Extended kernel for Windows XP?

XP Luna · Unread post by **XP Luna** » 01 Feb 2021, 17:55

Hi there,

I love using Windows XP but it is almost impossible to use it as the main system because you can´t install almost any recent programs. There was an attempt to develop an Extended Kernel for XP, but it was discontinued. I think it is possible to make this. I hope this thread motivates win32 or anybody else to try it.

win32 · Unread post by **win32** » 01 Feb 2021, 20:15

There have been a few projects, like BWC's extend kit for XP/2003, Dibya's ExtendedXP, the XomPie wrapper package and the only active one is Samuka's One-Core-API (not much activity in the past few years, though there was a commit in November and then claimed in January that he was getting WDDM support into XP/2003): https://github.com/Skulltrail192/One-Core-API-Binaries

As for me, I actually made something that was quite simple and was for the purpose of getting the last version of SteamLiteXP to actually work on NT 5.1 XP x86 (it works on Server 2003/XP x64 apparently). Apparently it does work for its intended purpose (as of late November).
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/774493236671807488/782339504937238598/advapi32.dll

I did attempt to make something more substantial to get the main version of SteamLite (Vista and up) to run. However, VIsta was still my main focus and some issues did crop up once a fair few Vista functions were implemented. Many XP-compatible programs would start calling all kinds of Vista functions (ones I hadn't added) and started failing. Actually it is a problem with the x86 kernel32 on Vista right now, so it's more of a matter of commitment than ability. Dibya succeeded in Vista compatibility (Pale Moon 27) and Samuka apparently got Chromium 57 and .NET 4.5, but many important Windows 7 functions are not present yet.

So, if I do anything for XP, it will only be for NT 5.2 (Server 2003 x86/x64 and XP x64) since those have considerably more functions than NT 5.1. And that is mostly because of some of the limitations I've faced in modifying ntoskrnl, ntdll and win32k on Vista, which XP/2003 don't have. And if I don't succeed in eliminating the blocking of modified versions of those files, I will switch to NT 5.2.

But I do feel that I am getting relatively close to bypassing the checks on Vista (which will also help efforts on 7/8.x if anything).

i430VX · Unread post by **i430VX** » 01 Feb 2021, 21:41

Almost impossible to use as a main?

It's quite easy for me, and i do a lot of stuff.

XP Luna · Unread post by **XP Luna** » 01 Feb 2021, 21:54

Then maybe you could make an extended kernel

i430VX · Unread post by **i430VX** » 01 Feb 2021, 22:16

XP Luna wrote: ↑01 Feb 2021, 21:54 Then maybe you could make an extended kernel

I think you're quite mistaken. I don't code. Well, not anything that is REAL code... only Batch, HTML, and CSS.

XP Luna · Unread post by **XP Luna** » 01 Feb 2021, 22:22

Okay, I had a little bit of hope.... But maybe there are some other talented people out there;)

Unread post by **MassClaw** » 04 Feb 2021, 07:27

Yeah.. but the position of it is not really convinent.

XP Luna · Unread post by **XP Luna** » 04 Feb 2021, 14:40

What position do you mean?

Unread post by **MassClaw** » 04 Feb 2021, 19:32

The release. Being released inbetween 2000 and vista (Both have active kernel extenders), XP isn't really in a nice position here.

XP Luna · Unread post by **XP Luna** » 04 Feb 2021, 20:46

Why is that a problem? Where´s a will, there´s a way

i430VX · Unread post by **i430VX** » 05 Feb 2021, 07:29

Is there? IF there was a will, it seems like it would have surfaced at some point in the past (nearly) 7 years since support ended.

XP Luna · Unread post by **XP Luna** » 05 Feb 2021, 08:51

You have point there, but the Vista Extended Kernel came late too. We all thought this would never happen. And it happened. XP is based on NT, so I think there IS a way.

Compa · Unread post by **Compa** » 09 Feb 2021, 08:36

XP Luna, I appreciate the enthusiasm you show in your posts, but you should understand that working with a 20+ years old OS is gonna be difficult, and requires ALOT of time consuming inspections, testing, just to make sure even a few smaller things work let alone something so complex as a web browser for instance.

There's also all the different hardware configurations to take into consideration, types of software, and what is natively supported by XP's functions to even allow an extended kernel to work in the first place. I'd imagine parts of BWC's kernel could be reused as Windows 2000 and XP RTM are extremely similar internally but other aspects would certainly have to be rewritten, though I imagine things like font smoothing APIs and some primitive support for things introduced in NT 5.2+/6.0 backported into XP SP3 would be much easier to deal with for instance.

