[Alanoll]

WinPE works more like a starting setup from within windows type mode. This unfortunately means x64 won't work as setup MUST be started from boot.

[Siginet]

Hmmm... I hope we find a solution to this. It would be great to be able to multiboot Win64 on my disks.

I will do some digging myself as well.

Thanks to everyone involved!

[Jazkal]

noisehole, on Jul 14 2005, 06:34 PM, said:

Quote

The installation process for x64 Edition operating systems does not support MS-DOS based mechanisms. For example, you cannot install Windows XP Professional x64 Edition from a command prompt.

which means pe based wont work
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

using winnt.exe in Dos won't work, correct. But you can use winnt32.exe in a command line on winpe. I've done it, i know it can be done.

[Viking]

Sorry Alanoll, but you're wrong. The GUI setup can still be run from PE, as long as you have an x64 version of PE. I've been playing with shrinking the source (gosh's way) as I always used to do with 32 bit, using winnt32 /noreboot etc, and you can do this withing x64 windows, so it would also work with x64 PE. (Which I don't have to test...)

What I've been thinking about though is because the winnt32 still works and creates the $WIN_NT$.~BT and $WIN_NT$.~LS folders as normal on your boot drive, maybe we could hack that somehow. ntldr has these folders in it if you search, but they only work if they're on the boot drive. Maybe we can hack it so that it looks on the CD instead, and hack those names instead of I386/AMD64 folders?

Not really sure. Just a thought...

[noisehole]

Jazkal, on Jul 15 2005, 03:00 AM, said:

noisehole, on Jul 14 2005, 06:34 PM, said:

Quote

The installation process for x64 Edition operating systems does not support MS-DOS based mechanisms. For example, you cannot install Windows XP Professional x64 Edition from a command prompt.

which means pe based wont work
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

using winnt.exe in Dos won't work, correct. But you can use winnt32.exe in a command line on winpe. I've done it, i know it can be done.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

oh ok, sounds good. at least one way to do it

[Jito463]

Fortunately, I do have a x64 copy of WinPE. I'll play around with it a bit this weekend and see what I come up with. I love working for an OEM. I get such cool toys to play with.

This post has been edited by Jito463: 14 July 2005 - 08:36 PM

[noisehole]

good to hear, please report back whatever comes out of 64bit pe

on the other side, i cant get erd2005 and xp64 (unmodified!) to work on multiboot. there're some instances of "\amd64" etc in txtsetup.inf of erd. i tried to modify it in some ways but couldnt get it to work if xp64 \amd64 is on the dvd too

so a hacked setupldr is most welcome

regards

[Jito463]

Something new I got to thinking about. In the setupldr.bin near the first listings of i386, there is a listing for $WIN_NT$.~BT (which is created when you run winnt32 /noreboot). I wonder if it's possible to use that to our advantage. Rename that listing instead of i386. Just thinking out loud.

*EDIT*
Just realized, I think that's what Viking was talking about above.

This post has been edited by Jito463: 16 July 2005 - 05:35 PM

[Viking]

That's the one Jito463!

I'm thinking that if we could get it to work, we could have a similar system to what we currently use for multiboots. That is have a "BOOT" folder and a "SOURCE" folder instead of having to worry about AMD64 and I386 at the same time...

[soul]

Ok, I've been taking a few notes about the new (post-2003 SP1) setupldr.bin format versus the old (pre-2003 SP1) one. So far, I've only found a few points of interest, which may or may not already be known:

• setupldr.bin is actually two parts. The first is the "boot image" (the correct term escapes me at the moment), and the second being a PE (exe) file.
  
• setupldr.bin and ntldr are identical up until a little ways into the PE header.
  
• If you strip off the first part, you can disassemble the remaining EXE portion with any disassembler.
  
• The checksum portion of the PE header isn't used, much less used to verify that the file has been modified.
  
• You can edit the first part without it throwing a "NTLDR is corrupt" message. Tested by editing only the three occurances of "NTLDR is corrupt".
  
