Jump to content

KernelEx 2022 (Kex22) Test Versions (4.22.26.2)

jumper

By jumper
in Windows 9x Member Projects

 Share

Recommended Posts

deomsh

deomsh

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Goodmaneuver: I ment Jumpers KEX versions, 4.5.2015.3 and 6.

I took a closer look at my LFN and it appears that the culprit was the use of the character " ï " (in Dutch normal). After changing to " i ", installation of LAV Filters 0.70.2 started as usual (but NOT in XP2 mode, only Windows 2003 SP1 or higher on my system). So the problem is different. Maybe we should discuss your problems with LAV Filters elsewhere.
 

Edited by deomsh
language, correction

Goodmaneuver

Goodmaneuver

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Deomsh: XP setting works up to LAV 0.67 and if LAV requires Vista then it does not work. My run loader error was only a fleeting incidence and never happened again.

@Jumper, A game (Broken Sword - Secrets of the Ark) refused to accept that virtual memory was enabled until I manually changed GlobalMemoryStatusEx to GlobalMemoryStatus which may indicate K.18 is not working here. I think it was never implemented. SetFilePointerEx to SetFilePointer does not work or not implemented. This error came from my attempt to run Leawo Blu-ray player 9. Looking at Maxthon 3 there are some import errors but no new ones.

I do not understand the Reg settings supplied with K.18. Redirecting dnsapi to lzdll stopped the Netgear EAPWake.exe loading. Did you mean to add .dll on the end of the knowndlls file name because this makes the registry look for examplefile.dll.dll. Java JDK when compressing to jar file displays warning now that "Attempt to allocate stack guard pages failed",is this due to stubs of the vector exception handler functions? It had never happened before and not a critical error, I will investigate further. Does not make any difference with jar.exe KEX disabled. KEX still loads even when all modules are KEX disabled that are displayed in Process Explorer?

The jar.exe error is not related to a KEX version error, still occurring with 4.5.2.

Edited by Goodmaneuver
Added info, investigated
  • 1 month later...
jumper

jumper

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

To aid in adding support for more compatibility modes, I wrote the following tool for everyone to help in gathering Windows version details:

From geocities.ws/jumper:
    GetVersion — Display and copy to clipboard results of GetVersion, GetVersionExA, and GetVersionExW:
    [7z] GetVersion.7z - 4KB (with C source)

For stock Win98se, the output of GetVersion.exe looks like this:

GetVersion:		0xC0000A04

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOA*):
  dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x00000094
  dwMajorVersion     	0x00000004
  dwMinorVersion     	0x0000000A
  dwBuildNumber      	0x040A08AE
  dwPlatformId		0x00000001
  szCSDVersion[128]	"a" [61 00 00 00 ...]
  return TRUE

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOEXA*):
  dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x0000009C
  dwMajorVersion     	0x00000004
  dwMinorVersion     	0x0000000A
  dwBuildNumber      	0x040A08AE
  dwPlatformId		0x00000001
  szCSDVersion[128]	"a" [61 00 00 00 ...]
  wServicePackMajor	0x0000
  wServicePackMinor	0x0000
  wSuiteMask		0x0000
  wProductType		0x00
  wReserved		0x00
  return TRUE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOW*):
  dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x00000114
  return FALSE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOEXW*):
  dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x0000011C
  return FALSE

gv=0xC0000A04
gvex=4,A,40A08AE,1,a,0,0,0,0,0


I've also tested it on ME and XP/sp3. The last two lines will be used in Kexbases now and Core.ini later.

Please post the last two lines of your results and report any functions that return FALSE so we can have a complete set of results. Thanks!

Edited by jumper
pangoomis

pangoomis

Posted
Posted

Here's how it looks on my Windows 10 1809 17763.316 system (I'm long overdue for an Arch Linux install, I'm sorry :( )

<tt>GetVersion:        0x23F00206

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOA*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize    0x00000094
   dwMajorVersion         0x00000006
   dwMinorVersion         0x00000002
   dwBuildNumber          0x000023F0
   dwPlatformId        0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]    "" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   return TRUE

