jaclaz

I must be missing something , but if you "fix" the path to: %~dp0subfolder\oem\ %~dp0subfolder\oem\runonceex\ in oem.cmd, you actually KNOW the path to \OEM\RunOnceEx\ and the whole exercise is vain, you can directly hardcode it to \subfolder\oem\runonceex\ in the "main" batch. I mean, the expected situation is this one: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173102-batch-search-file-in-all-drives-script-help-needed/?p=1090274 Of course putting the actual file in root of the drive (or in a fixed, known path) would be much more convenient (and much, much faster), but if the OP really wants this (more complex than needed BTW) setup, he will probably have his own reasons for it. One could even use a self-deleting batch in root, if the issue is about "cluttering" the root of the drive, but we miss a description of the actual "final goal" and the environment/reason why this is needed. jaclaz

I am failing to see why you are asking questions when you already know all the answers to them. jaclaz

I have to presume that you are missing the definition of the adverb EXACTLY. EXACTLY how many partitions are on the disk? Are they all primary, or some are primary and some are logical volumes inside extended, describe them EXACTLY? On WHICH EXACT CHS each of them starts and ends? EXACTLY how many sectors are in each of them? How big EXACTLY is the hard disk? etc., etc. Do yourself a favour , get the UBCD: http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/ and burn it to CD. Then use the RPM in it. I don't want to know where/how you found Partition Magic for download. Then (if possible at all) do follow the advice of making the first, active primary partition a small FAT16 partition, believe me when I tell you that it will save you a lot of headaches, before or later. Get also bootpart from here: http://www.winimage.com/bootpart.htm there is a reason why Gilles Vollant (besides yours truly) says: BTW as hinted earlier, it makes VERY LITTLE SENSE (unless you want some additional troubles) to install NT 4.00 on NTFS on a system that will dual boot with 2K or later, however, JFYI: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/169500-chkdsk-refuses-to-check-ntfs-volume-under-windows-nt-40/ jaclaz

... and you have a broken Google Here : http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/OS-Enhancements/Change-File-Extension-Shell-Menu.shtml Obtained through : http://bit.ly/1yW41GG jaclaz

Which system is it? It is probable/possible that you are using a USB keyboard (ad mouse), the mouse should cause no issues, but it has happened that USB keyboards behaved "queerly" in the early parts of booting, if you have available (or can borrow) a PS/2 keyboard (and provided that the machine actually has a PS/2 port) you may try with it. And I wouldn't completely rule out a defective keyboard, so I would try with another one anyway. The fact that your system has now a BIOS password protection is not "good news", you may have accidentally set one, again, depending on which exact system (make/model) it is, it may be possible to clear that BIOS password or recover it. But this right now is not the "main" issue. jaclaz

There are two aspects on IDE vs. SATA. ALL of them depend mainly on the BUS/controller and on the actual hard disk. A "IDE" (actually ATA 133) has more or less the same speed as a SATA 1 (which tops at 150). Both normally "saturate" the speed of a rotational hard disk, particularly on a laptop where usually disks are "not that fast", SATA 2 being faster will surely saturate the HD speed, SATA 3 in practice makes only sense for SSD's or maybe for very high end disks, like 15,000 RPM ones, very unlikely to be on a laptop. BUT if the disk has NCQ, the SATA will become noticeably faster. See: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/120444-how-to-install-windows-from-usb-winsetupfromusb-with-gui/page-24#entry884409 jaclaz

How EXACTLY did you partition the disk? jaclaz

Well, the result will be slightly different each time, and of course "afolder" will be listed before "xfolder". Hint: If you have any control on the first level directory, you'd better name it starting with "a" than with "z". The "hope" is that, on average, there are far more files on a system than directories and that this will speed up (a little bit) the execution, and that a "higher" level such as "\OEM\" will be reached faster than a "lower" one. You can try also with : :NEXT5ECHO %TIME%FOR /F %%A IN ('DIR /B/S/OG %drive%\%rootfolder%') DO IF EXIST %%A\%partfolder%\%file% ECHO !TIME! FOUND %%A\%partfolder%\%file%& GOTO :NEXT5jaclaz

Which version of the command is faster? (they should ALL work). In my quick tests ":NEXT4" seemed slightly faster, or, if you prefer, I tentatively set in a "slower to faster" order in the batch. Using the IF EXIST should also represent an added "check", if the .cmd file will end up named with a rather common name, to avoid "false positives" or "filename collisions". jaclaz

What about "porting back" the info that the good FreeDOS guys have put together? http://www.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/Networking_FreeDOS_-_NDIS_driver_installation I would also look here: http://toogam.com/software/archive/drivers/network/network.htm maybe (just maybe) the Windows for Workgroup thingy helps in configuring/fixing... jaclaz

