[buyerninety]

In Post#76, Lone Crusader said;
"HOWEVER, ONLY devices installed AFTER updating SYSDM.CPL get
messed up Icons. If the devices were already installed while using the 98SE
version, their Icons remain correct.
But, NOT ALL devices installed after updating SYSDM.CPL get messed
up Icons. Only some."
I wonder if this isn't due to Microsoft in LATER file version changing the
intended 'target icon' to a different icon, while leaving the 'target icon
number(ing)' the same. So say they want to use an updated or different icon,
they do some minor recoding but leave the name 'icon number19' in the
updated file...but now that physical 'icon number 19' is a totally different
icon (fulfilling a different purpose). Makes sense if you figure what older
icons you'd want to get rid of...tape drives going the way of the Dodo, any
tape drive icon would be the first to be replaced with a different icon
(but bearing the same number) as newer functions/hardware types come along.
Only a limited number of (numbered) icons...and if those newer files are used
in the older OS file setup, you might get the type of behaviour Lone
Crusader noted. All conjecture of course, regarding that tape drive icon prob...
...now for something a bit more concrete.
In Post #53, Drugwash said;
"That's not the Tape Device icon. Where on earth did this one come from?
Gosh, weirdness!" ...specifically referring to;
http://www.msfn.org/...attach_id=35483
OK, that weird icon bears a very close resemblance to this (look on right);
http://ptgmedia.pear...nks/03fig16.jpg
A Cardbus (/ PC Card type) icon.
Looking into the NEC uPD720101 controller, from here;
(you're going to have to highlight & paste all this URL)
http://members.drive...1dfc0515ec4[0]=226568&ids[1]=112648&ids[2]=80195&ids[3]=121609&ids[4]=505363&cid=716&model=CardBus+to+USB+2.0+Enhanced+Host+Controller
it appears THAT Controller gets used on e.g. NEC USB2 5-port PCI Card and
also PCI/Cardbus to USB 2.0 adapters. (Called on both a "USB 2.0 Enhanced
Host Controller". The download link also leads to a bit more file info). Pics:
http://webcache.goog...0&gbv=2&ct=clnk
http://webcache.goog...0&gbv=2&ct=clnk
.
So there may have been a wrong driver (/selected?), or the driver may have
something like a wrongly coded device ID, or maybe they simply folded a wrong
icon into the right driver pack... so that weird icon seen may be an unrelated fault.
.
(Ah, and for that help on that abbreviation elsewhere, Lone Crusader,)
gratias tibi ago Sapiens Forensis ... EHGO

This post has been edited by buyerninety: 29 November 2012 - 11:28 AM

[LoneCrusader]

buyerninety, on 29 November 2012 - 10:42 AM, said:

I wonder if this isn't due to Microsoft in LATER file version changing the
intended 'target icon' to a different icon, while leaving the 'target icon
number(ing)' the same. So say they want to use an updated or different icon,
they do some minor recoding but leave the name 'icon number19' in the
updated file...but now that physical 'icon number 19' is a totally different
icon (fulfilling a different purpose). Makes sense if you figure what older
icons you'd want to get rid of...tape drives going the way of the Dodo, any
tape drive icon would be the first to be replaced with a different icon
(but bearing the same number) as newer functions/hardware types come along.
Only a limited number of (numbered) icons...and if those newer files are used
in the older OS file setup, you might get the type of behaviour Lone
Crusader noted. All conjecture of course, regarding that tape drive icon prob...
...
So there may be a wrong driver in there, or the driver may have something
like a wrongly coded device ID, or maybe they simply folded a wrong icon into
the right driver pack... so that weird icon seen may be an unrelated fault.
.
(Ah, and for that help on that abbreviation elsewhere, Lone Crusader,)
gratias tibi ago Sapiens Forensis ... EHGO

Something that was changed about SYSDM.CPL between 98SE and ME has introduced a bug when the file is used with the older 98SE.


