XP Bloke,
As far as I am aware, yes, it is possible. If you have
copied the i386 folder to the [fat] hard-drive, type:

c:\i386\WINNT.EXE

....and XP should install. It will start the installation with a process
that will not happen with a direct install from the cd-rom. It will begin
by copying the XP cd boot files to a temporary folder. The machine will
then reboot with these files as if it were the cd. These are the same
'files' that you would have on the floppy-set of startup disks that begin
installation with computers that do not have 'boot from cd-rom' capability.
It will then continue the installation process by copying the XP
installation files to a temporary folder on your computer as it would
normally.
Why you would want to do this, I don't know, as if you have a bootable
fat332 DOS partition, all you have to do is the same [above] command but
choosing the cd-rom as the target. You don't need to copy the i386 folder
to the hard-drive. But, you asked the question, and I have answered it for
you, being as clear as I can be. Is your problem that you can't access the
cd-rom from DOS? If so I will explain how, just give us the word.

--

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.


"XP Guy" wrote in message ...
Shenan Stanley wrote:

So, it it possible?

Yes.

Google could have told you that. ;-)

And actually, no. Google didn't tell me that.

I didn't actually come across anything or anyone who gave a catagorical
"yes" to that question, and certainly no one who claimed they've done it
(let alone explaining how).

If that's true, I haven't found it yet.

If you have, is there some reason you're not posting it?

You didn't/haven't asked how.

You asked is there a way/if it was possible.

And until you actually say how, then what basis do I have to believe the
accuracy of your answer?

How do I know that by answering "yes", that you have actually understood
the question? Others have put forward an affirmative answer, yet their
corresponding explanation as to the "how" indicates they did not
actually address or understand the question.

You seem (according to your own responses) just want to be given
the answers to the questions you ask.

I think any reasonable or rational person would have realized that my
question was framed in such a way as to invite an explanation of how to
do it (if indeed it can be done) and not simply to seek a "yes" answer
without the corresponding details. Clearly, in the context of the
question, an answer stating simply "no" is possible, while an answer
stating only "yes" is incomplete (if not useless) without the
corresponding details of how.

So, now I ask you how it can be done.