Bootable Win9x cd, Need some help Options

[MindChild]

Hey all,

I have been trying for a while to get a bootable, error free, Windows 98 SE bootable CD for some time now. The best approach I have found was:

http://www.heise.de/ct/english/99/11/206/

This link has been passed around more times than I can count. If anyone else has attempted this, I would appreciate your feedback.

My main issue, is once I actually start my W: from a ramdisk, as opposed to a subst hard drive folder, It appears as though Windows has lost it's ability to work with long file names. As soon as I switch it back to the hard disk, it works fine. I found a few things googling pointing to some people having similar issues, but no explination as to what it was or how to solve it.

I also found that Media Player 9 can't be installed without some manual work. The Roxio CD burning driver botches up the whole thing, causing windows to bluescreen before it is booted. You can disable said driver, but I simply avoid MP9.

[Nuno Brito]

I hopes this site helps you!

[jaclaz]

The topic has already been discussed hmmmth times!

Please do use the search function on the board, the more topics are held together, the easier will be to find relevant info :
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=8607
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=10623
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=12326

As you can see, about once every two thousands posts, there is one asking how to boot Win98 from CD, possibly with the Ct' method.

As said more than once, the Ct' method has some missing (or otherwise hidden or maybe mis-translated from German or however wrong) step(s).

This one works:
http://www.lachiesadicristo.it/w98cd/page1.htm

The Qualystem files are not anymore available.

jaclaz

[MindChild]

jaclaz: Don't be an not-so-very-nice person. I had a very specific issue, which nothing you pasted even touches on. I gave my point of origin so people would know where I am coming from.

I hope your little narcisitic episode made you feel an inch taller.

The topic has already been discussed hmmmth times!

Please do use the search function on the board, the more topics are held together, the easier will be to find relevant info :
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=8607
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=10623
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=12326

As you can see, about once every two thousands posts, there is one asking how to boot Win98 from CD, possibly with the Ct' method.

As said more than once, the Ct' method has some missing (or otherwise hidden or maybe mis-translated from German or however wrong) step(s).

This one works:
http://www.lachiesadicristo.it/w98cd/page1.htm

The Qualystem files are not anymore available.

jaclaz

[jaclaz]

hmm?

Just trying to help, sorry if I touched your sensibility.

If you think you'll get better results by making a new post, disregarding what has been done before, you are perfectly free to do so.

But still, I don't think that calling me an not-so-very-nice person is very polite, nor useful.

However, just wanted to let you know, from my "an inch taller" superior stance, that I have made win 9x CD's ALL PERFECTLY WORKING, in more than 4 different ways, including one derived from the famous Ct' article.

..and now I feel even a couple of inches taller....

Have a nice day.

jaclaz

[dennis123123]

jaclaz: Don't be an not-so-very-nice person. I had a very specific issue, which nothing you pasted even touches on. I gave my point of origin so people would know where I am coming from.

I hope your little narcisitic episode made you feel an inch taller.

HAHAHAA ROFLMAO

Anyway, although that was uncalled for really, I know where you are cominf from with that comment, because I got a similar one in another topic

I have made and successfully implemented win95 boot cds using the c't article. Like you said, I could only get 8 char file names until.......alll you have to do is enable 32bit drive access in device manager. thats it!

I also had to change msdos.sys with the WinBootDRV=W:\ and the other two whatever they are, that you are told to make the change in the registry.

Have fun.

[MindChild]

dennis123123: Thanks man. Much appreciated.

I don't mind some missing steps. I enjoy doing a little work. This one just had me boggled.

HAHAHAA ROFLMAO

Anyway, although that was uncalled for really, I know where you are cominf from with that comment, because I got a similar one in another topic

I have made and successfully implemented win95 boot cds using the c't article. Like you said, I could only get 8 char file names until.......alll you have to do is enable 32bit drive access in device manager. thats it!

I also had to change msdos.sys with the WinBootDRV=W:\ and the other two whatever they are, that you are told to make the change in the registry.

Have fun.

[MindChild]

Ok, with that little hint, it got my brain thinking the way it needed to.

Changing the access mode itself doesn't fix the issue, because it is already set to be 32 bit access. The PROBLEM is, the X drive, created by doing a SUBST, is using compatibility mode, hence the 8.3 filenames.

I remember when Windows 98 first came out, the driver model was changed. Bunches of people had problems because their CDRom drive had no 32-bit drivers, which, just like in this case, screws up windows pretty bad.

So the solution is to find a SUBST replacement, that agrees with Windows 98 32bit driver model insistance.

