Referenced memory error Win98SE on VB 5.0.1

[loukingjr]

This is the link to the ova file: http://www.mediafire.com/download/b3i72 ... in98vm.zip
I have no idea how to attach this to the bug ticket but will keep trying.

FWIW, I downloaded the .ova from MediaFire (took 4 attempts) and imported it into VB 5.0.12 on one of my Mac hosts. I haven't had any error messages and it seems to work. I can get online for example. But I have NO idea what I am doing with Win98 so I still haven't figured out the display doctor to increase the screen size.

[michaln]

I have no idea how to attach this to the bug ticket but will keep trying.

Just add the link to the ticket, sorry I wasn't clear. Thanks for providing the VM!

I expect that the problem is definitely not reproducible on an OS X host... because the OS X builds of VirtualBox no longer support software virtualization at all. It's possible to turn off VT-x in the VM settings but it has no effect. The problem will only show up with software virtualization, possibly only on 32-bit Windows hosts, and possibly only under certain conditions.

[mpack]

and possibly only under certain conditions.

I can confirm that. I can meet all the criteria mentioned, but it still doesn't crash for me. The only unusual feature of my Win98SE VM is that I following the instructions (from the Howto) for installing with ACPI support. I'll attach a log just in case you want a non-crashy Win98SE for comparison.

[Kurt_Aust]

For the life of me, I can't get Win98se to install in v5.0.x whatever settings I choose, however it installs just fine in v4.3.x.

If I then "upgrade" VirtualBox to 5.0.x, Win98se will successfully boot about a third of the time. If I disable hardware virtualization it will always boot but be so slow as to be painful.

[Kurt_Aust]

Looking further at the problems with installing Win 98se on VirtualBox 5.0.x I found that I could install on my older systems but it was a bit more glitchy than in 4.3.x and there was graphics corruption / visual artefacts during setup.

Core 2 Quad Q9540
Gigabyte EP45-DS3R motherboard
Windows 10 Pro x64
VirtualBox 5.0.12

Core 2 Quad Q9400
HP DC7900 SFF PC Q45 chipset
Linux Mint 17.3 x64
VirtualBox 5.0.2


However on my latest PC there is no way Win 98se will install in VirtualBox 5.0.x while it installs just fine in VB 4.3.x

Haswell-E 5930K
ASUS X99E-WS motherboard
Windows 10 Pro x64 and Linux Mint 17.3 x64
VirtualBox 5.0.12

[michaln]

That's a huge gap between Core 2 and Haswell. Could you try on something in between? Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge? Nested paging makes a big difference.

The problem with graphical glitches is known, but that's different... (can be worked around by turning off hardware virtualization). We tried reproducing the VM process crashes but so far without success. We haven't found any system where it happens.

[Kurt_Aust]

That's all I've got, I probably would have stuck with the Core 2 Quad, except my parents PC died so they got my old one and I upgraded.

There really hasn't been all that much improvement in the CPU's for quite some time, even with Skylake the real improvement is in the Z170 chipset with the 20x PCIe 3.0 lanes.

[michaln]

The big improvement with regard to virtualization was after Core 2 (i.e. Nehalem). Sandy Bridge had further significant improvements ("unrestricted execution" in VT-x). I agree that in general the improvements have been very very incremental. But for virtualization, I really would not want to go to anything older than Sandy Bridge.

The upshot is that as far as VirtualBox is concerned, a Core 2 and a Haswell are practically two totally different CPUs because the way virtualization behaves is very different.

[Kurt_Aust]

I had a quick look at work on the one PC down on the factory floor I have access to.

Sandy Bridge i3 2130 CPU
ASUS P8H61-MX motherboard
Windows 7 Pro
VirtualBox 5.0.12

The install fails with the exact same error as on my home Haswell-E system, right at the start of the install process.

98se-fail-SBi3.jpg (125.53 KiB) Viewed 2273 times

Turning off all the enhancements that make running the VM viable lets me get further along, but I've never been able to complete an install in the 5.0.x series.

It installs perfectly well with full hardware acceleration enabled in the 4.3.x series.

[michaln]

That is a known problem. But that's not what this thread is about. This thread and the related ticket is about the VM process itself crashing, not the guest software crashing.

[Kurt_Aust]

It looks like the 5.0.14 update has fixed my problem of a Windows 98se VM that was installed and working under the VB 4.3.x series randomly failing to start.

I've had 20 successful starts in a row (10 on Win 10, 10 on Mint 17.3), as it used to only start 1 time in 3 on previous 5.0.x builds there's only a 1 in 3.5 billion chance of it not being fixed.

Hence the only quirks remaining for me is that USB flash drives won't attach to the VM on a Win 10 host and that Win98se won't install in the 5.0.x series.

Annoying to be sure but at least they can be worked around.

[michaln]

Hence the only quirks remaining for me is that USB flash drives won't attach to the VM on a Win 10 host

Is there a separate thread or ticket discussing that (I do not want this thread to turn into a USB discussion).

My experience with Windows 10 has been bad enough so far that I steer clear of it. Broken in too many ways, for no apparent benefit or reason. Sadly that seems to be the way of modern OSes and the latest OS X release is no better.