The index numbers of all the Icons related to this bug (and their DLL locations) have remained the same in both OS versions.

I believe the use of the Tape Icon is a random effect of the bug; I don't believe the Tape Utility has anything to do with it.

-The bug does not exist under ME, whether the Tape Backup utility is installed or not.
-However, the bug does exist under 98SE, whether the Tape Backup utility is installed or not. (Icon 19 instead)
-I have compared all of the files related to the Tape Utility from both systems. They are identical.

As far as "wrongly coded device ID," it would make sense if it only affected a specific piece or specific type of USB hardware. It also affects Mass Storage Devices which are installed with a generic driver and without specific ID's.


I believe there may be no solution to this issue. I can't see how we're going to fix a bug that we can't pin down, especially since we don't even have a program that can be used to work on .CPL files. Without knowing what was changed, we're playing Russian Roulette trying to hit on the issue.



es grata
EHGO? = Entente Halieutique du Grand Ouest??

[buyerninety]

"So there may have been a wrong driver (/selected?), or the driver may have
something like a wrongly coded device ID, or maybe they simply folded a wrong
icon into the right driver pack... so that weird icon seen may be an unrelated fault."

THAT above para referred only to the weird icon seen for the NEC USB 2.0 Enhanced
Host Controller... but I understand you're asserting that the bug is causing both...
Ahhh, OK both the two examples we've seen so far, acted to give an incorrect icon
for a USB "Host Controller" (example "Intel 82371AB/EB PCI to USB Universal Host
Controller" [a USB 1.1 Controller] and example "NEC USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller",
...mmm HEY, with the NEC Host Controller example, it had an 82371AB/EB sitting right
above it in the Device Manager display, but THAT 82371AB/EB DID show its correct icon!

{...Oh, it was a line of Latin, so I figured you would get it through
googling "EHGO latin"
...Haha, "Et Hoc Genus Omne", (colloquially) ..'and all that sort of thing'.}

This post has been edited by buyerninety: 29 November 2012 - 04:16 PM

[LoneCrusader]

buyerninety, on 29 November 2012 - 03:54 PM, said:

THAT above para referred only to the weird icon seen for the NEC USB 2.0 Enhanced
Host Controller... but I understand you're asserting that the bug is causing both...
Ahhh, OK both the two examples we've seen so far, acted to give an incorrect icon
for a USB "Host Controller" (example "Intel 82371AB/EB PCI to USB Universal Host
Controller" [a USB 1.1 Controller] and example "NEC USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller",
...mmm HEY, with the NEC Host Controller example, it had an 82371AB/EB sitting right
above it in the Device Manager display, but THAT 82371AB/EB DID show its correct icon!

Yes, but the bug also affects USB Mass Storage Devices. I haven't posted a screenshot of this, but I encountered it in one of my tests. It's not just limited to Host Controllers.

buyerninety, on 29 November 2012 - 03:54 PM, said:

{...Oh, it was a line of Latin, so I figured you would get it through
googling "EHGO latin"
...Haha, "Et Hoc Genus Omne", (colloquially) ..'and all that sort of thing'.}

Ah yes, lol, I should have made the Latin connection since the previous text was in Latin.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Is anyone going to try and pursue this or is it a dead issue. I have been looking into it but can't find the bug

[LoneCrusader]

PROBLEMCHYLD, on 16 January 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

Is anyone going to try and pursue this or is it a dead issue. I have been looking into it but can't find the bug

Some "deep" investigation revealed that Microsoft made changes to how USB devices are enumerated at a point between 98SE and ME.

"Files from that period" might possibly be usable, but would be purely experimental, still suffer from the removed CONFIG.SYS content that I mentioned, and would not have any of the fixes applied by later HotFixes.

Personally I've written this off unless someone can figure out what Microsoft changed about the enumeration of USB devices and apply it to the proper 98SE HotFix version.

