Jump to content











Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

MS-DOS 7.1


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#1 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 23 August 2008 - 09:11 AM

I decided to make a "real" MS-DOS 7.10. There is already a version by Wengier + Roy, which is the MS-DOS kernel from Win98fe, with many utilities replaced and added. While it is true that one can manufacture an "uber-DOS" with the finest freeware, the attempt here is to make a DOS out of MS released stuff.

To this end, one takes the five versions of Win9x on hand, and compare the files. Since DOS is a module in Win9x, there is no reason that it is to be consistently updated for each version. In practice, some from Win95 remain in 95c, and most of 98fe appear in 98se. There is further two updates to DOS, as

1. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/263044 fdisk with disks > 64 GB
2. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/311561 winboot.sys = io.sys (corruption under DOS)

Although the second fix attempts to apply the winboot.sys to 98fe vs 98se differently, the files are indeed identical. So we can number these DOS versions as 7.10.0 (Win95c), 7.10.1 (Win98fe), 7.10.2 (Win98se), 7.10.3 (q311561). There is an interesting file by Tihily, one finds on MSFN by googling for IONOLOGO. This compares to 7.10.3, minus a large slab of code at the end, and minus the bitmap. It is about half the size of the original.

The vast bulk of stuff comes from Windows 98se. Scandisk is imported from Windows ME. We then get a few other utilities from the OLDMSDOS archives. These are MS-DOS 6.22 specific, but if ye take the original MS-DOS 6.22 files, and compare these with 6.21, you find that they are identical, except that the string 0x0616 is replaced by 0x0615. We then replace this by x070A, and these work nicely under this DOS.

DOSSHELL v 7 is the same as DOSSHELL 6, except 6 is changed to 7 in the help-about screen etc. So we can use this without modification. One notes that the program winfile.exe is short-name only, too. Memmaker and MsBackup round off this bit.

For extra additional files, we add compress (for DOS 6 stuff), expand (from Windows 3.11, which handles both SZDD and KWAJ formats), exetype (Winnt 3.51 utility: it's DOS), and where (MS, unknown source, DOS). A defanged Regedit is thrown in. We could put GWBASIC in for a lark, too.

Since also enough of PC-DOS 7.10 exists, we could dual-boot the two. The two together could use the same files! A modified version of BASICA.COM 3.40 for modern hardware exists, this can be added to this DOS release.

Note here, that while these closely follow IBM/Microsoft sources, neither of these develop DOS, and more recent files by others would be reccomended in a modern environment.

#2 mr_

mr_

    Frequent Member

  • Members
  • 355 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 23 August 2008 - 10:34 AM

Unfortunately you may not post your progress of work due to licence restrictions.
But I am still interested in things you done because I can use them as inspiration for myself.

There is also FreeDOS, I wonder why you didn't mention it but PC-DOS?

#3 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 23 August 2008 - 11:34 AM

One can make a set of instructions, and assorted modified files (or how to get them). The bulk of the files come from Win98, but there are some downloads worth the hunt, which are used in this version.

PC-DOS 7.10 is mentioned because it is supported in the MS-DOS multiboot, prehaps.

#4 JonF

JonF

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1185 posts
  • Location:Boston, MA
  •  
    United States

Posted 23 August 2008 - 12:23 PM

One can make a set of instructions, and assorted modified files (or how to get them).

It would be really nice if one would do that ...

What's a "defanged Regedit"?"

#5 mr_

mr_

    Frequent Member

  • Members
  • 355 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 23 August 2008 - 12:24 PM

PC-DOS 7.10 is mentioned because it is supported in the MS-DOS multiboot, prehaps.

grub4dos can be used to mulit boot any of them.

#6 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 10424 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 23 August 2008 - 08:46 PM

One can make a set of instructions, and assorted modified files (or how to get them).


Yes, this sounds like an excellent idea.

