[Released] XP RAID 5 Hack
[Released] XP RAID 5 Hack
Hi All
I have created an addon to replace the files needed for the XP RAID 5 hack as mentioned at TomsHardware Guide.
I've only been able to test in VMWare, but I have had a RAID-5 software array up and running and also a mirrored RAID-1 software array as well.
This should work whether you have the update packs intergrated or not, but you will need to have SP2 slipstreamed first. Also I have only run this update pack using the latest intergrater, and no nLite, but should work using nLite.
The addon can be found here: Rikgale_XPRAID5_addon_v1.cab
MD5 Hash: DBC21C273E107C842DEDED46BF2E328E
I have created an addon to replace the files needed for the XP RAID 5 hack as mentioned at TomsHardware Guide.
I've only been able to test in VMWare, but I have had a RAID-5 software array up and running and also a mirrored RAID-1 software array as well.
This should work whether you have the update packs intergrated or not, but you will need to have SP2 slipstreamed first. Also I have only run this update pack using the latest intergrater, and no nLite, but should work using nLite.
The addon can be found here: Rikgale_XPRAID5_addon_v1.cab
MD5 Hash: DBC21C273E107C842DEDED46BF2E328E
Last edited by rikgale on Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Yep
It just adds the ability if you have enough drives to do mirroring (RAID 1) and Parity (RAID 5), thru software.. It does not affect anything else, it just adds functionality.
Normally XP can only do spanning and stripping of dynamics discs, these hacks, allow as I said mirroring and parity.
Only two things to note sofar.
1) You can't install to a software RAID 5/RAID 1 setup.
2) For some unexplicable reason when there is a RAID 5 array present this line in My RunOnceEx.cmd fails to work (its part of my MSAntiSpyware install).
Simple work around is to remove the array discs (all of them), install uAXP and add the array discs back in and actiavte the array. Probably safer anyway not to have the array present during an install anyway.
I've found the software based RAID5 setup to be very robust. When I get the money I'll be setting up a system using this, as a backup system.
Hope this helps
It just adds the ability if you have enough drives to do mirroring (RAID 1) and Parity (RAID 5), thru software.. It does not affect anything else, it just adds functionality.
Normally XP can only do spanning and stripping of dynamics discs, these hacks, allow as I said mirroring and parity.
Only two things to note sofar.
1) You can't install to a software RAID 5/RAID 1 setup.
2) For some unexplicable reason when there is a RAID 5 array present this line in My RunOnceEx.cmd fails to work (its part of my MSAntiSpyware install).
Code: Select all
REG ADD %KEY%\007 /V 7 /D "%systemdrive%\Progra~1\Micros~1\gcasDtServ.exe /regserver" /f
I've found the software based RAID5 setup to be very robust. When I get the money I'll be setting up a system using this, as a backup system.
Hope this helps
Rikgale,
thanks for the hash!
One more request:
I got trouble from here connecting to http://www.thethirdrow.plus.com/ , is it possible for you to mirror it somewhere else, probably rapidupload or something ?
thanks for the hash!
One more request:
I got trouble from here connecting to http://www.thethirdrow.plus.com/ , is it possible for you to mirror it somewhere else, probably rapidupload or something ?
Not sure why you cant access it, as I can get to it fine.
Here is a rapidshare link
http://rapidshare.de/files/10324004/Rik ... 1.cab.html
rikgale
Here is a rapidshare link
http://rapidshare.de/files/10324004/Rik ... 1.cab.html
rikgale

@twig123:
Google is your friend: http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm? ... 830&page=5
Here's a better guide... good old Tom's Harware....
http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/11/19/ ... page3.html
Google is your friend: http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm? ... 830&page=5
Here's a better guide... good old Tom's Harware....
http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/11/19/ ... page3.html
Firstly, my apologies, this is going to be a long one. Grab a sandwich and some coffee before reading this one through.
So, in looking at the toms hardware guide on how this (the XPRAID5 Hack)was done, I examined the results.
Frankly, I was confused. Sure, it works, but it does mangle a few things. I have to wonder if the person who brought this to THG's attention (and why nobody in THG bothered) actually looked at these files with a disassembler. The fix should have and could have been a little cleaner.