[LoneCrusader]

I have discovered another POTENTIAL solution to the problem this project was supposed to address. At the moment, it is buggy, requires further testing, and may be impractical to implement as part of a "project."

The purpose of adding the Windows ME SYSDM.CPL was the fact that it will automatically install the drivers for USB & USB Storage devices WITHOUT prompting the user to select a driver.


I have found a way to cause this auto-installation under 98SE, but it suffers from a strange bug.


If the following conditions are met, then 98SE will automatically install the drivers for a USB Flash Drive:

-USBSTOR.INF is placed in WINDOWS\INF
-The SPECIFIC VID&PID of the Flash Drive is listed in USBSTOR.INF


Now, here's the problem.

If a Flash Drive has been installed using this method during a Windows session, then any subsequent attempt to install another Flash Drive that does NOT have its VID&PID specified in the INF (and therefore uses the Generic INF lines) will cause a "You Must Restart" dialog along with a Yellow Exclamation Mark error on the "USB Mass Storage Device" entry in the Device Manager.

Rebooting before attempting to install a "generic" Flash Drive will prevent this bug.



So, theoretically it is possible to achieve the auto-installation without the ME SYSDM.CPL. However, it would require an enormous amount of work creating a comprehensive INF list of VID's & PID's that would need to be continually updated with new Device entries.

This post has been edited by LoneCrusader: 05 March 2013 - 02:53 PM

[TmEE]

I wish I had more time and some extra knowledge on the inner workings of these things.... such stuff should not be easy to hack it, just a compare and skip if the program is written in any sane way (though I kind of doubt it is the case).

[MiKl]

LoneCrusader, on 05 March 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

So, theoretically it is possible to achieve the auto-installation without the ME SYSDM.CPL. However, it would require an enormous amount of work creating a comprehensive INF list of VID's & PID's that would need to be continually updated with new Device entries.

I have something like this working on my systems.
I have a German sysdm.cpl (4.10.2224, 09.12.2000) active. It has the same size as the original so I think it has not been drastically patched/changed.
It's been a while but IIRC the key was using usbstor.sys (4.90.3000.1) not higher (!!) and the 50 KB big usbstor.inf taken from the WUPG98 package.
So far, all USB devices had been installed without any problems - but on the other hand, I have only 10 or so

When I find the time I will test it with the original sysdm.cpl from 1999.

Best, Mikl

[LoneCrusader]

TmEE, on 05 March 2013 - 06:05 PM, said:

I wish I had more time and some extra knowledge on the inner workings of these things.... such stuff should not be easy to hack it, just a compare and skip if the program is written in any sane way (though I kind of doubt it is the case).

Microsoft made changes to the way USB devices are detected and enumerated between Windows 98SE and Windows ME. (Info taken from MS documentation.)

MiKl, on 05 March 2013 - 06:34 PM, said:

I have something like this working on my systems.
I have a German sysdm.cpl (4.10.2224, 09.12.2000) active. It has the same size as the original so I think it has not been drastically patched/changed.
It's been a while but IIRC the key was using usbstor.sys (4.90.3000.1) not higher (!!) and the 50 KB big usbstor.inf taken from the WUPG98 package.
So far, all USB devices had been installed without any problems - but on the other hand, I have only 10 or so

When I find the time I will test it with the original sysdm.cpl from 1999.

Best, Mikl

I just want to be sure we're on the same page here...

The USB devices will install without a "problem" with the 98SE SYSDM.CPL's. The only difference with the ME SYSDM.CPL is that it will automatically install a driver for a USB Storage device, without prompting the user. The 98SE versions will prompt the user to search for and select a driver, even when it has the driver in WINDOWS\INF already. (Unless the device VID&PID is in the INF, as I pointed out.)

Assuming we are on the same page, it should be interesting to check out the USBSTOR.INF from WUPG98.