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOEXA*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize    0x0000009C
   dwMajorVersion         0x00000006
   dwMinorVersion         0x00000002
   dwBuildNumber          0x000023F0
   dwPlatformId        0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]    "" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   wServicePackMajor    0x0000
   wServicePackMinor    0x0000
   wSuiteMask        0x0100
   wProductType        0x01
   wReserved        0x00
   return TRUE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOW*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize    0x00000114
   dwMajorVersion         0x00000006
   dwMinorVersion         0x00000002
   dwBuildNumber          0x000023F0
   dwPlatformId        0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]    "" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   return TRUE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOEXW*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize    0x0000011C
   dwMajorVersion         0x00000006
   dwMinorVersion         0x00000002
   dwBuildNumber          0x000023F0
   dwPlatformId        0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]    "" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   wServicePackMajor    0x0000
   wServicePackMinor    0x0000
   wSuiteMask        0x0100
   wProductType        0x01
   wReserved        0x00
   return TRUE

gv=0x23F00206
gvex=6,2,23F0,2,,0,0,100,1,0</tt>

1
Goodmaneuver

Goodmaneuver

Posted
Posted (edited)

I can confirm that VLC3 works with XP or higher KEX settings when CheckRemoteDebuggerPresent = IsDebuggerPresent on a volume that has only had 4.5.2 on it.

@jumper, I posted this to help with what Schwups was talking about on p36 where VLC3 does not work with K11 and above and that VLC does not work with settings above 2K mode. libqt_plugin in the reference back to other thread on p35. I will shift if you still think inappropriate. I do not know about the syntax error? I think it really matters when higher KEX versions are used and then the user goes back to use an earlier version on the same build :- (the registry).

Edited by Goodmaneuver
wrong page ref
jumper

jumper

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@MrMateczko - Thanks. For Win10 we'll probably eventually want each of the major builds even though Kex will probably never really have any significant support for that OS. The biggest need is for x86 versions of XP0,1,2,3; Vista0,1,2; and Win7, 8, 8.1.

@Goodmaneuver - Wrong thread. Double-check your spelling and syntax, add missing DLL name, and repost in the Kext: DIY thread.

IntMD

IntMD

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here are the GetVersion.exe results for WinXP SP3 build 2600.xpsp_sp3_qfe.180912-0606 (with POSReady patch) 

<tt>GetVersion:		0x0A280105

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOA*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x00000094
   dwMajorVersion     	0x00000005
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000001
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00000A28
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"Service Pack 3" [53 65 72 76 ...]
   return TRUE

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOEXA*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x0000009C
   dwMajorVersion     	0x00000005
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000001
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00000A28
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"Service Pack 3" [53 65 72 76 ...]
   wServicePackMajor	0x0003
   wServicePackMinor	0x0000
   wSuiteMask		0x0100
   wProductType		0x01
   wReserved		0x00
   return TRUE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOW*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x00000114
   dwMajorVersion     	0x00000005
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000001
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00000A28
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"Service Pack 3" [53 00 65 00 ...]
   return TRUE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOEXW*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x0000011C
   dwMajorVersion     	0x00000005
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000001
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00000A28
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"Service Pack 3" [53 00 65 00 ...]
   wServicePackMajor	0x0003
   wServicePackMinor	0x0000
   wSuiteMask		0x0100
   wProductType		0x01
   wReserved		0x00
   return TRUE

gv=0x0A280105
gvex=5,1,A28,2,Service Pack 3,3,0,100,1,0</tt>

 

Edited by IntMD
1
deomsh

deomsh

Posted
Posted

Here the GetVersion results for Windows 10 Pro version 10.0.17143 Build 17143 (or: Version1803 OS build 171430.590).

gv=0x23F00206
gvex=6,2,23F0,2,,0,0,100,1,0</tt>

1
jumper

jumper

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So Win10 1809/17763.316 and 1803/17143.590 are both reporting the same (incorrect) build number:
23F0 hex = 9200 dec

In comparison: WinXP SP3 build 2600.xpsp_sp3_qfe.180912-0606 (with POSReady patch) reports:
A28 hex = 2600 dec

What is MS thinking! Are 17143 and 17763 updates to an earlier 9200 install?

deomsh

deomsh

Posted
Posted (edited)

My Windows 10 Pro was a (free) upgrade to Windows 7 Ultimate, years ago. Thats all I know.