• The third occurance of "NTLDR is corrupt" is the one that is actually printed when editing an occurance of "I386". I haven't tested editing each occurance of "i386", "I386", and "amd64", one at a time, to see if the other messages are used anywhere.

I think the most important thing here is the separation of the two parts: the boot image that calls the setup loader, and the setup loader .exe itself. It's only logical that the checksum exists in the boot image portion, which is under 20kB in size, and is only a couple kB larger than the pre-2003 SP1's boot image portion. This is good, because it almost entirely rules out any "complex" integrity checking, which leaves the only viable option that comes to mind being CRC/CRC32.

I've been known to get bored of projects and put them off indefinitely, so I figured I should dump my notes/thoughts here before that happens. I still have a few more ideas though, and I'll let you know if they turn up anything interesting.

[rebelryder]

I've used the older setupldr.bin and now I don't get the corrupt/mising ntldr error. But. It starts the setup process but then stops and gives me thi message " setup cannot find the temporary installation files".

I've rechecked everything but i can't see anything out of place. Any ideas ?

[Viking]

Well, how about this for an idea rebelryder.

What if someone tests changing txtsetup.sif so that it doesn't reference AMD64 as a source folder, but only references I386. Then copy all the setup files to a single I386 folder. If this works, then be can simply do our Multiboots the same old way....

I'd test this myself, but I'm away from my home machine for a week or so. If nobody else tests it when I get back home, I'll give it a try myself.

Any comments?

This post has been edited by Viking: 19 July 2005 - 04:49 PM

[rebelryder]

I don't see how changing the reference from amd64 to i386 will make a difference. There are 12 entries referencing SourceDisksFiles.

[Viking]

I'm just thinking that maybe we can use the old setupldr.bin that you were trying, but that won't work while it's looking for folders that setupldr.bin doesn't know about. Was just a thought....

[Jito463]

I've been looking into renaming the $WIN_NT$.~BT section in setupldr.bin, but I'm stuck on something. Does anyone know what file references the $WIN_NT$.~LS directory? I can't seem to find any mention of it. It's got to be referenced somewhere, but where? I've looked in setupldr.bin, bootsect.dat, disk.sys, dmboot.sys, dmload.sys, ntfs.sys, ntdetect.com, txtsetup.sif, migrate.inf and ntdll.dll. I'm at a loss.

[swammer]

rebelryder,

how far did you get on the install? (what part did it fail) I'm currently trying with the old setupldr.bin and currently it has passed until it asks the domain/workgroup.

[anshim]

Hey eb,

This is my first post to MSFN & i found it great so far. I am facing the same problem with setupldr.bin of win2003 sp1.

well swammer have you reached at this installation stage from Multi-OS bootable disc ?

one more thing i dont think checksum is the cause as this setupldr.bin must be created through exe2bin tool ? & if yes then this tool doesnt let bin files carry Image_DOS_Header with them so no point of checksum ?

Please correct me if i am wrong whatever be the case, installing win2003-SP1 through bootable disc with modified setupldr.bin fails with "NTLDR is corrupt. The system cannot boot." error message

Thanks
anshim.

[swammer]

my install finished and i'm got windows 2003 sp1 installed from my multi disc. though my multiboot only has one OS right now.

all I did was replace the setupldr.bin in the 3std and i386 directory and it ran fine! I used the setupldr.bin from the original install (before integrating the SP) and editing it to point to 3STD

winver reads:
version 5.2 build 3790.srv03_sp1_rtm.050324-1447: service pack 1

This post has been edited by swammer: 21 July 2005 - 08:42 AM

[swammer]

i added 2003 SP1 Enterprise, did the same thing as above and it's almost done with the install

This post has been edited by swammer: 21 July 2005 - 10:05 AM

[Alanoll]

swammer, on Jul 21 2005, 11:05 AM, said:

i added 2003 SP1 Enterprise, did the same thing as above and it's almost done with the install
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

congratulations...you completely defeated the point of this thread by saying you used the PRE-SP1 version of teh setupldr.bin. We've already assertained that that works, however it does NOT work for an x64 platform