jaclaz

Yep, that is a clear example of the dash/underscore issue. A file named gfx-boot.gfx would be normally "uppercased" to GFX-BOOT.GFX, and a file GFX-BOOT.GFX is ALREADY uppercased (as the dash is not in itself an alphabetic character subject to lower/upper case) but for *some* reasons in the process also the dash is uppercased to underscore and the result is the GFX_BOOT.GFX (that the gfxmenu command cannot possibly find). To be fair, more than two versions (actually seemingly all of them) were actually booting (to grub4dos), the issues showed after booting (txtsetup not running and/or grub4dos failing to load the gfxmenu). jaclaz

What is the gfxmenu line in your menu.lst? (in "Bugfix Version 4.8")? gfxmenu /GFX-BOOT.GFXor gfxmenu /Boot/GFX-BOOT.GFXgo to the grub4dos command line and issue the ls command, check if the file is seen as ALL CAPITALS, as all small letters or in any different way from the one in menu.lst. (or use find / and [TAB] autocompletion) Usually a line *like*: gfxmenu /GFX-BOOT.GFX || gfxmenu /gfx-boot.gfxis used when in doubt, this will attempt loading GFX-BOOT.GFX and IF this fails, attempt to load gfx-boot.gfx. BUT there is a generic issue with the dash or minus "-", as it is considered to be the "small letters" correspondent to the "CAPITAL" underscore "_", a good idea to avoid issues would be to rename the file without the dash, to GFXBOOT.GFX, then this will surely work: gfxmenu /GFXBOOT.GFX || gfxmenu /gfxboot.gfxno matter if the file is (or is made by mkisofs parameters) in upper or lower case. jaclaz

The thread posted by Trip explains it nicely (last post): http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/laptop/f/3518/p/19495053/20316997.aspx The only non-matching part are the dates (October 2013 vs.February 2014) jaclaz

Naah, the good guys at Malware Bytes were affected by the "modern disease", and besides making the site looking as the usual demented kids playground (and seemingly removing the manual update method from the new 2.x ): https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=145331 https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=145331&p=811956 seemingly you can get an outdated update from here point FAQ - Section A - Item #4: https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=10138&page=1entry490977 http://data-cdn.mbamupdates.com/tools/mbam-rules.exe Another good product going along the stupidity path .... jaclaz

The "long" url, besides it's length, contains a number of "special" characters, namely the ampersand "&", that are likely to not play well. I mean, temporarily try a "fire.bat" as following: @ECHO OFFECHO "%1"PAUSEWhat happens? Can you wrap the parameter in double quotes before? Something *like*: and try with this "fire.bat": @ECHO OFFECHO %1PAUSEWhat happens? jaclaz

Not really-really. If you get it from the original download from the MalwareBytes server: http://downloads.malwarebytes.org/file/mbam then it is possible, otherwise it is more likely that it is a "wrapper ad-ware" or the like added by the file hosting site. I mean, IF the good guys at MalwareBytes actually did want to add a "forced toolbar", would they have it detected by their own program? In your thread here: http://discussions.virtualdr.com/showthread.php?265249-New-Malwarebytes-2-00-0-1000-found-Trojan&p=1461023 you already got all the answers you may need. jaclaz

