China DOS Union

Up to System Commander 7.x, it could still be installed under DOS. But since version 8.x, it can only be installed under Windows because I don't have the serial number for its installation under DOS. We know that System Commander has a MultiFAT function, which can also be said to be one of its major features, that is, allowing you to install similar or even exactly the same OS in the same partition, but this partition must be a System Commander - marked MultiFAT partition. As for how it is marked, I don't know exactly. Anyway, it needs to consider that the partition is a MultiFAT partition. Generally, it is that when it is installed in the partition where it is located, it becomes a MultiFAT partition.

Previously, when installing System Commander under DOS to the main partition of DOS, it regarded DOS's C: as a MultiFAT partition. In this way, I could install various versions of DOS in C:. But now System Commander 8.x can only be installed under Windows, and it only regards Windows's C: as a MultiFAT partition. But I don't need a MultiFAT partition under Windows, so the problem arises.

I copied all the System Commander - related files in the directory where System Commander was installed under Windows and in the root directory to DOS's C: under DOS. Then I first entered System Commander under Windows, disabled it, restarted and entered System Commander under DOS, enabled it. In this way, although the MBR is still System Commander's MBR, at this time, the files that System Commander calls when starting (I think so) are the relevant files under DOS. Now the startup/selection and other functions are all okay, and it seems that everything is okay. But there are still problems. Several OS menu items are missing, and when I add a new OS, it doesn't appear on the System Commander startup menu. The way of adding manually, System Commander can recognize the partition of the OS and the OS, but it just can't be added to the startup menu item. Later, when I re - enabled System Commander under Windows, it could be added automatically. It seems that the migration is not successful, and it seems that a certain file is still missing or some settings need to be changed? According to reason, the MBR is unchanged. If System Commander uses the drive letter as the path, then C: is still C:, and the path of the directory is still the original path, but why doesn't it take effect?

If someone has the serial number for installing System Commander 8.x under DOS, then everything would be easy.

I installed System Commander 8 under Windows on drive D. Then I formatted drive C. At this time, it showed that the files required for System Commander to start were missing. But there was a simple startup partition selection option. But only drive C was available. It can be seen that files were written to drive C. Then I installed Windows on drive C again. After installation, there was no OSloader, still that simple option. It can be seen that what was written in the hard disk master boot record was not ordinary (at least it blocked NT's OSloader). Then installing System Commander 8 under drive C could make the startup option appear normally.

So I think: Because something was written in the hard disk master boot record, there is specificity between versions. So DOS version and Windows version cannot be used universally. I wonder if this is possible: Install the Windows version of System Commander --> Back up the files used by System Commander and the relevant data of the master boot record --> When needed, operate in DOS, and put the files back to the corresponding positions.

This is just my speculation. Operating the master boot record is risky. Please everyone analyze more.

cnconfig:

Hehe, your problem is simple. Actually, the problem you encountered is already included in the original description of my question. I have already said: "……Copy all the files related to System Commander in the directory where System Commander is installed under Windows and all System Commander-related files in the root directory to the DOS C:……" This shows that System Commander must have its own related files in the root directory of the installation partition. I think these are the following files:

SCDOS.SYS
SCOSW.LOG
SCOSW_A.SYS
SCOSW_B.SYS
SCOSW_D.SYS
SYSCMNDR.HLP
SYSCMNDR.SYS
SYSIOMGR.SYS

You formatted C:, so System Commander cannot start normally.

As an OS selector, System Commander must take control first during the boot process. So it rewrites the MBR in the MBS to its own MBR. I think it also occupies 2 sectors. Therefore, it is not that you "shielded the nt's osloader", but it is ahead of it. It is System Commander that boots NT's NTLDR. You said later "Then install Windows on drive C. After installation, the osloader does not appear, and it is still that simple option. It can be seen that what is written in the hard disk master boot record is not ordinary." Hehe, actually, there is nothing extraordinary. When Win98 is installed, it will automatically rewrite to its MBR. Win2000 will not. Did you install WinXP? So because it is still System Commander's MBR, it is naturally "still that simple option". If you installed Win98, it would be gone, hehehe.

Actually, it doesn't matter whether you install System Commander to C: or D: or other drives. The key is that it must have the several startup files I mentioned earlier in C:\ (to be precise, in the root directory of the main partition where it is installed). And the file system format of the boot partition must be FAT type. Is your C: FAT32?

As for the general problem you mentioned about the DOS version and the Windows version, I think V Communication didn't distinguish between the DOS version and the Windows version when it was released because its installation file setup.exe is a file that can be executed under both Windows and DOS. It's just that the serial numbers required for installation under the two platforms and their formats are different.

I thought about my problem carefully later. Now it seems that the title I used when I first asked the question was not too accurate. Actually, it should be said like this, or the key of the problem is " How to set up MultiFAT partition". I tried again later. Because the setup program SCIN of System Commander has no option to uninstall MultiFAT, so I can only Delete current group under Windows, then start to DOS and Install MultiFAT option, but it still doesn't work.