No need to post the copyrighted files but would however be great to see which versions of individual apps have been updated or where we can get from the official sites.

I didn't even knew there was an fdisk from MS capable of handling partitions over 64Gb

----

Lately, freedos have done a lot for DOS and some of the tools you find on their releases are simply amazing and might still work flawlessly on MSDOS.

Good topic Wendy.

:whistling:

#7 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 24 August 2008 - 08:28 AM

There are a lot of good DOS programs, including the utilities that made it to freedos. Freedos is still under development, and much is being written to accomidate modern hardware. One day, they might even consider writing replacements for programs like doskrnl (OS/2), and ntbio.sys / ntdos.sys (winnt).

Even back in the eighties and nineties, there was still an aftermarket for utilities that replaced DOS functionality. Every part of DOS has been replaced by third party utilities, except for the kernel. Even command.com.

One could, as Wengier and Roy do, replace DOS utilities with others from other operating systems, or make the necessary patches to restore functionality that Microsoft have removed. The present work still allows this to happen, but the release consists entirely of files modified to remove some of the bad mistakes already made. There is of course, nothing wrong with the China-DOS Union version of DOS 7. In fact, it is a masterpiece of configuration.

On the other hand, the present project is to make a DOS 7.1 that maximises the DOSness of it. One appreciates that the DOS 7.0 / 7.1 / 8.0 is a transition from old hardware to new hardware, and Microsoft's aim of making DOS a better place for Windows at the expense of DOS. One selects earlier or later versions of this, to go with how much DOS and how much modern hardware support one wants.

Remember, that when DOS 7.0 came out, a 1 G drive was a luxury, and that the 137G or even 64G was almost unheard of. By the time ME came out, one was looking at disks of the order of 60 G, and that the 64G limit required a fixpack from MSFT.

Still, making a DOS is an interesting challenge that makes the documentation of this part all the more important.

DOS 8 is also in the pipeline. It is even more confusing. While the 7.1 kernel is a multi-use thing, the WinME disk has no fewer than four kernels, winboot.win, winboot.ebd, winboot.lf, and winboot.cd. Each of these appear eventually as winboot.sys. To these, two (win, ebd) have been reissued in a fixpack, and Windows XP, and prehaps a few others, have issued their own form of .ebd in their boot-disks.

#8 was_jaclaz

was_jaclaz

    Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 7100 posts
  • Location:Gone in the mist
  •  
    Italy

Posted 24 August 2008 - 10:32 AM

Though I suspect that Wendy :whistling: knows about this:
http://www.msfn.org/...ME-t118119.html

I'll throw it in, as I did not get adequate feedback.

Also, now that 4DOS has gone Freeware/Open Source, it is something to take into consideration:
http://4dos.zzl.org/

Also, I would be curious to know Wendy's opinion on LZ-DOS:
http://dos.nm.ru/

jaclaz

#9 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 25 August 2008 - 10:03 AM

Though I suspect that Wendy knows about this:
http://www.msfn.org/...ME-t118119.html


I did not know of this. Thanks! I disagree with the compressed nature of IO.SYS in WinME, consider this:

winboot.win  110.080  8.00 default for hard disks - loads windows

	winboot.lf   108.544  8.00 found in Windows ME 'base,cab' file

	winboot.ebd  116.736  8.00 found in Windows ME Emergency disk

	winboot.bcd  116.736  8.00 found in bootable disk on cd - the fourth vers.

	winboot.xp   116.736  8.00 found in WinXP created disks

	winboot.2k5  116.736  8.00 found in Win2k3 sp1 and vista.

	winboot.tih  122.876  7.10 found in Tihiy's Revolution pack (7.10.3)

	winboot.983  222.670  7.10 fat32 (in an update, listed as 7.10.3)

	winboot.95   223.148  7.00 no fat32 support

	ibm*.com	  86,790  7.10 vers 7.10 build 1.32

	io.sys		75.885  7.10 lzdos

	rom-dos.sys   77.649  7.10 romdos 4.20.1588.

