LoneCrusader

I've never seen any of these errors before... very odd. Are you sure the CD(s) you're using are in good shape and not dirty, scratched up, or otherwise damaged? I would try using a different CD/DVD drive; it's always possible it could be the cause as well. Some "lower quality" ones don't always function well under a DOS environment or with SETUP. When I set up a new Win9x system I always partition and format the drive and then I copy all of the Windows SETUP files to a folder on the hard drive, such as C:\WINDOWS\SETUP\ and run the installation from there instead of from the CD. This also prevents Windows from asking for the CDROM when installing new hardware. (Using a folder under WINDOWS on the HDD will trigger a prompt about the folder already existing or cause Windows to try to install to s different folder during SETUP, always check this or use MSBATCH.INF to override the install folder and kill the prompt about it.)

Glad to hear you've had success with the INFs. The UAA Bus Driver (best to try the 2K version rather than XP) remains out of reach though, at least for now. rloew and I did some work with it, but it still fails to load. Despite Windows 2000 and Windows 98 sharing the WDM driver model, simply satisfying all of the missing imports for a 2K driver does not guarantee it will work under 98, and one can spend a lot of time fooling with it with no guarantee whatsoever of any success. Then, IF you got it working, the actual 2K HD Audio drivers that run on top of it may not work either. Unless someone can magically produce the source code, things don't look promising. (As promised above, I do have a newer INF version in the works. The transitions from the 2K/XP files are done but I have to decide how to split it up again; once again the files have grown beyond the annoying 64KB limit.)

SETUP /p i disables ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) and reverts 98SE to APM (Advanced Power Management). The only downside to this might be the loss of some power saving features; but IMO this is irrelevant especially in a system built for performance/gaming. It might be helpful to have ACPI on a system that you plan to leave continuously powered on, but otherwise I see no benefit. You will probably need to use SETUP /p i on the G31 board (I assume that's the one you're working with) if you want to be certain there are no resource conflicts in the Device Manager. Of course you can always run a normal SETUP and see what the Device Manager looks like when you reach the Desktop. If you have conflicts, especially with "Motherboard resources," or you have trouble getting the machine to Shut Down properly then I would start over using SETUP /p i. I've never needed to use SETUP /p j for anything.

Visit rloew's site and see for yourself about the patches. Beyond that it will depend on what 98-compatible hardware you want to add to your system. If you're not very serious about this or very committed to seeing it done, I suggest you find some older hardware. You're in for a rough project and I doubt you will be happy with the result, depending on what you want to use the machine for.

You will probably still need the SATA patch as many boards that have SATA ports + an IDE controller still do not work properly without it because the IDE controller allows connection of PATA drives but is still treated as a SATA controller by the BIOS. I believe Tommy had this issue... I would also go ahead and get his 48-bit LBA patch for use with drives >128GB if you're getting the SATA patch anyway as it will allow you to use more common/more modern drives. The RAM patch is (ideally) installed at the first reboot of Windows SETUP, but it can be installed at any time. Installing it at the first reboot allows you to set up Windows without having to physically reduce RAM to 512MB or less, as the limitation doesn't present itself until this point.

It probably CAN be done, but I doubt it could be done in such a way to give any "satisfaction." For starters you would need at least 4 non-free patches from our good friend rloew to support your RAM, SATA, 1TB HDD and so on. You would have to use a FAT32 partition for Windows 98SE and even if you use a 98SE compatible NTFS driver you cannot break the 4GB file barrier and risk corrupting your NTFS disk if it has such files and you access it under 98. Then, there are no 98SE drivers whatsoever available for any of the devices you listed, so you would need to add a 98-compatible expansion card for every device you need to work under 98 - Audio, Video, Network, etc, which would probably be more expansion cards than your board can support and be utterly useless and redundant under Win10. You don't have to drop back to "ancient" hardware to run 9x, but you should at least step back far enough to have some of it be compatible.

If it has been solved, then it was solved without changing the CPL file. The 4.90.0.3002 one in USP 3.51 is still the same one that I created in the thread I linked to.

I dug up the 8.1.0.28 2K version of the driver that I linked in the previous incarnation of this thread. It is only missing one function, NdisInitializeString, under a vanilla 98SE system. This reminds me of the other 2K network driver file that was missing an NDIS function, I believe in Dave-H's thread where he ended up using a DOS driver. Any chance of an NDIS stub or extender set? wait a minute.. "NDISEX" ?? lmao

Using the ME SYSDM.CPL allows USB Storage Devices to be "autoinstalled" without prompting you to choose the driver and click though the dialog boxes, similar to Windows XP and up. It does however have some unresolved bugs under 98SE. (See this thread where I tried, unsuccessfully, to fix it.) I recommend using NUSB 3.5, as it doesn't change the CPL. You can always manually put back the 98SE version with 3.6 though, as it only affects the specific issue I mentioned.

Interesting; I'm afraid I can't be of much help on this point as I'm not familiar with the issue, but I would definitely be interested in knowing if that is true or not. If it is true, it's still possible to find good quality used PSU's on eBay though.

NUSB... Always check the Important/Pinned Topics thread first. Your questions may already have answers.

Added to the list. Thanks! If anyone has any other links that they feel should be here, please let me know.

