jds

1. Shouldn't you simply navigate to the directory with the driver files, right-click on the INF file you want, then select Install from the context menu (I can't recall if a simple double-click does the same thing)? 2. Assuming the hardware is Plug-and-Play, shouldn't you simply point the Found New Hardware wizard to the above directory? 3. If you know the class of hardware to install, can't you use the Add New Hardware wizard, select the class of hardware (provided W9X already has this defined, that is) and point it to the above directory. 4. If the driver in question has a Setup.Exe file, that's usually a hint that it wants to do things its own way, so you run that and various files (including the INF files) should get copied to their respective locations in preparation for the Found New Hardware wizard. This type of driver generally requires you do this before physically adding/connecting the hardware. That's all the methods I can think of, I don't know about "infinst.exe" but I don't think that's a file for a user to be invoking. HTH Joe.

The original SMB/CIFS documents from MS should be somewhere on ftp.microsoft.com (don't ask where, I don't remember, and MS keep moving stuff around or worse, deleting it). Beyond the limited information there, most of the available information is reversed engineered and documented by people involved in the Samba project. The "last working version for 9X" information by the Wireshark people is a load of BS. The version they state, when you find it, has a single byte corruption, which a user from Brazil once identified and reported in an Ethereal forum. However, once you fix that byte, the stupid thing doesn't work properly on 9X anyway. The version you want is "0.10.14" (if anyone can find a version history list that makes sense of their crazy numbering system, please let us know). Another possibility that I haven't confirmed, is to install WinPcap version 4.0beta2 and then Wireshark version 0.99.something (maybe 0.99.4?) without WinPcap. Update: For some reason (perhaps "DLL Hell"), Ethereal 0.10.14 no longer works on my machine unless KernelEx is installed. Also, Wireshark 0.99.4 (which incidentally doesn't need WinPcap 4.0beta2, after all) works fine on my machine with KernelEx installed. Finally, versions 0.99.5 to 0.99.6a can be tricked into working but seem to decode packets in real-time, which hogs the machine (not sure if this is standard behaviour). BTW, what's "gina"? Joe.

Yeah, the auto-detection for TugZip and 7-Zip gets it wrong. The archive is actually LHA, and that (I used LHA version 2.12) can see and extract all the files within. Strange that the three SCSIFMT.* files show up and are successfully extracted with PKUNZIP and UnZip32 (Info-Zip). So one mystery solved and another created. The three files in question are compressed with LHA method 5, but so too are all but one of the other files in that archive. BTW, it seems LHA method 5 must be equivalent to PKware's DeflatN method (which I think is based on LZ77). Joe.

OK, thanks! That should help for some other FDISK programs. However, AFAIK (actually, I'm pretty sure) AFDISK interfaces directly with the ASPI driver, so why this is important, is that if your disk is not properly initialized, then DI1000DD.SYS will typically crash, so you are then unable to use a standard FDISK program to correct the problem (Catch 22). I could give a direct download link, but to play nice with the "I agree" stuff from Adaptec, here's the page you need : http://www.adaptec.com/en-us/speed/scsi/dos/dosdrvr_exe.htm Edit 1 : Hang on a second, just downloaded and it's not the 'dosdrvr.exe' with the right goodies that we need. Will investigate. Edit 2 : OK, panic over. When looking into 'dosdrvr.exe' using PK-Zip, Info-Zip, TugZip or 7-Zip, only the three files SCSIFMT.* are visible. However, if you run this executable, all the goodies appear, including AFDISK.*. Joe.

Didn't have ASPIEHCI.SYS last night. Now I do. Replace Bytes F7 F1 at offset A950 with EB 06 in ASPIEHCI.SYS Again, great work Mr Loew! I hope I'm not being a nuisance here, but whilst you're playing with this stuff, is there any chance you could also look at Adaptec's AFDISK.EXE, which can be found in any of the archives 'aspidos.zip', 'dosdrvr.zip', or 'scsilite.zip' (or the EXE versions of same)? If you try to define/change partitions with this, using the Panasonic USBASPI.SYS driver (don't know if it's OK with ASPIEHCI.SYS and the like, since only the Panasonic driver works for me), it crashes (divide by zero error, if I recall). I suspect AFDISK may be relying on some ASPI parameter or function that USBASPI doesn't provide, but that is pure speculation. Joe.