This more or less amount to "Enable automatic logon" http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315231/en-us but you seem to have followed oNLY PARTIALLY "Method 2" This is "strange". Maybe it is a timing problem, but pressing (sometimes tapping insistently) F8 should bring you to this: it is possible that the F8 key is also used by your BIOS to change boot device selection, if this is the case you should try again, starting pressing/tapping F8 only after the initial BIOS bootscreen. Try again, after having read this page: http://www.playtool.com/pages/safemode/safemode.html If you get to that screenshot, try selecting "Safe Mode". jaclaz

Good. Now, let's remove (temporarily) the looping into various drives, and let's limit the test to a single drive. Try your on your own setup (possibly do this on a "filled" volume). @ECHO OFFSETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONS ENABLEDELAYEDEXPANSIONSET drive=C:SET folder=OEM\RunOnceExSET rootfolder=OEMSET partfolder=RunOnceExSET file=newtest.cmdECHO %TIME%FOR /F %%A IN ('DIR /B/S/AD %drive%\ ^|FIND "%folder%"') DO IF EXIST %%A\%file% ECHO !TIME! FOUND %%A\%file%& GOTO :NEXT1:NEXT1ECHO %TIME%FOR /F %%A IN ('DIR /B/S/A-D %drive%\%file% ^|FIND "%file%"') DO ECHO !TIME! FOUND %%A&GOTO :NEXT2:NEXT2ECHO %TIME%FOR /F %%A IN ('DIR /B/S/A-D %drive%\%file%') DO ECHO !TIME! FOUND %%A&GOTO :NEXT3:NEXT3ECHO %TIME%FOR /F %%A IN ('DIR /B/S/AD %drive%\%partfolder%') DO IF EXIST %%A\%file% ECHO !TIME! FOUND %%A\%file%& GOTO :NEXT4:NEXT4ECHO %TIME%FOR /F %%A IN ('DIR /B/S/AD %drive%\%rootfolder%') DO IF EXIST %%A\%partfolder%\%file% ECHO !TIME! FOUND %%A\%partfolder%\%file%& GOTO :NEXT5:NEXT5:OUTOFHEREECHO %TIME%You get the idea .The point is that (hopefully/maybe) making the list for only directories might be faster and compensate the additional IF exist. It is entirely possible that *somehow* Windows "caches" results of a previous DIR command , so each snippet should probably be tested "separately". jaclaz

Still, it would make IMHO things more "sound". Can you post a practical example of your (intended) setup? Maybe there is some more efficient way to look for the file(s) I mean, would something *like*: be faster than: And (still cannot say if more efficient) have you actually tried FORFILES? jaclaz

@Mike88 Depending on the real use of the batch, it would be much more convenient and "safe" to have the file on *any* drive BUT on a known path, like root or (say) \mytagfiles\ , depending on the number of files/directories/subdirectories on the filesystem the search for it could take a long time. The FOR /L loop assigns all valuee from 90 to 65 step -1. The EXITCODEASCII "translates" them to ASCII, 65 is A and 90 is Z. Some info on EXITCODEASCII is here, JFYI: http://www.robvanderwoude.com/ntset.php and here you can find a simple batch that uses it: http://reboot.pro/topic/2986-yacbfc-dec2hexcmd-and-hex2deccmd/ http://reboot.pro/topic/2986-yacbfc-dec2hexcmd-and-hex2deccmd/?p=136708 jaclaz

Which makes me not alone but rather in good company. Well said . jaclaz

All is well that ends well. Just for the record, as often happens, a "key" piece of info was missing initially (the fact that it was an "install from USB"), and I guess that having posted it here: MSFN Forum Unattended Windows Discussion & Support Device Drivers http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/88-device-drivers/ instead of: MSFN Forum Member Contributed Projects Install Windows from USB http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/157-install-windows-from-usb/ sent people looking for a wild goose chase, at least that happened to me , I was completely deceived by this issue that while it didn't at all look like a X,Y,Z problem, was actually a (slight) form of the X,Y,Z problem: http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/put-down-the-chocolate-covered-banana.html jaclaz

Good, actually I said "seemingly" as I saw at first sight no /S switch in your DIR command, and did not take the time to actually read the batch, as it seemed to me much more complex than needed. Now that I have read it, please allow me to doubt (though it is possible) that a self calling batch sub will be faster that executing the command with a recursive switch. And now that I have, besides read it, it tested it, getting as result a: error on my XP, I can confirm that your approach is *somehow* not the best one. To replicate, try using it (slightly modified to look only on one disk and to provide some feedback) on a disk (say A:\ ) where "test.cmd" is in: root\Afolder\BUT with the actual batch residing in a directory on C:\ containing a number of directories.... @ECHO OFFSETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONS ENABLEDELAYEDEXPANSIONSET /A Counter=0DIR /B /S A:PAUSESET FindFile=mytest.cmdSET FoundFile=NopeCALL :IsItThere "A:" %FindFile% FoundFileIF "!FoundFile!" NEQ "Nope" GOTO :FOUNDECHO ERROR: "%FindFile%" not found.PAUSEEXIT /b:FOUNDECHO File "%FindFile%" found in "%FoundFile%".ENDLOCALPAUSEEXIT /b:IsItThereSET /A Counter+=1SETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONS ENABLEDELAYEDEXPANSIONSET Result=NopeIF EXIST "%~dp1%2" ((SET "Result=%~dp1")&GOTO :DONE)FOR /F "tokens=*" %%G IN ('dir /B /AD "%~dp1"') DO (IF !Counter!==6 GOTO :DONEECHO !Counter! "%~dp1" CALL :IsItThere "%%G" %2 ResultCALL :IsItThere "%%G" %2 ResultIF "!Result!" NEQ "Nope" GOTO :DONE):DONEENDLOCAL&(SET %3=%Result%)&EXIT /B 0This is what I get: If I copy mytest.cmd to root of A;\ I get: jaclaz

