jumper Posted November 4, 2019 Share Posted November 4, 2019 The PSAPX method was only needed for a short time. An updated Psapi.dll for KernelEx was released almost five years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 (edited) Loblo thanks for testing I had not done so just yet, one method to overcome the date problem is to change the time back a year & once browser is running change date back to real time. I tested this with Opera & it works with open tabs. TLS1.2 Certificates once time is reset pages download. I have backed up drive & JRE8u51 works with Vuze so install OK. When renaming JRE the auto registry update will rename to suit the new name of the JRE folder for the javaw.exe if in a location that is within the 8.3 file naming criteria. So check that there is no old renamed JRE locations in registry. Placing Jre8u51 in original JRE location works then. Vuze works with WIN98SE KEX setting still with Jre8u51 but if stepping up to Jre8u141 then Vuze needs a NT based KEX setting to work, So things have changed here with Jre8u141. Tested the idea I had with the date on GNGR, It tries to run then terminates; though if date is changed back only 6 months it still brings up the trial window as Loblo explained. Release date was February 2019. Lobo Evolution relies on system for HTML parsing to some degree it seems and I will have to check in modern OS. More investigation required. I have mentioned Vuze as I had it for a test. There are a lot of bad files out there Vuze should be about 10MB I found a good copy at https://www.filepuma.com/download/vuze_32bit_5.4.0.0-6499/ bundled software which I decline all offers & choose Tabbed UI Mode. Disable update checking in interface/start as core is not fully compatible with 5.5 & above. Google DNS 8.8.8.8 not working. Jumper, brilliant, thanks, I visited KernelEx Auxiliary DLL Updates before but have overlooked PSAPI update. Edited November 8, 2019 by Goodmaneuver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 I agree with Loblo about Lobo Evolution, it performs the same with Win7 as it does with WinME. This might not be a bad thing if it gets further development. GNGR when testing with Win7 works a bit better than Lobo but still is not a viable option. The out of date screen comes up and then continues to welcome screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) This info was wrong. There has been some concern about whether the 12.18 files make a difference with Opera 12.02. Well I have found Wikipedia and this https://xem.github.io/minix86/manual/intel-x86-and-64-manual-vol1/o_7281d5ea06a5b67a-197.html will be viewable with the 12.18 file update where they will not if just 12.02 is used. Edited January 12, 2020 by Goodmaneuver False information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loblo Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 This page as well as Wikipedia can be viewed just fine with vanilla Opera 12.02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) Thanks Loblo, I did not have TLS 2 nor TLS 1.1 enabled for that matter. All my posts referring to this have been corrected. After copying Opera 12.02 folder across from one drive to one that has 12.18 files, the settings are reset to TLS 1.0 only within 12.02. The Opera 12.18 files do not use the Application Data folder where as 12.02 does. Edited January 15, 2020 by Goodmaneuver Grammar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) >what prevents, newmoon 26.5 for vanilla 2000 from running on 98se. Quote from https://msfn.org/board/topic/173233-kernelex-45-core-updates-45201617/?do=findComment&comment=1176961 Simply put, 16 bit drivers. KEX 4.5.1 allowed Mozilla 3.6.28 to run but 4.01 did not transfer TCP data. KEX 4.5.2 allowed up to Mozilla 9 to work where higher versions stalled the TCP and also video playback. Giff images were not playable with Mozilla 3. Improvements were made with MozJS.dll but new function exports to XUL.dll meant it was not upgradeable. It has been a while ago and I am quoting my memory. Browser.xpt has to match the XUL.dll version and the XUL of 11 was close enough for 9 OMNI files to work and this is how I started to test. Mozilla has an error reporting system and the CSS, and XUL files were altered slightly to fix the errors. It is the XUL.dll that is incompatible with the driver system of 98/ME with versions > 9. 98/ME has to be made as sprightly as possible to XUL runner of Mozilla 9 to work faster along with other improvements discussed elsewhere it can work quite good. Before we make judgment of speed try Mozilla 9 on a more recent operating system. Best to use Mozilla 9 over previous versions as MozJS from 9 is not bad at working the web pages. I chose CometBird as it was made to be slimmer. KEX24 and Mozilla9: *\MSVC*.dll = BASE, *\XUL.dll = NT40, CometBird.exe = Bases. Everything counts and Shlwapi the commonly used file of Shell32 and all those under its dependency tree should link PNCRT.dll as well in all usage for speedier performance. XUL 9 may still stall on some web pages though it is not that often and so does XUL 4 and those in between. Roytam1's phoenix-0.5-cl933-tls12 http://o.rths.ml/gpc/files1.rt/Firefox10-new-nss.7z files can be used as replacements along with Mozglue from SeaMonkey10 like discussed earlier but this time all files are used except those that obviously are not used. CommetBird's MozJS can use MSVCR80 too. I upped the StackSize of KernelEx CurrentControlSet/Control/MprServices to 8000 and RP8 to 4000. It turns out in my builds the memory manager likes Shlwapi.dll to have Pncrt. Shlwapi is only one, but Shfolder, not proven, and is used less, also might benefit from Pncrt. Edited March 27, 2020 by Goodmaneuver Recent discovery