Allow me to illustrate using excerpts from the dmboot.sys and dmconfig.dll files.
I'll try and make this make sense. For reference, I use tiny hexer and PE Explorer.
Here's a code snippet of DMBOOT.SYS (the original) at the location to be changed:
Let's see what PE Explorer Disassembler says about the recommended HEX edit chage (Hacked DMBOOT.SYS, same location):
Guh. Granted, it works. Switching their position changes the relocations that are called, which I'll list here (these relocations are the same between the original and the hacked, with two slight differences):
So, it's essentially faking it out. Swapping the relocation pointers for WINNT to assume the abilities of SERVERNT and leaving SERVERNT to do god knows what (what WINNT would do in the original, pressumably).
But what if we take a closer look at 2 lines in particular and then swap their hex code:
Without HEX swapping WINNT and SERVERNT at the begining of the file.
Just in case you don't want to do the mental gymnastics, here's the complete patched sequence:
WINNT is now pointing to (pushing, being pushed by, whatever) the section that was once labled for SERVERNT, which means it now goes through all it's subsequent routines as the spirit of the hack intended.
The same holds true of the DLL.
Original:
Hacked:
Sure enough, same relocation swapping occuring:
We do the same swap-o-matic:
and we get this:
Sadly, not much can be done about the EXE. No matter what, it's going to do this:
So, the question is this: Is it the order that they're referenced to or listed in? DMADMIN.EXE has (prior to editing it) nothing related to WINNT, only SERVERNT and LANMANNT. Obviously, just changing the EXE alone wouldn't work, pressumably because of what the relocation pointers in the SYS and DLL do when calling WINNT, they don't accomplish the desired result. (and obviously, as WINNT isn't being called by the EXE, the WINNT sections won't work right leaving the EXE to call to them under the guise of SERVERNT).
Can switching the PUSH's so that calls to WINNT now execute what SERVERNT was responsible for be enough? (for the astute observers: the DLL and SYS list each of the three initially in reverse order of each other. SYS lists WINNT, SERVERNT, LANMANNT; DLL lists LANMANNT, SERVERNT, WINNT. For whatever that's worth.)
If anyone has the capability and willingness to test differently modified files, PM me or respond here, as I'd really like to find out if these changes to the SYS and DLL (with the original change to the EXE of course) are enough, but lack the resources/equipment to do so. (I can verify that the modified files DO work as normal under a regular XP Pro install and do not introduce any problems). Even better if you can tell me if it won't work and can explain (prove-ably) why the method currently in use is the only operable one.
(A note: The original "Hack" doesn't modify the PE Checksum of either the SYS or DLL, only the EXE. The method used here changes the PE Checksum of all three, so if you use this information to change your own files, don't forget to update those.)
*edit: realized I confused the examples and posted code from the SYS into the sections for the DLL. Corrected.*
Cab'd for i386, no integrator INI yet.
https://www.sharemation.com/Aeenzawthi/ ... niq=40a2tk
So, in looking at the toms hardware guide on how this (the XPRAID5 Hack)was done, I examined the results.
Frankly, I was confused. Sure, it works, but it does mangle a few things. I have to wonder if the person who brought this to THG's attention (and why nobody in THG bothered) actually looked at these files with a disassembler. The fix should have and could have been a little cleaner.
Allow me to illustrate using excerpts from the dmboot.sys and dmconfig.dll files.
I'll try and make this make sense. For reference, I use tiny hexer and PE Explorer.