Fantastic work (as usual) Mr. Loew! It's also encouraging that more people have managed to get this driver to work OK beyond 64G [edit: 64G partition size, that is]. As an aside, I notice that Ghost 2003 (which was based on Ghost 7.6) gets a lot of mention around here. Yet the latest in that original line of Ghost S/W was version 8.3.0.1331, so I don't understand why. Joe.

ZoneAlarm v5.5, until I got rid of it, used to place and leave temporary files there. The most current file was then still in use, and I got a msg "Access denied" when trying to delete all Zone Alarm tmp files at the same time, a little nuisance. No idea how cleantmp.exe reacts when it encounteres a file "Access denied". Hey, I was trying to remember why I chose 'xdel' from DR-DOS for my batch file instead of say, 'deltree' from W9X/MS-DOS, and maybe that was it. Maybe 'deltree' stops at the first such problem, whereas 'xdel' keeps going onto the next file. Joe.

Another general question may be: Does the installation of KernelEx make Win98 vulnerable to WinXP malware, which a regular Win98SE installation would just ignore? In other words, does the installation of KernelEx eliminate the raison d'être of Win98? Good question, and the answer I think, is mostly (well, more than that) no. KernelEx simply adds API functions and convinces software that it is running on a W2K+ O/S. That can satisfy complex applications that use lots of API functions and/or have an artificial restriction on running in W9X. Almost certainly, malware isn't going to have the later, it will want to infest as broadly as possible. AFAIK, malware typically uses a limited range of basic API functions, so for the most part, isn't going to be influenced by the former. What malware is more likely to rely on is the behaviour of W2K+ O/S, which KernelEx doesn't affect, such as auto-playing a USB drive as soon as it's plugged in, and all those control/notification features that allow a W2K+ O/S to automatically pick-up malware from simply being connected to the Internet. So it's mostly the behavioural differences between W9X and W2K+ that make the later more vulnerable to malware, not the extra API functions (unless of course there's a new API function that itself introduces a vulnerability, and KernelEx implements it, but such an API function would more likely be implemented as a dummy "stub" anyway). Joe.

Firstly, since back in 2008, I downloaded a file called 'AutoPatcher98.Dec.07.Final.(Zip.version).zip', and really don't want to download another 300MB (it's difficult) unnecessarily, would the correct installation sequence with this starting point be as follows? : 1. Unzip the above file to an installation directory 2. Run AP2008UP.EXE and point it to the same directory 3. Run the installation batch file Secondly, can anyone confirm if the correct MD5 or CRC32 for the ZIP file should be as follows? : MD5 = e2a6a3729e70692032c5f7c76be04323 CRC32 = 2dd8fb02 Finally, may I humbly suggest to add to the first page here, a comment to the effect that the executable files of this package can be extracted using 'innounp.exe' from http://sourceforge.net/projects/innounp/ This would help ease concerns by people such as Sweet William about the opaqueness of this package, aka. "the debate" referred to above. BTW, in case you guys think he's paranoid, you should perhaps ponder the implications of "my website was hacked into", also mentioned above. Joe. PS. It is not my intent to reopen "the debate", rather to offer a suggestion to address one of the concerns and reduce the chance of a similar debate in the future. That and seek information concerning the ZIP version.

Hey, you're right! Just tested it now. I can change the %temp% and %tmp% environment variables in Autoexec.Bat and they stick, however, when I open an archive in TugZip, any files it temporarily extracts end up in %windir%\temp, presumably due to those registry values you indicated. I used to be wary of deleting stuff in %windir%\temp, but have since become more comfortable that unless there's something actively using this directory, it's safe to wipe. Also, if something in there is currently open, you get an "access denied" error when you try to delete it. I normally just define %TEMP% in Autoexec.Bat, for the benefit of DOS applications that may use it (also for my own benefit, since I often put stuff there too). That leaves the automatically generated %TMP% environment variable pointing the MS-W temporary directory, so I can use this in batch files when required. Didn't know that. Another feature copied from DR-DOS 6 (or earlier?) Joe.

