Damnation Posted June 9, 2017 Posted June 9, 2017 I saw this and was wondering whether server 2003 supports efi? https://books.google.com.au/books?id=zayrcM9ZYdAC&lpg=PA57&ots=x2JUU8k_FA&dq=ntoskrnl efi&pg=PA57#v=onepage&q=ntoskrnl efi&f=false
Dibya Posted June 9, 2017 Author Posted June 9, 2017 Just now, Damnation said: regarding efi could you use code from reactos to get it to work? I do not know which portion of reactos do so Just now, Damnation said: I saw this and was wondering whether server 2003 supports efi? https://books.google.com.au/books?id=zayrcM9ZYdAC&lpg=PA57&ots=x2JUU8k_FA&dq=ntoskrnl efi&pg=PA57#v=onepage&q=ntoskrnl efi&f=false It says it do but it never worked for me . I may have to ask some reactos DeV's.
Damnation Posted June 9, 2017 Posted June 9, 2017 if your Intel USB 3 kernel patch is working again, do you mind if i test it?
Dibya Posted June 9, 2017 Author Posted June 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Damnation said: if your Intel USB 3 kernel patch is working again, do you mind if i test it? I made few changes in etwevent functions but i cannot remember what i did . I am not in home i said already . i am trying to recreate it again for you . Sorry man i have provided it if i am in home .
Damnation Posted June 9, 2017 Posted June 9, 2017 11 minutes ago, Dibya said: I made few changes in etwevent functions but i cannot remember what i did . I am not in home i said already . i am trying to recreate it again for you . Sorry man i have provided it if i am in home . I'm really looking forward to trying it out
Dibya Posted June 9, 2017 Author Posted June 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Damnation said: I'm really looking forward to trying it out i know thats why i am trying my best
Damnation Posted June 9, 2017 Posted June 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Dibya said: i know thats why i am trying my best The work you are doing is really Appreciated Thanks for the effort you put into all this
j7n Posted June 9, 2017 Posted June 9, 2017 *True love for windows XP server 2003 in to do list so donot worry I love your enthusiasm. Unexpected commercial with Madonna... Here where I live I don't see advertisements for any computer software on TV. Server seems to be far ahead. I was impressed that its SP1 build can run programs requiring XP SP3, including Crusader Kings because of GetThreadId, which XP doesn't seem to support at all. (Maybe there is an update that I am not aware of.) Some applications have stupid version checks, such as the installer of Photoshop CS3, but that fortunately could be bypassed.
Dibya Posted June 10, 2017 Author Posted June 10, 2017 i am getting getting some size not specified error on nasm RegSetKeyValueW: mov edi,edi push ebp mov ebp,esp mov eax,[ebp+0Ch] push esi push edi xor esi,esi xor edi,edi cmp eax,esi jz L77C8CC7D cmp [eax],si jz L77C8CC7D push esi lea ecx,[ebp+0Ch] push ecx push esi push 00000002h push esi push esi push esi push eax push [ebp+08h] call RegCreateKeyW ; operation size not specified mov edi,eax L77C8CC4C: cmp edi,esi jnz L77C8CC75 push [ebp+1Ch] push [ebp+18h] ; operation size not specified push [ebp+14h] ; operation size not specified push esi ; operation size not specified push [ebp+10h] push [ebp+0Ch] ; operation size not specified call RegSetValueExW ; operation size not specified mov edi,eax mov eax,[ebp+0Ch] cmp eax,[ebp+08h] jz L77C8CC75 push eax call RegCloseKey L77C8CC75: mov eax,edi pop edi pop esi pop ebp retn 0018h ;------------------------------------------------------------------------------ L77C8CC7D: mov eax,[ebp+08h] mov [ebp+0Ch],eax jmp L77C8CC4C
roytam1 Posted June 10, 2017 Posted June 10, 2017 41 minutes ago, Dibya said: i am getting getting some size not specified error on nasm RegSetKeyValueW: mov edi,edi push ebp mov ebp,esp mov eax,[ebp+0Ch] push esi push edi xor esi,esi xor edi,edi cmp eax,esi jz L77C8CC7D cmp [eax],si jz L77C8CC7D push esi lea ecx,[ebp+0Ch] push ecx push esi push 00000002h push esi push esi push esi push eax push [ebp+08h] call RegCreateKeyW ; operation size not specified mov edi,eax L77C8CC4C: cmp edi,esi jnz L77C8CC75 push [ebp+1Ch] push [ebp+18h] ; operation size not specified push [ebp+14h] ; operation size not specified push esi ; operation size not specified push [ebp+10h] push [ebp+0Ch] ; operation size not specified call RegSetValueExW ; operation size not specified mov edi,eax mov eax,[ebp+0Ch] cmp eax,[ebp+08h] jz L77C8CC75 push eax call RegCloseKey L77C8CC75: mov eax,edi pop edi pop esi pop ebp retn 0018h ;------------------------------------------------------------------------------ L77C8CC7D: mov eax,[ebp+08h] mov [ebp+0Ch],eax jmp L77C8CC4C the pushs should have "dword" keyword
Dibya Posted June 10, 2017 Author Posted June 10, 2017 3 hours ago, roytam1 said: the pushs should have "dword" keyword thanks i will test and let you know . its coding time . no more manual patching its time to opensoarce with custom patching engine .
