• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Weird problem with Novell Personal Netware

R

RuudB

Experienced Member
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
158
Location
Heerlen - Netherlands
Hallo allemaal,

I have a Commodore PC10, model 2, with a 4.77 MHz 8088. I have running Novell Personal Netware on another 10 MHz XT and then took the card and hard disk from this machine and installed it in the Commodore. Netware starts up but hangs up after VLM has been started. Ctrl-Alt-Del doesn't work anymore. The first PC has a V20 and so I placed one in the Commodore. And... now things work!

What can be the reason, the little extra speed or the few extra instructions?

Any idea is welcome!
 
There is a couple of very handy instructions Intel added to their 80186 which also got used in the NEC V20 and 80286-on.
Because they're in the V20, you'll often find that basic "286 or higher" software often runs on them, but will fail on an 8088 at any speed.
 
The first XT I mentioned has a V20 as well. I just dug up a Commodore PC20-III that can run at 4.77, 7,54 and a speed near 10 MHz. I'll let you know how this machine behaves.
 
RuudB said:
... I'll let you know how this machine behaves.
Click to expand...
At 9.54 MHz VLM fails when it has to look connected servers. But with the V20 it works fine. So it must have to do with the instruction set. Coming upstairs I suddenly remembered that I had an issue with VLM for one or another reason on my Commodore 386SX and had to replace it. So that is something to be checked in the future....
 
I tried to install Novell Dos 7 on my XT and that didn't work out. So I took an obsolete disk, replaced the one in my 386SX and installed ND7 on that one. The VLM.EXE on that disk was the same as the one on my XTs. That puzzled me.
But when starting to write this message I realized I missed an important clue: the fact that the setup program of ND7 didn't work on my XT! It seems that ND7 is meant for a 386 or better. Could be including the 286 but I didn't install ND7 on it: the disk of my Commodore PC35 is just a copy of the 386's one.

Next step: I'm going to install the predecessor of Personal Netware, Netware Lite 1.1, or even 1.0. AFAIK these work on a 8088.
 
Yes I'm doing all my XT's with Netware Lite 1.1.
I haven't yet installed on an 8088 but as far as I know it's compatible (only done V20, 286, and 386 so far). As long as your network driver is 8088 compatible it should be fine. I'm installing Novel NE1000's so haven't had to worry about that bit.

It is a brilliant product and relatively lightweight (my V20-8 machine had 565KB free after loading DOS 3.3, NWLite, network drivers and a mouse driver) - you can remove it from memory when not in use as well.

But it wasn't a free product, and has a very annoying copyright protection scheme. Even when it was new it was considered annoying, because it required you kept one install disk per machine and only used that disk on that machine. Of course there are ways around it - just mentioning it so it doesn't take you by surprise when the alert comes up if you're not using unique media.
 
Here's a scan of the Novell Dos manual page showing the Pers Netware system requirements
 

Attachments

  • Pers Netware.jpg.jpg
    Pers Netware.jpg.jpg
    90.8 KB · Views: 2
Hallo SpidersWeb,
But it wasn't a free product, and has a very annoying copyright protection scheme.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, strange. I cannot remember a copy protection at all. IIRC I just copied the directory to another PC, adjusted parameters according the used network card and I could run it. And now the cherry on the cream: I still have a "portable" PC from those days and I completely forgot that that directory is still on it! So now I hope I can get it to work again as client or server and find out if the above claim is true.

Maybe interesting: I also have 1.0 version, downloaded from vetusware.com AFAIK, and that has a file that explains what to change so you have a second version. I don't see any reason why one then cannot create more versions. And maybe one can hack the 1.1 version as well.
 
