Tihiy

can be: - Software confict - Registry error - Incorrect Explorer.exe version - .pwl (password file) issue

You just can't search. http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=43605

Don't include any. Hm... Why?

I can remove standard logo from IO.SYS, not add. It is packed with some proprietary algorithm, i'm not so good in compression.

Yes, it is pure trash

According to Patch137 manuals, Windows scandisk and Defrag unable to work with big disks. However, DOS scandisk able. In Safe Mode, Windows uses only DOS to access HDD, so no pdr or other drivers loaded.

"Invalid switch /M/W". space seems to be needed for start.exe.

Maybe. The main problem with these applications that they're written to take advantage of Unicode functions which are't implemented in 9x/ME. KernelXP project (set of wrapper libraries) allow some simple applications to run, although complex application does not work correctly in most cases. Another big problem that KernelXP is uncompatible with Revolutions Pack - what's why this project is paused. I'll give Adobe Acrobat Reader 7 a try.

You probably have MB with Intel chipset or own IDE/SATA drivers.

You can try and look. It's very small in size, but I was unable to find what it does. Not sure about anything, i have 120GB HDD max.

Gape, you're an oracle. This crazy address http://members.aol.com/__121b_HeNUO+UpHGm0...9g/v5yhhca3pTc= leads to patch for Esdi_506.pdr, which enables handling of 145GB [and more in full ver]; but it is demo and no even warez copies exist. Recently maximus have sent me a hexed copy of that patch which works with drives up to 400GB; i'm currently testing it now. Also some DOS/Windows tools can't handle this limit as well. It can be fixed by using Windows ME tools like scandiskw or defrag. New DOS tools can be used from FreeDOS. "DOS driveletter fix" is a patch for any io.sys which makes DOS to forget drive letter order when installing new drive.

You're right here; your product is more flexible and suitable for almost anyone. But MDCU specializes on wise install order which advice full installation (98lite seems also not supported), so "preserving" (sp2.cab) and file-existance check is not need. As for MS article, i studied it when was creating inf scenario for RP. I noticed almost all flags not working properly with setupx installer (i don't know is it true), so i'm using setupapi (NT-like) installer, which is faster and correctly uses all flags.

Gape, you're wrong in some criterias: Not exactly true. It uses same Windows install mechanism and does not contains any IE/MDAC/WSH/MSI/VCRT updates, so all updates can be installed well. Adopted from ME. Sometimes even better than ME support. - Preserve mechanism (new files from sp2.cab) + Really solves 512+MB of RAM problem SE SP doesn't contain some features of MDCU: - DOS driveletter fix - QFECHECK entries - Install order. It's tested many times and different from SE SP.

"as legal as possible" hm... Shell Update contains files which aren't available separately, only from ME. So you need valid Win ME.

You cannot use /custom parameter under Windows. I remember you can use /a parameter for scandskw to perfom automatic scan. Set parameters for checking in scandisk.

azagahl, wrong topic I'm aware of that problem, it'll be fixed in next version, i've already told.

Yes, clicking on a lot of "No" buttons is annoying.

*insulting* Good Idea, although if you haven't tried, don't post just to post. Hm... Why am I posting now?

Cute. Please don't doublepost. Then KernelXP will be able to do something serious, i'll tell. Currently project is paused.

You're right. But i've found a lot of bugs in Revolutions Pack 2.9. My hotfix is based on Revolutions Pack 2.5, which does not contains those bugs, but it can contain others. Look if any dummy 0-byte files are located in the root of the drive. (i haven't found any) And remember that semi-slipstream method can fail (windows will load without icons ) without TI...dll.

Have you tested new MS hotfix? Have you tested my hotfix?

Hi, superscotty19 If something about RP confuzes you, ask me. The newer versions of RP (since 2.1) are separated into few parts, - Basic (32-bit icon support) - Shell Update (yes, it actually uses some Windows ME files) - Toolbar Patch (32-bit icons for toolbars) so you don't need to extract anything.

Simple. I've just read technical CAN buletin mentioned in article. It says integer overflow occurs in LoadImage() function when dwResSize value (4-bit) exceeds maximal word (2-bit) value. If dwResSize will be ~FFFFFFFF (-1) then malicious code can be executed. So, hacked version of user32.dll has patched import table which LoadImage() points to loader written in "unused" space. It loads Ti......DLL and gives it control. Check function in Ti......DLL opens icon file and checks if dwResSize>maximal word value. If it is, function fails (so virus won't be executed). If it does not, it transfers control to User32.dll original LoadImage() pointer hardcoded. [if i had Windows sources i believe it's just 1 line of code to add But, because Win9x developer team is killed, ( ) stupid NT developers trying to write a 16-bit memory hook which do the same, but: - It will consume 16-bit handles, bad - It won't protect machine until loaded - When unloaded, will crush everything] So... if ^^ that was you wanted ? As I as said before, this update isn't critical. AND MY UPDATE SHOULD BE TESTED WELL IF WILL BE INCLUDED SOMEWHERE.

Yeah, looks like they released new version. But seems it still present as [hidden] task! (Maybe check msconfig?) Somebody tested? [i'm still thinking my version is better]