LoneCrusader

Did you uninstall the Demo RAM patch BEFORE you tried to install XUSBSUPP?

The OP, shae, is a frequent visitor to our 9x section. In his original post, he mentions Win9x. (Emphasis mine.) That's why I have taken the position that I did. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Ok, that's fine. The ones that I referred to in \VMM32 "IF any ... are there" would only be there in the event that they had been updated since the original installation was done. Otherwise they are already packed into VMM32.VXD. What's the version number of the VMM.O20 that was present? It's the only one that falls into this category it seems. Interesting, had you updated this file before?

I disagree.. if the original intent of the thread was to categorize SATA to IDE adapters that work under 9x, then I don't think it should be moved from the 9x forum, as it would be much harder for 9x users to find, and some may never know about it. Also it would quickly become filled with non-working or irrelevant things with regard to 9x. If others post in the thread that aren't interested in 9x, then they could be referred to or have their posts split to the Hardware section. This is kind of like my "in"famous Bootable DVD thread - it could belong to the Bootable CD\DVD forum where it originally started, but my goals and all methods used were specific to DOS/Win9x so I felt that it was better here...

IMO, you should always install NUSB and any other Operating System updates BEFORE you attempt to install add on (or even onboard) cards. Are you using a USB Keyboard or Mouse? If so these count as USB Devices and must be removed also. See this thread (applies more directly to the USP, but applies to NUSB as well). EDIT: And DO NOT! use USB20DRV.EXE.

No problem. CONFIG.SYS is not altered by XUSBSUPP, so it's fine to leave as-is. Good idea to back up the entire drive.

Ok, here is a step by step, directory by directory list of instructions for removing XUSBSUPP from an unbootable machine. *BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT YOU LEAVE ALL OF THE FILES WITH AN .O20 EXTENSION AND ONLY RENAME COPIES OF THEM!* 1.) In the root C:\ folder: Be sure AUTOEXEC.BAT is blank unless your system had any previous specific settings in it. If these lines are present, delete them: 2.) In the C:\WINDOWS folder: Delete: VFWWDM32.DLL 3.) In the C:\WINDOWS\INF folder: Delete: USB.INF IMAGE.INF NODRIVER.INF Copy & Rename the Copy: NODRIVER.020 to NODRIVER.INF 4.) In the C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM folder: Delete: RPLCLDR.EXE (If exists.) DEVLIB.EXE (If exists.) UHCD.SYS USBD.SYS USBHUB.SYS OPENHCI.SYS USBCAMD.SYS IMAGECLS.SYS VFWWDM.DRV CONAGENT.EXE KERNEL32.DLL KRNL386.EXE MSGSRV32.EXE REDIRECT.MOD SPOOLSS.DLL WINOA386.MOD Copy & Rename the Copy: CONAGENT.020 to CONAGENT.EXE KERNEL32.020 to KERNEL32.DLL KRNL386.020 to KRNL386.EXE MSGSRV32.020 to MSGSRV32.EXE REDIRECT.020 to REDIRECT.MOD SPOOLSS.020 to SPOOLSS.DLL WINOA386.020 to WINOA386.MOD Rename: VMM32.VXD to VMM32.BAD (Can be deleted once all of this is successful.) ***Important!!! Copy & Rename the Copy: VMM32.O20 to VMM32.VXD BE ABSOLUTELY SURE TO LEAVE VMM32.O20! (I also advise making an extra backup copy of the good VMM32.O20, say VMM32.ORI) 5.) In the C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VMM32 folder: Delete: NTKERN.VXD VMM.VXD VMCPD.VXD VTD.VXD VXDLDR.VXD VPICD.VXD VCOND.VXD VWIN32.VXD IF there are any of the above files in this folder with a .O20 extension, Copy them and Rename the Copy back to .VXD. 6.) When you boot the 95 installation again, it will error, saying it can't find NTKERN.VXD. Ignore this and press a key to continue. 7.) If any Driver Instalalation dialogs appear, cancel them. When the machine is booted, go into the Device Manager and remove any USB devices still showing. 8.) Then go under Add/Remove Programs and Remove "USB Supplement to OSR2." This will get rid of the extra .O20 files but they MUST be there for the uninstaller or this uninstall can destroy your system. It will also get rid of the NTKERN error message. I hope this will recover your system back to the status quo ante-XUSBSUPP.. lol

Ok, it's probably irrelevant anyhow. MSDUN (I believe) and XUSBSUPP (I know) copy all of their files to the required locations when installed anyhow, so "Skipping" the redundant file copies called by the various .INF's should not affect the machine. Yes, I certainly hope we can recover the system, especially since you can't do a reinstall. EXTRACT can be run from DOS, but VMM32.VXD is "built" during installation. The VMM32.VXD inside the .CAB files is only a "starter" file. Other .VXD's are combined with it during the second phase of SETUP. XUSBSUPP makes backups of all the files it changes/updates, so I believe it is possible to recover, but I will have to test it before we take a chance with your system.