Here's a code snippet of DMBOOT.SYS (the original) at the location to be changed:
Code: Select all
0002107A SSZ0002107A_WINNT:
0002107A 57494E4E5400 db 'WINNT',0
00021080 0000 Align 2
00021082 SSZ00021082_SERVERNT:
00021082 5345525645524E5400 db 'SERVERNT',0
0002108B 000000 Align 2
Code: Select all
0002107A L0002107A:
0002107A 53 db 53h; 'S'
0002107B 45 db 45h; 'E'
0002107C 52 db 52h; 'R'
0002107D 56 db 56h; 'V'
0002107E 45 db 45h; 'E'
0002107F 52 db 52h; 'R'
00021080 4E db 4Eh; 'N'
00021081 54 db 54h; 'T'
00021082 SSZ00021082_WINNT:
6CAC5D4C 57494E4E5400 db 'WINNT',0
00021088 00 db 00h;
00021089 00 db 00h;
0002108A 00 db 00h;
0002108B 00 db 00h;
0002108C 00 db 00h;
0002108D 00 db 00h;
Code: Select all
000210F2 L000210F2:
000210F2 FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
000210F5 8B353C5D0400 mov esi,[ntoskrnl.exe!_stricmp]
000210FB 687A100200 push SSZ0002107A_WINNT
*******This is how the above line looks in the hacked file*************
000210FB 687A100200 push L0002107A
*******End Difference One**************************************
00021100 FFD6 call esi
00021102 85C0 test eax,eax
00021104 59 pop ecx
00021105 59 pop ecx
00021106 750B jnz L00021113
00021108 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
0002110B C70001000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000001h
00021111 EB39 jmp L0002114C
00021113 L00021113:
00021113 FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
00021116 6882100200 push SSZ00021082_SERVERNT
*******This is how the above line looks in the hacked file*************
00021116 6882100200 push SSZ00021082_WINNT
*******End Difference Two**************************************
0002111B FFD6 call esi
0002111D 85C0 test eax,eax
0002111F 59 pop ecx
00021120 59 pop ecx
00021121 750B jnz L0002112E
00021123 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
00021126 C70002000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000002h
0002112C EB1E jmp L0002114C
But what if we take a closer look at 2 lines in particular and then swap their hex code:
Code: Select all
000210FB 687A100200 push SSZ0002107A_WINNT
....
00021116 6882100200 push SSZ00021082_SERVERNT
*****swap-o-matic******
000210FB 6882100200 push SSZ00021082_SERVERNT
....
00021116 687A100200 push SSZ0002107A_WINNT
Just in case you don't want to do the mental gymnastics, here's the complete patched sequence:
Code: Select all
0002107A SSZ0002107A_WINNT:
0002107A 57494E4E5400 db 'WINNT',0
00021080 0000 Align 2
00021082 SSZ00021082_SERVERNT:
00021082 5345525645524E5400 db 'SERVERNT',0
0002108B 000000 Align 2
------------
000210F2 L000210F2:
000210F2 FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
000210F5 8B353C5D0400 mov esi,[ntoskrnl.exe!_stricmp]
000210FB 6882100200 push SSZ00021082_SERVERNT
00021100 FFD6 call esi
00021102 85C0 test eax,eax
00021104 59 pop ecx
00021105 59 pop ecx
00021106 750B jnz L00021113
00021108 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
0002110B C70001000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000001h
00021111 EB39 jmp L0002114C
00021113 L00021113:
00021113 FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
00021116 687A100200 push SSZ0002107A_WINNT
0002111B FFD6 call esi
0002111D 85C0 test eax,eax
0002111F 59 pop ecx
00021120 59 pop ecx
00021121 750B jnz L0002112E
00021123 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
00021126 C70002000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000002h
0002112C EB1E jmp L0002114C
The same holds true of the DLL.
