Xpcli Bootfiles on floppy
#1
Posted 21 May 2012 - 05:33 PM
Aim is to have a small set of files, that one can use to boot an XP from a preexistant location, ie an install which does'nt boot, or a set of files (usb).
The aim also is to have it fit on a floppy, "for those old computers".
You have an XP install not booting. You can use the fiels on this pc to boot to Xpcli.
Concept:
You boot, get Grldr menu. Grldr makes a ramdisk.
(Chenall)Fat makes Fs and copies files to the ramdisk.
Firadisk etc enables a boot in Ram.
USB: If you boot the files from Wimb or Misty, chances are you will have the necessary files.
If you boot from an already installed XP, you could be left without USB (SP1).
(so the boot disk would have to have required usb*hci files).
-Minlogon be used, or Winlogon (from already installed), but what are the (non working) dependencies?
-Dietmar's Config, obviously.
So we have at this point,
Grub4dos boot
menu.lst
Fat tool
Dietmar's Config
Usb*hci.sys
Firadisk or etc.
a .bat files to create the ramdisk and copy.
The rest in either on Hd to repair (=already installed) or usb.
- TheHive likes this
#2
Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:09 PM
ACPI hal expect acpi driver.
Listed projects uses "Standard PC" hal
What about mass storage controller drivers?
Limit to pciide.sys?
Idea, not tested:
Create a core disk image:
include "Standard PC" kernel, hal, minlogon, firadisk and and registry files
compresse image
Boot from floppy disk, expand disk image to RAM.
Copy missing files from hard disk to RAM disk.
Boot windows from RAM disk.
#3
Posted 21 May 2012 - 08:33 PM
Yeah, I'd been thinking of gzipping a few things. Either on a small img file, either on an fsz "bigger" file.
"Bigger" file, still fitting on floppy, but 50Mb fs. m,with already the Sytem32config etc folders.
About Hal, can you expand?
Thanks
#4
Posted 21 May 2012 - 09:56 PM
Windows uses fixed names:About Hal, can you expand?
%SystemRoot%\system32\hal.dll and %SystemRoot%\system32\ntoskrnl.exe
At installation different hal and kernels are renamed to this two names.
Based on file name, there is no easy guess about used hal and kernel.
Mentioned projects uses standard hal and single processor kernel.
Simple approach:
use standard hal and single processor kernel too.
Include registry, hal and kernel to hard disk image.
Or create a universal registry file.
Or different registry files, relating to used kernel and hal.
Include registry to hard disk image, read kernel and hal from hard disk.
Most likely file copy list is different too.
The first approach may be a good idea to start.
The second approach is more elegant, but is more difficult.
Which floppy disk size do you assume?
#5
Posted 22 May 2012 - 07:21 AM
#6
Posted 22 May 2012 - 02:22 PM
Yeah, I read a topic about that not so long ago, either a recent one, or an old one (Msfn, etc?).Windows uses fixed names:
%SystemRoot%system32hal.dll and %SystemRoot%system32ntoskrnl.exe
At installation different hal and kernels are renamed to this two names.
Thanks for clearing it though.
Either 1.44, for real hardware, or 2.88 for easiness, portability.Which floppy disk size do you assume?
#7
Posted 22 May 2012 - 03:04 PM
http://reboot.pro/15..._25#entry151841
basically you can reduce greatly the number of files to be actually copied to the RAMDISK, and use "directly" the files on the hard disk.
Obviously with minlogon this approach is much simpler, but there is no reason why it could not work with Winlogon as well, though using Winlogon may bring quite a few strings attached in a non-PE environment, such as WFP and WPA that need also to be solved.
All in all (and IMHO) one could use the pre-PE approach and have an actual PECLI (as opposed to "full" XPCLI), I mean the only advantage (with a number of disadvantages) of the "full XP" approach is that settings/installed apps/whatever are "not volatile".
In what you propose, since you anyway re-build from scratch (like in a PE build) I find that the effort to solve the complications of Winlogon are much bigger than the little provisions needed to make a PE "non-volatile" (basically backing up the involved Registry hives and add a few commands to the "building script").
