VOGONS


First post, by Sasha

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Motherboard: don't know what it is

Processor type and speed: AMD Turion(tm) 64 X2 mobile Technology TL-64 2.20 GHz

Amount and type of RAM: 1918 MB and I don't know what type is

Video board w/ RAM amount and type:
Hmm, I don't know what that is, so here's what is on the display page, please indicate what this question was looking for:
Chip Type: ATI Radeon X 1200 Series (0x791F)
DAC Type: Internal DAC (400MHz)
Adapter String: ATI Radeon X 1200
Bios Information: RS690
Total Available Graphics Memory: 831 MB
Dedicated Video Memory: 128 MB
System Video Memory: 0 MB
Shared System Memory: 703 MB

Sound board: Same thing as video:
Realtek High Definition Audio
Device Type: Sound, video and game controllers
Manufacturer: Realtek
LLocation: Location 3 (Internal High Definition Audio Bus)

Operating system: Windows Vista Professional 32-bit
Game name: err, it's not a game, it's a programme, scandisk for Windows 95

Description of problem: this is getting too disjoint, I think I'll just describe the whole thing and then please indicate if you need other information and how to obtain the information from Vista.

I used to use regular scandisk to scan all my drives in the past. However, with Vista, even though it is a 32-bit version, I get the following error:

16 bit MS-DOS Subsystem wrote:

config.nt. The system file is not suitable for running MS-DOS and Microsoft Windows applications. Choose 'Close' to terminate the application.
Close

(p.s. I like how they phrased it to "choose" close)

When I run Scandisk via DosBOX, however, it sets up the graphics and everything:

Microsoft Scandisk
─────────────────────────────────

─────────────────────────────────

It initializes the mouse and stuff, but it never does get around to scanning the disk itself. On the older version (before 0.63), it gives "Write 0 to rom at f392e" over and over again. This writing takes up a whole lot of CPU (in csrss.exe), so I figured perhaps a new version without it would work. However, even when the cycles are set to Max and priority set to Realtime, it only uses up in the 20s of CPU, though I doubt this is the reason, and it still doesn't work. I left it on overnight, but to no avail. The following commands have been used before scandisk:
mount C D:\ (drive to scan)
mount D F:\ (drive with scandisk programme)
D:
cd WIN95 (directory with scandisk programme)
scandisk C:

Edit: the D:\ (mapped C drive) has a FAT16 filesystem.
Any suggestions?

Last edited by Sasha on 2007-09-08, 15:20. Edited 4 times in total.

Reply 1 of 17, by wd

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Author
Rank
DOSBox Author

Do NOT, NEVER use any OS system tools within dosbox, especially not ones
that want to directly access the disk. This is not what emulators are for,
not dosbox and not any other.
Use XPs disk checker, or some other, but not scandisk.

Reply 3 of 17, by Qbix

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Author
Rank
DOSBox Author

scandisk utilities are closely tight to the supported filesystems by the os.
Hence mixing them is a bad idea.

Water flows down the stream
How to ask questions the smart way!

Reply 4 of 17, by doomer

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
wd wrote:
Do NOT, NEVER use any OS system tools within dosbox, especially not ones that want to directly access the disk. This is not what […]
Show full quote

Do NOT, NEVER use any OS system tools within dosbox, especially not ones
that want to directly access the disk. This is not what emulators are for,
not dosbox and not any other.
Use XPs disk checker, or some other, but not scandisk.

Very wisely said.

Why on earth would one would to use a 16-bit, twelve year old scandisk on a brand-new operating system like Vista? Frankly speaking, this is just asking for trouble.

Just use the built-in Vista disk check by right-clicking on your hard drive in "computer" and selecting tools.

Once again, running windows 95 scandisk on Vista is an extremely stupid idea, to say the least.

Reply 5 of 17, by Sasha

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

But in my case, it's required for a certain programme to install. When I couldn't figure out why it didn't install, I recalled all the programmes that it runs before installing and tried running them one by one, and the scandisk is the one that failed.

Reply 7 of 17, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

Then set it up on a disk image and try to extract the installed program from the disk image.

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 9 of 17, by Sasha

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
wd wrote:

Maybe it isn't compatible with XP? Especially not if it runs scandisk.
Setup some virtual environment and install win9x in there, and your
program, too.

Dominus wrote:

Then set it up on a disk image and try to extract the installed program from the disk image.

How do I do either one of those things?

Reply 11 of 17, by Sasha

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Hmm, I'll try it, thanks, because searching the internet for just "Virtual Environment" returned wiki pages that talk about it, forums that talk about how useless they are, &c., but no virtual environments themselves.

Reply 12 of 17, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

look at the dosbox guides forum.
You understood wd's answers wrong, he answered your two questions, for the first one he recommended to search for search for qemu, vpc, vmware etc. Searching for "Virtual Environment" doesn't help there.

For the second he told you to search the forum (not the net, the forum, meaning this forum). Again "Virtual Environment" isn't the search term, especially when I told you to "Then set it up on a disk image and try to extract the installed program from the disk image." I'll probably have to add, that this still meant you to use that advice with Dosbox.

Sorry to be so teacher like, but I DO believe in educating people to be able to find stuff on their own. If you just present results to people they don't learn.

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 14 of 17, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

bah, talking about reading more closely what people write. Sorry.

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 15 of 17, by Sasha

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Awesome, thanks, even though the virtual machine didn't quite work, I'm guessing it's some bug, I can use it to do other stuff... I'm assuming there's no risk whatsoever using a Virtual Machine? Like from software overclocking and stuff?

Edit: Oh, and I'm sorry, one more thing, is there a way to let the emulator to take over my computer (like to let it control shutting down, &c.)?

Reply 16 of 17, by IIGS_User

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Sasha wrote:

Edit: Oh, and I'm sorry, one more thing, is there a way to let the emulator to take over my computer (like to let it control shutting down, &c.)?

If you hack the software, it may can do, but usually it can shut down itself only.

Klimawandel.

Reply 17 of 17, by ADDiCT

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Is it just me, or is this thread just kind of surreal?

Sasha, why do you want to run W95 scandisk on Vista?! Either this is a bad joke, or you don't know about the handy llittle "chkdsk" command that's been in all Windows NT versions since the first one AFAIK (XP and Vista are NT ("New Technology") based OS's, too). To use it, open a command prompt, and type "chkdsk" to get instructions.

I think you should read some articles about emulators (like the Wikipedia one). You should also be aware of the fact that there are some fundamental differences between emulation and virtualization.

What program do you want to install/run on your Vista machine? If we knew that, we could try to help you getting that program to work, instead of just shooting in the dark.