Jump to content











Photo
* - - - - 1 votes

WTG + WimBoot + VHDX powerful combination.

wimboot win to go vhdx winntsetup v3.6.1 usb to go usb booting

  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#26 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 11 July 2014 - 11:11 AM

Hello Everyone......

I know 32-Bit 'Win_8.1_U1' can only be installed into x86-architecture based UEFI firmware/system and 64-Bit 'Win_8.1_U1' can only be installed into x64-architecture based UEFI firmware/system.

But why ?

I think there should be some special UEFI files within EFI folder, 'boot.wim' and 'install.wim' which allow a UEFI firmware (x86/x64) to detect their respective OS (x86/x64). And if UEFI firmware (x86/x64) found their respective UEFI files (x86/x64) in EFI folder, 'boot.wim' and 'install.wim' , then it allow their respective OS (x86/x64) to boot and install in UEFI mode.

So I want to know about these Special UEFI files which are read by UEFI firmware (x86/x64) within from EFI folder, 'boot.wim' and 'install.wim' in order to boot and installation of their respective OS (x86/x64).

I want to put all Special UEFI files (both x86 and x64) of both OS (x86 and x64) into the 'Win_8.1_U1_x86.iso' so that x86 UEFI firmware treat 'Win_8.1_U1_x86.iso' as a x86 OS while x64 UEFI firmware treat 'Win_8.1_U1_x86.iso' as x64 OS.

So that I can boot and install 'Win_8.1_U1_x86.iso' in both x86 and x64 UEFI architecture based PCs without changing BIOS settings to 'BIOS/MBR/CSM mode' and 'Disable Secure Mode'.

Note- AFAIK, We can also install WINDOWS within from a WinPE 5.1 with the help of 'WinNTSetup v.3.6.1'.
'Win8.1U1SE_x64_boot.wim' is a unique WinPE which can boot into both BIOS and UEFI mode.

'WinNTSetup v.3.6.1' require only 'install.wim' for Windows Installation and can Install 'Win 8.1 U1' in both BIOS and UEFI based PC. It means 'install.wim' also contains some special UEFI files which extract into the Installation Drive during installation and play an important role when System boot from the Installation Drive in UEFI mode.

So can anybody please tell me about the Special UEFI files (both x86 and x64) in EFI folder, 'boot.wim' and 'install.wim' which allow a OS (x86/x64) to boot and install into their respective UEFI firmware (x86/x64) based PCs.

I know my thinking may be foolish, stupid and non-sense. But I want to know about the actual secret about the whole drama.

Any related information will be highly appreciated......


Thanks in Advance

Regards.......

Edited by devdevadev, 11 July 2014 - 11:15 AM.


#27 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14726 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 11 July 2014 - 12:12 PM

So can anybody please tell me about the Special UEFI files (both x86 and x64) in EFI folder, 'boot.wim' and 'install.wim' which allow a OS (x86/x64) to boot and install into their respective UEFI firmware (x86/x64) based PCs.
 

And - again - you need to read and study the available documentation, some of which has been ALREADY pointed to you (more than once):

http://reboot.pro/to...files/?p=185443

 

Try reading again these pages:

http://homepage.ntlw...ot-process.html

http://homepage.ntlw...ot-process.html

Then do some searches based on their contents.

Surprisingly, you may find some answers, like, example:

http://technet.micro...y/hh824898.aspx

While in UEFI mode, the Windows version must match the PC architecture. A 64-bit UEFI PC can only boot 64-bit versions of Windows. A 32-bit PC can only boot 32-bit versions of Windows. In some cases, while in legacy BIOS mode, you may be able to run 32-bit Windows on a 64-bit PC, assuming the manufacturer supports 32-bit legacy BIOS mode on the PC.

 

 

If there is something that you do not understand, ask about the specific things that you do not understand, instead or re-asking, over and over (and over) over half the internet,  the same generic question, slightly re-worded.

 

 

 

I know my thinking may be foolish, stupid and non-sense. But I want to know about the actual secret about the whole drama.

