rloew

PassingBy is not around anymore, but BenoitRen remains with us, so if the above info is not enough (but it *is* a good start), you should ask him. I'm not sure Patching "IsDebuggerPresent" to "ReadFile" is a good idea. The two API Calls have different numbers of arguments. This will cause a Stack error when the API Call returns. It is also possible that an incorrect File Read command could be executed. I would suggest "GetLastError" instead.

I have a driver Patch that probably will work. The RocketRaid 1720 does not appear to use the incompatable Marvell Chip. BIOSes generally boot the Motherboard Drives first, but some can switch the Boot priorities around. In addition to the Floppy. CD, Hard Disk choice, newer BIOSes have a Hard Disk Boot Priority setting and/or a one-time Boot Selection Function Key.

Check your Hard Disk Boot Priority Setting in your BIOS. Be sure that your Motherboard Connected Hard Disk comes before any Add-In Card. What Highpoint Card are you using? Some are not compatable with Windows 9x.

This is off-topic, but just very quickly Rudolph, is this patch for Windows 9x only, or will it enable me to generate files over 4 GB on Windows XP with FAT32 drives? The Patch is an API hook so it is designed specifically for Windows 9X. The concept may be portable to other OSes but the code isn't.

Even this limitation can be overcome. I have written a Large File Emulator that supports Uploading, Downloading, Playing Videos, etc. files larger than 4GiB on a FAT32 FileSystem.

If I may, using for the rest of the space a Partition ID WIndows 9x/Me does not know anything about, like NTFS or EXT2/3/4 should give the same result but if needed you have some storage space accessible by other OS's. jaclaz Yes, provided that no Logical Partition starts above the 137GB limit, and the other OS does not boot from it or use it before loading it's own drivers.

1. Correct 2. Correct 3. If you connect the SATA Drive to the Motherboard with a SATA - PATA adapter then the same issue applies. If you use an add-on PCI Card then the Card BIOS determines support.

Ah, but it will attempt to assign a drive letter (which means access). The only other workaround is to boot using, e.g., Grub4DOS and "hide" the others.I currently have a slight problem with a 250gb that I have yet to "hide" the extras. A "phantom drive" appears (due to wrap-around) and I do not touch the one(s) higher than 137gb. Rearrangement of the partitions is currently not in my schedule nor the funds (yet) to purchase a permanent fix. BE FOREWARNED! Even if you don't touch the "phantom drives", Windows 9x might try to stick a Recycle Bin or _Restore Folder in it without any warning. This could corrupt data below the 137GB Limit. Hide the Partitions or Patch the Driver, or else.

I have added code to my 23GB Bootable Floppy Emulation BD-RE to support Writing. The Disk now can run DOS and be loaded or edited using standard utilities. Software can be run that needs to self-modify or save data.

As far as I can tell, only Western Digital uses "Advanced Format". Even the 3TB Drives from other Manufacturers use 512 Byte Physical Sectors. 3TB USB Drives use 4KiB Logical Sectors though and are not supported by unpatched Windows 9x.

I have written a set of Patches for Windows 98 to deal with the 4 issues that occur with the latest Hard Drives. 1. Hard Drives larger than 2TiB. 2. Advanced Format Drives. 3. Partitions larger than 1TiB. 4. SATA Drives without Drivers. I have no intention of letting the march of progress push me off Windows 98SE any time soon.

What is the native capability of IO.SYS, 512 bytes or 2K bytes? (The last part of that comment at least, implies 512 bytes.) BTW, I just purchased a cheap MP3/MP4 player whose sector size (via USB) is 1KB. I'm having some difficulties with it (in all O/S, from DOS to Vista), but that may be due to the quality (or lack thereof) of its Flash, rather than its sector size. It's formatted as a "Super Floppy" (sans MBR). Anyway, that's what led me to re-read this thread. Joe. As is, DOS and Windows 9x will only handle 512 Byte Sectors. I have extended DOS to 32KiB and Windows 98 and 98SE to 4KiB.

It is possible to update a file in one CAB. I have sold patched CABs with my High Capacity Disk Patch built in for years. This provides 48-Bit LBA support from day one. You will need tools I have written, similar to the slipstreaming tools that LoneCrusader bought.

That is the famous "Rosewill IDE-SATA07 adapter" based on Marvell 88SA8052, referenced in this thread elsewhere and said to be very good. I actively looked for it but did not find any actually for sale, regardless of whether they would ship to Brazil or not. It seems its production has been discontinued. It was the successor to the long-ago discontinued legendary "Rosewill IDE-SATA01 adapter", which was based on the Marvell 88SA8040. Marvell wrote the Firmware for the Highpoint Card I mentioned before that does not support more than 2TiB, so it is possible there could be an issue above 2TiB.

