Windows NT Source Compiled!

[hakon]

*DELETE*

[Marcello]

WinOCM, have you managed to compile the NT 4 explorer, I tried numerous ways, but nothing seems to work.

[RentedMule]

I have Visual Basic for Alpha I do believe. I would love to find Visual C++ 2.0 RISC Edition for Alpha, Mips and Mac 68000, Or VC5 for RISC.

[The Distractor]

Random banners? Don't think they ever made it into the final builds.

I actually think I remember seeing them, in win95 i think.

[Kenneth]

An internal debugger could be handy.
Very handy if we could restart (almost all) the subroutines from an BSOD without rebooting the system.
Sort of : kdb:>bootbitch. and then the kernel restarts windows without restarting the system.

Offtopic Comment

Guess who's back? xD

I think our NT Overseer, All hail te overseer!

BootBitch or SmKick is implemented.

[Kenneth]

Booting...

Still booting...

Oh no! BSOD!

SMKick to the rescue!

Final Results.

[PTL]

OCM, could you be on to something...?

[Kenneth]

Maybe...

[Kenneth]

Sorry about the double post but you all should meet NTKM v2.

Code: Select all

Windows NT Kernel Monitor [5.2.3800]
Portions Copyright (C), Microsoft Corporation
 
Windows Server 2003 Kernel Version 3800 (SP1) MP (1 procs) Free x86
Built by: 3800.WRKP1.2(daveprobert)
Machine Name:
Kernel base = 0x80000000 PsLoadedModuleList = 0x8015c700
System Uptime: not available
 
Entered NT Kernel Monitor on INT3 at 0x0000:0x8082d382
ntkm>

Very WinDBG Like though.

It comes with a 4 minute analysis process though.

[PTL]

For some reason the debugger pics you showed reminded me of the scene in Half-Life 2: Episode One where the vortigaunts own G-Man.

[Kenneth]

[Leapo]

Ok, I'm not exactly sure what this is anymore...

I though it was a large leak of pure Windows NT 4.0 source code compiled into an almost-working OS, but that doesn't appear to be the case. I see bits of Windows Server 2003 in there.

Is this some conglomeration of the source leaks of Windows NT and Windows 2000, combined with the Windows Research Kernel?

[Kenneth]

Ok, I'm not exactly sure what this is anymore...

I though it was a large leak of pure Windows NT 4.0 source code compiled into an almost-working OS, but that doesn't appear to be the case. I see bits of Windows Server 2003 in there.

Is this some conglomeration of the source leaks of Windows NT and Windows 2000, combined with the Windows Research Kernel?

It was originally about NT4, but I expanded it to contain 2k and 2003.

[Leapo]

It was originally about NT4, but I expanded it to contain 2k and 2003.

So you've combined the source code of all three, in some fashion, to make one OS?

[Kenneth]

Basically.

[angelwolf71885]

you should call your source FrankenNT xD

[Kenneth]

FrankeNTstein.

[angelwolf71885]

FrankeNTstein.

FrankeNsTein

[PTL]

FrankeNT 4.5.6.2600

[Leapo]

personally, I would have tried getting the pure NT4 source bootable before jamming other bits into it...

At least then you would have a known working system to start from. It must be hellish trying to track down problems through the current kitbashed source.

[Kenneth]

personally, I would have tried getting the pure NT4 source bootable before jamming other bits into it...

At least then you would have a known working system to start from. It must be hellish trying to track down problems through the current kitbashed source.

Actually, Leapo, there are some problems with the kernel that I cannot fix. Namely, it's the CRT. If you really, really, really want to know more come on #nttalk on freenode.

[angelwolf71885]

personally, I would have tried getting the pure NT4 source bootable before jamming other bits into it...

At least then you would have a known working system to start from. It must be hellish trying to track down problems through the current kitbashed source.

you cant boot something thats only 80% complete at best its bedder if its not complete because then we can modify it

and make it bedder its a foundation for something better

[Kenneth]

personally, I would have tried getting the pure NT4 source bootable before jamming other bits into it...

At least then you would have a known working system to start from. It must be hellish trying to track down problems through the current kitbashed source.

you cant boot something thats only 80% complete at best its bedder if its not complete because then we can modify it

and make it bedder its a foundation for something better

Kernel's 99% complete. It's just that the C Runtime library is missing.

[angelwolf71885]

you cant boot something thats only 80% complete at best its bedder if its not complete because then we can modify it

and make it bedder its a foundation for something better

Kernel's 99% complete. It's just that the C Runtime library is missing.

o wow thats alot better then the estimate of 3 months ago xD

[Leapo]

Kernel's 99% complete. It's just that the C Runtime library is missing.

I realize there are holes that will need to be plugged, but its still advisable to use as much original NT 4.0 source as possible before resorting to Windows 2000 and Windows 20003 source to fill in the gaps. Don't go replacing chunks of NT 4.0 with newer code just because it's newer (not yet anyway). All the existing parts of NT 4.0 are already known to work together, so using as many together as possible should give you the largest chance for success; you want as few variables as possible keeping you from getting this thing bootable.

Once you have it up, running, and stable, THEN it's time to start replacing whole parts of NT 4.0 with source from newer versions of Windows.