Again, the grub4dos has been ALWAYS developed by a group of Chinese programmers, and it has been CONSTANTLY mantained. The original sites were: https://web.archive.org/web/20051124034926/http://grub4dos.jot.com/WikiHome https://web.archive.org/web/20131126183730/http://sarovar.org/projects/grub4dos/ and the program was supported on the Chinese forums United DOS and Sysoft . Initially, and for a few years until 2009 the lead developer was tinybit, then another couple of nice guys (bean123, Climbing, and possibly a few others that I cannot remember) took over it because of some personal problems tinybit had, then chenall (yet another nice Chinese guy) started proposing (initially in a separate branch) a number of interesting and useful new features. After 0.4.4-2009-10-16 which is to be considered the "stable" last version of the 0.4.4 series (and NO previous version of 0.4.4 series is suggested) there were for some time two branches, the "tinybit one" (more "conservative") and the "chenall one" (more "experimental"). The two branches were later re-merged together, and the official grub4dos main developer became chenall. tinybit, still provides, when he can, patches and snippets. In the course of this process, access to previous sites was lost and/or sites were closed, until finally the development (still by the same guys) went on on the code.google site: https://code.google.com/p/grub4dos-chenall/ There NEVER was a "noticeable" gap (years) in the mantaining/developing of the project, only a rather complex number of changes to the project site(s). Last version on Sourceforge is 0.4.4-2009-03-31, the one on gna.org is 0.4.4-2009-06-20, on the (now dead) page on nufans.net: https://web.archive.org/web/20100212013943/http://nufans.net/grub4dos there were: the "old" versions up to 0.4.4-2009-06-20the "last" 0.4.4 version 0.4.4-2009-10-16the "history" with all intermediate versions https://web.archive.org/web/20100802045111/http://nufans.net/grub4dos/historythe "tinybit" repoisitory with versions up to 0.4.4-2009-11-12 and the 0.4.5-2009-12-12 https://web.archive.org/web/20091213024431/http://nufans.net/grub4dos/tinybit/the "chenall" repository with versions 0.4.4-2009-11-10 and 0.4.5-2009-12-23 https://web.archive.org/web/20100209075651/http://nufans.net/grub4dos/chenall/Then the development was taken by chenall, and in the new grub4dos site, https://code.google.com/p/grub4dos-chenall/%C2'> there are versions starting from 0.4.4-2009-11-14 and 0.4.5-2009-12-20. Rest assured, both myself and Steve6375 were around at the time, and actually if you can have this info in English is mainly because we managed to have reboot.pro (was bootland) become the grub4dos English support board for the project and a number of members helped with the "western" side of grub4dos. Of course, if you are happy believing that the project died and wasn't maintained for several years and that it was "saved" much later, you are very welcome to do so , though it is not an accurate representation of events. jaclaz

Sure , and between 3/4 and 4/5 of posts reference Linux, NT and XP, besides 9x/Me (and even Vista and 7), the differences between them and even include notes about use of dsfok (under NT based systems), of dd (under BOTH Linux and NT based systems), and some more generic dd philosophy. You might appreciate how I did not post a link to something really off topic, such as antigravitory cats : D@mn! Look at what you made me do! Yes, it shouid be the same, though MDGx seemingly found only the 32 bit one. A good question (that we cannot ask here ) would be "Who is actually running the XP 64 bit version?" jaclaz

Not in this case. JFYI (already provided link): http://reboot.pro/topic/14-grub4dos/ http://reboot.pro/topic/14-grub4dos/?p=133739 Possibly to get something that is working better? jaclaz jaclaz

To be picky, a firewall should be between you and a (possible) fire and not stand right in the middle of your office, preventing you to get to (say) the restroom or your co-workers' desks. In other words, it should be a safety measure against perils coming from the outside, not an obstacle to everyday work. Maybe this round the good Comodo guys overdid it a little. (or their "smart" Default Deny Protection is not as smart as one would expect ) jaclaz

Well, you don't *need* to, but it would have been nice of you to provide this information . Let me assure you how that information is not at all important to me, basically because I already knew about it, most probably long before you learned about the existence of nlite or mkisofs (but thanks for providing it ). For the record, the version of mkisofs I use has even a "-duplicates-once" switch! Good. Then the thingy is maybe not actually "running fine" or maybe it is "running fine BUT with wrong characters displayed" . The basic question remains,why would you ask for suggestions/guidance and later do something different? By the same tokens you should use only the grub4dos version that you can find on the sourceforge or gna.org page. jaclaz

Big bump, I know , but I happened to find - while looking for *something else* - a Toshiba UDF driver for XP (both 32 bit and 64 bit): http://wp.xin.at/archives/829 which may possibly solve the issues that KB321640 : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/321640/en-us completely FAILS to solve. Rigorously UNLIKE tested (not the 32 bit, nor the 64 bit one), reference is just for info. jaclaz

Why don't you post (as opposed to a "dummy" example) the actual thing that you are trying and the actual error you are getting (stupid as it might be)? We are talking of the Windows 98 COMMAND.COM, right? It is likely that you are hitting into one of the various limits to either PATH length or command line length (typically 127 or 255 characters if I recall correctly). If it's a URL, maybe you can use a shortened url, like tinyurl or similar, since you mentioned firefox extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/it/firefox/addon/tinyurl-generator/ jaclaz

