Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account


Photo

Letter Assignment when dual booting win98 & XP

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#51
LoneCrusader

LoneCrusader

    Resistere pro causa resistentiam.

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 811 posts
  • Joined 11-May 09
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

I guess you are missing the point I was trying to make. :unsure:

Hiding a partition by means of changing it's partition ID in the MBR (or EPBR's) is ONLY a convention to prevent "good behaving" apps and OS's to access that partition.

As long as the partition data is there, a program under ANY OS may be able to read that info and consequently "operate" on the hidden partition.

In other words a hidden partition is only hidden to you and to the running OS and to programs that respect this "convention".

I showed you an example for NT, but you can do EXACTLY the same under DOS/9x or Linux or whatever, in other words, if the data is there, it can be read (and used for whatever good or malicious scope):ph34r:.

If you want to make a partition really "hidden" you need to remove the data identifying it, not simply changing it's ID.

Think of it about the difference between having a reserved document in plain view on your desktop with a nice yellow post-it on it "Please don't read or take this" vs. keeping it in your safebox. ;)

jaclaz

Hmmm.. :huh:
Interesting. I had been under the impression that such a program would depend on the OS for access to a partition, and that partition would have to be "recognized" by the OS for this to occur. (i.e. NT and Linux systems see all partitions whether they are assigned a letter/mounted or not)

Definitely something to think about. Thanks again. :thumbup


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#52
mntview64

mntview64

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 14-March 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Speaking of Anti-Viruses, I am using the old Norton 2000 anti-virus program on my win98. On my other computer that has XP, I am using AVG-9. When I install XP on my main computer with win98, to duel boot, I want to use AVG-9 or the latest version. I know AVG-9 won't install on win98, but will it still give virus protection for win98 OS? Do I uninstall my old Nortons from win98?

#53
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,417 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Do I uninstall my old Nortons from win98?


In my personal opinion you should UNinstall ALL Norton Antivirus versions, old and new, from ANY system around.

There are a few thread about software that still work on 98, here:
http://www.msfn.org/...howtopic=105936
http://www.msfn.org/...c=105936&st=390
http://www.msfn.org/...howtopic=137928
there may be others.

jaclaz

#54
Multibooter

Multibooter

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Joined 21-March 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

XP ...I would never dream of using it on the internet. When the day comes that my 98SE cannot take me wherever I want to go online, I will use Linux. :yes:

This is exactly my view too. On rare exceptions I do use the internet under WinXP, like for downloading with eMule a file >4GB.

My young son, however, only wants to use WinXP :w00t:
he needs wireless access to the shared printer on the home network, so the home network is mixed Win98/WinXP :w00t: ,
he wants to access the Internet with his Nintendo DS, which works only with WEP :w00t: , so I am not using WPA.
he needs to connect his Asus school-netbook to the home network, so the network has to be set for file sharing :w00t:
his Asus netbook has locked up with virus infections already twice :w00t:
his friends come over and hook up their infected notebooks to the router :w00t:
Life consists of compromises, it's hard to avoid WinXP and other risks in life.

As long as the partition data is there, a program under ANY OS may be able to read that info and consequently "operate" on the hidden partition.

I am quite sure that eventually malware which infects hidden partitions will become common, given the increased use of hidden partitions. Does such malware exist already?

#55
Multibooter

Multibooter

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Joined 21-March 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

In my personal opinion you should UNinstall ALL Norton Antivirus versions, old and new, from ANY system around.

Definitely, nothing is gained by keeping Norton Antivirus. But Symantec stuff in general is hard to get rid of, the uninstall usually leaves a lot of trash.

Make sure to uninstall Norton Antivirus before installing another anti-virus package, having 2 different anti-virus programs on the system is asking for trouble.

#56
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
Sorry for the delayed reply ... time is lacking.

