Have you tried XUSBSUPP?

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177518-xusbsupp- … indows-95-osr2/

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-13, 08:59:

Have you tried XUSBSUPP?

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177518-xusbsupp- … indows-95-osr2/

not yet, I thought the best was installing the chipset drivers first... should solve it to install xusbupp before chipset drivers?

psaez wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:17:

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-13, 08:59:

Have you tried XUSBSUPP?

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177518-xusbsupp- … indows-95-osr2/

not yet, I thought the best was installing the chipset drivers first... should solve it to install xusbupp before chipset drivers?

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any motherboard or chipset-drivers. For the originals that would be USBSUPP and USBUPD2, but XUSBSUPP includes both of them + a handy tray utility for ejecting mass storage devices, and generic drivers for most said devices so it's an easy recommendation over the original updates.

Edit: ...and while you're at it, you're also supposed to install DirectX before you install video card drivers (usually DirectX 7 or 8 ).

There are A LOT of caveats to installing Windows, which if not known will often lead to a situation that requires you to start over or land you in unnecessary trouble.

leonardo wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:35:

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any mother […]
Show full quote

psaez wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:17:

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-13, 08:59:

Have you tried XUSBSUPP?

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177518-xusbsupp- … indows-95-osr2/

not yet, I thought the best was installing the chipset drivers first... should solve it to install xusbupp before chipset drivers?

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any motherboard or chipset-drivers. For the originals that would be USBSUPP and USBUPD2, but XUSBSUPP includes both of them + a handy tray utility for ejecting mass storage devices, and generic drivers for most said devices so it's an easy recommendation over the original updates.

Edit: ...and while you're at it, you're also supposed to install DirectX before you install video card drivers (usually DirectX 7 or 8 ).

There are A LOT of caveats to installing Windows, which if not known will often lead to a situation that requires you to start over or land you in unnecessary trouble.

Exactly, install a fresh copy of Win95, install the IE 4.0 and DirectX then install the XUSBSUPP.

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-14, 11:30:

leonardo wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:35:

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any mother […]
Show full quote

psaez wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:17:

not yet, I thought the best was installing the chipset drivers first... should solve it to install xusbupp before chipset drivers?

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any motherboard or chipset-drivers. For the originals that would be USBSUPP and USBUPD2, but XUSBSUPP includes both of them + a handy tray utility for ejecting mass storage devices, and generic drivers for most said devices so it's an easy recommendation over the original updates.

Edit: ...and while you're at it, you're also supposed to install DirectX before you install video card drivers (usually DirectX 7 or 8 ).

There are A LOT of caveats to installing Windows, which if not known will often lead to a situation that requires you to start over or land you in unnecessary trouble.

Exactly, install a fresh copy of Win95, install the IE 4.0 and DirectX then install the XUSBSUPP.

IE 4.0? can I know why to do that please?

Do you have a safe link to IE 4.0?

psaez wrote on 2024-04-14, 15:14:

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-14, 11:30:

leonardo wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:35:

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any motherboard or chipset-drivers. For the originals that would be USBSUPP and USBUPD2, but XUSBSUPP includes both of them + a handy tray utility for ejecting mass storage devices, and generic drivers for most said devices so it's an easy recommendation over the original updates.

Edit: ...and while you're at it, you're also supposed to install DirectX before you install video card drivers (usually DirectX 7 or 8 ).

There are A LOT of caveats to installing Windows, which if not known will often lead to a situation that requires you to start over or land you in unnecessary trouble.

Exactly, install a fresh copy of Win95, install the IE 4.0 and DirectX then install the XUSBSUPP.

IE 4.0? can I know why to do that please?

Do you have a safe link to IE 4.0?

Well, it's optional but trust me you'll have a much better experience with it installed. Keep in mind that you have to write the ISO on a blank CD-R.

https://archive.org/details/microsoft-interne … .1712.3-english

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-14, 16:11:

psaez wrote on 2024-04-14, 15:14:

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-14, 11:30:

Exactly, install a fresh copy of Win95, install the IE 4.0 and DirectX then install the XUSBSUPP.

IE 4.0? can I know why to do that please?

Do you have a safe link to IE 4.0?

Well, it's optional but trust me you'll have a much better experience with it installed. Keep in mind that you have to write the ISO on a blank CD-R.

https://archive.org/details/microsoft-interne … .1712.3-english

can't simply be copyed on a folder and installed from the folder directly executing installer?

psaez wrote on 2024-04-14, 16:34:

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-14, 16:11:

psaez wrote on 2024-04-14, 15:14:

IE 4.0? can I know why to do that please?

Do you have a safe link to IE 4.0?

Well, it's optional but trust me you'll have a much better experience with it installed. Keep in mind that you have to write the ISO on a blank CD-R.

https://archive.org/details/microsoft-interne … .1712.3-english

can't simply be copyed on a folder and installed from the folder directly executing installer?

Try Virtual Clone, but I'm not sure if it works.

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-13, 08:59:

Have you tried XUSBSUPP?

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177518-xusbsupp- … indows-95-osr2/

leonardo wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:35:

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any mother […]
Show full quote

psaez wrote on 2024-04-13, 17:17:

dominusprog wrote on 2024-04-13, 08:59:

Have you tried XUSBSUPP?

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177518-xusbsupp- … indows-95-osr2/

not yet, I thought the best was installing the chipset drivers first... should solve it to install xusbupp before chipset drivers?