While I search for solutions, any direction is welcome.

[dog]

Unfortunately, you're unlikely to find anyone here who knows more about 9x CDs than jaclaz

[Nuno Brito]

..what goes around comes around..


This version might be an alternative to native win9x subst..

http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/...iles/dos/subst/

More info about the program here, then again, Jaclaz is really the person who probably knows best how to bypass these issues using only native win9x files..


I think that ReactOS contains a compatible win9x subst tool - might be worth to check

[Daemonforce]

I've seen a similar topic before and I need to ask myself...Is this a project really worth pursuing?

[Nuno Brito]

If people demand this type of problems with such regularity - maybe it's time to properly create some information that can be used as a manual for future generations..

Imagine yourself discussing windows PE in a time when cpu's become nano-sized running at the speed of light..


Maybe it might come up something usefull from this type of things - never waste a resource just because it grows rare or unpopular - I know you're doing some heavy work with windows PE, so you probably know what I'm talking about. You're doing a good work yourself - I'm really hoping to see that documentation you mentioned before..

[jaclaz]

Well, the trick is actually NOT using the SUBST command.

From my "elevated" point of view, , I can see right where it should be, i.e. here:
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=12326
and, to be more exact here:
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=12326&st=99
a link to this page:
http://www.geocities.com/freedatarecovery/
that hints a method using this:
http://www.v72735.f2s.com/LetAssig/index.html

Just for the record, this is NOT meant to help particularly MindChild, only to make clear that, besides his lack of politeness, his statement:

I had a very specific issue, which nothing you pasted even touches on.

is also FALSE.

jaclaz

[MindChild]

jaclaz: Thank you for the help. If what you provided was showing what I was looking for, then I missed it. If this is the case, please accept my appoligy.

My methods are differing from the c t' method, of course, because those aren't perfect. But it gives me direction as to what I need to think about as I go through.

Well, the trick is actually NOT using the SUBST command.

From my "elevated" point of view, , I can see right where it should be, i.e. here:
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=12326
and, to be more exact here:
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=12326&st=99
a link to this page:
http://www.geocities.com/freedatarecovery/
that hints a method using this:
http://www.v72735.f2s.com/LetAssig/index.html

Just for the record, this is NOT meant to help particularly MindChild, only to make clear that, besides his lack of politeness, his statement:

is also FALSE.

jaclaz

[MindChild]

jaclaz: Ok man. I STILL don't get it. I see all of the pointers directing me toward using LETASSIG, but what does this even do for me? In the example on http://www.geocities.com/freedatarecovery/, this person uses a ram drive as the windows system (Not my issue, as I do the same thing), but it appears that they simply alias X: from C: and back again. My goal is, of course, for this to run even if no hard drive is in the machine, let alone windows installed. What am I missing?

Thinking about it, the SUBST is unnecessary (I think), at the point I am at. What is being SUBST to X: will reside on the CDRom, which wont be run in Compatibility mode. So in the meantime, I am going to try this out. The trick is finding something that will work while constructing/debugging this image.

[jaclaz]

Well, maybe I did not fully understand what your problem is,
the idea behind this type of Win9x CD-ROM booting is that you use Letter Assigner to exchange
Letter X: with letter C:
Where BEFORE the exchange
Letter X: is the RAMDRIVE
Letter C: is the CD-ROM (booted from in Hard Disk emulation)
whilst AFTER the exchange
Letter X: is the CD-ROM (i.e. read only)
Letter C: is the RAMDRIVE (i.e. read/write enabled)

So you have the advantages:
1) That your windows runs on C:, which is a read/write enabled volume
2) That you can "develop" the install on a smallish partition of a "normal" hardisk, thus making a normal Win9x install
3) That you do not have to bother about applications that need write access to the system partition, of course such writes/changes are volatile
4) Since only two drives are mapped, C: (RAMDRIVE) and X: (CD-ROM), there is no need for a hard disk present, you can even, once booted, remove the CD-ROM (the disk I mean) and load another one, or even, provided that you have an affordable UPS and you won't need to reboot, (unfortunately an occasion not as rare as with NT based systems) remove the CD-ROM (the drive I mean this time) alltogether.

It is possible to change the above lettering schemes to better suite your "develop" install, of course.

The 8.3 limit of the SUBST command is, as Microsoft usually puts it, a "by design" feature:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/w...k.mspx?mfr=true

Long filenames cannot be used on SUBST drives.

