graphic card have 512MB memory, there will only be 512MB left for cache *and* dos-programs-in-windows *together*?

are there any bad things with having 512MB graphic memory instead of the normal 256MB with win98? will there be less memory adresses left for normal memory or something? (I'm choosing here between two ASUS Geforce7600GS silent, one that have 256MB and one that have 512MB and they cost allmost the same...)

yeah I've read that 64bit XP is somewhat problematic, but I am not gonna use 64bit windows anyway (well, as long as not anyone is creating a problemfree 64bit-capable windows98 hehehe), but I will run some 64bit Linux on it in the future. and someday in about five years or so I probably will add more momory to the computer (the M2V-motherboard can have 8Gb ASUS says) so it can handle that enormous 3D-thing I'm modelling in some linux counterpart of 3dsmax :-) (with a by then bought serverfarm in the basement to do the processor-intensive rendering, well one can dream...) And perhaps I will try that 64bit version of MenuetOS when they go GPL. As long as I can run win98 on the computer it is ok that it isn't using anything more than 32bit and 1 to 1.5 GB (somewhere I've read some made it use 1.9 GB, but I guess dos-functionality will break then?), the rest are for the other oses I allso run. The bad thing about the M2V-motherboard is that it have a "HD-audio" Realtek ALC660 that don't have win98-drivers (and is not compatible with, or can emulate, anything older like AC97 either I think?) so I must put a soundcard in it, fortunately I have a SBLive!5.1 from and old computer that the stopped working when the weather-gods thought it was fun to 'flash' it a little... (but I guess I should check now that the soundcard wasn't hurt too... I guess it is hard to buy win98 and dos-compatible soundcards today, right?) Today I've read that it is not as easy as just put the soundcard in some nice slot and everything works ok, it must be in the correct PCI-slot to get correct IRQ, and they should not collide with some other thing in the computer that allso uses that irq because they are all used up, twice. The motherboard manual says: IRQ assignment A B C D E F G H X _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PCI slot _ X _ _ _ _ _ _ PCI slot _ _ X _ _ _ _ _ PCI slot _ _ _ X _ _ _ _ PCI slot _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X PCI epress x1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X PCI epress x16 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X GigabitLAN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X Marwell 6121 SATA _ X _ _ _ _ _ _ SATA (VIA) X _ _ _ _ _ _ _ USB1 _ X _ _ _ _ _ _ USB2 _ _ X _ _ _ _ _ USB3 _ _ _ X _ _ _ _ USB4 _ X _ _ _ _ _ _ HD audio But I can't find any mention of what irq numbers the A to H is? or are they some other kinds of irq than the normal irq 0-15 (where soundcards normally use 5 or 7) ? Though on the normal irq-list, irq 3, 10 and 11 are labled "IRQ Holder for PCI Steering". Are these three together forming the eight A to H, like 2^3=8 ? perhaps I should disable, if possible, the USB-ports that uses the same letter-irq as the soundcards pci-slot. (since I will disable HD audio and don't use SATA they are a less problem) Something I still really don't know is if I must borrow another processor to be able to flash the bios to a new version that supports the processors G1 stepping. And the webshop that I intended to buy the stuff from refuses to flash it for me.....

somewhat related to this thread, it could be possible to recreate the win98 kernel (like the persons that make ReactOS have recreated the winXP-kernel) ? Ok it took a couple of years for the reactos folks to do this, but I don't plan to die that soon, and win98 should be simpler to make right? (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm not too good at programming these sort of things (os-kernels), but it is never too late to learn something new :-) Do anyone know of some good info about the win9x kernel parts, like the uh.. spec for it? If we can make a new win98-kernel that works exactly as the current one, then perhaps later someone interested can modify the source to use dual-core/multi-core processors later

The problem is that any edition of Windows 98 se that uses different names for "Program Files" or "Windows" will produce errors when updates try to install. The other problem is that some of your language strings will become English. But the only way to actually find out the exact effects is to try it out! But it really shouldn't work. Would it work (except for some things being in english afterwards), with a non-english win98se if I have c:\Program\ renamed to c:\Program files\ (and all references in the registry too) before ? on this setup I have windows in c:\W\ so I have to reinstall anyway so if I do the change before anything else, perhaps there isn't that much to change than ProgramFilesDir, ProgramFilesPath and CommonFilesDir in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion and perhaps some more. A better idea would maybe to modify autopatcher (if possible) instead. I really don't like the idea of having a space in an important windows-directory, when I can have it a normal 8-char non-lfn...

have anyone tried ASRock ALiveSATA2-GLAN with win98 ? http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=ALiveSATA2-GLAN it seems to be allmost the same as ASUS M2V (but "K8T890 CF" instead of "K8T890" ?)

Is microsoft forcing hardware producers to remove win9x drivers from their webpages? HP have just removed their win98-drivers and says thing like this "HP’s licensing agreement with third-party providers granting use of their components will expire." and "Microsoft has stopped providing and supporting certain files related specifically to Windows 98 SE, and this change affects all technology companies. HP, along with other technology companies, is no longer able to use selected components in support of Windows 98SE, which has an impact on our software strategy for Windows 98, Windows 98 SE, and Windows Me." on their webpage. ? ps. have anyone made backups of all hp's drivers?