	rom-dos.sys   71.265  6.22 romdos 4.20.1588

	ms*.com	   78.912  6.22 MSDOS io.sys + msdos.sys

Tihiy's io.sys is essentially the one in the fix (7.10.3), so the major change going from 7.10's singular io.sys to the multitude of 8.0's io.sys has more to do with a commercial decision by Microsoft to make DOS hard to detangle from Windows. I suspect further the changes between xp and 2k3 is to stop some kinds of hexits in files to prevent it loading windows completely.

IBM DOS has broken support for fat32 (but enough still to allow it to set up a computer), and no support for things like LFN. Symmantic has persisted with it for ghost restores, though (the first public appearence of this is in Ghost). Still, ghost is not "fiddling the fat", so to speak, and it is Ghost, not DOS that walks the hard disk [ghost can read NTFS partitions].

The difference between winboot.983 (the source of Tihiy's io.sys) and winboot.95 (from the original release) is not informative. One recalls that the transition from Win95 to WinME represents a mixed DOS/Windows environment in 1994 to a complete Win32 environment in 2000. Microsoft's commercial decision to spawn a multitude of winboot.sys files for ME is more to do with this (making it difficult to run DOS and Windows in dual boot), rather than "bettering DOS".

LZ-DOS

LZ-DOS is one of the review DOS versions. That it contains a few files, puts it in the same group as MS-DOS 5.02, PC-DOS 6.31 &c. Still. It is sometimes presented as a patched form of Microsoft's DOS. I don't think this is the case. Even though the kernel is compressed, i think it's more to do with a different version.

Look, for example, at ROM-DOS 4.20.1588 above, which supports both LFN and FAT32 under plain DOS. We see that it is quite possible that LZ-DOS could easily be this size with necessary DOS support (which does not include loading a logo). Still, i have only read the binaries, and loaded it into a VM.

Its command.com, for example, does not support drive Locking (LOCK, UNLOCK).

4DOS

I know about 4dos. I used it since the shareware 3.02 (registered to 4.02). I used to keep the system readme in a 4dos help file, and even to using a modified 4help to open cdrom readme.txt files. Still, i don't see a place for 4dos (or other third-party enhancements) in this project.

#10 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 26 August 2008 - 07:14 AM

Part 1.

You need access to either Win98 or Win98se install tape, and something that can read .CAB files. The files are sorted by extention. This is the set of files to fetch.

drvspace.bin

ebd.cab

choice.com

command.com

diskcopy.com

doskey.com

edit.com

format.com

keyb.com

mode.com

more.com

sys.com

ega.cpi

ega2.cpi

ega3.cpi

iso.cpi

attrib.exe

chkdsk.exe

cvt.exe

debug.exe

deltree.exe

drvspace.exe

emm386.exe

extract.exe

fc.exe

fdisk.exe

find.exe

findramd.exe

hwinfo.exe

label.exe

mem.exe

move.exe

mscdex.exe

nlsfunc.exe

regedit.exe

scandisk.exe

scanreg.exe

setver.exe

smartdrv.exe

sort.exe

subst.exe

xcopy.exe

xcopy32.exe

edit.hlp

xcopy32.mod

ansi.sys

aspi2dos.sys

aspi2hlp.sys

aspi4dos.sys

aspi8dos.sys

aspi8u2.sys

aspicd.sys

btcdrom.sys

btdosm.sys

cmd640x.sys

cmd640x2.sys

country.sys

csmapper.sys

dblbuff.sys

display.sys

flashpt.sys

himem.sys

ifshlp.sys

keyboard.sys

keybrd2.sys

keybrd3.sys

keybrd4.sys

oakcdrom.sys

ramdrive.sys

winboot.sys

The only files different between Win98 and Win98SE are: xcopy32.mod, command.com, winboot.sys, and scandisk.exe. Since we plan to replace all of these files, except xcopy32.mod, there is no great harm here.