It's a little counter-intuitive, but you are actually supposed to install the USB support packages before you install any motherboard or chipset-drivers. For the originals that would be USBSUPP and USBUPD2, but XUSBSUPP includes both of them + a handy tray utility for ejecting mass storage devices, and generic drivers for most said devices so it's an easy recommendation over the original updates.

Edit: ...and while you're at it, you're also supposed to install DirectX before you install video card drivers (usually DirectX 7 or 8 ).

There are A LOT of caveats to installing Windows, which if not known will often lead to a situation that requires you to start over or land you in unnecessary trouble.

well guys, I tryed it, fresh clean W95 OSR 2.1 install, then, xusbsupp, then, the drivers I told you for this motherboard: VIA 4in1 Chipset Driver downloaded from https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/dfi-ca64-tc#driver

After installing the via drivers, it request for a reboot, and then, similar problem, now It can proceed installing the USB part, but after that, again similar errors, and again stuck with broken W95 install:

Hmm... there are a few unknowns in this thread for me but as general advice, are you aware that you may have to reduce the CPU speed during installation until you install some later patches? You can do this either by lowering the clock, or by turning off L1 and L2 cache from the BIOS, and then turn them back on when you've successfully completed setup and installed the necessary patches.

The fastest system I've installed Windows 95 on that didn't require this step is a 1 GHz Pentium III and you have a 1.4 GHz system. My Athlon, for example, already required turning off the L2 to get the setup properly completed. I recall for ViA platforms, 4.35 was generally the recommended 4in1 driver version, but I don't think this is why you are having the errors during device detection phase of the installation. If I had to wager a guess, I'd say the corruption is real and is occurring due to the IDE-to-SD/SATA adapter you have in-between your motherboard and the storage device. That's a hunch, though.

edit: Another hunch - how big is drive C? Windows 95 may freak out if your primary partition is larger than 32 GB. You can have a larger disk (120 GB, say) - just don't have any single volume be larger than 32 GB, and you'll be ok.

leonardo wrote on 2024-04-15, 20:27:

Hmm... there are a few unknowns in this thread for me but as general advice, are you aware that you may have to reduce the CPU speed during installation until you install some later patches? You can do this either by lowering the clock, or by turning off L1 and L2 cache from the BIOS, and then turn them back on when you've successfully completed setup and installed the necessary patches.

The fastest system I've installed Windows 95 on that didn't require this step is a 1 GHz Pentium III and you have a 1.4 GHz system. My Athlon, for example, already required turning off the L2 to get the setup properly completed. I recall for ViA platforms, 4.35 was generally the recommended 4in1 driver version, but I don't think this is why you are having the errors during device detection phase of the installation. If I had to wager a guess, I'd say the corruption is real and is occurring due to the IDE-to-SD/SATA adapter you have in-between your motherboard and the storage device. That's a hunch, though.

edit: Another hunch - how big is drive C? Windows 95 may freak out if your primary partition is larger than 32 GB. You can have a larger disk (120 GB, say) - just don't have any single volume be larger than 32 GB, and you'll be ok.

Hi

I'll test when I can go to that computer to reduce the clock and the cache. How can that affect the installation of some drivers?

On the other hand, I don't think is corruption, because it successfully works until I try to install VIA chipset drivers. And always break after installing them. That seems to be a pattern related with the drivers and windows 95.

psaez wrote on 2024-04-15, 22:13:

Hi […]
Show full quote

leonardo wrote on 2024-04-15, 20:27:

Hmm... there are a few unknowns in this thread for me but as general advice, are you aware that you may have to reduce the CPU speed during installation until you install some later patches? You can do this either by lowering the clock, or by turning off L1 and L2 cache from the BIOS, and then turn them back on when you've successfully completed setup and installed the necessary patches.

The fastest system I've installed Windows 95 on that didn't require this step is a 1 GHz Pentium III and you have a 1.4 GHz system. My Athlon, for example, already required turning off the L2 to get the setup properly completed. I recall for ViA platforms, 4.35 was generally the recommended 4in1 driver version, but I don't think this is why you are having the errors during device detection phase of the installation. If I had to wager a guess, I'd say the corruption is real and is occurring due to the IDE-to-SD/SATA adapter you have in-between your motherboard and the storage device. That's a hunch, though.

edit: Another hunch - how big is drive C? Windows 95 may freak out if your primary partition is larger than 32 GB. You can have a larger disk (120 GB, say) - just don't have any single volume be larger than 32 GB, and you'll be ok.

Hi

I'll test when I can go to that computer to reduce the clock and the cache. How can that affect the installation of some drivers?

On the other hand, I don't think is corruption, because it successfully works until I try to install VIA chipset drivers. And always break after installing them. That seems to be a pattern related with the drivers and windows 95.

There is a bug in Windows 95 that causes setup to not complete if you have an AMD CPU faster than 300 MHz. For Intel CPUs this seems to be a little bit more ambiguous (the problem still exists, but at a much higher MHz-limit). It may not be necessary for you to slow the system down - it seems you are passing that stage of setup, and the problem really comes in to play when you install the chipset drivers.

The problem could be something as simple as DMA becoming enabled for the hard disk controller after the driver is installed, which then breaks Windows or causes corruption because your device (via the adapter) isn't compatible - something like this. This is still speculation.

You could maybe try the 4.35 version of 4in1 instead to see if that makes a difference. You could also check the BIOS for DMA-related settings to your IDE controller. You could - for example - disable Ultra DMA and use PIO mode instead, just to see if that is what is triggering the problem.