Today I tested a computer with Microsoft Windows 8.1 Pro (64 bit, sorry no x86 available):

gv=0x23F00206
gvex=6,2,23F0,2,,0,0,100,1,0

BTW: my XPSP3 (x86) gave exactly the same values as IntMD's

According to this document the return values for Windows 10/8.1 can be (should be?) the same as 8.0's: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/sysinfo/operating-system-version 

Edited by deomsh
addition
1
roytam1

roytam1

Posted
Posted (edited)

after adding manifest: 

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<assembly xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" manifestVersion="1.0">
<assemblyIdentity
        version="1.0.0.0"
        processorArchitecture="*"
        name="GetVersion"
        type="win32"
/>
<description>GetVersion</description>
<ms_asmv3:trustInfo xmlns:ms_asmv3="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3">
  <ms_asmv3:security>
    <ms_asmv3:requestedPrivileges>
      <ms_asmv3:requestedExecutionLevel level="asInvoker" uiAccess="false" />
    </ms_asmv3:requestedPrivileges>
  </ms_asmv3:security>
</ms_asmv3:trustInfo>
  <ms_asmv3:application xmlns:ms_asmv3="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3">
    <ms_asmv3:windowsSettings xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/SMI/2005/WindowsSettings">
      <dpiAware>true</dpiAware>
    </ms_asmv3:windowsSettings>
  </ms_asmv3:application>
  <compatibility xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:compatibility.v1">
    <application>
      <!-- Windows 10 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{8e0f7a12-bfb3-4fe8-b9a5-48fd50a15a9a}"/>
      <!-- Windows 8.1 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{1f676c76-80e1-4239-95bb-83d0f6d0da78}"/>
      <!-- Windows 8 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{4a2f28e3-53b9-4441-ba9c-d69d4a4a6e38}"/>
      <!-- Windows 7 -->
      <supportedOS Id="{35138b9a-5d96-4fbd-8e2d-a2440225f93a}"/>
      <!-- Windows Vista -->
      <supportedOS Id="{e2011457-1546-43c5-a5fe-008deee3d3f0}"/>
    </application>
  </compatibility>
</assembly>

it shows in win10 1703: 

GetVersion:		0x3AD7000A

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOA*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x00000094
   dwMajorVersion     	0x0000000A
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000000
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00003AD7
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   return TRUE

GetVersionExA (OSVERSIONINFOEXA*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x0000009C
   dwMajorVersion     	0x0000000A
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000000
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00003AD7
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   wServicePackMajor	0x0000
   wServicePackMinor	0x0000
   wSuiteMask		0x0100
   wProductType		0x01
   wReserved		0x00
   return TRUE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOW*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x00000114
   dwMajorVersion     	0x0000000A
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000000
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00003AD7
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   return TRUE

GetVersionExW (OSVERSIONINFOEXW*):
   dwOSVersionInfoSize	0x0000011C
   dwMajorVersion     	0x0000000A
   dwMinorVersion     	0x00000000
   dwBuildNumber      	0x00003AD7
   dwPlatformId		0x00000002
   szCSDVersion[128]	"" [00 00 00 00 ...]
   wServicePackMajor	0x0000
   wServicePackMinor	0x0000
   wSuiteMask		0x0100
   wProductType		0x01
   wReserved		0x00
   return TRUE

gv=0x3AD7000A
gvex=A,0,3AD7,2,,0,0,100,1,0

 

Edited by roytam1
1
roytam1

roytam1

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, jumper said:

So Win10 1809/17763.316 and 1803/17143.590 are both reporting the same (incorrect) build number:
23F0 hex = 9200 dec

In comparison: WinXP SP3 build 2600.xpsp_sp3_qfe.180912-0606 (with POSReady patch) reports:
A28 hex = 2600 dec

What is MS thinking! Are 17143 and 17763 updates to an earlier 9200 install?
 

it lies to applications as Win8 if there is no correct supportOS manifest. see above.

Edited by roytam1
jumper

jumper

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

So as of 8.1, GetVersion, GetVersionEx, and VerifyVersionInfo are deprecated in favor of the new Version Helper APIs:

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/api/sysinfoapi/nf-sysinfoapi-getversion
[GetVersion may be altered or unavailable for releases after Windows 8.1. Instead, use the Version Helper functions]

With the release of Windows 8.1, the behavior of the GetVersion API has changed in the value it will return for the operating system version. The value returned by the GetVersion function now depends on how the application is manifested.

Applications not manifested for Windows 8.1 or Windows 10 will return the Windows 8 OS version value (6.2). Once an application is manifested for a given operating system version, GetVersion will always return the version that the application is manifested for in future releases. To manifest your applications for Windows 8.1 or Windows 10, refer to Targeting your application for Windows.