Another big issue is MSVC 2015-2019 redistributable not working on XP, but does on Vista and later. Not sure if it works on 2003 but it might seeing as NT 5.2 has many more API functions (it's closer to Vista than XP ironically).

And yeah, I expected XP to get an extended kernel before Vista due in part to XP's popularity, but I'm loving how many Vista enthusiasts genuinely exist around these parts nowadays. Always thought it was a good upgrade over XP back in the day, I had it with SP1 preinstalled on some AMD Athlon 64 x2 from the time.

XP Luna · Unread post by **XP Luna** » 09 Feb 2021, 09:43

Thank you. I think I´ll just wait. Maybe there will be an extended kernel for XP any time soon. The fanbase of XP is huge and there are some really talented programmers. But I think you are right. It is very difficult...

Compa · Unread post by **Compa** » 09 Feb 2021, 12:20

It's a matter of whether it's even possible, and anyone can devote their resources and effort to keeping an OS alive like this. Sometimes it won't feel worth it to them or real life takes over.

Unread post by **MassClaw** » 09 Feb 2021, 13:42

XP Luna wrote: ↑09 Feb 2021, 09:43 Thank you. I think I´ll just wait. Maybe there will be an extended kernel for XP any time soon. The fanbase of XP is huge and there are some really talented programmers. But I think you are right. It is very difficult...

There's a way yes, but it's a tough hill; the NT kernel jumped here with just the numbering, who knows if it's vastly different from 6.X but it's worth a try.

Compa · Unread post by **Compa** » 13 Feb 2021, 09:28

XP Luna wrote: ↑04 Feb 2021, 20:46 Why is that a problem? Where´s a will, there´s a way

Because on a technical level, it's hardly different from 2000. If an extended kernel happens for XP, don't expect it to do too much - the reason 2000's KernelEx works so well is because it's so close to Windows XP internally anyway.

XP and Vista, and heck, XP and XP x64 (Server 2003) are pretty different from each other and it would take a shitton of effort to get something basic working, explaining why it's been so difficult so far.

Sorry to break your bubble here. I think me and win32 highlighted this issue earlier, but yeah, you'd be looking at a LOT of time spent.

Also, on a legal note, don't suggest using leaked source code to backport if it happens in the future: using anything of the sort is a copyright violation no matter what, so if Windows 7 RTM meets the same fate as XP SP1 for instance... yeah. Even emulators can't use internal hardware documentation if it's come from a private/leaked source since it violates reverse engineering copyright law (even if the patents have been long expired).

@MassClaw While Vista (and therefore the rest of the NT 6 line ultimately) is built from 2003 SP1 and partially from RC1 sources, there were many internal changes between the two warranting the jump in version number. The only reason Windows 10 got a jump was as a marketing ploy (and to separate the RTM from prerelease builds IIRC).

luk3Z · Unread post by **luk3Z** » 09 Jan 2023, 17:38

Extended kernel for XP v0.4
DL (type in the search box): http://win2k.org/wlu/wluen.htm
Home: http://blog.livedoor.jp/blackwingcat/archives/1706829.html

ExtendedXP (Extended XP)
https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36763

XomPie:
https://github.com/tumagonx/xompie/

XP x64 ExKernel:
https://i430vx.net/files/win32/

XP ACPI Patcher
https://github.com/MovAX0xDEAD/ACPI-Patcher

XP 128GB PAE Patch:
https://retrosystemsrevival.blogspot.com/2018/01/windows-xp-ram-patch.html

WinXPPAE v3.5:
https://msfn.org/board/topic/183970-automated-batch-script-for-installing-winxppae-v35/

NTOSKRNL Emu_Extender for XP-2003:
https://github.com/MovAX0xDEAD/NTOSKRNL_Emu
https://msfn.org/board/topic/181615-ntoskrnl-emu_extender-for-windows-xp2003/

XP ACPI 2.0:
https://www.wincert.net/forum/topic/17689-xpw2k3-x64-on-modern-hardware/ (mediafire link)
https://msfn.org/board/topic/183464-compiling-acpi-v20-driver-for-windows-xp-sp3-and-windows-2003-sp2-x32x64/

One-Core-API:
https://github.com/Skulltrail192/One-Core-API-Binaries
https://msfn.org/board/topic/178078-how-to-install-one-core-api/

mina354 · Unread post by **mina354** » 10 Jan 2023, 00:05

luk3Z wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 17:38 Extended kernel for XP v0.4
DL (type in the search box): http://win2k.org/wlu/wluen.htm
Home: http://blog.livedoor.jp/blackwingcat/archives/1706829.html

ExtendedXP (Extended XP)
https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36763

The first one isn't really an extended kernel. The second one is discontinued by the developer himself, and mainly recommends One-Core-API instead.

Eclipse Community