Hallo Caluser2000,
Caluser2000 said:
Here's a scan of the Novell Dos manual page showing the Pers Netware system requirements
Click to expand...
It indeed mentions the IBM PC. But what I didn't mention, the installation files are on 1.44 MB floppies. The IBM PC couldn't handle those and XT compatibles with 1.44 drives are rare. It is that my Xi8088, http://n8vem-sbc.pbworks.com/w/page/59325872/Xi 8088, is able to handle them otherwise I wouldn't have found out that XTs cannot run the setup. If ND7 was meant to run on XTs, why wasn't ND7 distributed on 720 KB floppies? Have a look at DOS 5 and DOS 6.22: the first one was distributed on 720 KB but 6.22 on 1.44 MB ones. 6.22 could run on a XT but was meant for 286 or preferably 386 and better.
 
RuudB said:
Hallo Caluser2000,

It indeed mentions the IBM PC. But what I didn't mention, the installation files are on 1.44 MB floppies. The IBM PC couldn't handle those and XT compatibles with 1.44 drives are rare. It is that my Xi8088, http://n8vem-sbc.pbworks.com/w/page/59325872/Xi 8088, is able to handle them otherwise I wouldn't have found out that XTs cannot run the setup. If ND7 was meant to run on XTs, why wasn't ND7 distributed on 720 KB floppies? Have a look at DOS 5 and DOS 6.22: the first one was distributed on 720 KB but 6.22 on 1.44 MB ones. 6.22 could run on a XT but was meant for 286 or preferably 386 and better.
Click to expand...
Hardly surprising considering Novell Dos was released in 1993 or thereabouts and most new systems shipped with 1.44 meg floppies so not too much of an issue. You can also install it directly from the hdd if you transfer the files over from a network. Caldera Open Dos 7.01(Novell Dos rebadged-1996?) was available for download in 720k format so there's no reason to think Novell Dos 7 wasn't available in that format as well. DrDos 6 certainly was. For OpenDos 7.02 look for a file called 72DDR702.EXE. It extracts into 720 format disk images iirc and includes PN. There's also a "lite" version without PN. Sometimes MSDos 6.x up had coupons to get it on low density media.

Anyway these days fitting a 1.44 meg floppy to an XT class machine is quite trivial and has been discussed quite a lot here. Ok it's not "period correct" but is not impossible. Funny thing is DRDos 7 will boot off that on an XT without any extra tsr being loaded. Try that with any MS Dos. In that aspect alone proves it was designed to support XT class boxen.
 
Last edited:
RuudB said:
Hallo SpidersWeb,

Hmmm, strange. I cannot remember a copy protection at all. IIRC I just copied the directory to another PC, adjusted parameters according the used network card and I could run it. And now the cherry on the cream: I still have a "portable" PC from those days and I completely forgot that that directory is still on it! So now I hope I can get it to work again as client or server and find out if the above claim is true.

Maybe interesting: I also have 1.0 version, downloaded from vetusware.com AFAIK, and that has a file that explains what to change so you have a second version. I don't see any reason why one then cannot create more versions. And maybe one can hack the 1.1 version as well.
Click to expand...

Yes I have 1.1 (from the same source), and I was sent a fix just not one I could publish publicly on here.
If your copy doesn't bring up alerts that's fantastic - maybe patched or a site license?

I installed 1.1 on a genuine 8088 IBM PC XT last night with an NE1000 - worked like a charm. So I can confirm it's 8088 friendly now.
 
RuudB said:
IIRC I just copied the directory to another PC, adjusted parameters according the used network card and I could run it.
Click to expand...
It seems my memory was wrong. The directory contains two client and server executables; it was a matter of renaming them and I had a second set. AFAIK I never connected more than two PCs to each other so two different sets was sufficient.

But now the bad part: I wasn't able to fire up the server part because the configuration file was missing :( And that seems to reside in a hidden directory that didn't exist anymore.

So I decided to install the 1.0 version I downloaded from Vetusware. Why 1.0? Because that's the on I have as well, maybe I could recreate this hidden directory. Alas, nope :( It kept on asking for a driver diskette
that I didn't have.