98SE Posted June 10, 2017 Posted June 10, 2017 On Sunday, June 04, 2017 at 4:44 AM, jaclaz said: Anything planned for NT 4.0 and Windows 95? jaclaz LOL jaclaz!!!
98SE Posted June 10, 2017 Posted June 10, 2017 (edited) On Sunday, June 04, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Dibya said: I am talking about user 98SE . Any way I have barely know system architecture of nt4.0 but 9x is beyond my knowledge Obvious misunderstanding on jaclaz's part. Thanks for the chuckles. But neither of those two would be worth it anyhow though I did see XP kernel for 98SE. XP 32-bit just needs Intel USB 3.0 xHCI and extra memory support. Windows 7 64-bit just needs 2TB max memory and DX12 support and it will kill Windows 10. Don't stress yourself Dibya. XP doesn't need to run Windows 7 programs compatibility. Also no need to make every browser work on it. Firefox still works on XP and doesn't need Vista/W7 code. Waste of time and might create XP software compatibility problems later doing too much. It will be a nightmare trying to make it run W7 software on XP completely or always needing to patch each program to work and waste your energy. XP is good for all older XP software, just add Intel xHCI USB 3.0 and maybe the extra memory patch is all you need. I checked and I think XP can handle probably 262GB max. 192GB user memory / 70GB Ramdrive. Maybe it can go higher somehow on Win2K3 Server kernel. Edited June 10, 2017 by 98SE 2
Monroe Posted June 10, 2017 Posted June 10, 2017 This is probably a dumb question but the possibility of having USB 3.0 working on WinXP sounds great. I have older computers (IBM Thinkpads) that are USB 2.0. I do have a couple of newer flash drives that are listed as USB 3.0 but on my computers they work as USB 2.0. So the question would be ... if ExtendedXP does have USB 3.0 working later on ... and I'm sure it will ... will these USB 3.0 flash drives work as USB 3.0 flash drives on my computer? I'm thinking the USB 3.0 will only be for WinXP on a newer computer with USB 3.0 ports ... but maybe I'm wrong. ...
Damnation Posted June 10, 2017 Posted June 10, 2017 2 minutes ago, monroe said: This is probably a dumb question but the possibility of having USB 3.0 working on WinXP sounds great. I have older computers (IBM Thinkpads) that are USB 2.0. I do have a couple of newer flash drives that are listed as USB 3.0 but on my computers they work as USB 2.0. So the question would be ... if ExtendedXP does have USB 3.0 working later on ... and I'm sure it will ... will these USB 3.0 flash drives work as USB 3.0 flash drives on my computer? I'm thinking the USB 3.0 will only be for WinXP on a newer computer with USB 3.0 ports ... but maybe I'm wrong. ... If your laptop is as old as I think it is you will need to put in a USB 3.0 PCMCIA card to get USB 3 speeds. and they won't be an intel chip, probably Renesas or ASmedia or something
Recommended Posts