Probably. Do you have a Dial-Up Modem in the new machine? (Or the old one?) It's OK, I'm just worried now about helping you recover your system. I've never encountered this problem, or anything similar, using the USBSUPP packages. I have seen something similar when using the 95 Unofficial Service Pack (mentioned previously in the thread), which rendered one of my test machines unbootable. I made sure that XUSBSUPP would "uninstall" properly before I released it, but that only works if you are able to boot into Windows. I didn't anticipate running into this... I will have to set up a test VM and install XUSBSUPP, try to "uninstall" it manually, and then make a list of what changes need to be made.

Yikes! I meant for you to install XUSBSUPP with the HDD in the old computer, and make sure it was OK there before trying it in the new one. Maybe I wasn't clear... I don't know why you would be seeing anything related to MSDUN, I've never encountered that before. It is completely unrelated to USB and shares no common files. Now we will need to get XUSBSUPP uninstalled to get rid of the VMM32.VXD error... but if you can't boot to Normal or Safe Mode, it's going to be a real pain, probably requiring several Deletes & Renames from pure DOS.

All of the required files are already provided by NUSB. Using files from Windows ME will NOT work, as many files from ME require some small modification to work under 98SE. NUSB extracts copies of all the required files to the proper location when installed. There is no need to copy anything else from any other source, although copies are placed in \WINDOWS\OPTIONS\CABS by the installer if they are needed for some reason. The correct .INF to use when installing the drive should be USBSTOR.INF, and then it will in turn use USBNTMAP.INF as well. In order to reinstall the drive, you may need to go into Safe Mode and remove all instances of the drive, both under "Storage devices" and "Universal Serial Bus controllers." You may encounter issues with drives that while formatted to FAT32, may be marked in their partition type as "Hidden FAT32." See this thread. (Some info therein is dated now; do not apply the HotFix suggested by dencorso, as it applied to an older version of NUSB.)

While I don't believe the search should be abandoned, I was able to track down this mysterious 8.1.0.28 version. And it is Windows 2K/XP only. So the Lenovo page is incorrect in claiming 9x compatibility, with that version at least. Release Notes Version 8.1.0.28 A package claiming to be a "Beta" version of the 2200 drivers seems to also be 2K/XP only. Beta Package

The 3.6 version includes a file (SYSDM.CPL) from Windows ME that has been determined to have strange effects on 98SE systems. There is an entire thread devoted to this with my (and others') unsuccessful attempts to pinpoint and correct problems. Also, some contents of that particular file, pertaining to CONFIG.SYS (used under 95/98/98SE but eliminated under ME) have been removed that were present in the 98SE version. The effect of this (or lack thereof) has yet to be determined.

You will likely get a wide variety of opinions in response to your question. This is a matter of deep division and disagreement, even amongst those of us who are still regulars here. I personally do not use or recommend ANY "Unofficial Service Pack." I recommend that users become informed about the specific updates they need, and apply them separately. Yes, this can become a tedious process, but it's essential for learning if you plan to continue using Windows 9x systems. There is no "one size fits all" solution because, INEVITABLY, something will be included or a choice made in an unofficial pack that the author or main users consider vital, but others may not want, or consider useless. Now, to try and answer your questions. 1.) It is the most active and the most recent. However it has also generated controversies and has unresolved known issues with USB devices. The "old" USP was created and maintained by Gape up until version 3.0 Beta 4. At this point, Gape disappeared and the project became inactive until PROBLEMCHYLD took it upon himself to update it. PROBLEMCHYLD has worked long and hard to try and get the USP to a "finished" state, and I admire his work, even if I disagree with choices that have been made. (I'm not trying to single out PROBLEMCHYLD here, I have also agreed with some of his changes, and I disagreed with many of the things about Gape's version as well, hence one of the reasons I do not use or promote "unofficial service packs.") The "512MB RAM fix" can be added without the USP. It also depends what "version" of this fix you are referring to. There are tweaks that may enable you to use up to ~1.5GB, but despite the wide reports of success with this, I have NEVER personally been able to make these work. Now, if you are referring to RLoew's RAM Limitation Patch, which needs no tweaks, and allows use of up to 4GB of RAM, then it is a different matter, as it is not free, and is not included in any unofficial package. Also, the RAM Limitation Patch and the older versions of the USP have issues when used together, due to "tweaks" applied by the USP. (Observed this on a test machine of my own.) 2.) External USB Device Support is virtually nonexistent on a fresh install, but can be made very comprehensive with NUSB. I recommend installing NUSB version 3.5. (note 3.5, not 3.6). Once NUSB is installed, many USB devices are supported, including flash drives, hard drives, and optical drives as well. 3.) Any hardware that old will have no issues under 98 and there shouldn't be any with the unofficial updates either. 4.) This one I cannot address personally, as I do not use the USP. You may well have encountered some of the known issues, or as yet undiscovered issues. We would need a substantial amount of further information to even guess at a cause or a solution. Also it is worth noting that a virtual machine may frequently behave differently than a real machine.