The issue is not at all about the foolishness or not, it is about you apparent lack of:

a. a plan (foolish as it might be)

b. will to study (and study hard) in order to learn about the topics at hand

c. will to experiment (see point #b. above), substituted by continuous nagging other people to get them do the work you should do, compare with:

http://www.msfn.org/...81se/?p=1080698

http://www.msfn.org/...81se/?p=1080984

http://www.msfn.org/...v361/?p=1081018

http://www.msfn.org/...v361/?p=1081788

 

 

If you think a bit about it, if you believe it is a "secret" :ph34r:, then it won't be easy to learn it :whistling: (and it is well possible that noone else - except maybe some of the good MS guys - that won't tell it - know this secret) .

 

Now, if you could

 

Any related information will be highly appreciated......

 

- besides "highly appreciate" - §@ç#ing READ the info that is provided to you, trying to understand them, do your own experimenting at the light of them, you might get nearer to learn the "actual secret". :dubbio:

 

:duff:

Wonko



#28 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 11 July 2014 - 01:54 PM

Wonko

 

If you think a bit about it, if you believe it is a "secret"  :ph34r:, then it won't be easy to learn it  :whistling: (and it is well possible that noone else - except maybe some of the good MS guys - that won't tell it - know this secret) .

 

How useful it would be if Wonko be a good MS guy like WZOR.

 

http://blogs.msdn.co...fi-support.aspx

 

Architecture Requirements

One new requirement introduced with UEFI native boot support is that it uses a specific bit-ness. This means that a UEFI 32 firmware core must be used to install a 32-bit OS and likewise UEFI 64 for a 64-bit OS. It is possible to have support for both 32-bit and 64-bit UEFI in one BIOS, but it requires additional work and ROM space, so this may not be commonly implemented.

This is only an issue in consumer scenarios if a customer wants to install a replacement or retail copy of Windows 8 on their OEM UEFI computer. In such a scenario, help the customer identify their current architecture (32-bit or 64-bit), and help direct them on a good path to reach their desired goal. They may need to contact the OEM in order to determine whether this potential limitation applies to their computer.

 

There are a lot more specific details here, if anyone wants to go deeper:

http://msdn.microsof...rdware/gg463149

 

Niehus, Microsoft

 

Here I want to replace 32-bit UEFI files in the 32-bit 'Win 8.1 U1' with 64-bit UEFI files instead of disturbing BIOS, ROM etc..So that UEFI 64-bit Firmware treat 32-bit 'Win 8.1 U1' as 64-bit 'Win 8.1 U1'.

 

 I always read you links carefully. But actually over and over asking always become useful for me because of getting  following new link.

    

 

Thanks and Regards for you love and support....


Edited by devdevadev, 11 July 2014 - 02:31 PM.


#29 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14726 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 11 July 2014 - 02:18 PM

 I always read you links carefully. But actually over and over asking always become useful for me because of following new link.

http://homepage.ntlw...ot-process.html

 

But you see, that link was a trap :w00t: :ph34r: in which you fell alright.
 
I had previously EXPLICITLY prompted you to read this page:
http://homepage.ntlw...ot-process.html
and that page has a direct link to:
http://homepage.ntlw...ot-process.html
in the part titled "Windows NT versions 6.x" (i.e. the part that you should have read with the most attention :whistling:)

 

Which confirms me how *somehow* you are not reading carefully (or attentively enough) the provided info, hence the prompt to re-read was actually quite appropriate .

 

The page on Oliver's Blog you just referenced, on the other hand is (yet another) confirmation of what everyone has been trying to tell you, i.e. that each and every UEFI/EFI implementation may contain (or fail to contain) everything and the contrary of it, and this is one of the reasons why it is so difficult (if not downright impossible) have a one-size-fits-all solution that can boot *any OS* on *any PC*.

 

:duff:

Wonko



#30 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 11 July 2014 - 02:30 PM

But you see, that link was a trap :w00t: :ph34r: in which you fell alright.
 