Anyway, if you assigned the unused 105G as a primary
NTFS partition, this would be the end result (assuming
as I stated, that NT* follows the same enumeration
rules as MS-DOS) :

Drive 0 (250G) =

C: Primary/Active FAT32 35G (Both O/S)
D-F: Extended/Logical FAT32 33, 30, 30G (Both O/S)
K: Primary NTFS 105G (Normally, NT* only)

Drive 1 (40G) =

G-J: Extended/Logical FAT32 10, 10, 9, 9G (Both O/S)

You will notice how the K: partition is enumerated last,
so that even for O/S (that is, MS-DOS and W98) that can't
see this partition (being NTFS), all other partitions get
assigned the same drive letter. Beware that F: is partly
beyond the 128/137G limit for LBA32, so you need to ensure
LBA48 solutions are in place lest you corrupt C: due to
LBA wrap-around! Same applies for K: which is entirely
above this limit.

Now, as for the W9* IO.SYS patch, this is for a separate
problem. If you have a mixture of CHS and LBA partitions,
MS-DOS 7.XX (W9X) and 8.00 (WME) will sometimes use CHS
addressing for partitions beyond 7.8G, which must use LBA
addressing, since otherwise CHS wrap-around will occur. In
your case, all partitions will have been LBA types, which
should mean you are safe from this bug. However, if you
were to choose slightly smaller partitions on your second
hard drive, you might still be vulnerable to this bug.

As for the various service packs and updates from MGDx and
other sites, beware some of these will restore the standard
(ie. buggy) version of 'IO.SYS', so (if you had a mix of
CHS and LBA partitions types) you would need to restore the
patched version PRIOR to rebooting.

Joe.



I have 2 hard drives in my computer and 2 DVD's. Both hard drives are EIDE/PATA. Right now I am running win98se and I want to install XP pro sp3 so it will dual boot both OS. Drive 0 is 250gb and Drive 1 is 40gb. Drive 0 has 5 partition volumes. C drive is primary/active with win98se installed on it. My other volumes have other programs installed into them except G drive, which I left empty. All volumes are FAT32 on both hard drives. So I have:
(Drive 0) ---------------------------------------------- (Drive 1) is extended partition with 4 volumes.
C:\ primary/Active win98se 35gb ------------- H:\ programs installed 10gb
D:\ programs installed 33gb -------------------- I:\ programs installed 10gb
E:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- J:\ programs installed 9gb
F:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- K:\ programs installed 9gb
G:\ empty 105gb


The order in which MS-DOS (*) enumerates partitions is :

a) First primary partition of each drive, in turn
B) All extended partitions of each drive, in turn
c) All remaining primary partitions of each drive, in turn

Drives that are not recognized are not enumerated.

* At least as far back as version 7.0, perhaps even 6.22
(earlier than that, only one primary partition was supported).

Assuming NT uses the same rules, what you should do is make
that 105G partition a primary partition. Then it will get
enumerated last for NT, & ignored for DOS/W9X. So all other
partition drive letters will match between the two O/S.

BTW, if you get phantom drive enumeration or other LBA problems
in W9X, you might want to try my revised patch for V7.10 'IO.SYS'
(based on original patch by Steven Saunderson), available at :
http://jds.com-t.com/general.html

Joe.


Thank you JDS (Joe) This sounds interesting to me, but am still a little confused here. If I make my G volume into a primary partition, then install NTFS on it, win98 won't see it, so then win98 will change the drive letters on my second hard drive, because there won't be a G volume on my first hard drive. Then what happens when I boot into XP, where it can see all volumes, to the letter assignment? Do you know if XP has to be installed on a primary partition? I have read XP will run from a logical drive as long as it can install it's drivers in the first primary partition of the hard drive.
Another question, what is this V7.10 - IO.sys patch for? I downloaded all the win98 updates from MDGx web site and installed them in order to get my 250gb hard drive to run win98se, and so far everything is working great.



#57
mntview64

mntview64

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 14-March 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Sorry for the delayed reply ... time is lacking.