Wonko
#8
Posted 22 May 2012 - 04:06 PM
Not new, not new..! There are things which exist which are older! than a month!
Parthenon, Earth..
Joking aside..
Very nice, and happy to see these kinds of ideas here .
It is, amongst other things like , and , what Reboot is about .
http://reboot.pro/12339/ topic, I like, I enjoyed at the time reading it. Hadn't seen the Mix part though at the time.
I saw yesterday on a G**gle search, someone had written "Doing a xp and Pe mix"(didn't read), I thought, only a madman would try that .
So, it was you?!
If using Winlogon means a lot more complication,
As you say, "make a PE "non-volatile"".
to quote Hive,
yeah .Interesting!
#9
Posted 23 May 2012 - 12:18 PM
Winlogon.
How is it different, from its counterpart Minlogon ?
Mkay.Obviously with minlogon this approach is much simpler, but there is no reason why it could not work with Winlogon as well, though using Winlogon may bring quite a few strings attached in a non-PE environment, such as WFP and WPA that need also to be solved.
...
Wonko
http://smallvoid.com.../winnt-wfp.html
Wpa seems less straigtforward.You can momentarily disable it through the registry by changing this DWORD :
Note these other HEX values are possible :
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE SOFTWARE Microsoft Windows NT CurrentVersion Winlogon]
SFCDisable=1 (Default=0)
..
2 - Disabled for next boot only, no prompt for enable
Anti-WPA.exe bring up registry changes too, but it is about referencing the program itself.
I'll look more into WPA.
#10
Posted 23 May 2012 - 12:50 PM
http://www.msfn.org/...post__p__997865
In a PE (i.e. - I think with "setup in progress=1") there is no WPA and the Winlogon process is gratly simplified, and as well SFC is not running.
The advantage of a "mixed mode" PE is that it is FASTER, WAY faster when booting through NTLDR than through SETUPLDR.BIN as large parts of the setupreg.hiv (which are now "system") are already built and need not to be re-built form scratch, saving time (but possibly creating a few portability issues).
Wonko
#11
Posted 25 May 2012 - 02:01 PM
I was wondering for a long time how to get there,
Le punto di post-install, pre-config. Before the "personalisation".
When the computer reboots, but you're still not half way!
Good, nice you're onto that one.
Piacere.
#12
Posted 28 May 2012 - 03:10 PM
I was thinking the other way. Having the Software reg already done, but have a setupreg that would "discover" the system, the harware. Actually if the setupreg could even stop after it created the Hardware key, and merge with preexistant hives..The advantage of a "mixed mode" PE is that it is FASTER, WAY faster when booting through NTLDR than through SETUPLDR.BIN as large parts of the setupreg.hiv (which are now "system") are already built and need not to be re-built form scratch, saving time (but possibly creating a few portability issues).
Wonko
Just to have a boot (quote:creating a few portability issues)which would avoid the compatibiliy/portability issues,that would be a normal registry, but its start would be pe-like.
Would be slower, but I don't care.
#13
Posted 28 May 2012 - 05:57 PM
http://reboot.pro/15252
What is needed on a floppy?
You need on the floppy (first things that come to mind):
- grldr + the FAT thingy
- SETUPLDR.BIN around 260 Kb
- SETUPREG.HIV <-the PicoXP "compacted" one is 123 Kb
- TXTSETUP.SIF <-the PicoXP one is 19 Kb
- configDEFAULT <-the PicoXP "compacted" one is 13 Kb
- configSAM <-the PicoXP "compacted" one is 8 Kb (maybe a 0 sized file can be used)
- configSECURITY <-the PicoXP "compacted" one is 8 Kb (maybe a 0 sized file can be used)
- configSOFTWARE <-the PicoXP "compacted" one is 37 Kb
- Various HAL's, each around 100 Kb
- What about the Kernel?
- the USB driver files
- the firadisk or WinVblock driver
Or am I missing something?
Can the grub4dos FAT tool copy from NTFS (most likely setup of the "host" system) and FAT12 (most likely the filesystem of the floppy - but with some limitations we can have a NTFS formatted floppy if needed)?
