user57

for me chrome was a big problem because it tooks 2 weeks to compile up, this is bad when you want to write something or testing the code then the next problem was that the vm snapshots (only a few) already took up the 2 TB limit. so work was limited for example i could not compile a extra debug version (the compiler optimization can make problems) also when clicking around they are more time consuming if they take time because these sum up windows 10 also is not the fastest horse, it has a lot a background activity - also it force upgrades neither if you dont want them nor you know they dig into your computer in total these things then sum up all together - when you have limited time it gets a even bigger problem to install some new VS2022 compiler and win11 would take to much up - while a better computer still just could "eat it up anyway"

what you wrote rather describe a small console where you can enter a executables name + that parameter the createprocess function can do exactly this, so this might be a question for a plugin someone writes that is doing that that %s is useally something for translate a string with something called printf with %s it knows that is a string it either gets translated before given as parameter (then you not fine) or the programm that reads that parameter untranslated with %s (then you are fine) for a dll there would be the rundll.exe question

these executables (processes) useally just use the parameters given to them having a compling code that means you could write the createprocess() function with a parameter that then can be readed out by the next process (in this case ytdl) the parameter might just be a string to that file like C:\info.ini the program(ytdl) then reads out this from the parameter

it sounds to me someone is trying to make a windows 2000 support for this, or at least it would go that direction i once told sam and dibya what i think about that the GetLogicalProcessorInformation is available in windows xp with SP3 that one contains also NUMA information (SYSTEM_LOGICAL_PROCESSOR_INFORMATION structure) NtQuerySystemInformation( "SystemLogicalProcessorInformation", buffer, *len, len ); maybe "SystemNumaProcessorMap": https://www.geoffchappell.com/studies/windows/km/ntoskrnl/api/ex/sysinfo/numa.htm many mothersboards dont have more of NUMA´s, it used to be an second socket for a second (or more then 2 cpu sockets) - with own wires to extra ram (like the RAMBUS-RAM (rd-ram) used to do this) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-uniform_memory_access that in win2000 ? raise questions if you want the file what was about to being made for firefox i sended you a private message it may not contain that specific function, however it shows a different way to get this value and give a idea how the ntoskrnl is holding it https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/sysinfoapi/nf-sysinfoapi-getlogicalprocessorinformation if you really want to have this reaction you have to make a ntoskrnl kernel extender here is a implementation from doxygen { ULONG MaxEntries, Node; PSYSTEM_NUMA_INFORMATION NumaInformation = (PSYSTEM_NUMA_INFORMATION)Buffer; /* Validate input size */ if (Size < sizeof(ULONG)) { return STATUS_INFO_LENGTH_MISMATCH; } NumaInformation->HighestNodeNumber = KeNumberNodes - 1; /* Compute how much entries we will be able to put in output structure */ MaxEntries = (Size - FIELD_OFFSET(SYSTEM_NUMA_INFORMATION, ActiveProcessorsAffinityMask)) / sizeof(ULONGLONG); /* Make sure we don't overflow KeNodeBlock */ if (MaxEntries > KeNumberNodes) { MaxEntries = KeNumberNodes; } /* If we have entries to write, and room for it */ if (Size >= FIELD_OFFSET(SYSTEM_NUMA_INFORMATION, ActiveProcessorsAffinityMask) && MaxEntries != 0) { /* Already set size we return */ *ReqSize = FIELD_OFFSET(SYSTEM_NUMA_INFORMATION, ActiveProcessorsAffinityMask) + MaxEntries * sizeof(ULONGLONG); /* For each node, return processor mask */ for (Node = 0; Node < MaxEntries; ++Node) { NumaInformation->ActiveProcessorsAffinityMask[Node] = KeNodeBlock[Node]->ProcessorMask; } } else { /* We only returned highest node number */ *ReqSize = sizeof(ULONG); } return STATUS_SUCCESS; }

its probaly a known path - it can differ - you also can set some of these best would be to search your disc for a known and relativ unique file filename xp useally has it like at Documents and Settings\ (user like administrator or all users) there then should be something called userdata

for doxygen the function look like this: BOOL WINAPI GetNumaHighestNodeNumber(PULONG HighestNodeNumber) { NTSTATUS Status; ULONG Length; ULONG PartialInfo[2]; // First two members of SYSTEM_NUMA_INFORMATION /* Query partial NUMA info */ //Status = NtQuerySystemInformation(SystemNumaProcessorMap, PartialInfo, sizeof(PartialInfo), &Length); // SystemNumaProcessorMap = 55, // 0x37 Status = NtQuerySystemInformation(SYSTEM_INFORMATION_CLASS)0x00000037, PartialInfo, sizeof(PartialInfo), &Length); if (!NT_SUCCESS(Status)) { return FALSE; } if (Length < sizeof(ULONG)) { return FALSE; } *HighestNodeNumber = PartialInfo[0]; return TRUE; }