Original:
Code: Select all
6CAC5D40 SSZ6CAC5D40_LANMANNT:
6CAC5D40 4C414E4D414E4E5400 db 'LANMANNT',0
6CAC5D49 000000 Align 4
6CAC5D4C SSZ6CAC5D4C_SERVERNT:
6CAC5D4C 5345525645524E5400 db 'SERVERNT',0
6CAC5D55 000000 Align 4
Code: Select all
6CAC5D4C SSZ6CAC5D4C_WINNT:
6CAC5D4C 57494E4E5400 db 'WINNT',0
6CAC5D52 00 db 00h;
6CAC5D53 00 db 00h;
6CAC5D54 00 db 00h;
6CAC5D55 00 db 00h;
6CAC5D56 00 db 00h;
6CAC5D57 00 db 00h;
6CAC5D58 L6CAC5D58:
6CAC5D58 53 db 53h; 'S'
6CAC5D59 45 db 45h; 'E'
6CAC5D5A 52 db 52h; 'R'
6CAC5D5B 56 db 56h; 'V'
6CAC5D5C 45 db 45h; 'E'
6CAC5D5D 52 db 52h; 'R'
6CAC5D5E 4E db 4Eh; 'N'
6CAC5D5F 54 db 54h; 'T'
Code: Select all
6CAE415D L6CAE415D:
6CAE415D FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
6CAE4160 8B35B811AC6C mov esi,[msvcrt.dll!_stricmp]
6CAE4166 68585DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D58_WINNT
*******This is how the above line looks in the hacked file*************
6CAE4166 68585DAC6C push L6CAC5D58
*******End Difference One**************************************
6CAE416B FFD6 call esi
6CAE416D 85C0 test eax,eax
6CAE416F 59 pop ecx
6CAE4170 59 pop ecx
6CAE4171 750B jnz L6CAE417E
6CAE4173 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
6CAE4176 C70001000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000001h
6CAE417C EB39 jmp L6CAE41B7
6CAE417E L6CAE417E:
6CAE417E FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
6CAE4181 684C5DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D4C_SERVERNT
*******This is how the above line looks in the hacked file*************
6CAE4181 684C5DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D4C_WINNT
*******End Difference Two**************************************
6CAE4186 FFD6 call esi
6CAE4188 85C0 test eax,eax
6CAE418A 59 pop ecx
6CAE418B 59 pop ecx
6CAE418C 750B jnz L6CAE4199
6CAE418E 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
6CAE4191 C70002000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000002h
6CAE4197 EB1E jmp L6CAE41B7
Code: Select all
6CAE4166 68585DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D58_WINNT
....
6CAE4181 684C5DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D4C_SERVERNT
*****swap-o-matic******
6CAE4166 684C5DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D4C_SERVERNT
....
6CAE4181 68585DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D58_WINNT
Code: Select all
6CAC5D4C SSZ6CAC5D4C_SERVERNT:
6CAC5D4C 5345525645524E5400 db 'SERVERNT',0
6CAC5D55 000000 Align 4
6CAC5D58 SSZ6CAC5D58_WINNT:
6CAC5D58 57494E4E5400 db 'WINNT',0
6CAC5D5E 0000 Align 4
...............
6CAE415D L6CAE415D:
6CAE415D FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
6CAE4160 8B35B811AC6C mov esi,[msvcrt.dll!_stricmp]
6CAE4166 684C5DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D4C_SERVERNT
6CAE416B FFD6 call esi
6CAE416D 85C0 test eax,eax
6CAE416F 59 pop ecx
6CAE4170 59 pop ecx
6CAE4171 750B jnz L6CAE417E
6CAE4173 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
6CAE4176 C70001000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000001h
6CAE417C EB39 jmp L6CAE41B7
6CAE417E L6CAE417E:
6CAE417E FF75FC push [ebp-04h]
6CAE4181 68585DAC6C push SSZ6CAC5D58_WINNT
6CAE4186 FFD6 call esi
6CAE4188 85C0 test eax,eax
6CAE418A 59 pop ecx
6CAE418B 59 pop ecx
6CAE418C 750B jnz L6CAE4199
6CAE418E 8B4508 mov eax,[ebp+08h]
6CAE4191 C70002000000 mov dword ptr [eax],00000002h
6CAE4197 EB1E jmp L6CAE41B7
Code: Select all
01002830 SSZ01002830_winnt:
01002830 77696E6E7400 db 'winnt',0
01002836 00 db 00h;
01002837 00 db 00h;
01002838 00 db 00h;
01002839 00 db 00h;
0100283A 00 db 00h;
0100283B 00 db 00h;
Can switching the PUSH's so that calls to WINNT now execute what SERVERNT was responsible for be enough? (for the astute observers: the DLL and SYS list each of the three initially in reverse order of each other. SYS lists WINNT, SERVERNT, LANMANNT; DLL lists LANMANNT, SERVERNT, WINNT. For whatever that's worth.)
