Drugwash

Thanks Den, I got it. Update went smoothly. Jumper, sdbcreate should build a file called KernelEx.sdb that's required by the NSIS (not MSI) installer to build the KernelEx installation package. Without that file, the installer script bails out, so we cannot build a KernelEx installer under 9x unless the .nsi script gets modified (which I don't think we should try).

Ah thanks, I forgot to check the SVN (not that I'm very fond of scouring through folders and files anyway). The sdbcreate executable compiles fine under my 98SE but at runtime it throws an error reporting missing export NtOpenFile in NTDLL.DLL (which is probably forwarded to the kernel), called from APPHELP.DLL. The only dependencies of sdbcreate.exe are SHLWAPI.DLL, KERNEL32.DLL and APPHELP.DLL and the first two seem to be fulfilled, at least apparently. My version of APPHELP.DLL is the one from XP-SP1 (5.1.2600.1106) - dunno if it's suposed to work in 9x or how I ended up with it (I do add/replace many system files manually when something seems to be missing). There is no such file on the Win98SE or ME CD. Here's the sdbcreate I built earlier today: download

Here's an updated set of banners, hopefully you'll find common ground. Nevertheless, anybody is free to hack their own explorer.exe and replace the existing banner with any other in the package: download The banner gallery has been updated as well, but it does not contain all the versions in the archive, so you better take a look inside before you vote. Enjoy!

Great job with the docs, thank you! I read through and there's a couple of things that might need further clarification: 1. What exactly should the msvc6chk tool do? People who already have an old VC6 installation with multiple modifications might have problems if headers get changed, possibly adding duplicate definitions or whatever. But first, where is it? Can't find it in the sources, nor is it anywhere on my HDD (VC6/PSDK included). 2. Note 2 says: "To execute sdbcreate project and create SDB database you need Windows Vista or later. " What about those that can only access Win98/ME/XP machines? Is the SDB database/project mandatory for KernelEx? Now, I've tried to build again. Everything went fine except for a couple of warnings. building kexbasen.dll: D:\free\KernelEx\apilibs\kexbasen\kernel32\jemalloc/jemalloc.c(239) : warning C4163: '_BitScanForward' : not available as an intrinsic function building auxiliary: psapi.c(53) : warning C4273: 'GetProcessId' : inconsistent dll linkage. dllexport assumed. However, the NSIS installer (I used 2.46, latest at the time of writing this) errors out at line 335 - I assume it has to do with the sdbcreate file that cannot be found, because the tool wouldn't run on 98SE. What can we do in this situation?

OK, I've updated the image in post #2140 with the latest 3 files. One might have to clear browser cache to view the updated image.

Praise the Lord - the Master is finally happy! So much for the voting though... Well, glad to be of service. Have a good one!

Does any of these fit your requirements? download

Oh c'mon, I can do that kind of stuff anytime! I've done all of my banners from scratch, doesn't it show? There's blank gradients in both archives, inside the icon files, to prove it. You first said you wanted it to look as similar as possible to the original, now it doesn't matter anymore. You're a problem child alright! Now, what exactly do you want it to look like? Choose a font, choose the colors, choose the backgrouns gradient style and colors, choose the exact text, choose whatever else any type'em down, so we know where to go to. It's 10AM here after a blank night, so please make it fast while I prepare myself another coffee.

EDIT: Old gallery was removed. Please see post #2172 for the full banner gallery.

You're welcome! I'd still prefer the one to the left with 'uSP3' but hey, you're the boss. If you want an honest vote, copy/paste all versions presented here from all users (bphlpt, Lone Crusader, me) in a single image, give'em numbers and ask people to vote what they like most. Since most images are hidden within archives and not everyone would go to the length of downloading those archives just to look at a bunch of banners, the voting (if any) may not truly reflect reality. But then again, we have much bigger problems than a startup menu banner... And you know what's funny? Personally I always use small icons menu, which doesn't show a banner, because I just feel it's a waste of memory, besides having a huge menu that'd extend past the screen's height if it used large icons. But let's not be selfish, there's people who like it so... choose the best and enjoy! @LoneCrusader: Oh well, what's a few hours compared to a wasted lifetime... Since I built a few versions of that banner as well, one of them may find its way in, just for kicks. On the other hand, it shows I'm not having troubles with my system, having to reboot in Safe Mode, otherwise I would've already known that! My uptimer app shows current session has been up for 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours and 50 minutes.

There you are: download It may be one pixel off to the right or something, I had to rebuild it from scratch because the alpha blending doesn't always work identically and there would've been some white trails left. And well, I had already forgotten which font I used for that version (it was Arial Narrow, Bold, 14). Yep, absent-minded, that's me!

