thanatoid

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:Sx1duhh4u8qIFwKj@soft255.demon.co.uk:

> In message <Xns9B00A0A3D3E0thanexit@66.250.146.158>,
> thanatoid <waiting@the.exit.invalid> writes
>>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>in news:j4rBM+WAo4qIFwMb@soft255.demon.co.uk:
>>
>>> In message <e1fkC8mAJHA.1180@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>, Gary
>>> S. Terhune <none@?.?.invalid> writes
>>>>Just to keep me happy, eh? So you really don't care about
>>>>the innocent user who might stumble upon this thread and
>>>>not realize that it isn't about Windows 98?
>>>>
>>> I do, actually.
>>
>>See what I mean? According to Terhune, Windows xLite is NOT
>>Windows. I have asked him to show me a single file in
>>Win98SELite which did not come from MS, but he prefers to
>>argue in ignorance and refuses to even look at the program.
>>After all, it's a figment of our imagination.
>>
>>
> Well, to be fair, I rather suspect 98lite.exe is not M$ (-:

Yes, but that file is NOT in the OS! It's the customizer! It's
like saying that if the BIOS is not made by MS, it's not a
Windows machine!
(I should have said "in a finished Win98SELite install".)

--
[from a recent conversation]
thanatoid: So why did you decide you needed broadband?
Neighbor: I wanted to read my e-mail faster.

MEB

In news:an7$LCUB+3qIFw6+@soft255.demon.co.uk ,
J. P. Gilliver (John) contemplated and posted:

| In message <##sF8ZIAJHA.4992@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, MEB
| <meb@not.here.invalid> writes
|>I see you installed something new from soporific, what was it?
|
| It was the full UBCD, but with the option - which it offers - to
| install over an existing system, keeping settings etcetera. I should
| have known better - this sort of thing is always better done as a
| full clean install. And I don't _really_ hold soporific responsible.

Well you shouldn't, no one knows whether these things will work perfectly
on everyone's system.

BTW: the UBCD of this discussion is soporific's *Unattended Boot &
Installation CD* ** NOT** the Universal Boot CD, for testing and diagnostic
purposes.

IF I'm reading this and your other posts correctly: Your issue stems from a
*MIXED modified system*. 98Lite removes system files AND modifies registry
settings during its modification process, so does soporific's UBCD. Many of
these MODs require some of the IE5/6 files [and depending upon the MOD, IE
updates] be installed within the system.

|>
|> I have outlined what would likely be the normal procedure in this
|>situation and the procedure when installing an un-official
|>compilation. Perhaps it might be beneficial for you to outline what
|>you have already done. You
|
| The installation proceeded quite far, but did get to a point (after
| one - I think - reboot) where it went into a loop, repeatedly
| encountering some error message.

The problem likely arose with the massive device changes being made within
the system, During the process USB [a universal driver is installed] and
other devices [PCI, firewire, etc.] were being changed. Depending upon where
in the process it failed, the registry may not have been fully updated
[which appears to be the issue].

Potenially, you could physically remove all added adapters from the system,
which *might* allow booting to Safe Mode. From there, you may be able to
remove *all* adapters shown in Device Manager. This DID work for me once
upon a time during my testing of some of the older MODs.

As an additional FYI for potential MOD users: you will find these work
better if you uninstall/physically remove USB/Firewire devices [not the
software] *prior* to attempting the installation.

|
|>should also note that unless you follow the procedures and
|>updates/patch process being used in unofficial patchings by the
|>creator of the patch, your results will likely NOT reflect the same
|>success.
|> That type of process requires one be prepared to re-install an image
|>should the testing fail or corrupt one's system.
| []
| Indeed. I managed to restore my system to how I had it by use of an
| ERD saveset from before I started with UBCD; this is not a full
| image, but is a Microsoft utility. Unfortunately, as I've only
| discovered subsequently, it (a) didn't bring back sound - which I
| didn't notice immediately - and (b) has damaged _some_thing involved
| with the loading of drivers in general. (I've now found it with
| _three_ things - the sound, the microscope [webcam], and a new USB
| stick.)
|
| To keep some people happy I will say: I am using 98lite; any advice
| given may not be applicable to those who are not.

Again, the UBCD installs the universal driver package [among other device
changes]. That universal driver package DOES require the removal of ALL USB
and Firewire devices prior to its installation.

Wish I could be more help, but since you are stuck in a loop of failed
software installation, in a *dual modified* system, much of what I would
potentially suggest will not be viable.

*IF* Safe Mode can be entered after removing the devices, run through the
file re-registration processes outlined within the Microsoft KBs PRIOR to
re-installing the removed adapters..