in the past we either where called dump, its just not doing that, it would be found, its not a problem, you still can block it with a firewall (no windows has a firewall + software that can do anything at higher software levels - and its hardware supported so software dont have a chance (you dont see it when the hardware is doing that instead of the software)) it might be a good idea to come up with it now again after all these years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RutDZMCjkMs and today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1eX_vvAlUc i think it was to shortsighted to always not understand that things like "there could be a pedophile, there could be a terrorist" is like we always said not the real thing that is intended - it is a gate-opener or a backdoor behind held open sure if you hang up a camera in everybody´s home - at some point you will find a pedophile and a terrorist but its not the main goal the main goal is that company´s get the private data - things like if you dont work enough - or what they can change in your life (gathering that info) (there such things already also in external things like a email-provider (gmx.net for example providers owners of workers insight in their mails)) after that a lawers apears that says something like "i know everything better then you, and we have the right to do so" or something like that - and then talks something about terms of use maybe eula (or whatsoever the names are) - if it dont stands there now - no problem we write it step by step a little closer with every terms of use upgrade - lawers provide the neccesary support, maybe influencers, maybe politicans but the big deal is that the word company is involved (what says us what this is really about) and i think here is the catch - company dont have the right what the police got - and never should for me thats the main thing (company) that needs to be removed - if something is even doing like that it has to be the police - and never a company ! never if the law is really against us there should be new laws being made that exactly write out the company of these things sometimes they also write something like "but amazon safes that data for the police" or "its property of amazon/company" its not its like a speech on a phone or a packet in a shipping station just because you have it you dont own it (a letter, a packet or spoken message are such examples) - period that needs a better clarification in the law itself - and if somebody is doing that only the police is allowed to - company has nothing to search here and the people that support things like that or mixing it together (like the amazon example) should be clearly identified what they really are - they are the company´s interests - and if a policeman/politician/whatever helps these people, they are helping them for a fraud/crime and so on... as zuckerberg diplomatic once said : facebook ends where the law ends... but by censoring speech (freedom of speech) zuckerberg is going against constitutional law - and zuckerberg/or facebook are not above the law in my opinion zuckerberg did exactly that by censoring certain (and legal spoken things) (so he said exactly that in hope that they dont get the trick - also the lawers could said this to him to say so) zuckerberg certainly dont have ""domiciliary rights" of facebook" to forbid the higher law - there domiciliary rights cant outnorm freedom of speech or legalize false law´s it dont necessary has to be freedom of speech that would include many other laws including the one to spy certain people, prohibits other company´s interests or stealing data ect. that´s why we need better law´s against company´s doing such things

i looked at it in doxygen QueryWorkingSet and Ex are doing partly the same thing they call up NtQueryVirtualMemory where then both access the either "MemoryWorkingSetList" or "MemoryWorkingSetListEx" as parameter // typedef enum _MEMORY_INFORMATION_CLASS { MemoryBasicInformation, MemoryWorkingSetList, // <-- this MemorySectionName, MemoryBasicVlmInformation, MemoryWorkingSetExList // <-- and this } MEMORY_INFORMATION_CLASS; however on msdn they might look different: (QueryWorkingSet) typedef struct _PSAPI_WORKING_SET_INFORMATION { ULONG_PTR NumberOfEntries; PSAPI_WORKING_SET_BLOCK WorkingSetInfo[1]; } PSAPI_WORKING_SET_INFORMATION, *PPSAPI_WORKING_SET_INFORMATION; (QueryWorkingSetEx) typedef struct _PSAPI_WORKING_SET_EX_INFORMATION { PVOID VirtualAddress; PSAPI_WORKING_SET_EX_BLOCK VirtualAttributes; } PSAPI_WORKING_SET_EX_INFORMATION, *PPSAPI_WORKING_SET_EX_INFORMATION; the parameter sizes are the same, so a linking to that function works, just maybe not fully functional that we should keep an eye on if it behave different if they behave different you have have to write a code that redirects to QueryWorkingSetEx to -> NtQueryVirtualMemory with that MemoryWorkingSetExList xp might got this function parameter