Anyway, if you assigned the unused 105G as a primary
NTFS partition, this would be the end result (assuming
as I stated, that NT* follows the same enumeration
rules as MS-DOS) :

Drive 0 (250G) =

C: Primary/Active FAT32 35G (Both O/S)
D-F: Extended/Logical FAT32 33, 30, 30G (Both O/S)
K: Primary NTFS 105G (Normally, NT* only)

Drive 1 (40G) =

G-J: Extended/Logical FAT32 10, 10, 9, 9G (Both O/S)

You will notice how the K: partition is enumerated last,
so that even for O/S (that is, MS-DOS and W98) that can't
see this partition (being NTFS), all other partitions get
assigned the same drive letter. Beware that F: is partly
beyond the 128/137G limit for LBA32, so you need to ensure
LBA48 solutions are in place lest you corrupt C: due to
LBA wrap-around! Same applies for K: which is entirely
above this limit.

Now, as for the W9* IO.SYS patch, this is for a separate
problem. If you have a mixture of CHS and LBA partitions,
MS-DOS 7.XX (W9X) and 8.00 (WME) will sometimes use CHS
addressing for partitions beyond 7.8G, which must use LBA
addressing, since otherwise CHS wrap-around will occur. In
your case, all partitions will have been LBA types, which
should mean you are safe from this bug. However, if you
were to choose slightly smaller partitions on your second
hard drive, you might still be vulnerable to this bug.

As for the various service packs and updates from MGDx and
other sites, beware some of these will restore the standard
(ie. buggy) version of 'IO.SYS', so (if you had a mix of
CHS and LBA partitions types) you would need to restore the
patched version PRIOR to rebooting.

Joe.




I have 2 hard drives in my computer and 2 DVD's. Both hard drives are EIDE/PATA. Right now I am running win98se and I want to install XP pro sp3 so it will dual boot both OS. Drive 0 is 250gb and Drive 1 is 40gb. Drive 0 has 5 partition volumes. C drive is primary/active with win98se installed on it. My other volumes have other programs installed into them except G drive, which I left empty. All volumes are FAT32 on both hard drives. So I have:
(Drive 0) ---------------------------------------------- (Drive 1) is extended partition with 4 volumes.
C:\ primary/Active win98se 35gb ------------- H:\ programs installed 10gb
D:\ programs installed 33gb -------------------- I:\ programs installed 10gb
E:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- J:\ programs installed 9gb
F:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- K:\ programs installed 9gb
G:\ empty 105gb


The order in which MS-DOS (*) enumerates partitions is :

a) First primary partition of each drive, in turn
B) All extended partitions of each drive, in turn
c) All remaining primary partitions of each drive, in turn

Drives that are not recognized are not enumerated.

* At least as far back as version 7.0, perhaps even 6.22
(earlier than that, only one primary partition was supported).

Assuming NT uses the same rules, what you should do is make
that 105G partition a primary partition. Then it will get
enumerated last for NT, & ignored for DOS/W9X. So all other
partition drive letters will match between the two O/S.

BTW, if you get phantom drive enumeration or other LBA problems
in W9X, you might want to try my revised patch for V7.10 'IO.SYS'
(based on original patch by Steven Saunderson), available at :
http://jds.com-t.com/general.html

Joe.


Thank you JDS (Joe) This sounds interesting to me, but am still a little confused here. If I make my G volume into a primary partition, then install NTFS on it, win98 won't see it, so then win98 will change the drive letters on my second hard drive, because there won't be a G volume on my first hard drive. Then what happens when I boot into XP, where it can see all volumes, to the letter assignment? Do you know if XP has to be installed on a primary partition? I have read XP will run from a logical drive as long as it can install it's drivers in the first primary partition of the hard drive.
Another question, what is this V7.10 - IO.sys patch for? I downloaded all the win98 updates from MDGx web site and installed them in order to get my 250gb hard drive to run win98se, and so far everything is working great.

This confused me even more. I believe what you said eariler made more sense to me, when you said to repartition my empty G drive into 2 partitions, so hard drive 0 will keep the drive letter G in place and it won't change drive 1 letter asignment. After doing this partition change on drive 0 it would make it C - D - E- F - G - H. and drive 1 would be I - J - k - L. Then install XP and NTFS onto G drive, which would hide it from w98 on Drive 0 making w98 just see it as C-D-E-F-G and in turn change drive 1 drive back to H - I - J - K. I don't understand why making the NTFS partition a primary partition matters, or am I missing something here.