Well, in my day, when I got my first computer I had to solder its components http://www.zx81.de/english/zx80_e.htm .... and we liked it. (Kids today...) : http://tinyapps.org/blog/misc/200702250700_why_in_my_day.html Would anyone now have the guts for it? http://www.petervis.com/Electronics_Kits/Sinclair_ZX80_Kit/Sinclair_ZX80_Kit.html jaclaz

I don't want to somehow make you deviate from your original path , but nowadays I would rather use a USB stick, with a (updated/integrated/etc.) .iso and *any* number of "F6 floppy" images with the various SATA/RAID/whatever device drivers. There are a few possible options, using a .iso or not: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/157-install-windows-from-usb/ jaclaz

Now I see, you were following submix8c's suggestion, which I pointed out as not being (IMHO) valid for this scope, here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171350-textsetup-wont-accept-nlite-dvd/?p=1072315 as said everyone has his own ways , still, the simpler approach is to create a .iso and then burn the image EXACTLY along the IMGBURN tutorial I also linked to. I also gave you a link to this thread: which talks about recent (and suggested) mkisofs.exe versions. (just for the record, I personally use always the Mingw versions) There should be no need whatsoever for symlinks or hardlinks in any Windows XP install CD/DVD Did nlite create them? (or did you add them, and if yes, why?) The almost 4 Gb seem to me like a very, very large (and possibly complex) build, just in case I will re-point you to my suggestion: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171350-textsetup-wont-accept-nlite-dvd/page-2#entry1072315 of trying first with a smaller, simpler one. jaclaz

Well, reboot.pro (was bootland) has been the UNofficial grub4dos support site since what? 2006 , and it is mostly written in English. You still seem to me like missing a vital piece of info. A CD is a .iso and a .iso is a CD. As well, a DVD is a .iso and a .iso is a DVD. A .iso is a byte-by-byte/sector-by-sector image of a CD or DVD, you just "copy" (in jargon "burn") it as-is to the CD or DVD media. You want normally to make a .iso (with mkisofs or oscdimg, or other tool) and then burn the .iso image, that's the whole point. On the other thread: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171350-textsetup-wont-accept-nlite-dvd/ you failed to follow the link, given here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171350-textsetup-wont-accept-nlite-dvd/?p=1072211 to this thread on 911CD: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=24562 where (specifically here: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?s=&showtopic=24562&view=findpost&p=169834 ) it is explained what to do, i.e. burning the .iso image with IMGBURN following this: http://forum.imgburn.com/index.php?showtopic=61 guide. I know that sometimes my suggestions/links lead to other places where other links are given where other links are given, etc..... but this way, if one has the patience to follow through them, gets more info. Of course there are n tools capable of burning a .iso image, the important thing is to understand the concept above (a CD is a .iso and a .iso is a CD), and IMGBURN has proved over the years to be very reliable (besides being freeware and fairly small). And of course every one has his/her own ways, Steve6375, as an example, lives in the future and suggests always latest, experimental versions , whilst I - living in the past - tend to always suggest known, tested, reliable versions . jaclaz

Well, if you take some time actually READing the provided info, you will see how you fell in the usual misunderstanding: http://reboot.pro/topic/9696-oscdimg-and-grub4dos/?p=84356 This: is a commonly used/referenced set of command line switches to make a grub4dos/grldr booting .iso, but it won't in any way work for a PE or Windows XP install, and not necessarily it is a good "source" to extract and copy the boot files on another .iso (made with a completely different set of command parameters). As it was already suggested to you, you should NEVER edit .iso's, but rather create them in one single pass. Again, this does not mean that it won't work, only that you are looking for troubles as it is probable that it won't work. This is particularly true when using grldr as "boot sector" (or isolinux for that matters) as they are bigger than 4*512 bytes sectors=1*2048 bytes sector (the size of a common no-emulation CD/DVD bootsector), compare with this : http://reboot.pro/topic/12406-editing-iso-files/ and please review the specific information provided about "-boot-load-seg 0x1000" vs. "-boot-load-size 4" Get a decently recent version of grub4dos, like the one cdob suggested you, the version you have is seemingly "the changelog file is dated: 2009-06-20(r68)" an ancient, preliminary (and rejnown to be buggy) 0.4.4 version (the only 0.4.4 version that you could use is the one dated 16/10/2009), see: http://reboot.pro/topic/14-grub4dos/ but nowadays you should use ONLY: the latest version cdob suggested: http://code.google.com/p/grub4dos-chenall/downloads/detail?name=grub4dos-0.4.5c-2014-01-17.7z&can=2&q= OR the latest "featured" version: http://code.google.com/p/grub4dos-chenall/downloads/detail?name=grub4dos-0.4.5c-2013-03-03.7z&can=2&q= Which brings you back to the given links. jaclaz

