IPB

Google Frontpage Forums Unattended CD/DVD Guide
 Forum Rules Unattended CD/DVD Guide Homepage · MSFN Forum Rules
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Increase Hardware Compatibility for Windows XP WIM, Mup.sys
meofcourse
post May 29 2008, 09:06 AM
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 6-June 06
Member No.: 98174
Country Flag


Hi I have been testing the Windows Deployment Services that ships with Windows Server 2008 and have successfully create both Uni and Multi processor WIM images for Windows XP. However the issue I am having is when I build the image on a system with a Asus P5P800-VM and deploy it on to a Asus P4SP-MX (or vice versa) the imaging goes fine, but on the first boot I receive a mup.sys error and the tower continually reboots. Since it is a mup.sys error, I suspect it is a driver issue as deploying the image onto the same motherboard model it was created on works well. So the question becomes how do I increase the hardware compatibility for each Windows XP image I create? I would like to avoid making multiple images (this was one of the selling points of WDS as far as I can recall)

Thanks in advance for you help thumbup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jazkal
post May 29 2008, 09:56 AM
Post #2


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 532
Joined: 16-January 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 12605
Country Flag


Your WinXp images don't need to be uni and multi, you can have one that will work on both.

The WinXP image limitation is based on the HAL, and there is no easy way around it.

The benefits of only having a single image isn't a function of WDS, it is a 'feature' of Vista\Win2k8.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bj-kaiser
post May 29 2008, 10:00 AM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 5-December 06
Member No.: 117675
OS: none
Country Flag


QUOTE (Jazkal @ May 29 2008, 05:56 PM) *
Your WinXp images don't need to be uni and multi, you can have one that will work on both.

The WinXP image limitation is based on the HAL, and there is no easy way around it.

The benefits of only having a single image isn't a function of WDS, it is a 'feature' of Vista\Win2k8.

I concur, there are easy ways around the HAL limitation. They are just not supported by MS. whistling.gif
In the end unpacking and renaming the right files actually works like a charm for me.(well, I dont have so much systems to test that on, I have like a hand full of different hardware types at work, ranging from ACPI-PIC to ACPI-APIC MP)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
meofcourse
post May 29 2008, 01:51 PM
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 6-June 06
Member No.: 98174
Country Flag


QUOTE (Jazkal @ May 29 2008, 09:56 AM) *
Your WinXp images don't need to be uni and multi, you can have one that will work on both.

I suppose that could be possible. I have tried a multi image onto a uni box, but not a uni image on a multibox. I will give it a try.

QUOTE (Jazkal @ May 29 2008, 09:56 AM) *
The WinXP image limitation is based on the HAL, and there is no easy way around it.

Thats to bad.


QUOTE (Jazkal @ May 29 2008, 09:56 AM) *
The benefits of only having a single image isn't a function of WDS, it is a 'feature' of Vista\Win2k8.

Thanks for the clarification.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
meofcourse
post May 29 2008, 02:09 PM
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 6-June 06
Member No.: 98174
Country Flag


QUOTE (bj-kaiser @ May 29 2008, 10:00 AM) *
QUOTE (Jazkal @ May 29 2008, 05:56 PM) *
Your WinXp images don't need to be uni and multi, you can have one that will work on both.

The WinXP image limitation is based on the HAL, and there is no easy way around it.

The benefits of only having a single image isn't a function of WDS, it is a 'feature' of Vista\Win2k8.

I concur, there are easy ways around the HAL limitation. They are just not supported by MS. whistling.gif
In the end unpacking and renaming the right files actually works like a charm for me.(well, I dont have so much systems to test that on, I have like a hand full of different hardware types at work, ranging from ACPI-PIC to ACPI-APIC MP)


So what are these unsupported easy ways around the HAL limitations?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jazkal
post May 29 2008, 02:37 PM
Post #6


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 532
Joined: 16-January 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 12605
Country Flag


QUOTE (meofcourse @ May 29 2008, 02:51 PM) *
QUOTE (Jazkal @ May 29 2008, 09:56 AM) *
Your WinXp images don't need to be uni and multi, you can have one that will work on both.

I suppose that could be possible. I have tried a multi image onto a uni box, but not a uni image on a multibox. I will give it a try.

You create your image on a multi, and in your sysprep.inf file, there are settings that allow sysprep to switch between uni and multi as long as the box is the same HAL.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bj-kaiser
post May 29 2008, 11:32 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 5-December 06
Member No.: 117675
OS: none
Country Flag


QUOTE (meofcourse @ May 29 2008, 10:09 PM) *
QUOTE (bj-kaiser @ May 29 2008, 10:00 AM) *
QUOTE (Jazkal @ May 29 2008, 05:56 PM) *
Your WinXp images don't need to be uni and multi, you can have one that will work on both.

The WinXP image limitation is based on the HAL, and there is no easy way around it.

The benefits of only having a single image isn't a function of WDS, it is a 'feature' of Vista\Win2k8.