But what about when reading/writing cluster chains in the FAT itself?The surest way to tell would be to benchmark it, but I don't have 4K drives, and I'll try to avoid them for now, if I can. Windows 9x does the same buffering on the FAT itself so large requests will still be aligned. Most reading and writing of the FAT would be one sector at a time though, so alignment would have no significance.

Since there are no 3TB PATA Drives, I had no reason to test it. I would not be surprised if the PATA<->SATA Adapter supports full 48-Bit LBA both ways, but support still requires that the Controller Firmware support full 48-Bit Addressing. The Promise Card labelled "Maxtor ATA133" does support full 48-Bit Addressing as have the SATA PCI and PCI-E cards, I have tested, except the Highpoint Cards. Motherboard BIOSes do NOT. So a DDO is required for every Motherboard connected Hard Drive. The Highpoint AHCI cards are totally incompatable with Windows 9x. DOS and Windows 9x require additional Patches to support more than 2TiB.

It may be of interest that the JM20330 based adapter card combined with a Promise card will correctly handle a 3TB Drive and probably much larger.

Windows 9x implements 4KiB transfers internally whenever possible. This was done to improve performance and to reduce Memory paging issues. If the Data Clusters are at least 4KiB and aligned on physical 4KiB Sector boundaries, there will be no degradation. This alignment applies to the Data area, not the Partition itself.

I have added an Image Option to the next release of my RFORMAT Program. This will create a truncated Image File for any of the recognized formats and options in one step.

Who knows? My remark was more a "generic" one, you have something in your closet, you may be willing to sell it, but until you don't take it out of the closet and put it on display on your desk, under a big "for sale" sign you have 100% possibilities (read as "certainty") that noone will ever buy it, or the other way round 0% probabilities of ever selling it. Once you have it in plain view on the desk it is possible that someone is interested to it, you will have n% probabilities that someone will buy it, and no matter how little n will be it will always verify the n>=0 condition, with a chance of also verifying the n>0 one. jaclaz I have now posted a Demo and Manuals for my CDTOOLS Package on my Website. Incidentally N was =1 weeks before I posted my CDTOOLS Package.

rloew's comment about the recycling center for my bad and bulk-erased LS-120 diskettes, in posting #56 in another topic made me just more determined to find a way to re-initialize bulk-erased/de-gaussed LS-120 diskettes and LS-120 diskettes with a bad Track 0, without a Manufacturer's Formatting Rig Now we know. It is 4A or 4B. 4C if you count the separate Floppy Drive needed as a Formatting Rig. The LS-120 drive is under the control of the Hard Drive Controller, not under the control of the Floppy Drive Controller. An internal IDE/ATAPI LS-120 drive can format 720KB/1.44MB/120MB diskettes even when the Floppy Drive Controller is disabled in BIOS. I know. If it was under control of the Floppy Drive Controller, it would have been easy to reinitialize the Sectors. A Hard Drive Controller is not so flexible.

As far as I know the OEM Field at Offset 3 is not part of the BPB. The BPB that is used internally starts at Offset 0xB. That would make the two fields above BPB+8 and BPB+0x11 respectively. Total Sectors (16) takes priority over Total Sectors (32) so only one is relevant in any given situation. I just list "Total Sectors" in my Software as having both would be an invalid combination. Due to bugs in the standard Boot Code and extended features I have added, I have my own Versions of the Boot Codes as well.

64 Bytes is not enough. FAT32's BPB extends to 0x5A (90 Bytes). In addition it has another Sector of Code.

How about using the terms which Roberto Grassi, the author of GRDuw, the best software for superfloppies, has used in his Disk Information Report, e.g. or It uses the standard notation for CHS. It also uses "Hidden Sectors" which a number of people, including me, object to.

CHS is only literal for Floppies and very old Hard Drives. For everything else the interface is emulated. It is still the same protocol so the same nomenclature should be used for all. For numbers 1 and 2, I would stick with the latter set which represents the standard nomenclature. Number 3 is an entirely different story. It has nothing to do with CHS. Hidden_Sectors is Microsoftese. It makes little sense since earlier Partitions can lurk in the space. It would have been more appropriate for the "Reserved Sectors" field at offset 0xE. I personally would suggest "Start_Sector" as it is the primary purpose of the field in primary (possibly Bootable) Partitions. In Logical Partitions it is often set to the Offset from the corresponding Extended Partition, so "Sector_Offset" is another option.