jaclaz

Very well summed up! jaclaz

Notwithstanding the "AFAIK", this is a bestiality . Windows NT family of OS are DESIGNED to be installed on logical volumes inside extended partition. Their booting must be initiated (normally) from a primary active, but there is NO need WHATSOEVER to install to primary and then clone it somewhere else! That is one of the workarounds to be able to install 9x on a logical volume inside extended, see XOSL help: http://www.allensmith.net/OS/XOSL/I.htm If you are not familiar with XP, or the way it boots or installs: As I said, I am unfamiliar with this, I just know that booting WinXP from the second drive did not work with my setup. Simply DO NOT talk about it , (or, better, GET familiar with it ) jaclaz

Is there an "illegal" UBCD? I only know about the real and obviously legal one: http://ultimatebootcd.com/ @Keyboarder You can use UBCD as a .iso. Add a line to your current BOOT.INI on the XP stick: Add to root of the XP stick (from latest grub4dos - right now it is already inside the UBCD linked below): grldr menu.lst And: the UBCD .iso, say in /images/ubcd5.iso Basically you need an entry in menu.lst similar to this: title Ultimate Boot CD map /images/ubcd5.iso (hd32) map --hook chainloader (hd32) Get latest UBCD with grub4dos support: http://ultimatebootcd.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2131 Read some basics about grub4dos from here: http://diddy.boot-land.net/grub4dos/Grub4dos.htm http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showforum=66 Check for newer grub4dos here: http://nufans.net/grub4dos/ jaclaz

Very, very interesting. Well, you'd have a more techical approach and far less money the good guys at MS have. Gadgets, and stupid visual effects SELL. Yep, that's the reason why the stick approach is useful, how come you didn't use it this time? http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=125258&st=11 jaclaz

hxxp://www.msfn.org/board/Gosh_s_XP_Build_Environment_t106064.html hxxp://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=106064 i.e.: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=106064 jaclaz P.S.: and BTW you will land here: hxxp://www.msfn.org/board/topic/106064-goshs-xp-build-environment/ I am happy not to be the only one that thinks that the good guys who write the Board Software have a lot of fun with changing the address for "friendly names" at each release.

You have a problem (and either an incompetent "guy who knows Siemens serial cables " or you misunderstood him). There is NOT any "driver" inside the connector. There is a "converter", and IC (integrated Circuit) that takes the RS232 signals (and yes, they peak at 12 V) and converts them to TTL level. This IC must be powered and normally it is powered by the "attached to PC" side, but some cables for cellular phones do need to be powered from the "attached to phone size". Problem is that there are IC's that need +5V cc/0 and some that need 3÷3.3 V cc/0, some that will "like" everything. As well, there are two different TTL levels, a +5V and a +2.8/3.3V one, and even converters that will choose which TTL level depending on the power you give them. If you are lucky your cable is one that will like "any" power voltage and anyway output the "right" TTL level (the 2.8/3.3 one). Read this post, where the matter is a bit more explained: jaclaz

You got most (but not all) of it right. The feature/issue is about "partition boundary alignment". Depending on the DOS you will be using (and on the DOS programs you will use in it) you DO NOT want to have that partition NOT respecting the 63 Head boundary. DOS should normally have a CHS compatible geometry on the partitions it can access. Read here: http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/geom/index.htm A good idea is to use the same for XP also, if you plan to use Vista/7, as some SERIOUS problems that may lead to data loss have emerged. Read this: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=9897&hl= Where more info is given. jaclaz

IF your Power Supply is actually "barely giving enough power", INDEPENDENTLY from the problems you are having, you should change it NOW! An underpowered power supply can easily create weird things, including UNrepairable ones , like HD head crashes, overheating of vital parts and what not. And yes, IF it is really underpowered it may create exactly that kind of behaviour. Do use a PS calculator, see here: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=120535 But, more than that, use some common sense, i.e. don't take as "gold" the result of a calculator without thinking about it a bit and reading more on the topic, and also, an "aging" PSU is nothing like a "new" one in terms of actual power, how old is yours? At least testing it might be a good idea, but to have anywhere near an accurate enough result you will need either a dedicated PSU testing device or a multimeter AND have an above than average familiarity/knowledge with electricity/electronics and measurements. In other words, if you need to ask about it, you won't be able to test it manually. jaclaz

You should contact the "3rd parity" support , as what you want to do could be easily mistaken (or correctly taken, cannot say ) as attempting to remove a software protection, check against Rule #1: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/18408-forum-rules-updated-must-read/ jaclaz

predestined? I like it! It sounds just "right" I am not too sure between: predestined cdob or cdob the predestined though. jaclaz

Yep, exactly: life is tough! ...the good thing is that every time you learn something more : I don't think that such a DVD is available. But why don't you slipstream SP2 as you have been advised to do here?: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=142596 http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=142596&st=1 jaclaz

Possibly. I'll let you know when and if I'll be back . jaclaz

Yes, it is obvious and it was exactly my point - I guess we can call it "our" point , BUT, where would be the utility to hide/unhide the partition be residing? And moreover WHICH hiding/unhiding tool is it? You need something that installs either in the MBR only (like partita or MBLDR) or possibly in a few hidden sectors also like grub4dos grldr.mbr does (and in the case of grub4dos you will need two copies of grldr, one in the 9x and one in the XP partition, or put it in a third partition). In other words, you cannot use anything that resides in either the 9x or XP partition, if you are trying to provide a failsafe way in case one of the two (or their bootsectors) goes "beserk", as from a statistical viewpoint you have no reason to presume that the "9x" one is more likely to fail than the "XP" one or viceversa. grub4dos grldr.mbr in the MBR (+a few hidden sectors) may solve, say, 1/3 of the problem, i.e. since it can bypass bootsector CODE, it will remain functional even if bootsector CODE becomes corrupted (but of course not if the bootsector DATA becomes corrupted). In other words, what I am trying to understand is the theory, if you assume that one of the two partitions or one of their respective bootsectors is going to go beserk, what you propose as most "failproof" setup and why. jaclaz