I had previously EXPLICITLY prompted you to read this page:
http://homepage.ntlw...ot-process.html
and that page has a direct link to:
http://homepage.ntlw...ot-process.html
in the part titled "Windows NT versions 6.x" (i.e. the part that you should have read with the most attention :whistling:)

 

Which confirms me how *somehow* you are not reading carefully (or attentively enough) the provided info, hence the prompt to re-read was actually quite appropriate .

 

Actually I read Oliver's Blog last time when you share it with me. But forget it to reference at that time. Actually Oliver is talking about BIOS/Firmware modification in order to support for 32-bit OS in 64-bit UEFI Firmware. But I want to replace 32-bit UEFI files in the 32-bit 'Win 8.1 U1' with 64-bit UEFI files instead of disturbing BIOS, ROM etc..So that UEFI 64-bit Firmware treat 32-bit 'Win 8.1 U1' as 64-bit 'Win 8.1 U1'.

 

Regards.....


Edited by devdevadev, 11 July 2014 - 02:33 PM.


#31 cdob

cdob

    Gold Member

  • Expert
  • 1437 posts

Posted 11 July 2014 - 03:10 PM

can boot *any OS* on *any PC*.


Yes, a Boot Perpetuum Mobile would be nice ;)
http://en.wikipedia....erpetual_motion

At second glance: a Perpetuum Mobile is the simple quest.
The any boot is the difficult one :)

@devdevadev
What about building a Perpetuum Mobile first :dubbio:



#32 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14726 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 11 July 2014 - 03:17 PM

 But I want to replace 32-bit UEFI files in the 32-bit 'Win 8.1 U1' with 64-bit UEFI files instead of disturbing BIOS, ROM etc..So that UEFI 64-bit Firmware treat 32-bit 'Win 8.1 U1' as 64-bit 'Win 8.1 U1'.

It is clear what you want would like to do, the points are:

a. is it technically feasible? :unsure:

b. IF it is, which kind of knowledge/experience are needed to actually do that? :dubbio:

c. IF it is technically feasible AND IF you manage to gather the needed knowledge OR IF you manage to find someone willing to do it, how long (how much work/time) will be needed? (hours, weeks, months, years :ph34r:)

d. IF all the above check OK, would it be worth it (or will it be relevant by the time this goal is accomplished)?

 

As an example, I would like to build my new house only with matches, let's see how this goal goes through the above a/b/c/d questions:

a. Yes.

b. No particular knowledge, if not basic carpenter's one.

c. 23 years.

d. NO.

 

To expand on the example cdob :worship: just posted, let's see how the Perpetual Motion project will pass through the same four questions:

a. NO.

:whistling:

 

:cheers:

jaclaz



#33 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 11 July 2014 - 03:45 PM

Finally I got some positive response from 'Murphy 78'  :worship:

 

the bootia32.efi and bootmgr.efi for the 32-bit versions are not doing anything since there are no compatible ms operating systems. If you replace them with x64 versions and change the efi\microsoft\boot\bcd file to point to a 64-bit bootable wim, it will boot in uefi.
 

There are many reasons I don't hybridize my releases, and multiple boot.wim files are one of the big ones. You also break your ability to upgrade from a previous os.
You can hack some files and get it to work, but it's not advised. You also need to edit the normal legacy bcd to point at the x64 setup wim so users can run the repair option if their computer gets messed up.

I mostly leave them in the typical format because there are just too many downsides to trying to hybridize the setup. For as much as I think it's possible to get it to work with some hacks, there are a hundred things I'm not aware of like dll files and upgrade incompatibilities. You're welcome to try and inquire on the integration thread if you get stuck. I, or many others, can help you.

 

:)  :)  :)  :)

 

Regards.....



#34 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 13 August 2014 - 02:45 PM

Dual Boot WIMBoot_VHDX Configuration-

\bootmgr
\boot\bcd                       ( Boot entries for both \WIMBoot_x86.vhdx and \WIMBoot_x64.vhdx )
\WIMBoot_x86.vhdx
\WIMBoot_x64.vhdx
\install.wim                     ( Combined x86-x64 'install.wim' file)
\BOOTNXT

Cheers........