If you are using Windows 98fe, download a win98se bootdisk (eg from bootdisk.com, or powerload.com. You can fetch scandisk from http://www.mdgx.com/ , he has a version of scandisk from winme.

winboot.sys was updated in http://support.microsoft.com/kb/311561 . This contains two files, winboot.98s, and winboot.98g, You can use either. Alternately, you can use the file from Tihiy's Windows Revolution pack. This has no logo. His package uses also, wll.com to load the graphics, if needed.

fdisk.exe was updated in http://support.microsoft.com/kb/263044 . It contains two files also, Pick either. we're using the second version.

Ok. winboot.sys is io.sys, renamed.

Unpack EBD.EXE to get EXT.EXE, REBOOT.COM and FINDCD.EXE

Step 2.

You can add here some external files from "oldmsdos" packages.

version free: DOSSHELL, INTERLNK, MEMMAKER. MSBACKUP, QBASIC11

DOSSHELL from the MS-DOS 7 beta is only a version-number hack away
INTERLNK does not check version
QBASIC - you can grab the basic scripts (gorilla, nibbles, remline) from the supp disk

These are freely downloaded from the web, and some are available on the web.

MSD.EXE comes in several versions, as follows.

2.11 MSDOS 6.22 and Windows 3.11
2.12 not released - a version that covers chicago betas
2.13 Win95
2.14 Win98

3.00 avoid this: two of its buttons are dead.
3.01 use this. It's freely available as MSD3.ZIP

GWBASIC - yeah, use 3.23 (dos 4 vers).

Step 3
APPEND, BACKUP, COMP, EDLIN, EXE2BIN, GRAPHICS, LOADFIX, PRINT. REPLACE, RESTORE, TREE.

These exist in MSDOS 6.22, 6.21 and 6.20, the only difference being the version check. Do a diff on these, and modify eg 06.16 to 07.0A.


Step 4.
EXPAND.EXE comes from Windows 3.11. It handles both SZDD and KWAJ files

EXETYPE.EXE, EXETYPE.INI, and DELPART.EXE come from a winnt 31 resource kit. These are DOS programs, so you can see what DOS proggies abound.

WHERE.EXE i found in Wengier's package, along with his brilliant DOS 7.1 LOGO.SYS

COMPRESS.EXE is the hardest to find. Most common is version 2 (SZDD), but you really need version 1 (KWAJ). I found mine floating in the MSDOS 6.00 source tapes. v1 gives the tighter compression seen in DOS 6 and Windows 3.11

You have the source files for the diskettes.

#11 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 27 August 2008 - 10:57 AM

Part 2.

SHARE.EXE We get this from Windows 95 fe. You replace all instances of 0700x with 070Ax in a hex editor, and it works fine.

IO.SYS Tihiy's version of this already has the W3start hack in it. We just add the Phelum mods.
http://home.exetel.c.../phelum/w98.htm

HELP.HLP The source for this has had 'share' restored. This version will be released after the DOS is manufactured.


We need some config files. Here is samples

;FORMAT 

[Paths]

WinDir=.

WinBootDir=c:\msdos

HostWinBootDrv=c



[Options]

Autoscan=0

BootDelay=2

BootMulti=1

BootMenu=1

Logo=1

BootGUI=0

DoubleBuffer=0

Logo=1

SystemReg=0

;

;The following lines are required for compatibility with other programs.

;Do not remove them (MSDOS.SYS needs to be >1024 bytes).

;xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxa


Here is config.sys

[MENU]

menuitem=bootdos&#59; DOS Boot

menuitem=bootw98&#59; Windows 98

menudefault=bootw98,10



[Common]

DEVICE=c:\MSDOS\CDROM.SYS /D:IDECD001

LASTDRIVE=Z



[bootdos]



[bootw98]

Here is autoexec.bat

@echo off

GOTO %CONFIG%1



:bootw981

path c:\fenster;c:\fenster\command;c:\fenster\reskit

c:\FENSTER\VMADD\SYSINI.EXE

cd \fenster

win

goto :end



:bootdos1

path c:\win31;

c:\msdos\mouse.com

c:\msdos\mscdex.exe /d:IDECD001 /L:S

c:\msdos\idle

c:\msdos\fshare

goto :end



:1

echo invalid config.

:end

The next thing is to prepare an install file for this version of DOS.

#12 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 29 August 2008 - 07:24 AM

Add these files from MS-DOS 6.22 or whatever.

1. fasthelp.exe, 2. doshelp.hlp. We plan to patch fasthelp to read 'doshelp'.

This is the same MS-DOS 5 help command featured in Windows NT, 2K, XP, Vista, &c.

#13 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 28 December 2008 - 09:00 AM

FORMAT.COM

We use the version found at http://hddguru.com/ . Download and create the magic disk, it has a version of format.com that has been deversioned, and also /Q reactivated. You can replace the OEM string in the boot sector from MSWIN4.1 to MSDOS7.1 You must have a number there otherwise the thing won't work properly.

FIXMBR.COM

You make this out of a QBASIC file, such as HELP.COM (on the cdrom). Open this in the hex-editor, and replace QBASIC.EXE with FDISK.EXE(space), and at the end of the file replace /QHELP with /MBR(space)(space). Save as fixmbr.com

Here, we're trying to make an authentic MS-DOS 7.1 akin to the 6.x releases. It is not reccomended to use any version of MS-DOS fdisk on modern disks: instead, use freefdisk. This should still work with freefdisk.

COMMAND.COM

We use a versionless one here. Look for 3D 07 0A, and replace the following 74 with EB, or 75 XX with 90 90. This defangs the version-check. Neither of these actually report the underlying DOS. [a patched 6.22 one does!]. It's handy to do this, because some proggies launch \command.com, regardless of the setting of COMSPEC.

SHUTDOWN

This replaces the REBOOT.COM on the diskette. Look for SHUT12.ZIP on the net. You can shut-down or shut-down+reboot.

REGEDIT

I still include this, probably from Win98se. Windows ME makes a number of assumptions about DOS, is best avoided.

#14 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 28 December 2008 - 09:13 AM

MS-DOS is now long in the tooth, and many of its utilities are best replaced if one plans to use it on modern hardware. The following guide should help.

FDISK. use freefdisk here.

MSCDEX the Win9x version is 2.25, the same as DOS 6.22. It does not support for example, the ISO-4 extentions.

BASIC, BASICA, QBASIC. Ok if you must: otherwise, use REXX.

MOUSE: there are alternate freeware ones being developed. Still works, though.

SYS.COM Use the one from Win98se.

TREE. Dos itself does not support long file names, but there are alternate versions of tree that do support LFN. The version i have hails from MS-DOS 6.22, but pdtree comes with a DOS version that supports LFN.

In the main, MS-DOS has not been all that bad, but is more 'dated' than 'obsolete'.

#15 was_jaclaz

was_jaclaz

    Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 7100 posts
  • Location:Gone in the mist
  •  
    Italy

Posted 28 December 2008 - 10:09 AM

You can replace the OEM string in the boot sector from MSWIN4.1 to MSDOS7.1 You must have a number there otherwise the thing won't work properly.


FYI:
http://homepages.tes...name-field.html

It is a design disaster....


It is an implementation disaster ....


In fact, there is only one value for the OEM name field that all versions of all operating systems will agree to mean that the creator of the BPB is to be trusted: "IBM 2.0".


jaclaz

#16 mr_

mr_

    Frequent Member

  • Members
  • 355 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 29 December 2008 - 08:06 PM

This seams a strange project to me. I see it from pragmatical view, why only tools from MS?