No problem, and good luck!

He may also need to disable "Silent Boot" or similar settings that would hide that list, especially on OEM computers.

Ok, here goes lol It's best if you remove all devices again, put the hard drive back in the old computer for this, and uninstall the Demo RAM patch. Once this update is installed, there is a chance that it may enable you to get past the issues you were having with the newer machine, because it installs a newer VMM.VXD kernel that has a bugfix for newer processors. I can't say for sure if it will help or not, as we were never able to determine the source of your error, but it remains a possibility. So, once you have XUSBSUPP installed, if you still want to try the newer machine again, simply re-install the Demo RAM patch and remove devices again for a new test. If it doesn't work still, you can always put it back in the old computer... again... lol. Notes for anyone else who may be interested in or download this: This package is experimental! It renders ALL earlier official and unofficial USB Support packages for Windows 95 OBSOLETE and should NOT be used with any of them! See the enclosed XUSBSUPP.TXT for further information. XUSBSUPP.ZIP - 901.0 Kb

Okay thanks, that would be great. USB support for the (old) W95B computer would be better than trying to work with either CD's or floppy drives, to get data to and fro. That is all assuming this protection error can't be fixed, as I will then have to put the W95B HDD back into the old computer, 350 Mhz CPU. Will then see if I can get a KVM that supports 3 computers; a tad bit easier. Peter Peter, if you're still following this thread I have created a preliminary version of the "merged update" that I was referring to. It contains all of the official Windows 95 USB updates merged into one installation package. It doesn't contain any unofficial items yet, (including USB Storage drivers) as these are still incomplete. I've had it done for a while now but hadn't seen you around. I should have posted before... but anyhow, if you're interested in the update, just let me know and I will post a link to download it.

Sure about that? Microsoft Windows 98 Service Pack 1 (SP1) The file is named WUCSP.EXE but MDGx's link is dead.

This package is incompatible with my FIX95CPU update. It rendered one of my test systems unbootable. I do not recommend using it. These issues have been documented in the FIX95CPU thread.

Wow.. my OSR 2.5 CD is dated 12-01-1997 12:16 PM (GMT, shows as 7:16 AM in EST). Not mentioned on the list... I didn't know I had something unique.

@PROBLEMCHYLD Here's a LOGO set for users who also have the 98 Plus! package installed. This way they can have the "Second Edition" text and not lose the "Plus!" text. Courtesy of bphlpt & myself. You can add it if you wish, or if not it can remain linked here for anyone who wants to add it manually. 98PLUSSE.ZIP - 86.9 Kb

Yes, but the bug also affects USB Mass Storage Devices. I haven't posted a screenshot of this, but I encountered it in one of my tests. It's not just limited to Host Controllers. Ah yes, lol, I should have made the Latin connection since the previous text was in Latin.

so you should have been sure that it's neither Windows 95A/B/C, not either the original version or Windows 95A, because the retail floppy disks/CD-ROM were never updated except when Internet Explorer 1 was released. Yes. And I said this in my slipstreaming instructions: but nonetheless, I'm happy that you got it to work, and it's not worth splitting hairs over. Welcome to MSFN. I do have a copy of 95 Original/RTM now, but I've had so many other projects going on that I haven't had any time to devote to experimenting with it.

Something that was changed about SYSDM.CPL between 98SE and ME has introduced a bug when the file is used with the older 98SE. The index numbers of all the Icons related to this bug (and their DLL locations) have remained the same in both OS versions. I believe the use of the Tape Icon is a random effect of the bug; I don't believe the Tape Utility has anything to do with it. -The bug does not exist under ME, whether the Tape Backup utility is installed or not. -However, the bug does exist under 98SE, whether the Tape Backup utility is installed or not. (Icon 19 instead) -I have compared all of the files related to the Tape Utility from both systems. They are identical. As far as "wrongly coded device ID," it would make sense if it only affected a specific piece or specific type of USB hardware. It also affects Mass Storage Devices which are installed with a generic driver and without specific ID's. I believe there may be no solution to this issue. I can't see how we're going to fix a bug that we can't pin down, especially since we don't even have a program that can be used to work on .CPL files. Without knowing what was changed, we're playing Russian Roulette trying to hit on the issue. es grata EHGO? = Entente Halieutique du Grand Ouest??