If anyone has the capability and willingness to test differently modified files, PM me or respond here, as I'd really like to find out if these changes to the SYS and DLL (with the original change to the EXE of course) are enough, but lack the resources/equipment to do so. (I can verify that the modified files DO work as normal under a regular XP Pro install and do not introduce any problems). Even better if you can tell me if it won't work and can explain (prove-ably) why the method currently in use is the only operable one.
(A note: The original "Hack" doesn't modify the PE Checksum of either the SYS or DLL, only the EXE. The method used here changes the PE Checksum of all three, so if you use this information to change your own files, don't forget to update those.)
*edit: realized I confused the examples and posted code from the SYS into the sections for the DLL. Corrected.*
Cab'd for i386, no integrator INI yet.
https://www.sharemation.com/Aeenzawthi/ ... niq=40a2tk
Okay, so I got someone to loan me a 400gb hdd, and I did a VMWare test with the new files after I created 3 non-associated partitions of 100gb (usable space) a piece (to match the 100gb OS drive).
Okay, technically, I spaced out 2 50gb allocations to leave 3 100gb unallocated partitions.
Orignal patch vs modified patch produced the same working results, though the benching I got on the newer files was a tich faster. Doesn't mean much, since it was physically a single disk, overall performance was a tich slower than the THG test.
I should be adding this to the >Definitive Collection< as soon as I work a few other things out so I can do a single update release post.
Okay, technically, I spaced out 2 50gb allocations to leave 3 100gb unallocated partitions.
Orignal patch vs modified patch produced the same working results, though the benching I got on the newer files was a tich faster. Doesn't mean much, since it was physically a single disk, overall performance was a tich slower than the THG test.
I should be adding this to the >Definitive Collection< as soon as I work a few other things out so I can do a single update release post.
-
- Posts: 1131
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am
1: Availability.
2: In my testing example I set up a software raid using one physical HDD. While that may not seem like a whole lot of benifit, I'd like to see a card do the same thing.
3: Because this solution is always available, see #1.
4: If you have a system with room for the drives but no room for additional cards.
5: If you have a system where the card in question is not compatable. (It can happen, trust me.)
6: Availability.
@Glowy: Using a hex editor (mirkes.de Tiny Hexer specifically) and PE Explorer to find out where I needed to change what. This addon is now part of the "System File Patches" for the Integrator, link can be found in my signature.
2: In my testing example I set up a software raid using one physical HDD. While that may not seem like a whole lot of benifit, I'd like to see a card do the same thing.
3: Because this solution is always available, see #1.
4: If you have a system with room for the drives but no room for additional cards.
5: If you have a system where the card in question is not compatable. (It can happen, trust me.)
6: Availability.
@Glowy: Using a hex editor (mirkes.de Tiny Hexer specifically) and PE Explorer to find out where I needed to change what. This addon is now part of the "System File Patches" for the Integrator, link can be found in my signature.
What exactly is the point of a single disk RAID array?
Get up to $200 off on hosting from the same people who host this website!
http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2357
http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2357
RyanVM wrote:What exactly is the point of a single disk RAID array?
I believe Zacam only wanted to test out the functionality of the software RAID (both with the original and modified patches). The THG article covers the benefits of a software vs. hardware based system. For those who don't want to read the whole thing, here is a summary from the article:Zacam wrote:...for testing purposes.
In short, if you would like a fat amount of space using ports you already have available, this is one way to do it for free (plus the separate drives of course). You will also benefit from the RAID5's ability to maximize the space and availability of your data. Speed benefits are minimal vs. a hardware solution.There was definitely some amazement at THG's storage test lab, since handling a RAID 5 array under WindowsXP proved to be extremely doable. Relocating the RAID administration from controllers to the operating system may not be a powerful solution, but it enables a level of flexibility that is not common in the storage area. Any WindowsXP system is technically capable of running RAID arrays, as long as the desired amount of hard drives can be attached. It does not matter what hardware you are using. For RAID 5, merely three files need to be altered.
Our drive failure simulation passed with flying colors, as the rebuild process can be initiated easily even by less experienced users. In addition, it took about the same time that hardware-based RAID solutions would require. Yet we need to mention Windows security as an important issue, since access to the disk management will enable everybody to wipe out the whole array within seconds.
