450

These codecs are the one distributed ahead as CODECS.rar in the forum of HFSLIP. However, I think that the problem is not in a single codec in this. Because any codec is not built in but all any codecs need not be built in. Like the RunOnce registry key's being disregarded. However, I will try having been directed if thought about the possibility. When the codec is built in with the RunOnceEx registry key, it would be better to verify it having though it doesn't know how to become it though hit on. This is tried later.

HFSLIPWU.INF at that time is this. HFSLIPWU.zip

Yes, the problem still remains though WINNT.SIF is not included and it Bilded it. HFSLIP.zip

It seems not to have been able to append the file. HFSLIP.zip

The shown matter was confirmed again. It was confirmed not to include hotfix of IE6, and to include hotfix of IE7 temporarily removed in the test environment. It included it again though hotfix of KB928255 was removed in the test environment. The condition to integrate slipstreams fills the one that the problem occurred. However, is there a condition that we some overlooked ･･･?

The codec was never still built in though the file was copied though the test had been completed. The RunOnce registry key might be still disregarded.

It was all removed where the problem was about this time though did not know though was the one of a new version because making was specified as simply as possible to say nothing of this excluding the setup of IE7. All hotfix concerning IE7 remained entering when the problem was noticed. However, I will put hotfix of IE7 again and try.

No, the file is correctly copied. The registration processing of the written codec seems not to be done to HFSLIPWU.INF. We will answer the reason for WINNT.SIF to have the comment on nLite. It is because of the correction WINNT.SIF is not written by hand, the file is made by nLite somewhat. Because the time of making was reduced from the beginning more than it wrote for myself, such a method was adopted.

The source is clean only of the integration of SP2 into WindowsXP. Processing by nLite and other programs is not done at all. There is no change in the situation though the directory was renamed. Please confirm the log appended this time in detail. When the beta version of HFSLIP supports the slipstream integration of IE7 before, IE7 is memorized for the phenomenon that it is not possible to use it to install software to have been reported being disregarded either of registry key to RunOnce or RunOnceEx when slipstreams are integrated in the bulletin board where to tell the truth, I am though details cannot be confirmed because a past writing cannot be read. It seems that that is related though which registry key is not remembered whether being disregarded. HFSLIP.zip

It tried immediately. The codec is not still built in though everything was removed excluding IE7, the codec, and WINNT. SIF. The file used at that time is appended. The one as which WINNT.SIF is the same is used. test.zip

Indeed, it is necessary to compress it. It tried to up-load the log as it was. Thank you we wish to express our gratitude. ...It seems to have gone well. HFSLIP.zip

＞Upload failed. You are not permitted to upload this type of file It seems not to be able to up-load the file. May I send it by the mail so on?WindowsLiveMessenger can be used.

It is 450 that came after a long time. Always thank you. It reports because there was a mysterious phenomenon. The codec arranged in the HFEXPERT\CODECS folder seems not to be built in though HFSLIP 1.6.4 was used and integrated. When having confirmed it, the output seems to be done to HFSLIPWU.INF correctly as for the built-in sequence. IE7 is integrated in slipstreams in me, and it seems to be generated by this. I will report above.

Hello. Because the problem is brought up for a moment when I am using SNM this time, it reports. It seems not to be likely to be able to complete operation correctly by combining applied hotfix. KB928366 and KB927495 cannot be applied at the same time in my hand. Even if the file name is changed, the order of the operating system's retrieving the file is changed, and which hotfix is applied previously, it seems not to be able to evade. Is there a combination of such hotfix ..the other..?The appearing dialog is the following. ｢It is information 9005. Hotfix KB927495 need not be installed. Hotfix KB928366 including the up-to-date file has already been installed. ｣

It is compressed with UPX. There was a character of UPX in the exe header though the decompression in UPX was not tested.