Next phase: installing the 1.1 version. The program asked if it was allright to upgrade the existing version. The result: a working server! Then I got the idea to save the new stuff, to replace it by a copy of the original directory and to run install again. Result at the end: two different CLIENT and SERVER files !!! I repeated the trick using the files from the downloaded versions. And using the text how to change the number I think how to get a 4th one.

The trick: comparing the various versions I found out that both files use five bytes for the serial number. For SERVER.EXE this is from offset 66C5h..66C9h. For CLIENT.EXE this is from 33B9h..33BDh.

My codes:
EE E8 A8 63 30
A0 94 7A 5A 5A

Vetusware:
99 6F 42 5A 5A
99 6B 00 5A 5A

The last one is created by replacing two bytes as mentioned in an accompanying text.

FYI: the numbers can be found back in the original 1.0 files!

I hope this helps to generate your own versions :)
 
Yep, I just didn't want to put it up publicly because of forum policies. Just wanted to make you aware of it, but sounds like you got it sorted pretty quick!
I found you can use random numbers in there, code doesn't need to make sense, just be unique.

I think it's quite a cool tool - it feels fast in the XT world, doesn't use too much RAM, and can be completely unloaded.
 
Hallo allemaal,

I ran into a problem. I installed NW Lite on the PC that serves as server under Personal Netware and on one of my XTs. When starting up PN on both PCs, the XT sees the server, when starting NW Lite on both machines, the XT doesn't see the server. The startnet.bat of the XT"
LSL
3X503
IPXODI A
CLIENT
NET LOGIN
Nothing wrong IMHO, but no communication. Any idea?

TIA!
 
Check both cards are using "FRAME 802.3"
Some drivers will force/default to 802.2 over 802.3 (which is what Personal Netware uses) instead of 802.3 raw (which is what Netware Lite uses).

I also noticed "NET" (which brings up the user interface) will hang my 8088 - but the net commands are fine.
 
Hallo allemaal,

OK, the tires have been replaced, the vacuum cleaner and a cupboard have been repaired so....

RuudB said:
The startnet.bat of the XT....
Click to expand...
I found the, IMHO, stupid error: the startnet.bat of the server. The 386SX has been equiped with a 3C509B card. The install program of 1.1 doesn't drivers for it so I chose the one for the 3C503 with the idea to replace it later. Something I forgot :( I found out when doing a fresh install again. Added 3C5X9.com and replaced NET.CFG et voila, I could log in from my XT.

But I ran into another, probably small, error. Under SUPERVISOR I created various users but when logging in from my XT, none is recognized. When I log in as SUPERVISOR and run NET, only SUPERVISOR is visible as user. This in contradiction with the experiences I had with Personal Netware. Most probably because I'm doing something wrong. Any help? TIA!
 
Is the XT that can't login as another user also running SERVER.EXE? That could cause a problem - I couldn't see a way to specify which server to authenticate with.

Type "NET SLIST" and make sure you only see one server, the one you setup the accounts on.
 
Hallo SpidersWeb,

See the startnet.bat I mentioned above: no server started. Anyway, I ran the "net slist" command and only one server found (as expected). To make sure that that couldn't have messed up things, I didn't start client.exe on the server.
My observations done as user SUPERVISOR:
- on the 386SX: I saw the users PC10, PC20, XI8088 and SUPERVISOR, created as SUPERVISOR on this PC. I can log in with all these users on the 386SX
- on the XT: I only saw the users PC10, RUUD and SUPERVISOR. PC10 and RUUD were created later on the XT but I can only log in with PC10 (beside SUPERVISOR).
- on the XT: I can see the net drives on the 386 created by SUPERVISOR on the 386.
So I wonder: why can I see the created drives but not the users?

I can live with the fact that I have to create the various user names on the various amchines as well. And I don't mind to log in with SUPERVISOR on all connected machines. That is, if that won't result in conflicts. Anyone any experience? My last one was 20 years ago so I cannot remember anymore.

TIA for any comment!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top