it sounds a bit weird to me to be a "hp-printer problem/support forum" or something like "xp support channel from microsoft" but well from what i remember the 128 GB ram patch had a problem with the USB, this was because the ntoskrnl, hal maybe other files was taken from windows vista or windows 2003 server then a USB problem apeared a very common problem with a such method (taken files from a different OS/version) is that it can cause problem - it can be functional, it can be non functional or it can be partly functional so you should look if you use a kernel extender, a certain .iso you can do this by looking the files too look for the usb drivers (not the ones from the HP company) they have names like usbhub.sys ect. (usb*.sys) if you see a version of 6.0 or 5.2 (right click info/version) - your XP uses that 128 GB patch here is a such problem (this one was fixed by using a newer version): https://msfn.org/board/topic/185916-audio-not-working-on-windows-xp-x64-surface-pro-1/#comment-1282549 the usb problem of that 128 GB patch talked about: https://msfn.org/board/topic/176356-simple-xp-32bit-64gb-ram-true-pae-guide/page/2/ its something that should be sorted out of the problem list if you just have the 128 GB patch then you just need to place the usb files

oh someone has realized the same problem we often talked about, thank you for this one ffmpeg used to be be very self-contained that was good times but later on it wasnt that anymore - it used up engines(like cuda, or directx11+), dll´s, libs, special functions it wasnt easy to complete remove win10 from it, also to only 1 executable that can do all of this, and it dont need a grafic card to encode this so we can say playing and en/de-coding h.265 software based is possible - also fast if the XMM registers (aka mmx-avx) are used - those are 2-500 times faster then normal so i would say ffmpeg sadly now goes a different direction

https://www.file-upload.net/download-15542984/fileextd.dll.html that fileextd.dll a old file you dont see that often, the kernelex.dll must be a custom kernel extender

did you make the capacity test ? https://www.nextofwindows.com/how-to-verify-sd-card-capacity-on-windows

so it was on a ethernet cable or parallel "printer" cable? maybe the printer has a bad usb performance, are patched files involved (the PAE 128 GB extender has other usb drivers for example from vista) therefore you should repeat that usb performance test with a different OS, but maybe the same hardware of the computer

hard to say when you dont know the entire thing - but the firmware definitely has potential to fix a such related problems - but as said there might be more of things still involved

a alignment is made for a "piece of area" if you have a "align area" for 1 MB (aka 1´048´576) then 2048 sectors of 512 bits would fit in there (or 256 sectors of 4k (4096)) if you dont have a "align area" that rounds up correctly it might lead into a sector, cluster, track, cylinder, whatever in between a other if you have a area like 4k (4096) * 4 = 16384 but you made that area +1 then the area overlaps into the next 4k sector then it use up 5, 4k sectors while the other data is not used, maybe corrupted the 512 bit and 4096 bit sector question been around for a while now, the hardware/firmware can also handle this - in this case this in then made in the harddrive/firmware not the operation system anymore if the firmware handles that right it can emulate logical and physical sectors - a drive is made at least of 4 maybe more parts (cluster, cylinder, sector, head) - its a combination not a single piece like "i want this specific sector, like just an "offset you enter - and thats it? no" " this is very common for other electronic parts to translate something like this for example a "logical address" to a "physical address", or segmentation (thus 32 bit can write past 4 GB) where the electric signals in the ram apear is then part of that -hardware piece-, the hardware piece control that or in case of a harddrive in hand´s of that firmware - what later then translate this to a physical thing on the harddrive - thats it this also make the -32 wires question- come out again - a USB only has 4 wires (where 2 are rather a power supply - if you notice the light on your usb mouse it probaly get powered by this, the smartphone charge should be also a such example), rather 2 wires of the USB are used for "transfer and control - what then is limited by frequency that wire can do" - but a usb cable can write to a "terabyte + harddrive" - you dont need always 32 or 64 wires to do this (with 2 wires you would have a offset 2*2 = 4 , 4 wires 2*2*2 = 16) (there are such model´s who use 32 wires and control wires - but it is not always a must - if i remember right with FSB there was something done the ram only had 200 mhz but "quadpumped" its 800 FSB (that might bring out someones memory´s) - the cache and the TLB of the cpu can do this) i wonder why no-one has made the related change in the windows xp operating system yet - basicly it sounds simple to ask the harddrive what sector-size it uses (sometimes called the AF (advanced format)) but its just 4 k sectors the term "AF" sounds a bit to high for my opinion after that the right controlment for the 4 k sector has to be written - if it reads out a different sector size it handles for that size that was returned - if its 512 then its 512 if its 4096(4k) then its that size https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/windows-server/backup-and-storage/support-policy-4k-sector-hard-drives the x-box solution maybe ? if not it was like "everything is a paragon driver problem" it might be solved to a 16-18 TB harddrive just going for the sector size of 4k, the other might can be ignored for now