#35 milindsmart

milindsmart

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 201 posts
  • Location:Bangalore
  •  
    India

Posted 21 August 2014 - 07:45 AM

Nice. So how small a UFD can I use for this awesome combination? 8GB should be enough I suppose?

 

Since we need a fast USB drive, not requiring it to be 32GB+ is probably the most important advantage of this method.



#36 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 21 August 2014 - 10:21 AM

Nice. So how small a UFD can I use for this awesome combination? 8GB should be enough I suppose?

 

Since we need a fast USB drive, not requiring it to be 32GB+ is probably the most important advantage of this method.

 

1- If you prefer 64-bit OS along with 32-bit OS, then you can use following configuration. Actually following configuration will be better if you use it in Internal/External Hard disk of your PC. If you want to use it in USB Drive then it will require minimum 12-15 GB in order to running just perfect. (But you have to keep installed third party software limited and small)

\bootmgr
\boot\bcd                       ( Boot entries for both \Win8.1U1_x86.vhdx and \Win8.1U1_x64.vhdx )
\Win8.1U1_x86.vhdx
\Win8.1U1_x64.vhdx
\install.wim                    ( Combined Win8.1U1_x86-x64.iso 'install.wim' file )
\BOOTNXT

2- If size is important factor for you, then you can use following configuration in 8-16 GB High Speed 3.0 USB Drive in order to run smoothly. I had successfully tested following configuration within '7GB Partition' of my 16 GB Transcend JetFlash 780 3.0 USB Flash Drive. But I will include it within my 'Ultimate Super Smart Secret USB Drive' whenever I will buy a 32/32+ GB USB Drive. 

\bootmgr
\boot\bcd                      ( Boot entry for \Win8.1U1_x86.vhdx )
\Win8.1U1_x86.vhdx
\install.wim                   ( Win8.1U1_x86.iso 'install.wim' file )
\BOOTNXT

3- I personally prefer Penta Boot of Multiple OS's including Dual boot of 32-bit Windows OS because I can not afford 64-bit OS due to both greater space requirement and Compatibility Issues with my Micromax MMX310G 3G USB Manager. I will use following configuration in my Internal Hard disk whenever 'Windows 9' release. By this way I will keep Dual OS in C:Drive in form of two VHDX files . And I will not have to use USB Drive in order to re-install 'Win9Pro/Ent' . And there will be no need to format whole C:Drive again and again during re-installation. This configuration will provide maximum utilization in minimum hard disk space. If 'Win9Pro_x86' will corrupt, then I will re-install it within from 'Win9Ent_x86' with the help of 'WinNTSetup v3.6.3' by saving boring Installation and Reboot times and vice-versa. Drive D: is my main 'Data Partition' and there is very little chances to format it accidentally. It's why I will keep all Boot Files (bootmgr, bcd, BOOTNXT, nst_mac.mbr, nst_linux.mbr, grldr ...etc...) within D: drive so that I can always boot at least my 'Hackintosh' or 'Ubuntu' or 'Easy2Boot' in case when both 'Win9Pro and Win9Ent' will corrupt. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D:\bootmgr
D:\boot\bcd
       (Boot entries for C:\Win9Pro_x86.vhdx, C:Win9Ent_x86.vhdx, D:\NST\nst_mac.mbr, D:\NST\nst_linux.mbr, D:\SMART USB\grldr )
D:\BOOTNXT
D:\NST\nst_mac.mbr          ( EasyBCD bootloader in order to boot Apple Hackintosh )
D:\NST\nst_linux.mbr         ( EasyBCD bootloader in order to boot Ubuntu )
D:\SMART USB\grldr          ( Easy2Boot bootloader in order to boot various Payload Files within from 'SMART USB' folder )
C:\Win9Pro_x86.vhdx
C:\Win9Ent_x86.vhdx
C:\install.wim                        ( Win9AIO_x86.iso 'install.wim' file )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheers.........



#37 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14726 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 21 August 2014 - 10:42 AM

 

... I will use following configuration in my Internal Hard disk whenever 'Windows 9' release. By this way I will keep Dual OS in single partition C: . And I will not have to use USB Drive in order to re-install 'Win9Pro/Ent' . And there will be no need to format whole C:Drive again and again during re-installation. This configuration will provide maximum utilization in minimum hard disk space. If 'Win9Pro_x86' will corrupt, then I will re-install it within from 'Win9Ent_x86' with the help of 'WinNTSetup v3.6.3' by saving boring Installation and Reboot times and vice-versa.
 
