dhoffman_98

No argument there. And you are almost right. The FAQ indicates that it applies to more than just Windows 2000. It also applies to XP-SP1. But if you applied the earlier version of the patch to an XP-SP2 system, you are already safe and don't need to reapply the patch. As I said earlier, you CAN (and probably should) download this file to add to your unattended SP2 CD for future builds. But I wouldn't sweat over trying to apply this patch to hundreds/thousands of XP-SP2 machines that had the old hotfix installed. You are already covered.

m1m1m1m1m1m1... (nice name...) There is an FAQ in the security bulletin that indicates what changes are made and the reason for releasing another updated version. It also indicates that the changes that were made from the previous version The new bulletin only applies to SP2... IF you did NOT already apply the earlier hotfix. However, if you already applied the earlier version, and you are running SP2, then you don't need the new update. Apparently, from the updated security bulletin, they made some changes to the new version of the hotfix that apply to the other operating systems and service packs... as I quoted in my previous post. If your intentions are to build an unattended CD, then it's certainly OK to use the new version, but this is not a required update to an already patched system.

This is NOT for XP SP2. Read the FAQ:

OK, but you can also get them from expanding the hotfixes with the /X option. I guess the only question though is what benefit do you get from the catalog files? I thought it had something to do with the file protection, but maybe I have more reading to do. Even this link from Microsoft (although it was written for 2000) shows instructions for creating the svcpack.ini file and says to expand the files and include the catalogs, but doesn't say much about what they do. http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/downl...P4/HFDeploy.htm OK, I just found more information at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q282784/ This is really about the qfecheck program, but it does say something about how one problem that qfecheck looks for is files that are out of date or the wrong version when compared to the catalog files. It says "For each file that is installed by a hotfix, Qfecheck checks to see that the current catalogs on the computer contain the information that would be used by Windows File Protection (WFP) to validate the file. If a file is valid according to the hotfix information in the registry, but the installed catalogs do not concur, Qfecheck reports an error." So now I guess the question becomes this... is it just convenient to leave out the catalogs, or is it more proper to include them? What are the pros/cons of doing it either way? Thanks for the feedback... Oh and anyone can chime in on this... I'm not trying to make it sound like I'm picking on Incroyable. In fact, while I'm here I'd like to thank Incroyable for all the work you have done. David

Incroyable.... Was this only the beginning of your SVCPACK.INF file? Did you cut the catalog part off? I'm asking because until now, I was using the Integrate function, but I agree with you that it would be much easier to retire hotfixes by editing that file rather than re-doing the integrate each month from a virgin installation. So I'm interested in trying that out. But in my current svcpack.inf file, at the bottom, it also shows a whole list of "ProductCatalogsToInstall". Are they just not needed, or should I leave it alone? Thanks, David

Congrats to everyone who did 7.0 with all the patches up to 7.0.5 But I have a question... why didn't you just install 7.0.5 instead of doing all the patching? There is a full version of 7.0.5 ready to go and can be installed silently with "/S /v/qn" switches. Just curious.

I think I have to disagree with your findings. I followed your recommendations and removed 873339 and 886185 and rebuilt my CD. I did a full install and now both of those packages are showing up as new updates that need to be installed. So unless you know of something that specifically says they replaced those files, I think they are still needed.

Looks like todays updates have finally been released... http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/ms05-nov.mspx KB896424 is new and does not replace any previous fixes. Also the MRT (KB890830) package is updated for November and uses the following Reg Key: 1F5BA617-240A-42FF-BE3B-14B88D004E43 David

No argument there... you are lazy. How lazy do you have to be that you cant just click the links and download? Someone posted the direct download links two posts before yours.

Forgive my ignorance, but what does the "N" mean when talking about Windows XP Home N or Windows XP Professional N? Thanks, David

Great news! Finally! I've been waiting a whole month for this update! ROFLMAO

OK, so what is in this registerwinzip.reg file?

Some people haven't moved to SP2 yet, and this site USED to be a great resource for when new SP1 hotfixes came out. I'm a little dissapointed that this forum isn't still kept up to date, but I guess the people who were moderating it all moved on to SP2 now.

Quick nlite question... I haven't tried using nlite yet. I've been using the CDIMAGE program to create my ISO images. I know there is a "-o" switch with CDIMAGE that tells it not to add a second copy of a file that appears more than once in the image, but rather to simply leave a pointer to the first file. So for example, I can include a copy of my entire i386 directory so that in the final install, that directory would be copied to the hard drive, reducing the need for a CD again anytime updates are done. Normally, this would have made the CD image very large, but by using the -o switch, it reduces the size. Anyhow.... does anyone know if nlite will do the same thing, or should I stick to using CDIMAGE if that's what I want to do? Thanks, David

Aaron, Just wanted to double check something. You have Q831167 under the Type 1 fixes, but the one I got is a Type 2. Thanks for keeping this up to date. Great work! David