This post has been edited by LoneCrusader: 05 March 2013 - 10:09 PM

[Drugwash]

Quote

Microsoft made changes to the way USB devices are detected and enumerated between Windows 98SE and Windows ME. (Info taken from MS documentation.)

Could you please point to the source of documentation? I'd like to see if there's something useful in there.

I should probably get my head back to working on that NE editor, since there's none out there to work (correctly and fully) under 9x, at least in my personal experience. But anyway, it won't do anything other than changing the GUI - no actual code editing. So if there's some unwanted changes from 98SE version to ME version, that'd have to fall into much more capable hands.

[MiKl]

LoneCrusader, on 05 March 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

Assuming we are on the same page, it should be interesting to check out the USBSTOR.INF from WUPG98.

O.K. - I have done some testing and it looks like as if the sysdm.cpl I used was indeed based on the ME one modified/patched to look like the 98SE one
So, sorry for the false alarm ...

But while testing I had these two (under slightly different names) active at the same time and I was wondering if this would not be a work-around ??
I will keep this setup for a few days and see if there are any issues.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Good to see there is still interest in this. Its it possible to hex or patched the Win98 version by finding the right offset. General Idea

[LoneCrusader]

@ Drugwash & PROBLEMCHYLD

I have sent you a PM.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

LoneCrusader, on 19 November 2012 - 04:05 PM, said:

I have been unable to find any solution to this issue.

The Icon bug is an obvious cosmetic flaw, and, I noticed that several strings pertaining to CONFIG.SYS that are present in the 98SE SYSDM.CPL have been removed from the ME SYSDM.CPL. It is unknown at this time whether this would cause further problems for users who need special CONFIG.SYS setups or use it to load drivers, but I suspect further problems may lie hidden.

There may be a way to make the 98SE version function in the same manner, but I have not managed to find it. I have tried various changes to the .INF files involved, trying to force an automated install, but nothing has worked.

I'm somewhat lost here What would the CONFIG.SYS have to do with USB? I'm just curious. Are the references needed?

[LoneCrusader]

PROBLEMCHYLD, on 07 March 2013 - 10:23 PM, said:

I'm somewhat lost here What would the CONFIG.SYS have to do with USB? I'm just curious. Are the references needed?

CONFIG.SYS has nothing to do with USB.

The reason I feel the removal of the CONFIG.SYS references may be important is that since Windows ME does not use CONFIG.SYS, using the ME version of SYSDM.CPL may break the use of CONFIG.SYS on 98SE.

This would need to be tested thoroughly.. I don't have any machines that use special CONFIG.SYS entries, but there may be many users who do, especially on older hardware.

[go98]

Somebody mentioned hex-editing sysdm.cpl...it's should be easy with the right tool since a .cpl file is exactly the same structure as a .dll file (which in turn differs just 1 bit from an .exe file)

[LoneCrusader]

go98, on 05 April 2013 - 09:36 AM, said:

it's should be easy

Sure it is, if you know what you need to hex edit in the first place!

[Drugwash]

Hex-editing is easy anyway, but here we have a little more than that, namely adding/removing/modifying resources, such as controls in dialogs, strings and even icons, bitmaps and other, for those wanting a modern look. None of the existing tools I know does the perfect job - not even M$'s Visual Studio 6. So we need a new, specially designed tool. I started to build one, but left it aside, as I got sidetracked by other issues - who knows when (or even if) I manage to pull through.

If anybody knows of such existing tool that can specifically work with 16-bit .cpl files and is Win9x compatible, other than the ones already mentioned throughout this topic, please speak (or send PM).

[go98]

LoneCrusader, on 05 April 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

go98, on 05 April 2013 - 09:36 AM, said:

it's should be easy

Sure it is, if you know what you need to hex edit in the first place!

Haha, hex-editing is even trivial. I read some hesitation here because it's a .cpl file. Somebody said it could be renamed to .dll, which is the correct way to do (identical structure). Then you can work with it with your tool of choice.