rloew

Some PCI-E Video Cards work on Windows 98 with the NVidia Drivers. I have Patched Drivers for most PCI-E SATA Cards.

Probably the best solution is two versions. A "Lite" (current) Version and a "Full" Version. @drugwash: I have never used NSIS. I write my own Installers.

Thanks again for the confirmation I will eventually write up a full document explaining the goals of the SP. Here is a brief introduction, the SP is intended for users who don't have fast internet, that are not able to download large packages. On a 850mhz, 40 GB HDD, 512MB, the SP installs on a system with all updates selected in about 4min and 25sec. This is what I use for a test bed. Since Microsoft, has completely killed off support for the Win9x systems, its my civil duty as a Win9x power user to try my best and pick up where they have dropped us off. The pack has very minor cosmetic changes. Service Pack does NOT have any hidden agenda. It is there to use if needed. The main goal of the SP is to increase system stability, system performance, and the option of allowing users to install what they want. Blah, blah, blah etc.... I will do the full documentation in the final release. I was referring to usage instructions before the Installation menu appears, not a goal statement. Also you specify that DirectX 9c be Installed before the SP. Where is an User supposed to get it. It is not in the CD, Windows Update doesn't work and it is not in your SP. The same thing can be said about IE6. A Service Pack should have at least everything that was in Windows Update so that a new Installation can be brought up to date without having to scrounge the Internet looking for pieces.

It really depends on the individual system. Some users may have runtimes and the necessary files installed already, so there would not be a need for them to install Main Updates. They could just install the other options. I can't think of a solution ATM. This is why I suggest a clean install. SP covers almost everything except for Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, Direct X and DotNET framework. I did a clean install to avoid any questions. Of course. Of course people should read instructions. The problem I saw was that it is not obvious when or where to find them. If the instructions are as well hidden as you have them, who is going to read them? If you have some free time, I would appreciate if you could test those two app with SP3. Its good to see the SP is playing well with your software. Another plus for the pack. Thanks for your findings, which is going to help me improve SP. DLLHOOK and FILE64 were a distraction relating to KernelEx. I did not run tests to see if my Software is compatable with your SP except for the RAM Limitation Patch and the SATA Patch, which were needed to Boot my Computer. When I tested U98SESP3.9 I verified that WDMEX worked after removing the WDMSTUB references. The remaining tests were for the USB problems I identified with 3.9, and the results are in my post from last week.

Can you post a screenshot? Attached. It appears also when starting and stopping the second pass. Some files from Main Updates needs to be installed first, before installing certain options. Doing Main Updates first separately from the rest worked, but there are no instructions to do so. I know about the CHM because you told me. There is no reference to it that I can see. The Installer goes to the selection menu without the user being able to read the CHM beforehand even if he knows about it. Your target audience will mostly be NEWBIES. Experinced users will have less need for this SP. The Instructions should be plainly displayed before the selection window. Website instructions will quickly be separated from a downloaded package, so you can't depend on people reading the Website for Installation instructions. This will always be a problem with your patches. Your patches are superior over the standard Microsoft files. Therefore, all your patches needs to be installed after the SP to avoid system problems. My Patches would not have affected your Installer. Doing the Install in two passes seems to have resolved the INFEX issue. There are two solutions. The Service Pack installs VMM.VXD 4.10.2226 and ESDI_506.PDR 4.10.2230.Solution 1. Change your versions to the following, VMM.VXD 4.10.2226 > 4.10.2227, ESDI_506.PDR 4.10.2230 > 4.10.2231. This will help distinguish the rloew patches and SP patches. Solution 2. Back up your patched VMM.VXD and ESDI_506.PDR, Install the SP, replace the files in dos before Windows start up. You shouldn't have any problems if you follow the instructions. To avoid IP issues, I do not include VMM.VXD VCACHE.VXD or ESDI_506.PDR in these Patches. I use whatever the User has. Setting the Version would make the actual Version unidentifiable. Also they could be using Version 2222 which would then not be updated by your SP. In addition, in the absence of an official Versioning System, changing Version numbers can lead to problems especially if multiple people inplement Patches. I found that the following works for each Installation pass: 1. Uninstall my Patches. Partial uninstall or Uninstall Failed is OK. 2. Run U98SESP3 Install Pass. Do not reboot. 3. Reinstall my Patches. 4. Reboot. You may want to add this to your documentation. SP3.x has a CHM file with instructions. Same instructions on the Main website. See above comments on Instructions. I don't have any USB troubles ATM. Sorry can't help you. It does seem to work eventually. WDMEX will fix this issue. Sorry, don't have any USB audio. Others will have to test this. The problem seems related to the Kernel System Renderer. I did not use DLLHOOK or WDMEX in these tests. WDMEX replaces WDMSTUB, so the INF files would have to be purged of WDMSTUB references. DLLHOOK issues were related to KernelEX not U98SESP3. I don't see any reason for problems with DLLHOOK or FILE64. GRAYSQ.ZIP

I decided to test the current version of U98SESP3 in my test setup. I observed the following issues: 1. A large gray rectangle appears when I started selecting installation items. 2. OCX CIC.DLL could not be registered. 3. The Installer eventually hung with no message. Task Manager reported INFEX was not responding. Reboot failed, had to reset. 4. My RAM Limitation Patch and SATA Patch were disabled and had to be replaced to boot Windows. 5. There was no option or message about USB in the Installer. Later I found the USB information on the Web Page. 6. Installing an USB Mouse crashes twice. Third boot allows installation to complete. This may be related to the WDMSTUB Installation bug I found previously. 7. USB Audio works now but on first attempt left a nameless misconfigured device in Device Manager. It was necessary to reload it's driver twice.