#58
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag


Sorry for the delayed reply ... time is lacking.

Anyway, if you assigned the unused 105G as a primary
NTFS partition, this would be the end result (assuming
as I stated, that NT* follows the same enumeration
rules as MS-DOS) :

Drive 0 (250G) =

C: Primary/Active FAT32 35G (Both O/S)
D-F: Extended/Logical FAT32 33, 30, 30G (Both O/S)
K: Primary NTFS 105G (Normally, NT* only)

Drive 1 (40G) =

G-J: Extended/Logical FAT32 10, 10, 9, 9G (Both O/S)

You will notice how the K: partition is enumerated last,
so that even for O/S (that is, MS-DOS and W98) that can't
see this partition (being NTFS), all other partitions get
assigned the same drive letter. Beware that F: is partly
beyond the 128/137G limit for LBA32, so you need to ensure
LBA48 solutions are in place lest you corrupt C: due to
LBA wrap-around! Same applies for K: which is entirely
above this limit.

Now, as for the W9* IO.SYS patch, this is for a separate
problem. If you have a mixture of CHS and LBA partitions,
MS-DOS 7.XX (W9X) and 8.00 (WME) will sometimes use CHS
addressing for partitions beyond 7.8G, which must use LBA
addressing, since otherwise CHS wrap-around will occur. In
your case, all partitions will have been LBA types, which
should mean you are safe from this bug. However, if you
were to choose slightly smaller partitions on your second
hard drive, you might still be vulnerable to this bug.

As for the various service packs and updates from MGDx and
other sites, beware some of these will restore the standard
(ie. buggy) version of 'IO.SYS', so (if you had a mix of
CHS and LBA partitions types) you would need to restore the
patched version PRIOR to rebooting.

Joe.




I have 2 hard drives in my computer and 2 DVD's. Both hard drives are EIDE/PATA. Right now I am running win98se and I want to install XP pro sp3 so it will dual boot both OS. Drive 0 is 250gb and Drive 1 is 40gb. Drive 0 has 5 partition volumes. C drive is primary/active with win98se installed on it. My other volumes have other programs installed into them except G drive, which I left empty. All volumes are FAT32 on both hard drives. So I have:
(Drive 0) ---------------------------------------------- (Drive 1) is extended partition with 4 volumes.
C:\ primary/Active win98se 35gb ------------- H:\ programs installed 10gb
D:\ programs installed 33gb -------------------- I:\ programs installed 10gb
E:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- J:\ programs installed 9gb
F:\ programs installed 30gb -------------------- K:\ programs installed 9gb
G:\ empty 105gb


The order in which MS-DOS (*) enumerates partitions is :

a) First primary partition of each drive, in turn
B) All extended partitions of each drive, in turn
c) All remaining primary partitions of each drive, in turn

Drives that are not recognized are not enumerated.

* At least as far back as version 7.0, perhaps even 6.22
(earlier than that, only one primary partition was supported).

Assuming NT uses the same rules, what you should do is make
that 105G partition a primary partition. Then it will get
enumerated last for NT, & ignored for DOS/W9X. So all other
partition drive letters will match between the two O/S.

BTW, if you get phantom drive enumeration or other LBA problems
in W9X, you might want to try my revised patch for V7.10 'IO.SYS'
(based on original patch by Steven Saunderson), available at :
http://jds.com-t.com/general.html

Joe.


Thank you JDS (Joe) This sounds interesting to me, but am still a little confused here. If I make my G volume into a primary partition, then install NTFS on it, win98 won't see it, so then win98 will change the drive letters on my second hard drive, because there won't be a G volume on my first hard drive. Then what happens when I boot into XP, where it can see all volumes, to the letter assignment? Do you know if XP has to be installed on a primary partition? I have read XP will run from a logical drive as long as it can install it's drivers in the first primary partition of the hard drive.
Another question, what is this V7.10 - IO.sys patch for? I downloaded all the win98 updates from MDGx web site and installed them in order to get my 250gb hard drive to run win98se, and so far everything is working great.