change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruninho Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 I wish we had a definitive version of KernelEx and a simple rundown of how to run certain browsers there. I tend to spend too much time trying to figure out how to make the things work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) I do not want to rush KernelEx. Mozilla 9 will run with 4.5.120=4.5.2 (final) standard settings. My previous posted settings are recommended for best performance. Win95 setting on CometBird works on one build. The text indices on some places do not allocate the font with Mozilla. This is not a resource problem, I think it is not reading the registry in certain cases like that of Vuze and WinWord97 if Win95/98/ME setting not chosen and Riched20 14.0.7155.5000 is used. The text is not displayed on the "save as" layered tabs much like the browser. JavaScript is used in the OS and for Mozilla's main engine. It is a speedier method of transposing WEB pages. See speed of the Java only built browsers above, they are much slower. Edited February 2, 2020 by Goodmaneuver added WinWord version Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumper Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) There is no version 4.5.120 of KernelEx. Please stop using that number in your posts! The latest versions are 4.5.1 and 4.5.2 (official), and 4.5.2016.x (unofficial). Product version 4.5.2 (final) does contain DLLs with the file version 4.5.12.0. Perhaps this is the cause of your confusion. Unless you need to refer to specific test versions of individual DLLs, please use the correct product version to refer to the standard release as a whole. Edited February 2, 2020 by jumper 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) Yes but if you install it and look under the verification sheet it says 4.5.120. I can not check right now as I am doing a partition resize. MozGlue should use BASE as it shares functions common with other CRT files. If 4.5.12 is acceptable to describe the version then I will adopt this. It is for new users 4.5.2 as a description is confusing as for the reason you have said and Verify.exe. OK 4.5.2 then for all other posts that have been made and I will change my posts if desired. Edited February 2, 2020 by Goodmaneuver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siria Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 jumper said: > There is no version 4.5.120 of KernelEx. Please stop using that number in your posts! > The latest versions are 4.5.1 and 4.5.2 (official), and 4.5.2016.x (unofficial). Goodmaneuver said: > Yes but if you install it and look under the verification sheet it says 4.5.120 KernelEx versioning IS very confusing in itself. Yes the installation package says 4.5.2 but when you open any file properties it does say 4.5.120. And that version 2016 comes in very different subversions, yet all only say "2016" in file properties, doesn't make things easier either. Perhaps it's best to mention BOTH declarations when meaning 4.5.2=4.5.120 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumper Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 > Yes but if you install it and look under the verification sheet it says 4.5.120. There you go again, not specifying the product version! However, what you are seeing is a debug message that reveals a design flaw in the internal version structure. It is a product version structure with only three fields. Release candidate build 12 of v4.5.2 has files awkwardly versioned 4.5.12.0. In Kernelex.dll file version 4.5.12.0, that was crammed into the product structure as 4.5.120 resulting in a value that is unique to product version 4.5.2, but is not a valid product or file version! So again, please use the real product version when referring to KernelEx or any other software package in use. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodmaneuver Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) OK thanks for clearing it up but I admit I did not know from my second post when Schwups replied. I thought 4.5.2 was 4.5.12. I will correct relevant posts. KEX 4.5.1 has the Verification result 4.5.110. Edited February 2, 2020 by Goodmaneuver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumper Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) I think I see the confusion now. While neither of you said it, I think the KernelEx property sheet tab also displays (dimmed) that unique 4.5.120 value (that is neither property nor file version). However, when you look at the KernelEx files themselves: > KernelEx versioning IS very confusing in itself. Not really. The displayed resource version strings are product: 4.5.2, file: 4, 5, 12, 0. Only when using a debugging tool such as Dependency Walker can one see that the binary product and file versions are both 4.5.12.0. Not really a big deal. > but when you open any file properties it does say 4.5.120 By "it" you must mean the KernelEx tab for all PEs, not the Version tab for kex files. This is what took me forever to deduce; please be more specific in the future. > yet all only say "2016" in file properties Again, in the KernelEx tab. This is because of the design flaw that only allows three integer fields. <Edit> Good discussion, everyone :) I think we now have it all sorted out: > I thought 4.5.2 was 4.5.12. Yes: 4.5.2 (product) = 4.5.12 (file) = 4.5.120 (internal/Verify/tab) > KEX 4.5.1 has the Verification result 4.5.110. 4.5.1 (product) = 4.5.?? (file) = 4.5.110 (internal/Verify/tab) The ?? is probably 11, but need to look it up. So 4.5.12 is maybe not "Build 12".... </Edit> Edited February 2, 2020 by jumper Cross-post response Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now