I concur, there are easy ways around the HAL limitation. They are just not supported by MS. whistling.gif
In the end unpacking and renaming the right files actually works like a charm for me.(well, I dont have so much systems to test that on, I have like a hand full of different hardware types at work, ranging from ACPI-PIC to ACPI-APIC MP)


So what are these unsupported easy ways around the HAL limitations?

The unsupported way is to replace the HAL depending files with copies for the right HAL, youll find those files inside driver.cab or SPX.cab.
my take on that one: http://code.google.com/p/unixp/source/brow...unk/lib/hal.au3

and since I know that's hardly comprehensibel (even if you know AutoIt, I know my coding "style"), here the simpler version with comments:
left filename is source (driver.cab or SPX.cab), right filename is the target filename in SYSTEM32.
CODE
HAL "ACPIPIC_UP"
halacpi.dll -> hal.dll
ntkrnlpa.exe
ntoskrnl.exe

HAL "ACPIAPIC_UP"
halaacpi.dll -> hal.dll
ntkrnlpa.exe
ntoskrnl.exe

HAL "ACPIAPIC_MP"
halmacpi.dll -> hal.dll
ntkrpamp.exe -> ntkrnlpa.exe
ntkrnlmp.exe -> ntoskrnl.exe


If you need to support other HALs, just have a look at %WINDIR%\Inf\Hal.inf.

some helpful links:
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=19397
http://www.myitforum.com/articles/15/view.asp?id=8997

This post has been edited by bj-kaiser: May 29 2008, 11:32 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mats
post May 30 2008, 07:28 AM
Post #8


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 189
Joined: 10-May 05
Member No.: 55408
Country Flag


I prefer to let sysprep do the switch by setting updatehal or updateuphal values depeninding on wether it's a multi or singleprocessorbox.
If you are using MDT or SCCM this can be integrated into the task sequence rather easy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheReasonIFail
post Jun 5 2008, 06:52 AM
Post #9


Junior
*

Group: Members
Posts: 93
Joined: 8-April 07
From: Berwyn, Illinois
Member No.: 134809
OS: XP Pro x86
Country Flag


I use the script from the second link supplied by bj-kaiser.

That's allowed me to use one WIM image on every machine I've encountered yet. I've used the same image on the several different types of machine models and the only problem I've had was when using the image on the AMD platform, but that's easily resolved by disabling a service or two and you're good to go!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bj-kaiser
post Jun 5 2008, 09:28 AM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 5-December 06
Member No.: 117675
OS: none
Country Flag


QUOTE (TheReasonIFail @ Jun 5 2008, 02:52 PM) *
I use the script from the second link supplied by bj-kaiser.

That's allowed me to use one WIM image on every machine I've encountered yet. I've used the same image on the several different types of machine models and the only problem I've had was when using the image on the AMD platform, but that's easily resolved by disabling a service or two and you're good to go!

That'd be the one that gave HP the blame whistling.gif
intelppm. I had that problem too. and I had my own ideas about it, after I finally found out what was the reason for the reboots.

my take on that one:
http://code.google.com/p/unixp/source/brow.../workaround.au3
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
meofcourse
post Jun 11 2008, 10:28 AM
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 6-June 06
Member No.: 98174
Country Flag


Thanks guys,

I ran out of time to try these, but I will in the future thumbup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
secotton
post Jun 19 2008, 07:00 PM
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 29-November 03
Member No.: 10166



I've decided to change the HAL type once in the OS using a VBScript. It's not quite as nice, but it works for me very well. It changes the HAL by modifying the boot.ini to include /kernel=ntkrnlmp.exe /hal=halmacpi.dll.

Basically, it gets the processor name, and compares it against a list of processors that I put in at the top of the VBScript in an array. I only really enable the MP HAL if the computer is a dual core computer, otherwise, ACPI works for pretty much everything else just fine. I've done some speed tests, and haven't found any issue in running with the ACPI HAL versus the ACPI Uni HAL.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bj-kaiser
post Jun 20 2008, 10:01 AM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 5-December 06
Member No.: 117675
OS: none
Country Flag


didnt know Windows XP had boot options for that.

well, should have searched the knowledge base, I guess.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms791480.aspx
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MadMonkeyBoy
post Jun 20 2008, 10:20 AM
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 7-October 07
Member No.: 157456
OS: Vista Business x86
Country Flag


One thing I have found is that the image creation is better done on an AMD platform. This uses the processr.sys CPU driver, which is compatible with all CPUs, whereas an Intel CPU defaults to intelppm.sys - I believe this is the one that gave HP the headache. Plug 'n' pray will install the Intel driver on first boot anyway. Or on an AMD system, you can add amdk8.sys to the image.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Google Frontpage Forums Unattended CD/DVD Guide

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th November 2008 - 12:22 PM
All trademarks mentioned on this page are the property of their respective owners
MSFN is not affiliated with Microsoft
Copyright © 2001-2008 msfn.org
Privacy Policy