Dibya's patch BSOD

[caliber]

I'm getting BSOD on startup with this trick. how to reverse this issue ? does it work for you ?

https://retrosystemsrevival.blogspot.com/2018/01/windows-xp-ram-patch.html

 

[FranceBB]

Not sure which one you are using. Try installing the latest One Core API on a working system: 

Source: https://github.com/Skulltrail192/One-Core-Api - Build <redacted>

(Note for Dencorso: it's GitHub and the project is open source, so I don't think there are any issues, but if there are, please let me know).

Edited December 23, 2018 by dencorso
Someone did. One cannot always win, you know.

[dencorso]

I don't think so either. Unless somebody demonstrates convincingly it contains any unredistributables, links to it should be OK.

[heinoganda]

@caliber

The package you have tried is on the one hand outdated (kernel), on the other hand there was the update KB4463103 (kernel) with the POSReady updates where the ram patch would also need to be updated. I created an installer for this ram patch earlier this year, but if the project is not kept up-to-date, especially while there are still POSReady updates, there are problems like a BSOD. MS does not care about the RAM patch, so the author of this project would have to take care of the update.

Note to the author of the project RAM Patch:

In the future, I will not waste my time creating installers if you neglect your projects.
 

[Dibya]

@heinoganda

Sorry for inconvenience but I am going through severe trouble in my real life including my health

This year i collapsed many times.

To be honest for same reason i have stopped extended xp devlopement.

From next time I would request you to nag with my name rather mr.authoroframpatch or something like that

 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2018 by Dibya

[heinoganda]

@Dibya

The inconvenience I do not have, but the users who use this RAM patch.
In actual life we all have to carry our "packages". I wish you a speedy recovery in your health.

[jaclaz]

10 hours ago, dencorso said:

I don't think so either. Unless somebody demonstrates convincingly it contains any unredistributables, links to it should be OK.

Hah, I like the idea of 

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmanti_incumbit_probatio

So, someone could compile the source code and then compare the result to the contents of the pre-made binaries linked to.

I doubt (but am far from being able to convincingly demonstrate it) that the source code, once compiled, will ever produce binaries containing file versions *like*:

    FileVersion        6.0.6001.18000 (longhorn_rtm.080118-1840)
    LegalCopyright        © Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

or

    FileVersion        6.0.6000.16386 (vista_rtm.061101-2205)
    LegalCopyright        © Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

or

    ProductVersion        6.0.6002.18084
    FileVersion        6.0.6002.18084 (vistasp2_gdr.090806-2338)

or

    ProductVersion        6.0.6002.18005
    FileVersion        6.0.6002.18005 (lh_sp2rtm.090410-1830)

We can use some statistics, however, on the results of running filever:

1 Copyright (c) PJ Naughter 2007 - 2015 All rights reserved.
1 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. 1981-2001
2 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. 2005
63 © Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
8 Copyright (c) 1993-2017 the Wine project authors (see the file AUTHORS for a complete list)
1 Copyright 1998-2014 ReactOS Team
218 Copyright 1998-2014 ReactOS Team, 1993-2014 the Wine project authors

We can say that the project is largely based on Open Source and that less than 30% of the files in it have a MS Copyright (which doesn't of course mean that they are non-redistributable).

 

jaclaz

 

 

 

[caliber]

12 hours ago, heinoganda said:

@caliber

The package you have tried is on the one hand outdated (kernel), on the other hand there was the update KB4463103 (kernel) with the POSReady updates where the ram patch would also need to be updated.

I have done the test on another computer with XP that has never been updated. it's just a fresh XP install from the CD with nothing else.

[caliber]

12 hours ago, heinoganda said:

@caliber

 I created an installer for this ram patch earlier this year, but if the project is not kept up-to-date, especially while there are still POSReady updates, there are problems like a BSOD.

can you see over 4GB of RAM with your installer ? I have to re install XP once again because I have not made any backup of the patched files.

[jaclaz]

19 hours ago, FranceBB said:

Source: https://github.com/Skulltrail192/One-Core-Api - Build <redacted>.

I don't understand , I believe that anyone going to a GitHub page would first thing read the README

https://github.com/Skulltrail192/One-Core-Api/blob/master/README

my doubt was that by compiling the project source code the results would come out not similar to the binaries provided (actually they should come out identical, if the thingy is reproduceable).

jaclaz

 

 

[caliber]

20 hours ago, FranceBB said:

Not sure which one you are using. Try installing the latest One Core API on a working system: 

Source: https://github.com/Skulltrail192/One-Core-Api - Build <redacted>

how to install it ?

[dencorso]

15 minutes ago, caliber said:

how to install it ?

No. You want support for it, PM FranceBB. It's not a project MSFN wants to host nor support. One thing is to allow a link to it's git-hub page. To aid and abet it is much more than that, and hasn't been earned, so far.