This confused me even more. I believe what you said eariler made more sense to me, when you said to repartition my empty G drive into 2 partitions, so hard drive 0 will keep the drive letter G in place and it won't change drive 1 letter asignment. After doing this partition change on drive 0 it would make it C - D - E- F - G - H. and drive 1 would be I - J - k - L. Then install XP and NTFS onto G drive, which would hide it from w98 on Drive 0 making w98 just see it as C-D-E-F-G and in turn change drive 1 drive back to H - I - J - K. I don't understand why making the NTFS partition a primary partition matters, or am I missing something here.


Sorry again for the delay and sorry too for causing any confusion.

To be honest, your reply here confuses me. Did I ever mention splitting your empty "G" drive into two partitions?

Anyway, I think your confusion might stem from an assumption you may have, that physical drives are enumerated in turn (in sequence). That is not the case. The second thing you need to realize, is that for all the drive letters to match up, all partitions common (visible) to both O/S must be enumerated first, the remainder (eg. your proposed 105G NTFS partition) must be enumerated last.

So the idea is to arrange the partitions in such a way that, following the enumeration rules that I outlined in my first reply, the above enumeration sequence is achieved. For that, you would need to make the proposed 105G NTFS partition as primary, such that it is the SECOND primary partition on physical drive 0.

I hope that explains things well enough. Just slowly go through those enumeration rules and you should end up with the logical drive letter assignments I've outlined. The caveat is that I've assumed the NT* family follows the same rules as the DOS/9* family (someone let me/us know if that's not the case, since I don't have an NT* machine to experiment on).

BTW, in answer to your question on 'IO.SYS', I forgot to mention again the other/lesser bug, whereby phantom drive letters can appear in Windows (not a serious safety issue provided you don't write to those phantom drive letters). I don't remember the exact conditions under which this bug manifests, so I'm not sure if you will encounter it. However, it is also addressed in the patch available on my "general.html" web page.

Joe.

#59
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,871 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

BTW, if you get phantom drive enumeration or other LBA problems
in W9X, you might want to try my revised patch for V7.10 'IO.SYS'
(based on original patch by Steven Saunderson), available at :
http://jds.com-t.com/general.html


@jds: You say in your read.me:

However, one of Steven's changes were causing me other LBA problems, and since I didn't agree with it, I reversed it.

I've determined that the change you reverted is (quoting Steven Saunderson's original w98bug.txt):

* Offset 2072 was 04 now 00 (erroneous set of LBA flag for next par[tition]).

Would you please elaborate on what problems did that particular change have, and why do you consider it a misfix?

#60
mntview64

mntview64

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 14-March 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Thank you all for your help and information. This is what I ended up doing. I purchased a new 250gb PATA hard drive. Then I repartationed the G: volume on drive 0 into 5 partations, making drive(0) C-D-E-F-G-H-I-J-K and my drive (1) L-M-N-O. Then I used xcopy32 to copy from drive(1)L to H, M to I, N to J, and O to K on drive(0). I then removed my old 40gb drive(1) and installed the new 250gb hard drive. I used my XP-cd to partation the new hard drive into 2 partations, the first partation as primary and one logical drive, which made them D: and M: using the NTFS file system. Then installed XP into the D volume on drive(1). Now when I boot into win98 the drive letters are C-D-E-F-G-H-I-J-K on drive(0)just the way it was with 2 hard drives. Win98 doesn't see drive(1). When I boot into XP the drive letters are C-win98 D-XP-ntfs E-F-G-H-I-J-K-L all FAT32 and M-ntfs. I just renamed the volume label names in XP to show what volume it is in win98. Like C is win98 D is XP,E is 98-D, F is 98-E, G is 98-F, and so on. So far everything is working fine.

