|
|
|
bud4wiser
|
Posted:
Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:04 pm |
|
|
|
PRO New Member
Joined: 08 Sep 2007
Posts: 3
|
|
Hey, I think Vista Boot Pro is the single most important improvement to Vista ever released. I hope some one get's their due when MS hijacks it.
I tried working with BCDEdit and quickly "lost it" trying keep command line syntax and "terms" straight... - geez these MS guys must be the most anal-idiots in the world to compile anything that requires typing a freaking {GUID} at a command line.
So anyway, here's the question: By using Vista Boot 3.3 I'm successfully operating a quad-boot PC of several Vista OS , and XP installed on a FAT32 file system with a Windows 98 command interpreter installed - please don't ask why........
Here's the "deal" - to boot to the Windows 98 command prompt when using the Vista-boot manager I have to leave an entry in the legacy boot.ini file.
When I add the "text value" so that an entry shows up - then the BCD store reads the value and presents the selection in the opening screen - yet is is invalid and will not boot. However, I can remove the "text value" and the menu entry goes away from both the XP-based NT loader and the opening menu. However the valid 98 command prompt is available by just selecting the legacy XP install and then selecting the "blank" line below XP.
So anyway, my question is: I need to to know the command string or method to add a valid boot device for this BCD section.
I'm assuming if a correct value is applied - I can Vista Boot 3.3 to properly display "Windows 98" on a Vista Boot menu that corresponds to the "C:\" value on the legacy XP boot.ini menu. Thanks
Windows Boot Manager
--------------------
identifier {bootmgr}
device unknown
description Windows Boot Manager
locale en-US
inherit {globalsettings}
default {default}
resumeobject {bafae4bd-5273-11dc-95b7-c2f88735fc28}
displayorder {36c2fe1e-5d6a-11dc-9603-001aa08c288b}
{36c2fe21-5d6a-11dc-9603-001aa08c288b}
{default}
toolsdisplayorder {memdiag}
timeout 5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
NT50
Jeff Replogle |
Posted:
Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:20 pm |
|
|
|
Management Support Team
Joined: 19 Jun 2004
Posts: 9069
Location: Jackson, TN USA
|
|
Hopefully Jason, Jeff, or Graham will see this one soon. Be patient, Jason checks this section often.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
Grav!ty
Graham Massey |
Posted:
Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:57 pm |
|
|
|
Vice President Operations
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 19942
Location: Johannesburg
|
|
If you can get a dual boot with XP and the Win98 command prompt running, then both entries should appear in the "Earlier versions of Windows" Vista boot menu if Vista is installed after you have the boot.ini for XP and the Win98 command prompt setup.
I must confess I have no idea what command/text line to add to the XP boot.ini though. Hopefully someone else will give some input and help on that bud4wiser.
By the way, this is not a "bug" in VistaBootPRO. It is not designed to work with Windows 98 or it's command prompt. I'll change your topic title accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
jbullard
Jason Bullard |
Posted:
Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:50 pm |
|
|
|
Management Software Design
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 3204
Location: Utah
|
|
I will have to check into this. The next version of VBP will contain a "custom" bootloader path so users can enter custom paths instead of being forced to use either winload.exe or ntldr. I don't remember which file 98 uses to boot but this will be able to be added as a custom path with the next version.
I will do an install of 98 and see what files need to be referenced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
bud4wiser
|
Posted:
Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:29 am |
|
|
|
PRO New Member
Joined: 08 Sep 2007
Posts: 3
|
|
So no interest in seeing whether the NT loader can "call" the bootsect.dos file and shell back to a 98 command interpreter? I was think a BCD entry "could" contain something like this \NTLDR\Bootsect.dos(dat)?
Whatever value the legacy loader maintains for "C:\" already works from the legacy loader, I can't see why Vista Boot Pro's BCD menu can't hold a text string that calls the same value the NTLDR assigns to a C:\"dos-real" command prompt, Whether it's 98 on fat32 or "real-old DOS" on Fat 16.
Is this some kind of "EFI" programming issue, I thought the whole point of EFI was to do any and everything -- which makes me wonder if can't add a USB boot drive.... Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
NT50
Jeff Replogle |
Posted:
Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:41 am |
|
|
|
Management Support Team
Joined: 19 Jun 2004
Posts: 9069
Location: Jackson, TN USA
|
| bud4wiser wrote: |
| So no interest in seeing whether the NT loader can "call" the bootsect.dos file and shell back to a 98 command interpreter? I |
Jason is looking into it. Please be patient due to his plate is full 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
jbullard
Jason Bullard |
Posted:
Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:49 am |
|
|
|
Management Software Design
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 3204
Location: Utah
|
|
Sorry. I have had some major internet connection issues. I did look into this and with the next release we are going to include a custom path for the bootloader. This will pretty much allow you to type anything in there you want as long as the boot file exists.
So we do have a solution it is just not going to be released until the next version which we are working on.
Thanks for being patient.
Jason
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
bud4wiser
|
Posted:
Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:23 am |
|
|
|
PRO New Member
Joined: 08 Sep 2007
Posts: 3
|
|
Thanks for checking, this isn't hardly a priority. This is a feature of the Vista boot loader - Vista Pro simply repeats the process. As I "see it" - the problem resides with the Vista loader/BCD not being able to incorporate the appropriate "variables" - which in this case are text strings that refer to a valid compsec path for the NTLDR after it has hands off to it's legacy comspec.
This may very well be a case of "you can't get there from here." The next best thing may be for Vista Pro code would be to "rem" out any strings other than the NTLDR - then at least, it won't be repeating the Vista Bootloader mistake..........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|