I have selected during installation only "Virus Scan", and KAV 6 is rock stable. I suspect that some left-over real-time protection components of your Symantec AntiVirus were interfering with the real-time protection components of KAV 6. Having 2 different installations of anti-virus software on the same instance of an operating system may cause major problems. As a general rule you can have only 1 anti-virus software installed on an opsys. I didn't need any tricks to install KAV 6, the only thing tricky part was finding my way through their web site to the appropriate instructions on updating the database. As for SAV remnants, no, I did a complete uninstall before trying KAV 6. The extreme instability (at least for a full install) was KAV's own doing. Also, excluding the run-time protection when installing KAV would have been pointless for me, since SAV 9 on-demand scanning was (and is) still functional. Yes, that's something I do instinctively for all "last version for 9X" software. I did update Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition v8.1.1.323 Client with a .xdb file, see posting #2. Maybe it's an issue of a later build. I was originally with SAV 8. However, neither Live Update nor the EXE database update were successful after Symantec dropped support, so I was forced to install SAV 9. Can't remember if I tried the "*.xdb method" (did you check the eicar test file with yours?). Please do. Well, I was wrong. As you've also since found, SAV 9 (mine's 9.0.0.1400, yours' 9.0.3.1000) doesn't know to scan RAR archives. How disappointing! BTW, does the run-time protection still work with SAV 9.0.3.1000 when using a current database (eg. just run the 'eicar.com' file and see what happens)? I don't know how good it is (opinions vary), but (as someone here pointed out to me in another thread) Dr-Web still support W9X (and indeed, even DOS:-). Well, as a more general question, has anyone tried any W2K+ package with KerenelEx? Joe.

The following thread implies some serious resource requirements for newer FF versions, which may be relevant to your stability problems : Beware the optimized alternative build of FF mentioned in the same thread requires a minimum P4 processor : http://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml#CPUsupport (I don't know what the standard build of FF 3.X requires, you may want to check, but I should think if your processor wasn't suitable, you would be seeing "invalid instruction" errors.) I seem to recall some people mentioning a 3.5.X version of FF working for them, whereas 3.6.X didn't (I don't recall the particular X's). Finally, there's several mentions in the KernelEx thread about printing not working with FF 3.X, which is a serious limitation, as using IE as a workaround for printing is not acceptable, since this usually chops the right edge of web pages for me (and others I know). Not sure if this is a KernelEx limitation that will hopefully be addressed in the near future. Joe.

It is indeed listed as "sticky" within that thread. But it is no longer "stickyfied" per se. Are there two levels of "stickiness"? OK, regarding the expected update for December 2009, were there any actual updates in the pipeline or was this just conjecture about possible updates to come? BTW, I've not used this package myself, so cannot comment on its merits. Joe.

Your 6310 scanner/printer has a USB interface, I believe. Reading the Auto-Patcher thread, this installs Maximus-Decim's NUSB driver for USB, so perhaps this is what apparently breaks your printer installation. I found a reference to a similar (?) printer/scanner problem early in the AP thread at I'll leave it as an exercise for you to follow the thread and see if a resolution or work-around was mentioned for this (I've added a highlight of the string 'print' in the above link, to make this easier for you). Skimming towards the end of the AP thread, this seems to come in two parts, a 2007 release and a 2008 update. Have you applied the update (and retried the AP install)? Finally, you might request a moderator merge this thread with the AP thread, that would more readily attract the attention of those people more involved with the AP project. Joe. PS. The 2007 release I refer to is December 2007, not June 2007. PPS. KernelEx rocks!

I see. W95 shell under W98. The SH95UPD description says "This project implements functions not found in the windows 95 shell .. SH95UPD is based on the KernelEX project, and is basically a stripped down version of KernelEX". To me, this implied a KernelEx-ish equivalent for W95. So Tihiy's comment about "make SH95UPD a bit obsolete" made me wonder if KernelEx was now compatible with W95 (it has been previously stated by Xeno86 that it isn't). However, if SH95UPD isn't actually a KernelEx-ish equivalent for W95, then we can conclude that KernelEx continues not to support W95. (And I'd also better stop referring W95 users to SH95UPD.) Joe.

Autoexec.bat contains 2 lines: set temp=C:\TEMP set tmp=C:\TEMP Not sure what I needed the 2nd entry for. E:\<windows>\Temp\ nearly always stays empty; on rare occasions, maybe years ago, it contained some junk. Well, that's unfortunate. In that case, it is probably not safe for you to clear out your %tmp% directory. Normally this directory and associated environment variable is created automatically. If you use a separate %temp% directory, it's then much easier to delete those left-overs that inevitably accumulate. Joe.

The temporary directory in question isn't normally C:\Temp. Is that really where your %tmp% directory points? Joe.

