VOGONS


First post, by james1095

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

At some point in my tinkering on this DECpc XL 466d2 I noticed MSCDEX.EXE was failing to load with 'Packed file is corrupt'. Now the weird thing is it was working previously and I'm not sure exactly what I did that started this, and also if I call it twice in the autoexec.bat using exactly the same command it works fine the second time. This is version 2.23 and it behaves exactly the same whether I use the one in the dos folder or the one in the Windows 3.11 folder. I even tried replacing it with a freshly downloaded copy. Anyone know why this is happening or how to fix it? Apparently there's a tool to unpack the file but I'm really curious what is going on and why this only started recently.

486 DX2-66
40MB RAM
NCR 53C810 SCSI (onboard)
STB Powergraph 64 S3 Trio64V+ PCI
MS-DOS 6.22
Windows 3.11

Reply 1 of 15, by mkarcher

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

That's indeed strange. "Packed file is corrupt" is a well-known message, because one reason this message might appear is that the classic "EXEPACK" implementation might fail with that message on perfectly fine files if the high memory area is accessible during the initialization of the file. The MS-DOS kernels starting with MS-DOS 5 (maybe 4?) handle this problem, and temporarily disable the HMA while the EXE file is unpacking. You should never see this message for this reason on a MS-DOS 6.22 system, unless you have some other resident program loaded that interferes with the kernel logic that should reliably prevent this problem.

For troubleshooting, I suggest:

  • Disable "DOS=HIGH" in config.sys. This will fully eliminate the "classic reason" why you might see "packed file is corrupt" if all software and hardware components are operating properly.
  • If you are using EMM386, test whether the issue disappears without EMM386.
  • Run the same version of MSCDEX from a floppy instead of the hard drive, to check whether the SCSI controller makes trouble.
  • Copy the MSCDEX.EXE from that system back to an internet connected system and verify that the file has not been damaged during transfer.
  • Load a different amount of programs before MSCDEX (e.g. load SMARTDRV before MSCDEX if you didn't do so now, or the other way araound). After troubleshooting, if you are using SmartDrive at all, do load it after MSCDEX, because SmartDrive from DOS 6.x will cache CD data in that case.

You might also want to run MEMTEST+ 4.1 (newer versions are incompatible with 486 systems and crash on boot) to check for general system stability. While the program targets memory, it will usually indicate if anything is wrong on the front-side bus, the L2 cache, the RAM timings or the RAM itself. It's possible that something in the system is marginal and started to misbehave enough to cause some random failures with MSCDEX failing to load just being the first easily observable issue. If you CPU has a fan, check that the fan is working.

Reply 2 of 15, by james1095

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

You know, I wonder if it could have something to do with the SCSI controller. I remember now one of the recent changes I made was adding the third SCSI related driver to config.sys which I believe is what resolved the issue I was having with the Jaz drive only showing up as 743MB. It’s so strange though that I can call mscdex twice in a row in autoexec.bat and the first time fails with packed file is corrupt while the second time works, every time.

On the bright side, this really does take me back. I’d forgotten how much time I spent back in the day tweaking and troubleshooting just trying to get things to work the way they were supposed to. Back then of course there weren’t the sort of online forums we have today so I was mostly on my own.

Reply 3 of 15, by BloodyCactus

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

usually packed file corrupt is to do with the amount of free base ram, its a bug in the microsofts unpacker.

download unp, https://bencastricum.nl/unp/unp411.zip and run it on the mscdex.exe

--/\-[ Stu : Bloody Cactus :: [ https://bloodycactus.com :: http://kråketær.com ]-/\--

Reply 4 of 15, by Harry Potter

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

If you don't mind replacing MSCDEX, at least one replacement should be mentioned at https://dosprograms.info.tt/indexall.htm#utils.

Joseph Rose, a.k.a. Harry Potter
Working magic in the computer community

Reply 5 of 15, by james1095

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Well I solved this mystery. The system had gotten infected with the TAI-PAN.666 virus so the file actually was corrupt. When I replaced it with a new copy that immediately got infected when I executed it. Cleaning up this infection also fixed some general protection faults in windows 3.1 that had been plaguing me. It’s been so long since I’d encountered an actual computer virus that I hadn’t even thought of that possibility.

Reply 6 of 15, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Oh my! That's bad! You can try to vaccine some DOS applications.
Carmel Turbo Anti-Virus had such a feature, for example.