Windows 95 supports SUBST only for backward compatibility with drives created on older systems. Filenames on SUBST drives must comply with the 8.3 filename rule.

Or can you possibly post exactly what you are trying to achieve, which lettering scheme you want/need to use, as

My methods are differing from the c t' method, of course, because those aren't perfect.

without knowing in details which methods you are using makes trying to help a guessing game.

jaclaz

[MindChild]

Thanks jaclaz. I understand how that works now.

The way I was doing this, is to have a ~6MB ram drive, a boot floppy, and the cdrom (this is where it is similar to the c t' article. My method of getting there is much different however). The floppy boots, creates the ramdrive, assigns a letter to the cdrom, copies pertinent system files into the ram drive from the cd, then continue booting.

As you say, my issue was using SUBST to emulate the CDROM drive until I was ready to burn. I was just being boneheaded.

The Hard Drive emulation trick is neat, but compatibility is comprimised, since a lot of BIOS's don't support it properly. Especially of the ERA of Windows 98.

Well, maybe I did not fully understand what your problem is,
the idea behind this type of Win9x CD-ROM booting is that you use Letter Assigner to exchange
Letter X: with letter C:
Where BEFORE the exchange
Letter X: is the RAMDRIVE
Letter C: is the CD-ROM (booted from in Hard Disk emulation)
whilst AFTER the exchange
Letter X: is the CD-ROM (i.e. read only)
Letter C: is the RAMDRIVE (i.e. read/write enabled)

So you have the advantages:
1) That your windows runs on C:, which is a read/write enabled volume
2) That you can "develop" the install on a smallish partition of a "normal" hardisk, thus making a normal Win9x install
3) That you do not have to bother about applications that need write access to the system partition, of course such writes/changes are volatile
4) Since only two drives are mapped, C: (RAMDRIVE) and X: (CD-ROM), there is no need for a hard disk present, you can even, once booted, remove the CD-ROM (the disk I mean) and load another one, or even, provided that you have an affordable UPS and you won't need to reboot, (unfortunately an occasion not as rare as with NT based systems) remove the CD-ROM (the drive I mean this time) alltogether.

It is possible to change the above lettering schemes to better suite your "develop" install, of course.

The 8.3 limit of the SUBST command is, as Microsoft usually puts it, a "by design" feature:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/w...k.mspx?mfr=true
Or can you possibly post exactly what you are trying to achieve, which lettering scheme you want/need to use, as

without knowing in details which methods you are using makes trying to help a guessing game.

jaclaz

[jaclaz]

The Hard Drive emulation trick is neat, but compatibility is comprimised, since a lot of BIOS's don't support it properly. Especially of the ERA of Windows 98.

Yep, but nothing prevents you from using a simple bootdisk image, 1.44 or 2.88 for the initial boot, then copy the files to the RAMDISK from a "normal" CD directory source or from a HARDDISK image, say, through
http://www.geocities.com/jadoxa/shsufdrv/index.html
or some similar proggie, finally do the nifty letter exchange trick, assigning C: to the RAMDRIVE, and continue booting Win9x.

jaclaz

[doveman]

This one works:
http://www.lachiesadicristo.it/w98cd/page1.htm

I've been following this guide and I was doing OK until I got to Step 5 where it says (I don't have COA2):

a. In dos, run regedit /L:system.tat /R:user.dat /E registry.reg

b. Edit registry.reg, replacing “c:\” or d:\ or whever the system was originally installed, with “x:\”

c. Rename system.tat system.bak and user.dat user.bak

d. Run regedit /C registry.reg /L:system.tat /R:user.dat

e. On first run of windows from ramdisk, manually repair all shortcuts

I get an error when I try to do the first step, which makes sense to me because system.tat doesn't exist at this point. This would be a problem at step c as well.

It then goes on to say that COA2 misses a few registry keys that need correcting but the changetox.reg provided still leaves some of these unchanged (and would change them back to C: if COA2 had previously changed them).

I hope I'm not just being dumb but if someone wants to point out that I actually am, then no offence will be taken (as long as they help me!).

[jaclaz]

(I don't have COA2)

Look here:
http://htmole.altervista.org/info/coa2.htm

Never used the "manual" way, but it seems to me like there are some typos
system.tat should really be system.dat

See here for the meaning of the switches:
http://techsupt.winbatch.com/ts/T000001029F18.html

Basically the procedure should:
a) create a .REG (plain text) file from the existing Registry
b) modify paths in the .REG file
c) backup existing Registry
d) re-create a new Registry from the (path-modified) .REG file.

jaclaz