\bootmgr
\boot\bcd                        ( Boot entries for both \Win9Pro_x86.vhdx and Win9Ent_x86.vhdx )
\Win9Pro_x86.vhdx
\Win9Ent_x86.vhdx
\install.wim                     ( Win9AIO_x86.iso 'install.wim' file)
\BOOTNXT

 

 

:duff:

Wonko



#38 milindsmart

milindsmart

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 201 posts
  • Location:Bangalore
  •  
    India

Posted 22 August 2014 - 12:21 PM

So what if I use a WIM of only 1 index (say Windows 8.1 x86 update 1 core), /optimized /rebased /component-cleanedup ? :D

 

8 GB should do right? 



#39 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 22 August 2014 - 02:08 PM

 

So what if I use a WIM of only 1 index (say Windows 8.1 x86 update 1 core), /optimized /rebased /component-cleanedup ?  :D

 

8 GB should do right? 

 

I think you should try whole setup once in order to test exact size of USB Drive....

 

e.g.

 

If you create following setup then you can just boot to desktop of 32-bit 'Win 8.1 U1'. But if you want to install more third party software then you have to increase size of 'Win8.1U1.vhdx' from 1.3 GB to 5.2 GB or greater according to your requirement. I think 5.2 GB 'Win8.1U1.vhdx' should sufficient for normal uses. Thus 8GB (2,8GB + 5.2GB ) High Speed 3.0 USB Drive will do right job for normal uses.

 

Minimum size of 32-bit 'install.wim' = 2.7-2.8 GB

Minimum size of 'Win8.1U1.vhdx'     = 1.2-1.3 GB

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Total min. size of 32-bit WIMBoot    =       4.0 GB

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

Please try it and share you experience.......

 

Thanks & Regards.........

 

  • milindsmart likes this

#40 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 22 August 2014 - 02:33 PM

For faster WIMBoot Installation process you can follow Step.5 - Step.21 of following tutorial.

 

 

 



#41 milindsmart

milindsmart

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 201 posts
  • Location:Bangalore
  •  
    India

Posted 28 August 2014 - 12:15 PM

It seems that VHDs and WIMBoot cannot be combined according to http://blogs.technet...013.aspx#450392

 

No, you can't combine WIMBoot and VHD native boot (mainly because they share some pieces).

 



#42 devdevadev

devdevadev

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 477 posts
  •  
    India

Posted 28 August 2014 - 02:19 PM

I am currently using WIMBoot + VHDX combination in my USB Drive. It boot perfectly in my BIOS based PC. But I have not tested it in UEFI till now. 

 

Have you test 'WIMBoot + VHDX' configuration in your PC ? If not then please try it and then share you experience......

 

http://windowsforum.kr/review/5830280

 

http://windowsforum....ent_srl=5917160

 

Regards...


  • crashnburn likes this

#43 milindsmart

milindsmart

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 201 posts
  • Location:Bangalore
  •  
    India

Posted 29 August 2014 - 01:17 PM

Hmm... I wonder... maybe he meant that you can't keep the WIM inside the VHD?

 

Yeah I'll be trying it out soon...



#44 crashnburn

crashnburn

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 119 posts

Posted 19 October 2015 - 10:47 AM

I am currently using WIMBoot + VHDX combination in my USB Drive. It boot perfectly in my BIOS based PC. But I have not tested it in UEFI till now. 

 

Have you test 'WIMBoot + VHDX' configuration in your PC ? If not then please try it and then share you experience......

 

http://windowsforum.kr/review/5830280

 

http://windowsforum....ent_srl=5917160

 

Regards...

 

Interesting. How much Space/ Performance savings/ overheads are you getting with WIMBoot on VHD? 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: wimboot, win to go, vhdx, winntsetup v3.6.1, usb to go, usb booting

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users