Also I can't see a philosophical reason to hype MS-DOS, it's abandoned by MS. So there is also no "cool" or "fancy" reason for me. I use MS-DOS as reference, for testing and in case something works with MS-DOS, but not with FreeDOS.

Anyway, some informations here are still interesting.

#17 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 07 January 2009 - 08:03 AM

The title of the project is "MS-DOS 7.1", is supposed to represent what Microsoft would have released at this point. I mean, it's not a selection of cool DOS utilities, or a pick of favorites. It's then becomes not so much "can we get a really cool DOS", but "can we get a functional DOS 7.1 from Microsoft stuff".

The Wengier "China-DOS" selects things from three or four different DOS versions (PC-DOS, ROM-DOS, MS-DOS, Free-DOS), and mixes in things to suit. It is interesting, and it is innovative, but it's not "MS-DOS" (except for the kernel).

Freedos, for the most part is the kernel, with a lot of free-standing bits and peices added to make it work. I don't necessarily accept using 4dos as the only kernel, and it is useful to have Command.com hanging around there.

What "my favorite DOS" would include is a lot of PC-DOS stuff as well as MS-DOS. I have been a fan of PC-DOS since v 5.0, (having to suffer ms-dos on my home box!).

#18 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 09 January 2009 - 08:32 AM

The particular build will be used for the basis of the help file i am modifying.

#19 mr_

mr_

    Frequent Member

  • Members
  • 355 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 11 January 2009 - 03:05 PM

The title of the project is "MS-DOS 7.1", is supposed to represent what Microsoft would have released at this point.

Them dropped the DOS-based kernel line long time ago in favour of their NT-based kernel. If them would have put minimal effort in further developement MS-DOS could be now in a niche a very useful tool. But that's not the point, ms did try to kill it.

I think a DOS with a set of cool/useful is more handy.

#20 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 16 January 2009 - 09:11 AM

DOS is a facinating operating system, and one i grew up with.

It is relatively easy to make one of the 'best' around: one just looks to freedos for guidance here. I mean, lots of their stuff are designed to work on modern hardware etc.

But it is also interesting to see just how far one can take MS-DOS with the final versions that actually work as a general purpose DOS. They still keep releasing DOS stuff, so a ridgy-didge MS-DOS is the done thing here.

#21 submix8c

submix8c
  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • Location:Somewhere/Everywhere/Anywhere
  •  
    United States

Posted 21 February 2009 - 10:08 PM

Well, I'm just confused. You state "compress.exe" is on MSDOS 6.00. I have this set of disks, but this file does NOT exist - only "expand.exe" exists. Please explain exactly where this may be located (I have dos5.0 thru dos6.22).

#22 was_jaclaz

was_jaclaz

    Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 7100 posts
  • Location:Gone in the mist
  •  
    Italy

Posted 21 February 2009 - 11:15 PM

Well, I'm just confused. You state "compress.exe" is on MSDOS 6.00. I have this set of disks, but this file does NOT exist - only "expand.exe" exists. Please explain exactly where this may be located (I have dos5.0 thru dos6.22).


Do you have "source tapes"?

COMPRESS.EXE is the hardest to find. Most common is version 2 (SZDD), but you really need version 1 (KWAJ). I found mine floating in the MSDOS 6.00 source tapes. v1 gives the tighter compression seen in DOS 6 and Windows 3.11


NOT easily found/available:
http://groups.google...9f0e41?lnk=raot

However, FYI:
http://oldfiles.org....rload/msdos.htm

http://gnuwin32.sour.../mscompress.htm

jaclaz

#23 submix8c

submix8c
  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • Location:Somewhere/Everywhere/Anywhere
  •  
    United States

Posted 21 February 2009 - 11:46 PM

Nope, no "source tapes" - explanation accepted. Guess KWAJ-one is unavailable... Too bad, since it appears to compress much better than SZDD-one (I already have the SZDD versions - a gaggle of them). "DECOMP.EXE" won't work with non-KWAJ-ones either...