Sure you do , only, don't expect anymore to have it from me, that was the essence of my previous post. That is what I would have tried to find out, had you actually replied properly to my questions. It is very possible that you didn't do anything wrong, and it's simply some problem of the winsetupfronUSB in combination with your source, your laptop or the USB key, but cannot really say. Surely someone else will have the abilities to help you without you needing to take some time in trying to be helped by revealing the details I would have needed. Unfortunately my crystal ball is in the shop once again for tuning and maintenance and tarots and i-ching (or the way I use them) are soooo unreliable that I cannot suggest you anything without info. jaclaz

That's allright , since you apparently wasted that of the members who tried to help you , as I see it, please do correct me if I am misunderstanding : You asked if SP2 is needed and how to add it: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=142596 http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=142602 You were told basically that: it is not "necessary", but "advised" you won't be able to add it on a vlited install you would need to slipstream to source BEFORE vliting You basically replied: that's OK, I won't slipstream SP2 since I won't need it or it is too difficult And now you are here to whine about not being able to install SP2 on a vlited install? BTW you changed opinion on vlite pretty fast : jaclaz

It reappeared . jaclaz

I see. You don't want my help. Bye, bye. jaclaz

@Lonecrusader Not really. There is no real "need" to actually re-map the hard disk drive, it is just one of the possible solutions, and you should be careful between the use of "booting XP" or "booting the XP bootloader NTLDR" (which are two very different things). This is not different in any way from what will happen to the 9x. I mean, if something goes wrong with your 98 partition and/or bootsector the XP will be unbootable AS WELL as your 9x. That's why do boot starting floppies exist (and yes, you can boot start NT/2K/XP/2003 and Vista :ph34r:/2008/7) from a floppy. cannie made a very specific topic, that is however full with info about dual booting: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=118623 jaclaz

@VideoRipper Well, if it wasn't clear enough, I was kidding, obviously nothing personal, the bashing was not actually against anyone, but rather a simple attempt to remember people the principles of Occam's Razor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor or, if you prefer, KISS approach (Keep It Simple Stupid). The point is general. Lots of people think that since they have Delphi (and think they can program in it - mind you I am not saying that the "think" applies to you personally ) they are the allmighty (and only) Gods of computing. Script-kiddies, as you like to call the small number of people actually using ALREADY AVAILABLE on the given platform scripting engines to simply solve simple problems, on the other hand, like to think that Albert Einstein was, besides a great physicist, a very wise man: So, only, a "philosophical" matter. The whole idea of "compiling" is, in my perverted mind , a completely "wrong" approach, a quick (and at the time needed) workaround to improve the efficiency of SLOW processors/LOW computer power, useful if you really have COMPLEX needs, you trade in flexibility and freedom for speed, which is of course very good for Software companies but has no reason to be if speed is irrelevant and if you are going to share the source anyway. A "simple" example of a "simple" conversion from .exe to batch: http://www.forensicfocus.com/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=4805 (the original .exe is 1,163,264 bytes) The batch is (in the published form) 1,024 bytes. (in a bit more readable version it is 1,278 bytes). Since it's use is targeted to "assemble" snippets, like a bootsector or a file header, I personally see the advantages of the "simple" approach, and probably Yzöwl could make it simpler/better yet. jaclaz

Just for the record, this is the page (in the last updated version): http://bearwindows.boot-land.net/win2000.htm Log/news here: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2325&st=21 jaclaz

Is really TYHK99==KZW7179 ? If not, we have a couple of still unfinalized threads: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=23479&hl= http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=23635&hl= Where maybe TYHK99 can find some useful hints. jaclaz

OR use letter assigner Old, dead site: http://www.v72735.f2s.com/LetAssig/ Via The Wayback Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.v72735.f2s.com/LetAssig/ XP, unless you use a migrate.inf during installation will assign letters along it's internal order, that mind you is slightly different from the DOS one, check carefully here (and links within): http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=85729 and/or post info about your partitions (just one primary and all the rest logical volumes inside extended or multiple primaries? It may make a difference.) jaclaz

SHAME on you! You lost trace at 2nd hop! http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10745 http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10579&st=0&p=93201entry93201 www.hobeanu.com/blog http://www.hobeanu.com/blog/bypassing-file-system-security-in-windows/ http://www.hobeanu.com/blog/accessgain-tool/ http://www.hobeanu.com/blog/downloads/AccessGain.zip jaclaz

WHICH steps? Can you DETAIL them, EXACTLY as you performed them? jaclaz

Very nice of you for us (rather oldish) "script-kiddies". Since you are a programmer, why not showing it? Please post the source code AND the compiled version of an utility capable of doing this in (your choice): C C+ C++ C# Delphi You have exactly 8 (eight) minutes from now, or you may take notice, once and for all, that for simple tasks, simple approach is faster. It would take to this "script-kiddie" far less than 5 minutes to write a batch for it (2K/XP only), but I am giving you a fair advantage. Tick... tick...tick... jaclaz