Well it is not like a TXTSETUP.OEM is a digitally signed encrypted file stored inside a passwod protected RAR file on a Truecrypt volume it's a plain text file and you can put together one easily. The readme.rtf on the given site talks of F6 floppy install, so seemingly it is just TXTSETUP.OEEM that is missing. See here: http://rmprepusb.blogspot.it/2013/06/txtsetupoem-files-for-f6-floppy-disks.html Use (say) this driver as a "base" reference: http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/misc/utils/AMD_RAIDAHCIController_V25154039.zip This said, FORGET temporarily the above (it may become useful next time) and follow cdob's suggestion first. jacaz

Yep , the point on the other thread being (besides the nice sample by Yzöwl) that using DIR /S on a largish (possibly filled up to the brim) volume will be slow. If the volume is NTFS formatted, using a search tool parsing just the $MFT will result as waaaay faster. The suggested tool is MIA (but can be obtained through the Wayback Machine): http://web.archive.org/web/20130525223305/http://ndff.hotbox.ru/en/ And there is another nice tool here: http://reboot.pro/topic/18855-windows-file-search-utility-that-is-fast/ Just for the record, the bhplt example seemingly only looks for the file in root (which may or may not be what the OP wants)., and nowadays it makes little sense (unless there is a reason for it) to look for files in the A: or B: drive jaclaz

See: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/145316-batch-search-program/ Which OS is this intended to be run on? If Vista or later check also: http://ss64.com/nt/forfiles.html jaclaz

These ID's: %SATA_TO_IDE% = amdide_Inst,PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_4380&CC_0101 ;SB600 %PCI_IDE% = amdide_Inst,PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_438C ;SB600 Are inside this driver: ftp://supermicro.com/CDR-APLUS2_2.02_for_A%2B_AMD_SP5100_platform/AMD_ATI/Catalyst_Install_Manager/03.00.0746/Packages/Drivers/SBDrv/SB6xx/IDEATA133/LH/ Which, though being for the SB700/800 also "covers" the SB600. jaclaz

Good. To that add : jaclaz

Yes and no. Windows 9x/Me wraps around Dos much in the same way as 7 of 9's suit wraps around her body, though the final results is IMHO much better looking in the latter case . jaclaz

It is refreshing to have this kind of optimism injections on a thread. @billw You may want to try this: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2007-office_install/stdole32tlb-message-and-reconfiguring-every-time/08afbcb2-e3a2-4028-8ec1-0b45f24b76b2 The tool is not available anymore, but it can be retrieved thanks to the Wayback Machine https://web.archive.org/web/20100301160429/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290301 https://web.archive.org/web/20100531005942/http://download.microsoft.com/download/e/9/d/e9d80355-7ab4-45b8-80e8-983a48d5e1bd/msicuu2.exe The tool was retired for a reason : https://web.archive.org/web/20100831061718/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290301 But it is still IMHO worth a try. jaclaz

No. http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/questions-with-yes-or-no-answers.html Maybe you should first ask (yourself or on the forum if you can't find an answer by your own) the question: WHAT is docker? https://www.docker.com/whatisdocker/ Since noone (except maybe a handful of people) can understand anything in the mumble-jumble that is proposed there as if it was an actual answer to the question, it is unlikely that anyone will be able to answer you. The only snippet on that page that makes some (little) sense to me is the part answering the question: How is this different from Virtual Machines? The interesting page: https://www.docker.com/resources/usecases/ contains pearls such as: and: which - apart the abuse of acronyms - may well be submitted to next Vogon's Poetry Yearly Award. Maybe soon someone will be able to post on their site in plain enough English, thus allowing some more mere mortals to understand what (the heck) they are talking about. All in all however, it seems to me like the idea is NOT to run (say) existing Windows applications in a non-Windows OS, but rather to run "Docker applications" (whatever they are, but seemingly basically Linux originated programs/scripts) by putting them into a container and have the container (and thus the application inside it) run *everywhere*. jaclaz