Thanks to DOSforever, now I've learned a lot!

Later, I carefully thought about my question again. Now it seems that the title I used when I asked the question at the beginning wasn't too precise. Actually, it should be said like this, or the key to the problem is "how to set up the MultiFAT partition". Later, I did another test. Since the setup program SCIN of System Commander doesn't have the option to uninstall MultiFAT, I can only Delete current group under Windows, then start up to DOS and Install MultiFAT option, but it still doesn't seem to work.

Can I set the 0/1 tracks of the hard disk as an independent partition like BootStar?

Setting aside one track at the beginning to partition specifically for System Commander is a waste.

Boot Logical min MB
OS Name Vendor Drives partition size notes

AIX IBM 0 only no 100 9
BeOS Be any yes 250
BSDI Unix Berkely Software 0 only no 80
Btron 1B Btron 0 only no 40
Coherent Unix Mark Williams any no 15 9
CP/M Digital Research 0 only no 10 9
CTOS Unisys 0 only no 40
DOS all 0 only no 3
DOS/V IBM/Microsoft 0 only no 5
FreeBSD all any no 80
Interactive Unix Sun Microsystems 0 only no 20
JexeOS Toshiba 0 only no 100
Linux all any yes 15
Lynx Lynx Real-Time 0 only no 50
Minux all 0 only no 30 9
NetWare v2 Novell 0 only no 20
NetWare v3 & v4 Novell 0 only no 55 2
NetWare v5 Novell 0 only no 500 2
NeXT Step Next 0 only no 100 9
OpenStep Next 0 only no 120 9
Open Server SCO 0 only no 100 5
OS/2 v1.x IBM 0 only no 20 1
OS/2 v2 to v4 IBM any yes 40 1,4
Pick Pick Systems 0 only no 50 1
QNX QNX Software 0 only no 50
Solaris v4 Sun Microsystems any no 70 7
Solaris v7 Sun Microsystems any no 500 7
Solaris v8/9 Sun Microsystems any no 600 7,10
Theos Theos Software 0 only no 10
UnixWare SCO/Novell 0 only no 80 5
Venix Venturcom 0 only no 100 9
Windows 95 Microsoft 0 only no 40 1,6,8
Windows 95J Microsoft 0 only no 80 1,6,8
Windows 98 Microsoft 0 only no 250 1,6,8
Windows 98J Microsoft 0 only no 250 1,6,8
Windows Me Microsoft 0 only no 500 6,8
Windows NT v3.1 Microsoft 0 only no 90 1,3
Windows NT v3.5 Microsoft 0 only no 100 1,3
Windows NT v4.0 Microsoft 0 only no 220 1,3
Windows 2000/NT Microsoft 0 only no 800 1,3,8
Windows XP Microsoft 0 only no 1500 1,3,8
Windows 2003 Microsoft 0 only no 2000 1,3,8
Windows Longhorn Microsoft 0 only no 2500 1,3,8

[ Last edited by free2 on 2007-2-12 at 02:11 AM ]

Originally posted by free2 at 2007-2-12 02:05:
Can you make a separate partition using the 0/1 tracks of the hard drive like BootStar?

Separately carving out a partition specifically for System Commander wastes the first track.

I haven't used BootStar. System Commander can't carve out a partition unique to itself, nor can it exist independently of the file system. It must be installed on a partition using the FAT file system type. Even if it could carve out a partition separately as you said, it would be meaningless because only the partition where it's installed is a MultiFAT partition. If only its own partition is a MultiFAT partition and there's no operating system, it loses the significance of the MultiFAT function.

I didn't see anyone posting the installation code for DOS online. The previous approach was to partition a 200M space to install WIN95 and make System Commander. Because there were pictures, it was troublesome to add pictures under DOS.

Later, I used the Chinese FDISK of OS/2 to make a dual-boot menu for tax control machines. The earliest航天金穗 (Hangtian Jinsui) was with UCDOS. (I found that OS/2 3.0 didn't support hard disk partitions larger than 4.0G. Hangtian Jinsui switched to a Tsinghua machine, and the hard disk was upgraded to 6G. This was really annoying... IBM didn't care about this matter and said they had to wait half a year to upgrade to 4.0.)

Then later, I used DEBUG to write 4 active partitions and switched with FDISK. Then later there was PQ, and then there were directly 4 active partitions. Then later...

Recently, I don't use N WINDOWS to switch anymore, but I'm always being asked to do "one-click recovery" by volunteers, so I went back to the "menu era" and wrote a GHOST batch file and put it in CALL. It's still simpler with DOS, so I found BootStar. After all, System Commander is old. Mainly because I think the boasting in the ads (Can AIX be installed on X86??)

Still recommend BootStar. The basic operations are the same as System Commander. It doesn't support pictures.

GRUB is also good... Every time I go out, do I still bring a CD? Using a USB flash drive also requires playing with BIOS boot. It's still easier to play with software installation under WINDOWS...