#61
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,871 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Now you can go even further, and use the Win XP Disk Management to reassign the letters of all partitions, except the boot one, for them to take the same letters as you have in Win 98. Go to Control Panel -> Admnistrative Tools -> Computer Management -> Disk Management, then right-click over each partition and use Change Drive Letter and Paths... It may be necessary to assign a temporary letter, say, Z to a partition, in order to liberate the letter it's already using, so that you then, after rebooting, can assign it to another partition. Repeat until you've reassigned all letters to your satisfaction and then change the letter of partiton Z to it's intended final letter. It takes some time to perform all the changes, but the result is very rewarding.

#62
mntview64

mntview64

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 14-March 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Well I guess I spoke to soon. Installing went well and I can duel boot now and my drive letters are fine in win98. But I do have a big problem NOW! I purchased Windows XP Pro w/SP3 from a seller on ebay. After the windows activation, it pops up, this is not a genuine copy, this could be pirvate software. So it looks like I wasted the $70 I paid for this CD. I tried contacting the seller with no response, and now my 45 days to file a complaint with ebay and paypal is to late. I have read about using cracks to get it to activate, but I don't feel safe doing this. I would rather have a genuine copy, so I know all the updates and downloads will work.

My question is, when I uninstall this pirvate software, what happens to the duel booting setup. I guess I will have to reformat the partition I installed the pirate OS to, in order to remove it. I believe though, it will leave all the duel-boot files on my C: root. Should I remove those file also? Or when I get a legal copy of XP, and install it, will it just rewrite those files? If I don't remove those files, will I still be able to boot into Win98?

#63
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined 14-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
???
FWIW, you may be able to contact MS and get a replacement (with legit key) by reporting the "fake" one. However, you will probably have to pay "something" for the replacement. Also, check the CD and the MS "how to tell" page (holograms and all). Was it in an unopened package (also, check the CoA against MS "how-to-tell")?

Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image


#64
mntview64

mntview64

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 14-March 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

???
FWIW, you may be able to contact MS and get a replacement (with legit key) by reporting the "fake" one. However, you will probably have to pay "something" for the replacement. Also, check the CD and the MS "how to tell" page (holograms and all). Was it in an unopened package (also, check the CoA against MS "how-to-tell")?


I checked the update link that said to make this copy legal (geniune) from Microsoft, and the kit to make it legal, costs $149.00. Which they said I have to fill out the pirate software form and send the CD to them, but they would make my copy legal and send me a new CD.

This was in a sealed package, but wasn't in a box. This was suppose to be an OEM copy, and had the COA and OEM sticker on the book. The CD had the hologram on it. After I got the pirate warning, I checked the hologram closer and I could see that it was a sticker placed on the CD. Then I checked the Setupp.ini file on the CD, and it had the PID=76487 270 number in the file. If I am not wrong, this is the Corp. version (270) when it should have said OEM instead of the 270. So I have been check the internet stores to see if anyone had a close-out sale for Win XP Pro. that cost less than the $149.00 Micorsoft wants to charge.

#65
jds

jds

    -DOS+

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined 03-June 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag


BTW, if you get phantom drive enumeration or other LBA problems
in W9X, you might want to try my revised patch for V7.10 'IO.SYS'
(based on original patch by Steven Saunderson), available at :
http://jds.com-t.com/general.html


@jds: You say in your read.me:

However, one of Steven's changes were causing me other LBA problems, and since I didn't agree with it, I reversed it.

I've determined that the change you reverted is (quoting Steven Saunderson's original w98bug.txt):

* Offset 2072 was 04 now 00 (erroneous set of LBA flag for next par[tition]).

Would you please elaborate on what problems did that particular change have, and why do you consider it a misfix?


Sorry again for the delayed reply.

Anyway, the misfix is as follows ... When an LBA extended partition is defined, all logical partitions within in should/must use LBA addressing, even if they're not explicitly defined as LBA types. With the above-mentioned change, IO.SYS will look only at the type ID of the logical partition itself, ignoring the type ID (and hence addressing mode) of the extended partition that contains it. If the logical partition in question is not wholely within the 7.8G CHS limit, disaster (due to wrap-around)!

Joe.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



How to remove advertisement from MSFN