Another advantage of our WindowsXP RAID 5 approach is its unbeatable price point. Besides that hard drives one obviously needs to get, all you need is an adequate amount of storage ports on your motherboard or the controllers used. Buying expensive RAID controllers is no longer necessary here.
At the end of the day there is one downside left: Windows RAID 5 by far does not work as fast as hardware-based solutions. However, file servers do not always need to be as quick as possible. If you need to set up a redundant file server for occasional access and little traffic, a Windows RAID should definitely be an option to consider. But be careful: Once the RAID is rendered, you cannot transfer it to any of the hardware RAID controllers. Changing your mind this will always require reinstalling the whole array.
nolook
-
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:13 pm
nolook,
that is a good summary, but what I also remember of that article is that this 'hack' gives the user the ability to take those drives used for RAID 5 and put them on any other system (in any install/cabling order too) with this hack and windows just sees the drive(s) - no problems!
I think for a lot of people this is the most valuable feature: to be able to take your data and without worrying of install/cabling order just pop the drives into a new computer and carry on working.
Try to do that with a failed/failing hardware based solution (I have... oh my head) without matching the exact same hardware and in my case bios (SX6000) you not only cannot 'see' your valuable data, but you can also possibly lose it permanently too.
I include this 'hack' for every install I do - a definate 'must-have'.
Thank You once again rikgale and Zacam, truly appreciated!
Cheers,
FlyingGleek.
that is a good summary, but what I also remember of that article is that this 'hack' gives the user the ability to take those drives used for RAID 5 and put them on any other system (in any install/cabling order too) with this hack and windows just sees the drive(s) - no problems!
I think for a lot of people this is the most valuable feature: to be able to take your data and without worrying of install/cabling order just pop the drives into a new computer and carry on working.
Try to do that with a failed/failing hardware based solution (I have... oh my head) without matching the exact same hardware and in my case bios (SX6000) you not only cannot 'see' your valuable data, but you can also possibly lose it permanently too.
I include this 'hack' for every install I do - a definate 'must-have'.
Thank You once again rikgale and Zacam, truly appreciated!
Cheers,
FlyingGleek.
That's an unfortunate downside to hardware-accelerated solutions--Hardware-specific dependency. I do wish the RAID spec wasn't so vague in the implementations. The only solution for a controller failure is an identical replacement.FlyingGleek wrote:this 'hack' gives the user the ability to take those drives used for RAID 5 and put them on any other [hacked] system
..
Try to do that with a failed/failing hardware based solution...
-
- Posts: 1131
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:19 am
Hmm, I'm posting to a five years old thread...
Well, I would like to ask if someone could create a new nlite addon for this RAID5 Hack as the one by rikgale is for XP with SP2 and I haven't found any similar addon for SP3...
I've seen Zacam's one, but it's for integrator and not nlite.
I've found the files needed here: http://addto.it/Software-RAID-0-1-5-or- ... XP-Pro-SP3 but I cannot create the addon myself so I'm asking for your help.
Thanks everyone in advance and have a nice day!
Well, I would like to ask if someone could create a new nlite addon for this RAID5 Hack as the one by rikgale is for XP with SP2 and I haven't found any similar addon for SP3...
I've seen Zacam's one, but it's for integrator and not nlite.
I've found the files needed here: http://addto.it/Software-RAID-0-1-5-or- ... XP-Pro-SP3 but I cannot create the addon myself so I'm asking for your help.
Thanks everyone in advance and have a nice day!
- mr_smartepants
- Posts: 824
- Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
- Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
We all use Zacam's patches. Try his RAID-5 patch here: http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2274
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:19 am
- =[FEAR]=JIGSAW
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:54 am
- Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Re: [Released] XP RAID 5 Hack
7 yrs ??
Re: [Released] XP RAID 5 Hack
It's a spammer.
Alteration of the world
Want to thank me ? If you buy something on Banggood with this link, I will earn a little %.
Want to thank me ? If you buy something on Banggood with this link, I will earn a little %.