This page by Steve6375:
http://www.rmprepusb...makegrub4dosiso
seems to imply that only CDFS is supported
The "XP/PE" related files on the floppy may be gzipped, so there may be enough space even in a 1.44 Mb one
Wonko
#14
Posted 28 May 2012 - 08:05 PM
I wasn't really asking that as I sort of already know what should be on the floppy (+confere Cdob's post), but thanks anyway for that.
-PicoXp
That's the way I'm thinking.
Kernel, dunno.
Usbfiles, the ones from Misty & Wimb. (why?)
Fat I assume can copy from drives which Grub4dos can read, to a fat12/16/32 drive (including (hdx,x))
Yeah, I think.The "XP/PE" related files on the floppy may be gzipped, so there may be enough space even in a 1.44 Mb one
Wonko
But what I was getting at in the last post was,
would there be a way to have a xp starting with setupldr.bin, getting down to finding out about the hardware,
but then handing back 'control' to a real Xp.
-Is a long shot
-would be beyond my knowledge
-does anything resemble what I am trying to say?
#15
Posted 29 May 2012 - 08:25 AM
No idea, (maybe there is something that can be done with the Longhorn files - but then there would be anyway ussies with redistributing/replicating) but this:But what I was getting at in the last post was,
would there be a way to have a xp starting with setupldr.bin, getting down to finding out about the hardware,
but then handing back 'control' to a real Xp.
is exactly (AFAICT) what a "normal PE" does.I was thinking the other way. Having the Software reg already done, but have a setupreg that would "discover" the system, the harware. Actually if the setupreg could even stop after it created the Hardware key, and merge with preexistant hives..
Apart SAM and SECURITY (which are not actually used in a PE) DEFAULT and SOFTWARE are "static" and only SYSTEM is "dynamic" and built on-the-fly from the base of SETUPREG:HIV.
For the posted reasons, you'd better NOT assume and verify, before anything else.Fat I assume can copy from drives which Grub4dos can read, to a fat12/16/32 drive (including (hdx,x))
I am not trying to put you down in any way, rest assured , just "thinking aloud" and trying to pinpoint possible issues , sometimes expliciting doubts/ideas/perplexities helps in the development....
Wonko
#16
Posted 30 May 2012 - 11:36 AM
No worries, man! Your grumps are what get projects going (&on track)I am not trying to put you down in any way, rest assured , just "thinking aloud" and trying to pinpoint possible issues , sometimes expliciting doubts/ideas/perplexities helps in the development....
Wonko
The notes/ questions about Full Xp registry versus Pe registry, were really to check a few things.(before going pe). Thanks for the good explanations.
I actually had thought your mixed Pe was around that (mixing pe and full registry hives).
Mm, , actually, when you say Mixed mode Pe faster when loading though Ntldr rather than Setupldr.bin,
Can you expand? Cheers.
Since when, in a summery weather, was anyone supposed to be thorough?For the posted reasons, you'd better NOT assume and verify, before anything else.
Tested in qemu with a small ntfs image, file copied!
#17
Posted 31 May 2012 - 08:06 AM
#18
Posted 01 June 2012 - 01:27 PM
Hi,Hive.Should anyone need "talking" to me....
Wonko the Sane
http://reboot.pro/16972/
Yeah, I'd read that.
I think also it's a shame when topics come to an end for misunderstanding. I call it missunderstanding, as I feel it is.
Often things get out of hand because people are thinking too fast, and not being clear for the audience. On a topic which is as wide as the one that created the tension, it is difficult to sum things up and keep readable. The fast pace makes things difficult.
But, I would say, add to this a week of good sun, and people become out of hand.
Read it some time later and you'll discover some interesting things were raised, even if (the topic has ben raised many times) only for newbies (like me) to
understand the difficulties/ differences.
In the meantime I hope feelings weren't hurt, in the topic, and if the pace had been slower, people would've been more understanding (I think) of what people meant. Ie, not a clash, rather an exchange. Read it in a few months time, and see if all was just bad apples. ?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users