Thanks for the installation guide! Now I have read more about the motherboard at asus webpages and as I undestand, to use it with the 45W version (65nm) of the AMD64 3800+ the bios must be flashed. But is it possible to run the computer enough with that processor to be able to flash? I mean, can the bios setup (and its integrated flashing program) be run despite the processor is not supported (yet) ? And I'm not sure how well the ASUS EXTREME GEFORCE 7600GS SILENT 256MB PCI-E graphics card will work with win98se yet... there it lots of talk in http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=97140 about the http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php, and everything is not about the latest version... problems talked about is that windows don't turn off power when exit (I turn off power on a separate powerbutton on the floor after anyway so it's ok), and someone said something about bad graphics running dos games in a dosbox in windows (ok I can run dos games directly from dos but its a bad thing), allso problems restarting windows with 'win' command from dos. Well nothing that is show-stopper for me, if there isn't more problems than that. But the thing that i don't like is the sentence "PCIe may or may not work, depending on motherboard, chipset +/- NVIDIA GPU." So I must find someone that have tried the parts I want then? at least the parts themself, even if not together... The motherboard (ASUS M2V VIA K8T890 S-AM2 GBLAN ATX) is mentioned as working, except for the integrated sound and network(?) - I want to use a 'SoundBlaster Live! 5.1' modell SB0100 I allready have, and a separate network card will be just nice for the extra struck-by-lightning -protection (my old computer died when lightning followed the network cable from another computer), so that is not so important to me. anyone else have any thoughts of these?

There is not LFN support in the kernel, it is the DOSLFN tsr mentioned that handle that thing. FreeDOS is made up of many different, separate programs that act as "packages" to the overall FreeDOS Project. All the projects that is used in freedos is listed at http://www.freedos.org/freedos/software/ with doslfn is under 'util' You should be able to use them in other dos'es like ms-dos and enhanced dr-dos too. one mention of long file names in freedos I've seen is from 2003 http://www.freedos.org/news/archive/index....r=2003&mo=2 so probably you tested it before that, myself have never used anything before 1.0. (Note that there are newer versions of lots of the freedos parts after 1.0 and you have to download them separately to 'upgrade') note that most normal dos-programs do not support long file names, those that do (several tools have and command.com "freecom" have some support for it) need that you have loaded the lfn support (run doslfn) but it consumes 12KB memory, so when you run some games you might not want it. (there was allso an older lfn for freedos called "lfndos" but it eats 64KB and is rather old so don't use that one) I guess it should be possible to implement LFN directly in the kernel but then you couldn't unload it and save the memory... I have read something about 'LNF hooks' in the kernel source but I don't think they use them now. too bad there is no version with everything of the freedos cd on some floppys instead, but if you can't burn a cd getting the whole freedos, you could try a single floppy distribution of freedos called Balder http://www.finnix.org/Balder or another one called "Bootable FreeDOS" http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/...icial/bootfd.1/ I don't think they had enough space on the floppy to have doslfn on it too, so you have to download it separately and remove something else to make room for it. About the backup problem, as long as you have started doslfn first you should be able to use arj to archive and restore long file names :-)

FreeDOS have LFN support, so if you use that you can restore all files even those with long file names directly from dos. You can use DOSLFN in ms-dos too if you don't want to use freedos. download at http://www.geocities.com/jadoxa/doslfn/ run doslfn.com (doslfnms.com is for ms-dos7, see more in doslfn.txt)

> Motherbord is ok > Graphics card u should buy is 6200TC or 6800GT as win98 last drive for 6 serieds only in the http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=97140 someone says "It has been reported that this driver *works* on some PCI Express GeForce [7600 GS]" and later in the thread there is a link to a new driver http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php "Unofficial NVIDIA Display Driver 82.69 for Windows98/98SP1/98SE/ME" so I guess there is driver for both pci-e and geforce7600gs now? (But maybe there is some shutdown problems? but I guess I can live vith that, it isn't that hard to push the powerbutton after exiting windows) But now another problem has got me: I wanted the 45W version (65nm) of the AMD64 3800+ (the biggest reason to choose 3800) so the computer would not generate that much heat, so it would be more silent. But problem is, the motherboard doesn't support the processors "stepping" (what is that??) if I should trust amd's webpage: http://www2.amd.com/gb-uk/recmobo/DetailHa...?queryID=111728 (I got there from http://www2.amd.com/gb-uk/Processors/Devel...%5E9461,00.html ) If I mount the AMD64 3800+ 65nm/45W 'G1 stepping' into the motherboard ASUS M2V VIA K8T890 S-AM2 will it just not work then? or give me a message "processor not supported error" or something? ....So either I have to find another motherboard that is nice to win98 or give up on the idea of a low-watt processor > 2*1024 is ok but u need to use 1024 only when installing win98 . win98 will not run on 2gb ram yes the extra gig is for other oses like linux and winxp. If I understand you right, I have to temporarly remove one of the memories during install of win98, but can put it back later (after some registry-change or something) ? As long it is ok to install with 1GB it's fine. I don't have anything smaller since I don't have any other computer with DDR2

I am about to buy a new computer and use Windows98 on it, are there any hardware I should avoid ? Do pci-express only work with some motherboards and/or graphic cards? I would like to build something like this: motherboard: ASUS M2V VIA K8T890 S-AM2 GBLAN ATX graphics card: ASUS EXTREME GEFORCE 7600GS SILENT 256MB PCI-E processor: AMD ATHLON 64 3800+ SOCKET AM2 512KB BOX memory: CORSAIR 2GB DDR2 PC6400 XMS2 XTREME (2X1GB) CAS4 but would there be problems getting win98 work with this?