With the TeraByte Plus Patches you can use 512TiB to 4PiB depending on Logical Sector Size. Using just LLXX's 48-bit LBA patch or RLoew's patch for the same purpose, 2 TB (not 2 TiB), provided all partitions < 1 TiB. For onboard SATA drives, another of RLoew's patches may be needed, depending on the controller's manufacturer and model. This limit is 2TiB. The largest available drive under 2TiB is 2TB. The remaining 199GB can be accessed using a 2.5TB or greater Drive, but you will need Partitioning tools that ignore the reported size of the Drive.

With the TeraByte Plus Patches you can use 512TiB to 4PiB depending on Logical Sector Size.

"Not all" means that at least one (they are actually more than one, let's call them conventionally "a few") *somehow* managed to get a stable or "stable enough" system even without using your RAM limitation patch. This latter may be the second best thing after ice cream , but not - AFAIK - the ONLY way, very possibly a more "universal" solution , or if you prefere "best", but by no means "ONLY". Nothing more, nothing less. jaclaz Since you just love to nitpick. Show me where any of us said it is the ONLY way. It IS the more "universal" solution. LC and others have said it is the "best" solution. For some people, the alternative may be no built-in Ethernet or stripping their Registry. But it is definitely not the ONLY way. I know of several myself and ice cream isn't one of them.

True. But many people find that the alternatives do not work for them. LC and the person who E-Mailed me this morning discovered that. Certain Ethernet and Registry issues are not resolved by the alternatives as well.

I don't think you can blame the non-SP users. I don't use the SP, but I never said it was WRONG, just not my cup of tea. I only pointed out a few possible risks with your approach and some suggestions to make your users happier. The other non-SP users said very little as they had no reason to care. Most of the arguments you got into had to do with your implementation. These came from users or potential users of your SP.

I have MmIsAddressValid in my WDMEX.VXD replacement for WDMSTUB. I do not know if I have the other missing functions in WNIHDD51.SYS as I don't have a list or a copy of the File. I'd like to try it, how do I get it? BTW the wnihdd51.sys file has: InterlockedPushEntrySList, MmIsAddressValid, InterlockedPopEntrySList, NdisGetFirstBufferFromPacketSafe, NdisMGetDmaAlignment, NdisQueryBufferSafe. WDMEX.VXD is still in development so I haven't advertised it on my Website. The SList Functions can easily be added. I currently do not have any Ndis Functions in it. Edit: I added the Slist Functions. The Ex versions of the SList functions exist on Windows 98 but are not compatable with the XP Versions. Since the Ex SList functions are used by Windows 98 Drivers, I will not be able to add the XP Versions of them.

Apparently the phrase of the day is "Beat up on the new guy". Unproductive criticism and nitpicking don't solve problems. They just kill dialogue. If the OP knew all the right questions to ask, he would be experienced enough that he probably could figure out the answers he needed without help. If you don't have the patience to deal with inexperienced users, stick to the more elite threads. I don't use Kex either. A better answer to the OP's question would be what Versions of MAME work without Kex.

I have MmIsAddressValid in my WDMEX.VXD replacement for WDMSTUB. I do not know if I have the other missing functions in WNIHDD51.SYS as I don't have a list or a copy of the File.

I said DEVICE Manager, not Task Manager.

I said DISABLE, not install.

A few more: Faster. Smaller. Portable. Easier to hack and extend. Fewer restrictions on what you can do. Compatable with a wider range of hardware. When people say it can't be done, I do it.

Boot into Safe Mode. Disable, not remove, all of the USB Drivers using Device Manager. Reboot.

I haven't ported the changes from the Full Version to the Demo so there currently is no New Demo. If you are interested in buying the API, I can port the changes so you can test it.

The Demo is obsolete. It only works with older AMD Multi-Core Porcessors. Due to lack of interest, I never updated the Demo. I have upgraded the full Version to support Intel and newer AMD Processors.

Unless you limited memory to less than 768MB you need to set MaxFileCache as well. I did say ALL. I cloned the Hard Drive from my MA785 Computer, which is about a year older, ran a Registry Script that stripped all of the Driver Entries except for a few ROOT and Network Entries, and redetected everything. A few of my Programs had to be reworked such as my SMM Hook, 64-Bit RAM API and Multi-Core API. The built in Ethernet had no Driver so I needed to add a PCI Card. I have had so many problems with SETUP.EXE that I bypassed it years ago. I created a "pre-installed Windows Setup CD" that allows me to setup a new Machine without using Setup and with my Patches already Slip-Streamed in. I don't remember if I ever tried SETUP.EXE on the M5A97.

I have Windows 98 running on an UEFI System. It is an Asus M5A97 with an 8 Core AMD Processor. SInce you had a problem with HIMEMX, use HIMEM. DO NOT USE AHCI, it will crash. Go into Safe Mode, remove ALL Drivers, reboot into normal mode and redetect Drivers.

To gain access to the CD, you would have to rebuild the Boot Image of the CD to include GCDROM.SYS and add it to the list of Drivers in CONFIG.SYS.

IO.SYS 7.10 is not compressed. That is why I wrote IO8DCOMP but not IO7DCOMP.

I have used Windows 95 on two different modern AMD Systems. I have not seen this problem.