I don't know much about anything, but I'm very ambitious when I really wanna do something. Yes, 4bpp means four bits per pixel, equal to 16 colors. Depending on your image editor, there may be an option to change color depth with/out dithering. After creating the blank image and applying the gradient, add the 'Windows' text, then you may duplicate the original file (for safety) and change color depth to 4bpp, see how it looks. Certain tools allow application of the gradient only on a user-defined area, the rest being filled with the two basic colors that make the gradient. Changing the location (and width) of this area will change the border between the two colors, in 4bpp mode. It just needs trial and error. However, this is not a crucial requirement at all, just trying to avoid the nitpickers that are always out there, lurking in the shadows. EDIT: Here's some new artwork I managed to crop up: download There's both resource 157 and 161 in there, plus the full intermediary version set in the icon file. Fonts used: Impact, Arial Narrow, Haettenschweiler, Tahoma Colors: #FFFFFF, #FF2E2E, #C0C0C0, #808080 Gradient: #010080 -> #0000F6 Enjoy!

Guys, let me know if it works correctly or there's anything to change/add. Please note it only uses the ANSI versions of the API and some of the functions are not complete, so there's no testing available yet. Here you are: MSPatchGUI 1.1.0.0

Believe me, there's so much on my hands that I just can't decide where to start from! I've been lazy for so long. Please, you can always come up with any new combinations and you (or anybody else, for that matter) may definitely use the intermediary files in my pack as you like. Besides, you may have way more fonts installed than I do. And two visions are always better than one.

There's an .ico file inside my package that contains intermediary versions. Those can be worked on. There's also a blank gradient but it's not the proper 4bbp one. I took it from scratch, because I just couldn't find the fonts and tools to accurately replicate the original version. I'll try to play with more colors and fonts, but right now I'm working on that Delta patcher, I'd like to release a working version soon.

The JPG format is of no use for this particular purpose, especially being lossy - the format must be BMP, since it has to be hacked into explorer.exe as the BITMAP resource with ID 157. Another thing is that the gradient should be calculated so that the bitmap viewed in 4bpp (in situations where video driver is missing or inappropriate) would not "split" the first word or otherwise look unaesthetical. One other detail, albeit minor, would be resource 161, which is loaded in Safe Mode instead of resource 157. That's a grey-shaded image, much shorter than 157, but nevertheless it could be hacked into showing Second Edition somehow. I've played with res 157 a few days ago but never got to post the results. Banner3.bmp would be the best bet, since it's the only one that takes into account the 4bpp aspect. Here you are: download.

Any archiver will only unpack the Delta files. You get a bunch of _sfx_xxxx._p files (where xxxx can be 0000 to 9999), plus _sfx_manifest_._p and _sfx_.dll. Those are the source files that will further be processed to create the final files. Win9x doesn't know how to natively apply the patches, therefore an external tool is needed, which is what I've been working on. Using it, one will end up with the correct folder structure, plus the original patch files. There's a little more work to do before I can release the basic version. Stay tuned!

I've been playing with Delta packages back in 2011, it's not that big of a deal once you get the idea. And actually, the idea is very clever: take a certain file, patch it and out goes another file that may have no relation whatsoever with the former. The required API can be found in PatchApi.h, part of Platform SDK. I had built an AHK wrapper for the API but it was never completed, however it did work at the time. I'll be reviewing the code and maybe I can come up with a small toy to automatically unpack and apply the patch under Win9x. BTW, the package can easily be unpacked with 7-zip, which is what I'm using in the script.

Those logos are part of the personalization capabilities that MS seems to have "accidentally" slipped in, considering the later Windows versions. Personally, I could never stand the original logos, always changed them a.s.a.p. after installation. Therefore, from my point of view, the logos should remain optional, as long as anyone could have already personalized them and they're not part of the core system (such as system libraries, drivers, etc). If something overwrote them without my knowledge and consent, I'd be quite... you know... Let's hear other opinions too.

Yes, the issue is very complex and often requires deep hardware and software knowledge in order to fix it. I've had a lot of troubles in the past with motherboard resources being distributed idfferently from board to board, which made it a challenge plugging in and installing drivers for video cards, sound cards, modems and whatnot. A big problem is that nowadays' BIOS manufacturers removed all possible fine tweaks, leaving the BIOS as a useless picture (mostly in laptops/notebooks but desktop boards too), not a control panel that can (and sometimes has to) be altered. For that reason, most people with recent motherboards/BIOS versions will find it impossible to modify motherboard resources as to properly fit them to older OS versions such as 98/ME. As a result, some people will never be able to fix their installation, regardless of all the advices, tweaks and patches we might put out here. There will be nothing left to do, other than replace motherboard/videocard/soundcard/etc, if and when possible, and even then, the results may be uncertain. Therefore, we do our best but occasionally we may fail. Regretfully, there is nothing we can do, in such cases.