Most probably that is what the blogger meant, still, for all these years if a file was read only, you would have needed to run ATTRIB on it to change it's attributes (or do the same through GUI) in order to save it (or you would be forced to save the edited version to another file name). jaclaz

See: http://reboot.pro/topic/9446-problems-making-grub4dos-dvd-with-mkisofs/ AND given links. Or have a look here: http://reboot.pro/topic/9696-oscdimg-and-grub4dos/ particularly my post: http://reboot.pro/topic/9696-oscdimg-and-grub4dos/?p=84348 Additionally, check the actual mkisofs in use, see: http://reboot.pro/topic/19660-use-drivetofile-to-make-a-bootable-vhd-iso-bin-image-from-a-pen-drive/?p=183011 jaclaz

That's NeoWin's chief MetroTard Brad Sams again. Yes he really uses that phrase: "Office is the real deal"! Actually it's not, it is not much more than the traditional Word/Excel/Powerpoint VIEWERS that Microsoft keeps releasing. But we'll get back to this later I'm sure. Let the suffering commence ... It already commenced http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/28/microsoft_already_pointing_out_bugs_in_office_for_ipad/ but the good MS guys managed to find a workaround .... http://blogs.technet.com/b/bgp/archive/2014/03/27/unable-to-open-powerpoint-files-from-a-sharepoint-2010-on-an-ipad.aspx Please note how it is just a (though authoritative) blog post, not a real "Sorry chaps, we didn't though of this, temporarily use this workaround, we'll fix it with an update as soon as possible" kind of thing. If anyone can translate this: I would be happy (so many years in the field and I had always thought that you cannot have an edit and save option for a read only file ) jaclaz

In any case it is a non-problem, now both the loblo's .7z (compatible with 9.20 which is NOT alpha) and a .zip version are available. jaclaz

See if this applies: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2566263/en-us jaclaz

Maybe they are odd-ball in your (restricted ) "windows world". JFYI, for years there have been (in the Windows world, not in the Linux/Unix one) two main compression format: the free use/documented ZIP format the Commercial, proprietary RAR formatRAR format is much more "tight" than the ZIP format. To create /and decompress) ZIP archives there are tens of free or freeware tools. To create a RAR file you need a proprietary (licensed) version or Rar or WinRar (while to decompress them there is availabel a freeware UNrar). 7-zip is completely free and freeware and offers: ZIP compatibility (both for compressing an decompressing)RAR compatibility (to decompress only)7z new format which is "tighter" (i.e it results in smaller archives) than RAR and much more so when compared to ZIP7-zip also opens a number of other nowadays common formats, like the (coming from Linux/Unix) .tar.gz and .bz2 but more than that, also .iso images, hard disk and floppy and superfloppy images .img and - recently - .wim images, and as the title imples "7-zip File Manager" it is also a file manager, optionally offering an almost orthodox dual pane interface. (btw it also decompress the (coming from DOS) .lzh format in which the original Japanese versions of the Registry tools are. The actual result is: Anyone looking for "maximum compatibility" (at the cost of having bigger archives) is using ZIP format.Anyone looking for "maximum compression" and unaware of 7-zip is using WinRAR (having acquired a valid license for it)Anyone looking for "maximum compression" that learned about 7-zip, switched to it, because of the tighter compression and because of the added features, very handy in common use.Anyone really looking for "real maximum compression" is using (if he/she can afford it) WinRK or anyone among several PAQ8 based really "esoteric" or "uncommon" formats, such as nanozipIf you want some reference on the matter, see here http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/165454-winrar-5-wow/ and please , don't try using Google results (or statistics coming from your machine) about popularity : http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/158046-menu-selector-for-dos-based-programs-on-same-cd/?p=1008738 However, please find attached Regutils.7z unpacked to Regutils and re-packed (by 7-zip ) into Regutils.zip. jaclaz RegUtils.zip

That is the issue, it is an obsolete version. The "minimum" now is 9.20 (though cannot say if it works on 9x/KerneleX, but it should): http://www.7-zip.org/ jaclaz