PS: If you can, consider to make a backup of the virus.
They are historical artefacts, too and they might be interesting to future historians.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 7 of 15, by konc

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
james1095 wrote on 2025-03-28, 07:22:

Well I solved this mystery. The system had gotten infected with the TAI-PAN.666 virus so the file actually was corrupt. When I replaced it with a new copy that immediately got infected when I executed it. Cleaning up this infection also fixed some general protection faults in windows 3.1 that had been plaguing me. It’s been so long since I’d encountered an actual computer virus that I hadn’t even thought of that possibility.

I was about to suggest checking for a potential virus, but then read your post more carefully and saw that the second time you run the program it runs. Which wouldn't happen if it was really corrupted, and so I refrained from commenting. I could have saved you some time.

james1095 wrote on 2025-03-25, 06:02:

...and also if I call it twice in the autoexec.bat using exactly the same command it works fine the second time.

Reply 8 of 15, by james1095

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I can’t explain why but it did work the second time and that happened every time. I found an old copy of McAffee antivirus and that found and cleaned dozens of exe files and now it works. It also fixed the Awe64 software that was crashing in Windows.

Apparently this is a rather common virus so I expect it’s already archived somewhere.

Reply 9 of 15, by Harry Potter

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

james1095: If you want, I know of a website that has some alternate DOS drivers for things such as a mouse or CD-RFOMs. I can post an URL to it if you want. Do you want it?

Joseph Rose, a.k.a. Harry Potter
Working magic in the computer community

Reply 10 of 15, by Masaw

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
james1095 wrote on 2025-03-28, 07:22:

Well I solved this mystery. The system had gotten infected with the TAI-PAN.666 virus so the file actually was corrupt. When I replaced it with a new copy that immediately got infected when I executed it. Cleaning up this infection also fixed some general protection faults in windows 3.1 that had been plaguing me. It’s been so long since I’d encountered an actual computer virus that I hadn’t even thought of that possibility.

You can use my mini portable DOS antivirus to clean TAI-PAN.666 and all other variants of these virus located here Sharing my portable DOS Antivirus for 286+.
no need to boot from a clean floppy disk as it can disable the virus even if its active in memory

VCheck+ Portable Antivirus for DOS
=========================
Main: https://archive.org/details/VCHECK/
====
Updated! : http://old-dos.ru/index.php?page=files&mode=f … =show&id=103705
======

Reply 11 of 15, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
james1095 wrote on 2025-03-28, 14:56:

Apparently this is a rather common virus so I expect it’s already archived somewhere.

In the closed archives of antivirus companies, yes. :)

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 12 of 15, by james1095

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I already cleaned it the other day using a late 90s version of McAfee, so the problem is solved.

I do have an infected .exe that I moved to a floppy, I can upload it somewhere for you if there's somewhere this is allowed if you want to experiment with it. I don't want to get in trouble for deliberately posting a virus infected executable though. This particular virus doesn't do anything nefarious beyond spreading, but as I have seen, attaching itself to executables can cause malfunctions.

Reply 13 of 15, by BloodyCactus

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Jo22 wrote on 2025-03-29, 13:48:
james1095 wrote on 2025-03-28, 14:56:

Apparently this is a rather common virus so I expect it’s already archived somewhere.

In the closed archives of antivirus companies, yes. 😀

Its really pretty basic. I reversed the source code for it decades ago for a virus (vlad or ir) magazine (still have it). more commonly known as Whisper. I have about a half-dozen binary variants.

--/\-[ Stu : Bloody Cactus :: [ https://bloodycactus.com :: http://kråketær.com ]-/\--

Reply 14 of 15, by Masaw

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
james1095 wrote on 2025-03-29, 18:05:

I already cleaned it the other day using a late 90s version of McAfee, so the problem is solved.

I do have an infected .exe that I moved to a floppy, I can upload it somewhere for you if there's somewhere this is allowed if you want to experiment with it. I don't want to get in trouble for deliberately posting a virus infected executable though. This particular virus doesn't do anything nefarious beyond spreading, but as I have seen, attaching itself to executables can cause malfunctions.

pls send me a copy in my inbox. It would be great since i'm missing the ".666.B" subvariant of this virus... thank you

VCheck+ Portable Antivirus for DOS
=========================
Main: https://archive.org/details/VCHECK/
====
Updated! : http://old-dos.ru/index.php?page=files&mode=f … =show&id=103705
======

Reply 15 of 15, by james1095

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Hey sorry I completely forgot about this. I just tried to reply to your PM and it says I'm not authorized to use this feature, so I guess I need to participate in the forum more before I can reply to you. Seems kind of stupid that I'm not allowed to reply to a message I received but whatever. I'll get back to you.