My only backup that involves that file was made on July 31st, 2011, when it was replaced by USBD.SYS 4.90.3000.1. However, almost an year earlier (Sept-Oct 2010) I've been operating a script built by myself which used to create a serial communication with another computer using the COM port(s). Never had any blue screens or other related errors, while USBD.SYS was still in its original 98SE version (4.10.2222), but it's also true I can't prove it was in any way involved in those operations. On the other hand, I can't remember having any issues with the ME version installed after July 2011 either. BlueSoleil bluetooth works, I can transfer files between my 98SE and the old Nokia 2630 phone. Never had a standard IR device on any computer, dunno how it looks and operates, so I can neither confirm nor deny your experience. The only IR device I had on the 98SE machine was the remote control receiver connected to the K-World TV Tuner and for what it's worth, that thing used to work fine. From what I see, the ME version of USBD.SYS lists ks.sys as additional dependency, besides NTOSKRNL.EXE and HAL.DLL. If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Loew had difficulties (better said, the impossibility of) using USB (wireless/bluetooth?) headphones while trying to use certain (this?) ks.sys-dependent ME library and no version of ks.sys has been of help. Looks like we may be heading towards another dilemma. (sorry for my bad memory, I may be mistaken more or less on this subject) Off-topic: my bandwidth has been again capped down to ~12kB/s and disconnects every few minutes, so I may not be able to dowload 3.14 until the 20th-21st of this month, not from main server which does not support resume; it was at 25% moments ago and now it started from scratch - that's just wasted bandwidth on the server-side. (another couple typos, as usual...)

Maybe that version had been released in separate packages for 9x and 2k/XP and you just tracked down the latter. I couldn't find any details on it on the Lenovo page, therefore this is just an assumption. After all, there's been eight or nine years since the release of the package.

I've seen a few bad BIOS versions - both on laptops and desktops - that would refuse to boot to optical drive when HDD contained a valid bootable partition. Bad thing is, laptops usually have stupid useless BIOS settings where one may not be able to change much, if anything. In the above-mentioned situation, HDD boot should be disabled in BIOS, leaving ONLY optical drive boot for first installation phase. In that case - assuming optical drive is in good shape and installation media is also in good shape and bootable - one should be able to boot from optical drive and initiate OS installation. When setup reboots the machine, go into BIOS and change boot order, reenabling HDD boot so that setup could continue from where it left off. Do not let it boot from optical drive again! As a safety measure, before going to another installation attempt, take a small and clean piece of cotton cloth (and a magnifying glass if needed) and gently clean the optical drive's lens with a couple circular moves, to wipe off any dust that may have settled there. Careful not to scratch it!

Unless I wasn't fully awake this morning or my eyeglasses were too dirty, somewhere on a Intel page (linked somewhere above) it states clearly that there once was a Windows9x version of the 2200BG driver and the last 9x compatible version seems to have been 8.1.0.28 which fixed a certain bug in previous version. I've wasted eight hours today, searching for that version on the web and all I could find was at most an utterly useless installer on Cnet, which I wouldn't use even if my life depended on it. Someone has been very careful in removing all traces of all Windows9x drivers off the face of the web. The irony is, I just realized I have such mini-PCI Wi-FI card - the very same model - in a drawer, given by a friend of mine after dismantling a broken laptop. If I ever end up with a complete laptop that I could fix for myself (or someone else) and would need a 9x driver for that piece of hardware, they're gonna hear from me badly. (typos are gonna kill me someday...)

Try a thorough HDD scan (and repair) using HDAT2, HDD Regenerator or any other similar tool out there (if any). There may be bad sectors in critical system files that just break hardware detection and/or other important functions of the OS. Using MSConfig or any other similar tool (I use CodeStuff Starter), check if there's any unknown/suspect file(s) running at boot time. Disable everything that doesn't look critical for a normal operation (post the list of applications and services here, when in doubt). There could be either malware or a bad driver messing with your system. If you can borrow a small test HDD from someone, disconnect your current HDD, connect the new one, perform a OS install from scratch with all other hardware connected and if detection works OK and you get everything in Device Manager (you may install required drivers if you want, to make sure), then you can rule out a hardware failure (except maybe for your original HDD that you have previously removed). On the other hand, if you can take your original HDD to another machine (careful not to boot from it!), then you may use that system's tools to check drive integrity and any possible software intrusions. I believe everything else has been covered in the previous posts. Good luck! EDIT: Random browsing through the 9x section brought me to a topic that just might be of help here: ifsmgr.vxd and zero-byte .inf files