#24 was_jaclaz

was_jaclaz

    Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 7100 posts
  • Location:Gone in the mist
  •  
    Italy

Posted 22 February 2009 - 12:09 AM

I am not so sure that the old compress.exe is any better than "diamond.exe": :poke:
http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=81068

Did you check the ones here:
http://www.filewatch...?q=compress.exe

files from 1992 or 1993 may be the "real thing".

jaclaz

#25 wendy

wendy

    Frequent Member

  • Lady
  • 263 posts
  • Location:one mile from the QR main line
  • Interests:Operating systems, Weights and Measures, Geometry
  •  
    Australia

Posted 22 February 2009 - 08:11 AM

Microsoft has used a form of compression on releases since between DOS 4 and DOS 5a, although some OS/2 apps were released compressed.

Compress v 1 dates from ymb 1986 or so, gives fairly tight compression. The origional 1.0x versions rename compressed files to $ (eg edlin.exe to edlin.ex$), while the 1.1x versions use underscore (eg edlin.ex_).


Compress v 2 dates from 1990, released with the SDK, and not changed. This file gives a more loose compression,

Compress v 3 dates from after the ZIP format was released to open source. Microsoft based cab on ZIP

I:\>encomp1 -b -e -f conset.exe

Microsoft (R) Compression Utility - Version 1.11

Copyright (c) Microsoft Corp 1989 - 1992.  All rights reserved.



conset.exe

	  Wrote  75137 bytes to output file 'conset.ex_'

   151552 bytes compresses to 75137 bytes,  Savings: 50 percent



I:\>encomp2 -r conset.exe

Microsoft (R) File Compression Utility  Version 2.00

Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. 1990-1992.  All rights reserved.



Compressing conset.exe to conset.ex_.

conset.exe: 151552 bytes compressed to 81735 bytes, 47% savings.



I:\>makecab conset.exe conset.ex_

Microsoft (R) Cabinet Maker - Version 5.00.2134.1

Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. 1981-1999.



100.00% [flushing current folder]



I:\>dir conset.ex? /z /o:s



 Volume in drive I is Winxp		  Serial number is 2eb7:cde4

 Directory of  I:\conset.ex?



conset.exr	   58935  22/02/09  18:00 conset.exe RAR compression

conset.exz	   68133  22/02/09  17:55 conset.exe PKZIP (eg DR-DOS)

conset.ex3	   68301  22/02/09  17:52 Compress.exe 3  MSCF (DOS 7)

conset.ex1	   75137   6/06/02  19:57 Compress.exe 1  KWAJ (DOS 6)

conset.ex2	   81735   6/06/02  19:57 Compress.exe 2  SZDD (DOS 5)

conset.exe	  151552   6/06/02  19:57 Uncompressed file

		503,793 bytes in 6 files and 0 dirs	512,000 bytes allocated

expand.exe will unpack files by compress.exe, but some things need to be watched.

DOS 5, Windows 3.x0 and Windows NT 3.10 were prepared with compress v 2, which was also released in the SDK. expand and lzexpand.dll from these versions can only handle SZDD files.

DOS 6 (PC/MS) and a number of very early DOS/OS2 apps (eg WLO 1.x) were prepared with compress v 1, compress from these DOS versions can only handle KWAJ files.

Windows 3.11, Wfw 3.11 was prepared with compress v 1 also, but because earlier files would be encountered, expand and lzexpand.exe would handle both SZDD and KWAJ files.

Windows NT 3.50 and later, Windows NT, and Windows 9x were prepared with diamond, the extract utility is used to unpack these. compress from the resource kits prepare MSCF files, expand from these files can unpack SZDD and MSCF files.

Windows Vista and later are prepared with a new format WIM, which has not come into general circulation to this time.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users