Other discussion of running with jumper's add-on/development builds already existed here as well. There is no perfect solution, and no reason to start an entire new thread devoted to what works or doesn't work with the development version; KEX has enough threads as it is. I agree that it could also fit very well in the thread where it was, but in the end it's jumper's project and jumper's thread. We can only hope that he will eventually reach a "stable" version that incorporates new successes without breaking older ones.

3-15-2016 Added under "Supported Software, Games + Hardware": * Unofficial Intel ICH6/7/8/9/10+ Chipset INF Drivers for 98SE: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=163405 Added under "Component, Cumulative, Native Drivers, Updater, Update + Upgrade Packs": * Native USB Drivers (XUSBSUPP) for 95 B/C OSR2.x: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=177518 Added here so the thread can be unpinned. 8-28-2017 Added under "Supported Software, Games + Hardware": * Using real-mode (aka "DOS")-LAN-Drivers in W98SE?: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=176892 * PCI-to-PCIe-adapter work great!: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=176889

I have cleaned up the thread; moved the discussion of VTT and added a note that such discussion should be made elsewhere to the first post of this thread. Carry on...

Those should work OK, remember it's mostly about personal preferences once you have the basic requirements down. I personally wouldn't choose the G31 board since it's not a full size board and only has 2 RAM slots, but it's totally up to you. Check out the BADCAPS website when/if you want to get into the capacitor issues. I've had work done by the guy who runs it, and I was very impressed.

I have some HP ZD8000's which I had planned to try setting up 98SE on. They were available with around ~3GHz Pentium 4's, can use up to 2GB of RAM AFAIK, use the Intel 915 chipset (but the HDD inside is still actually PATA not SATA). I believe the ones I have use ATI Radeon X600 graphics. I never got around to the experiment, but offhand I don't see any reason it shouldn't work.

Come on you guys, there's no sense in having a row over something like this. I can see good points on both sides of this issue. Yes, it may technically be off-topic to post discussion and screenshots of success in this thread and maybe they would fit better elsewhere. However I don't see any reason to be overly agitated and hold up the entire project if such a report pops up from time to time. @loblo I understand you wish to report success with jumper's new files, but apparently he feels that such discussion should take place in a different thread. He has the right to do so I suppose, since it's his project and his thread. If you want me to move a post for you, let me know. @jumper You have the right to organize your thread as you wish, but if you do not want users to report successes with and discuss individual programs from time to time it may be best to state that specifically in the first post. Not everyone will have the same outlook on what is and is not "off topic."

I'm still digging, I may have it somewhere but it's lost in time. For the moment I found a working Wayback Machine link to 5.6, but the page it's originally linked from indicates 95/NT4 are not supported. For what it's worth, the current 7.2 Bootable DOS version is OS Independent, but you probably already knew that. I don't know what your goal is, whether you specifically need the Intel utility or whether you're just looking for a good CPU info tool, but CPU-Z version 1.32.1 will run on Windows 95. It may require a DLL file that does not come by default and/or the Desktop Update shell installed (it's been a while since I used it), but it does work.

You CAN get it working, but you MAY not be able to do it without a patch. It's mostly luck of the draw as to whether the card and your system will get along. It depends on what memory size the card reports during boot. Some 512MB cards work and some don't, but either way the card will probably be limited to 256MB actually usable unless you use rloew's patch. (Use DXDIAG tests and/or the nVidia Control Panel to check the reported memory once installed.)

I had hoped for more input from active KernelEx'ers about this, especially in letting me know what other threads are important and need to be linked here. Without any further suggestions I will have to assume the topic is good as-is and unpin the rest. I may add a separate link into the above list that will take you to the last/newest post of the given threads. @MiKl The WUPG98 thread among others seem to have been placed into a weird "Archived" state by the forum software upgrades. When this is in effect for a thread even I can't perform any actions on it. The NUSB thread was previously locked in this state and dencorso had to work on it for a while to get it back. We're trying to address the issue, as I agree with you that it needs to be unpinned. It hasn't seen any updates in forever and I don't know of any active users of it. Revolutions Pack is a different matter, it needs to remain pinned IMO.

The unofficial installer package does not always detect all of the "newer" cards that the driver will still work with. MDGx repacked the installer with an updated INF that handles later cards than the ones that were in the INF in the original package, but he could not update the nVidia setup/detection program that checks the cards initially. One must usually unpack the installer to a folder and manually point the Device Manager/Add New Hardware/Update Driver dialogs to it. The 6800GS may not have had "official" 9x support but the 6800 Ultra did, and the GS should work since it's the same chipset. You would probably have to manually add its VID & PID to the INF file for the driver version you are trying to use or use the 82.69 driver.

The OP's post could possibly fit in either the main forum or the project forum, depending on the greater scope of what he is trying to achieve. Since very few details were given, it has been moved to the main forum. However we also don't need any backseat moderators. Forum moderation is not up for public debate. If you have concerns about any post, take it up with myself or another moderator by PM.

I agree, I'm very fond of the 865 and 875. I build all of my 9x gaming machines on these boards, but one must be aware of the capacitor issues. Prescott and even Gallatin Pentium 4's work as well. I have to disagree on the RAM though, I once crashed my 98SE machine (which was running a 3.06GHz Northwood + 512MB of RAM and ran out of memory) just trying to read some pages on a mainstream news site. This was most likely a random occurrence, but there are also programs which very much need more RAM, such as some of the last 9x compatible games. WarCraft III, Rise of Nations, etc. Sounds like a winner!

There will be other changes, yes, but the KernelEx topics are a mess and will be dealt with first.