Looks something like this from the Run or Prompt:

regsvr32 {switches} {some DLL}

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

J. P. Gilliver (John)

In message <OjPLa#oAJHA.1016@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>, Gary S. Terhune
<none@?.?.invalid> writes
[]
>> I'm confused by the difference between "shell" and "kernel" in what you
>> say above; it seems to me that you mean different things by the two terms.
[]
>These may not be the best explanations, but they'll do.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_...ter_science%29
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_(computing)
>
Thanks - so, basically, you (and Wikipedia) use kernel to mean the
actual engine, and shell to mean the user interface.
[]
>>>what you describe doesn't sound like it's at all that simple, sounds more
>>>like rampant DLL Hell in the Hardware/PnP/Drivers installation layer. I
>>>won't go through all the steps in my logic, but if it were my machine, and
>>>I
>>>just wanted to get my real Windows 98 back, it would have been flattened
>>>and
>>>rebuilt by now.
>>
>> If I were going to do that, I think I'd go for XP.
>
>If you've been running Windows 98 and/or 98Lite for "years" on that machine,
>I doubt it's built to handle XP in any manner that would satisfy you. But I
>don't know the machine's specs, so I'm just guessing.

I would have had the same view. However, it is actually a reasonably
modern system - Celeron 2.4, 512+256M. It is newer than the installation
it's running, having (of necessity - something died) had a motherboard
(and thus processor and memory) transplant.
>
>>>Except that you still apparently want to play with the big boys and make
>>>it
>>>your holy grail to find out what went wrong and fix it. Problems is, you
>>
>> I'm very puzzled why you consider this to be such a satanic wish: what,
>> exactly, is wrong with wanting to know what has gone wrong.
>
>Absolutely nothing! You just didn't prepare for your experiment in a manner
>that would have allowed you to determine what went wrong. You have no data
>from your experiment except that you installed it, then tried to get out and
>can't. Beyond that, you only have my *guess* that the issue is in the
>hardware installation programming.

That would be my guess too.
[]
>> Wow! Well, it was the (presumed) expertise that I sensed you had developed
>> as a result of all that, that I'd hoped I could tap into.
>
>Nope. If I haven't made it plain, yet, I think your system is totally hosed.

You have (-:

>If you can't get into it, then an Overinstall of Win98 might get it working
>sufficiently well enough that you can more easily copy off your personal
>files before reformatting and reinstalling from scratch..
[]
>> Well, except for actual hardware failure or perhaps FAT corruption, I am
>> fairly certain I can extract my _data_ files, if necessary by booting into
>> DOS. (I frequently dump them to CD as well.)
>
>Extract your data files in DOS to where? You have a DOS CD burning utility?

Good point. But, in fact, I have a 98-like (! for you) system which
allows me access to all my files (in fact appears to be working in all
respects other than sound and new driver installation).

>Easiest way is to put the drive into another machine and use that machine to
>back up the files to CD or DVD (or get an external drive if your system is

I have that option ...

>new enough that BIOS sees and recognizes them, then use a bootable CD system
>like BartPE to copy the files from your system to the external HD.) Now that

.... and have obtained (though not played with yet) BartPE, as it would
appear that that is NTFS-compatible, and thus might be usable with XP,
which I am thinking of getting soon (on a netbook).

>I say that, I think there are bootable CD systems out there that include
>burner utilities. Might check them out.

Please share what you find here (perhaps in another thread to this one)
- probably many here would be interested.
[]
>> What is your opinion of TweakUI, and the other PowerTools?
>
>For the most part, I think they are too dangerous for the average user. I
>don't use them, I prefer to do things manually for the most part. The short
>and sweet is that I don't trust them, and every one of them contains
>functions that can wreck your system, either immediately or in the form of a

Interesting. You are probably right on all counts.

>time bomb. Using TUI to get rid of IE4 integration into Win98 was one such.

I don't think I knew that was among its functions; that was the main
reason I went for 98lite. I would have just used their IEradicator, but
more configurability seemed a good idea.

>I forget what the actual wording is of the settings involved, but once they
>were involved, it turned out the functions they supposedly "turned off"
>ended up completely hosed, with some secondary damage that was MUCH worse
>than just not being able to view the desktop as a webpage. IOW, the
>presumably simple tweaks had hidden parts that you aren't warned about and
>that most people found out they wanted after all. Coincidentally, those
>functions are among the same exact things 98Lite hoses.

Sounds as if the two might well use some of the same code (or at least
methods).
[]
>> Agreed - or, do it all themself, but still have plenty of dialog (about
>> both problems and suggestions) with the users. A couple of examples of
>> that, I would say, are Irfan Skiljan's IrfanView, John Steed's Brother's
>> Keeper (genealogy software), and GoldWave (sound editing); all of these,
>> but particularly the first two, deal openly with the users. I have
>> actually bought all of these (and some others), even though at least one
>> (IrfanView) is free for home use, as I believe in encouraging them.
[]




Other than complete reinstallation, do you have any remaining
suggestions about the "rampant DLL Hell in the Hardware/PnP/Drivers
installation layer" - such as what DLLs (and versions) are involved with
that? I expect not, but thought I'd ask.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

A leader who keeps his ear to the ground allows his rear end to become a
target.
-Angie Papadakis