So Windows is now doing with a manifest just what KernelEx does with compatibility modes. Okay, got it!

Can you run the test again with just the Win8.1 manifest entry? Also Win7? That would complete our post-XP version gathering. Support for manifests and the Version Helper APIs will be added to KernelEx todo list.

Edited by jumper
jumper

jumper

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Knowing some of the hex values allowed me to search the internet for more. Please confirm as many as you can and any more you find:

. WIN95....0xC0000004 4,0,40003B6,1,,0,0,0,0,0
. WIN95A...0xC0000004 4,0,40003B6,1, A ,0,0,0,0,0
. WIN95B...0xC0000004 4,0,4000457,1, B ,0,0,0,0,0
. WIN95B1..0xC0000004 4,3,40004BC,1, B ,0,0,0,0,0
. WIN95C...0xC0000004 4,3,40004BE,1, C ,0,0,0,0,0
. WIN98....0xC0000A04 4,A,40A07CE,1, ,0,0,0,0,0
+ WIN98SE..0xC0000A04 4,A,40A08AE,1, A ,0,0,0,0,0
+ WINME....0xC0005A04 4,5A,45A0BB8,1, ,0,0,0,0,0
. . . . . .
. NT40.....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,,0,0,0,1,0
. NT40A....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,0,1,0
. NT40B....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,Service Pack 2,2,0,0,1,0
. NT40C....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,Service Pack 3,3,0,0,1,0
. NT40D....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,Service Pack 4,4,0,0,1,0
. NT40E....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,Service Pack 5,5,0,0,1,0
. NT40F....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,Service Pack 6,6,0,0,1,0
. NT40G....0x05650004 4,0,565,2,Service Pack 6a,6,0,0,1,0
. . . . . .
. WIN2000..0x08930005 5,0,893,2,,0,0,0,1,1E
. WIN2000A.0x08930005 5,0,893,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,0,1,1E
. WIN2000B.0x08930005 5,0,893,2,Service Pack 2,2,0,0,1,1E
. WIN2000C.0x08930005 5,0,893,2,Service Pack 3,3,0,0,1,1E
. WIN2000D.0x08930005 5,0,893,2,Service Pack 4,4,0,0,1,1E
. . . . . .
. WINXP....0x0A280105 5,1,A28,2,,,0,100,1,0
. WINXP1...0x0A280105 5,1,A28,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,100,1,0
. WINXP2...0x0A280105 5,1,A28,2,Service Pack 2,2,0,100,1,0
+ WINXP3...0x0A280105 5,1,A28,2,Service Pack 3,3,0,100,1,0
. WINXP64..0x0ECE0205 5,2,ECE,2,Service Pack 2,2,0,100,1,0
. WIN2003..0x0ECE0205 5,2,ECE,2,,0,0,100,3,0
. WIN2003A.0x0ECE0205 5,2,ECE,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,100,3,0
. WIN2003B.0x0ECE0205 5,2,ECE,2,Service Pack 2,2,0,100,3,0
. . . . . .
. VISTA....0x17700006 6,0,1770,2,,0,0,100,1,0
. WIN2008..0x17700006 6,0,1770,2,,0,0,100,3,0
. VISTA1...0x17710006 6,0,1771,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,100,1,0
. WIN2008A.0x17710006 6,0,1771,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,100,3,0
. VISTA2...0x17720006 6,0,1772,2,Service Pack 2,2,0,100,1,0
. WIN2008B.0x17720006 6,0,1772,2,Service Pack 2,2,0,100,3,0
. . . . . .
. WIN7.....0x1db00106 6,1,1db0,2,,0,0,100,1,0
. W2008R2A.0x1db00106 6,1,1db0,2,,0,0,100,3,0
. WIN7A....0x1db10106 6,1,1db1,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,100,1,0
. W2008R2B.0x1db10106 6,1,1db1,2,Service Pack 1,1,0,100,3,0
. . . . . .
+ WIN8.....0x23F00206 6,2,23F0,2,,0,0,100,1,0
. WIN81....0x25800306 6,3,2580,2,,0,0,100,1,0
. WIN10....0x3AD7000A A,0,3AD7,2,,0,0,100,1,0
. WIN10A...0x42EE000A A,0,42EE,2,,0,0,100,1,0
^--- confirmed (+)?

Edited by jumper

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...