(Just finished writing this, and found that the website http://www.star-tools.com/ is down,??? But it should be everywhere online. I'll study it when I have time. It should be done in 3 minutes.

This recovery knowledge is just venting... After all, System Commander is now like "The Lost Tomb". I've almost forgotten it. I haven't seen it for a long time, but the menu is still a good thing.

[ Last edited by free2 on 2007-2-12 at 03:40 PM ]

……Because there are pictures, it's troublesome to add pictures under DOS.
——
I don't understand this sentence. What pictures are added?

Then later, I used DEBUG to write 4 active partitions and switched with FDISK. Then later there was PQ, and then there were directly 4 active partitions. Then later...
——
Hehe, I think you used the wrong term. Where are there 4 active partitions? It should be 4 primary partitions. There can be only one active partition.
I used to use FDISK all the time. Later, I found that DM is the most flexible. You can divide any type of partition. PM is not as flexible as it, and I use it less. This is my view on the two:
http://bbs.cpcw.com/viewthread.php?tid=1028891

... After all, System Commander is old. Mainly, I think the boasting in the advertisement (Can AIX be installed on X86??)
——
System Commander is old? It has been continuously releasing new versions. The latest one is 8.2

Still recommend BootStar. The basic operations are the same as System Commander. It doesn't support pictures

GRUB is also good... Do you still bring a CD every time you go out? Using a USB flash drive also requires playing with BIOS boot. It's better to play with software installation under WINDOWS. It's more convenient...

(Just finished writing this, and found that the website http://www.star-tools.com/ is down,??? ) But it should be everywhere on the Internet. Take time to study it. It should be done in 3 minutes.
This recovery knowledge is just venting. After all, System Commander is now like "The Lost Tomb". I've forgotten most of it. I haven't seen it for a long time, but it's still a good thing.

I also considered other multi-operating system boot managers, but it seems that I haven't found a function similar to System Commander's MultriFAT. I mainly use System Commander for this feature
http://www.cn-dos.net/forum/viewthread.php?tid=19008

[ Last edited by DOSforever on 2007-12-17 at 04:31 AM ]

cnconfig:

Originally posted by DOSforever at 2007-2-11 16:36:
When installing Win98, it will automatically rewrite its MBR. Win2000 won't. Did you install WinXP?

I installed a Windows XP today, SP2, and found that it does rewrite the MBR. I don't know which version of Windows you installed originally.

I later found the serial number for installing System Commander 8.x under DOS and will share it with you.

SC8-ENN-88888888-CMTR

However, my problem was not solved without installing under DOS.

Originally posted by DOSforever at 2008-8-9 04:17 AM:
I later found the serial number for installing System Commander 8.x under DOS and would like to share it with everyone

However, my problem still wasn't solved without installing it under DOS.

Once a disk is partitioned, it has a fixed ID, (hd0,x) (in the case of a single hard disk). Under DOS and Windows, the drive letters of each partition can be changed arbitrarily, but their IDs remain unchanged. In DOS and Windows, the C: drive is a different partition. Copying files from one partition to another within the partition is useless. System Commander is an OS bootloader. When installed, it writes its own MBR and also records the IDs of each partition. When you install it under Windows, it has recorded the ID of the partition where it was installed. You copied the installed files to another partition, but the partition ID recorded by its installation hasn't changed, so it can't change multifat.
I haven't used System Commander, but I can provide you with some ideas. You can try:
1. On the partition where you want to install DOS, preferably the first partition on the disk, install DOS first, install Windows on this basis, delete the Windows files, keep the System Commander files, delete the Windows boot menu, and install Windows on other partitions. In this way, multifat will be retained on the partition where you installed DOS.
2. Find a way to customize the installation of multifat. It seems difficult, hehe.
3. Find and change the partition ID recorded by System Commander. Then you can customize multifat as you like. It seems even more difficult, hehe.
4. Changing the partition ID also seems difficult to achieve. Once a partition is completed, its ID is determined.

Thank you for paying attention to my question. There is one point you reminded very well, but the problem is how to know how System Commander "records the ID of its installed partition", whether it only uses the ID of the partition where it is installed as the basis for determining MultiFAT partitions? If there is a chance in the future, do an experiment with two FAT32 primary partitions.

Originally posted by DOSforever at 2008-12-12 01:53 AM:
Thank you for paying attention to my question. There is one point you reminded very well, but the problem is how to know how System Commander "records the ID of the partition where it is installed", whether it is, and only uses the ID of the partition where it is installed as the basis for determining the MultiFAT partition...

Under the existing conditions, I personally think that the first method is the most worth trying, with the least difficulty.

Whether it is, and only uses the ID of the partition where it is installed as the basis for determining the MultiFAT partition?

From the description of your post, this is confirmed. It defaults that MultiFAT is in the partition where it is installed, and it cannot be customized.

But the problem is how to know how System Commander "records the ID of the partition where it is installed"

This is difficult. You must understand its source code, or have a bit of spirit to study the MBR, and maybe achieve something by researching it. If successful, you can customize MultiFAT in any partition.