Thanks! Til now, I've used the following batch file when required (I also have DR-DOS, so take advantage of 'xdel') : @echo off if $%1==$/? goto help if $%1==$/h goto help if $%1==$/H goto help if $%tmp%==$ goto lost rem A sneaky way to change drive %tmp%\ rem Now also change directory cd %tmp% c:\drdos.60\xdel /s /r /d %tmp% goto end :help echo Deletes the MS-W temporary directory (TMP). goto end :lost echo Huh? Where's MS-W temporary directory (TMP) ?! :end However, this doesn't check age of files or directories, so your solution should be better. Joe.

I've never uninstalled this (that I can remember). The only problem I have with these SP's are that they replace my patched IO.SYS file with the standard version with its insidious LBA bugs (for certain combinations of multiple partitions). So I make sure to repatch IO.SYS before the reboot. Perhaps if you identify the particular problem, it may be easier to correct it and carry on. Joe.

KernelEx 3.X is very much deprecated. You should be able to restore your original DLL's by uninstalling it. You also need to do this before upgrading to KernelEx 4.X (v4.5 has just been released), should you choose to do so (in which case, it would be interesting to know if that CorelDraw problem returns). Joe.

That's correct. Many such peripherals provide a built-in hub so you don't use up your USB ports. I even have a Prolific pen (Flash) drive with an inbuilt hub. It looks like any other such pen drive, but it has a USB hub between the USB connector and the actual USB mass storage sub-system. There are no accessible USB ports provided, nor any other USB functions. Go figure. Joe.

Haven't used any of this stuff, but ... what about version 7.2? The reviews at http://download.cnet.com/BitTorrent/3000-2196_4-10211384.html say there was a large speed improvement with version 7.1, and the system requirements at http://www.bittorrent.com/btusers/guides/bittorrent-user-manual/chapter-01-introduction-bittorrent-mainline/system-requirement (note, seem to have been written at version 6.1.2 build 13185) says that even W95 is OK. Joe.

Well, I looked into KAV 6 some time ago when I first started experiencing some issues with SAV 9 (more later) and unfortunately, have to tell you that it was extremely unstable on my W98 system at work. This was a full install, including the run-time protection. It was a struggle to get a few minutes of system operation before lock-ups and other aberrations occurred. It was even a struggle to uninstall it for the same reason. :-( Now, the problem with SAV 9 (FYI, SAV 8 is useless, its database can no longer be updated) is that since about August/September 2009, the virus database has grown to such an extent, that it silently breaks the run-time protection of SAV 9. No doubt the same will be true for the corresponding NAV edition. So, that was the reason for trying out KAV 6. In the end, I reverted to SAV 9, since at least that was stable, and the on-demand scan still works, despite the broken run-time protection. In fact, even the automatic updates still work (also manually via Live Update). Note that there are several sub-versions of SAV 9, so there is a slight chance that some later versions are not afflicted by the "broken run-time protection" issue, but Symantec don't seem to offer an upgrade path between sub-versions of SAV, just between different builds. Grrr. In summary : KAV 6 is extremely unstable, at least for a full installation (including run-time protection). SAV 9 is stable but only useful for on-demand scanning, the run-time protection is broken with current virus databases. Finally, from memory, SAV 9 does know to scan RAR archives (I'll check when I return to work and correct this entry if needed). Joe.

You should test. But theoretically, it should work. And thus make SH95UPD a bit obsolete.Next release is final and delayed because we don't have time. RC6.rar is close to final. You can post it probably; i can't because xeno would punch me. Firstly, thanks to you and Xeno for your much-appreciated work. Now, simply (as it's still unclear to me at least) - does this mean that KernelEx is now (or should be) compatible with W95? (There have been requests for this from W95 users, and previously, the nearest offering has been SH95UPD.) BTW, just took a quick look at the Compatibility Database in the Wiki at SF. It's not clear how new app's are added to this, but perhaps the page looks different once you register and login (maybe a new ADD button becomes visible). I'll check further into this when time permits. Joe.

OK, it's not clear if your posting was "FYI" or whether you're seeking the 'wmi9x.exe' file. I think it's the former, however, if it's the latter, the file is available at : http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyId=98A4C5BA-337B-4E92-8C18-A63847760EA5 I'm also interested by LLXX's suggestion to "Unpack the installer". Any idea how to do that? Neither TugZip nor 7-Zip can extract contents from this file. Joe.