jaclaz

Now I see. A sort of drivers-pack integrated Windows 98 "universal" install media, right? jaclaz

Thanks. But my question was not really "can you provide a ton of random extra .inf's, enough to make DRVIDX.BIN grow beyond 2 Mb?". It was more like "WHY one would add a ton of extra.inf?" or "In which (I guess particular) condition does it happen that the .inf are so many to make DRVIDX.BIN exceed 2 Mb?". jaclaz

Good. Why don' t you share your batch? This way next user needing to do a similar chore may be abe to find it. jaclaz

Look, I know that being a Mod on MSFN grants you special privileges , but allow me to doubt that you are authorized to write "MS" and "sense" in a same sentence. Remember that MS employees can use the secret seven : http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/Humour/microsoft-monopoly.html jaclaz

It makes no sense, however (please read as IMHO an exercise in futility). However the 2.27 is the actual version used in original Windows 2K CD, according to a few sources. That version never leaked AFAIK, and in any case they are really-really for Microsoft Internal use only. Non-news: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/18396-helpi-need-cdimageexe-version227/ jaclaz

May I respectfully ask what is the final scope of "bombarding windows with tons of extra INF files"? And what do you mean by "tons"? Can you post an example? jaclaz

Sure you can delete a sub-key. Basically you list the sub-keys of a given level (to get their names) piping the results in a FIND or FINDSTR expression and then proceed to delete them. The REG.EXE utility can do that fine. Examples: reg query HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Clipbook\ /s reg query HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Clipbook\ /s | FIND "Auto" http://www.robvanderwoude.com/ntregquery.php The point is different, however. Accordingly to the given resource, the user/password is also stored in Credentials Manager. You need to verify this piece of info, using the GUI methods/tools suggested. jaclaz

Still IMHO better than submarine flying tanks from Bacteria or flying dreadnoughts from Tomania. jaclaz

Yep. Just as an example, imagine that the "private" company knows about your income, knows about your politicla preferences and culinary tastes, can identify you online and filters your search results "pushing to the top" what you "should" like according to them. Are you really-really going to (say) page 38 of google results to find the first non-pushed article/site/resource/whatever? (and this provided that they just don't remove altogether what according to them might not suit you) Well, again, normally the GI are the "good guys", and directly or indirectly they are (or should be) controlled by *someone* (the people you contributed to elect to the Government), at least in theory. A "private company" has normally three points in it's agenda: money more money yet more moneywith "ethics" between 12th and 38th place . Having access to your habits, tastes, etc. is not a good thing, you personally may be technologically evolved enough to be able to deal with the traps that they may lay before you, bit the vast majority of people may be not. You are I believe confusing the technology with the "principles", the British intercepted (and opened with some steam from a teapot ) or simply kept letters sent by the US representatives all the time, it is called "spying" or "intelligence", nothing has changed much. Here is an example of a letter that President Washington might not have wanted to fall in the hands of the enemy : https://web.archive.org/web/20071111224808/http://www.clements.umich.edu/Spies/letter-1781may29.html (of no particular relevance from a military standpoint, though) jaclaz

I am notoriously personJ, no prob here. And I have one word for you: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061722/quotes?item=qt0282091 pssst, come closer, yes, like that: httrack jaclaz

Ah, well, if you say so. I guess that the several thousands (or more likely tens or hundreds of thousand) people that *somehow* managed to make in the 15 years since Windows 2000 release working install CD's using mkisofs or *any* version of CDimage or OSCDimg must have all been tricked into believing they installed Windows 2000 successfully from a CD. Just in case: http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/put-down-the-chocolate-covered-banana.html jaclaz

@sumix8c About your hfslip on Altervista issue, it seems like it is "yours only", I can reach it fine: http://hfslip.altervista.org/ http://hfslip.altervista.org/index.html Have you tried through a proxy? jaclaz

@Flasche You may have not read "The Dead Past" by Isaac Asimov, a short story written in 1956, which I recommend you to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dead_Past In the immortal words of Thaddeus Araman: jaclaz

Because they are frank and honest with their customers? (just an idea ) jaclaz

Well, a lot of people is unhappy with the fact that the NSA (or other three or more letter Government agencies) are capable of snooping on your private life and communications. Some are even upset by the fact that with a Court Warrant this is actually legal. BUT, after all, these are the "good guys", and - mainly - they are in good faith. Imagine that the one snooping on your habits is Microsoft or the company you work for (or just the geekish IT guy in it). No, it's not going to end well. jaclaz

Sure it is compatible with XP (I believe only with SP3), but how many people have Office 365 running on XP (and how many people have a Lync Server) outside - maybe - a large enterprise? jaclaz

If you read the reply I posted above, the MBOOTPATH was used to create a valid HFSLIP.CMD (and setting the HFSLIP and HFSLIPSVC variables) but relatively recently Acheron re-wrote that part of script: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/158622-hfsvcpack-and-hdd-based-installation-bug-fix/ so that valid values are generated independently from the MBOOTPATH. But since the beginning the HFSLIP is for SLIPstreaming, not for making a multiboot CD, if you prefer the MBOOTPATH was a way to prepare a slipstreamed source suitable to be later processed following one of the mentioned guides without further editing. Like: Several original sources+Gosh's or Fliakite's guide=Multiboot CD or AIO with original filesSeveral original sources, each slipstreamed with HFSLIP +Gosh's or Fliakite's guide=Multiboot CD or AIO with HFSLIPped filesBoth guides use AFAICR, a pre-expanded $WIN_NT$.~BT for booting (which goes in the ROOT of the CD renamed to a 4 letter name that is hexedited into SETUPLDR.BIN and a "normal" \I386\ subdir, only, instead of this \I386\ being in ROOT, it is placed in the path to which SetupSourcePath is edited in txtsetup.inf). I seem to remember how CDRPACK by Bart was also not aimed to make AIO's with various versions of NT systems (but I may well be wrong). jaclaz PS: Yes, now I remember, at the time I used Wincdman: https://web.archive.org/web/20050306033922/http://www.tech-hints.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20041207094207/http://berns.cae.wisc.edu/pages/wincdman.asp

I think you need a special permit to be allowed to post oximorons on MSFN . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymoron jaclaz

Did a few tests, the CALL is slower than the second FOR loop , and variable expansion wins over the IF's, but not by much. I made a batch taking the time for the execution of the various versions 100 times repeating it for 10 times then took the average of each set of 100 executions. Excluded the (as expected much slower) WMIC snippet with an average of 9,21 seconds , the various versions I posted were all in a range of 1,59-1,62, whilst the snippet in post #19 averaged 1,54 and the one in post #21 1,53. So, we are talking anyway of hundredths of seconds difference over one hundred executions. Attached is the batch I used. jaclaz P.S.: The one in post #16 averaged 1,65 and the one in post #17 by bphlpt 1,64 run10times.zip

Yep, the question came out "badly" , AFAIK Lync is mainly (please read almost exclusively) used in the enterprise, as besides the client you have to use either a Lync Server or the Lync Online which is part of the MS "Cloud" of online services, if I remember right as part of Office 365. "Common" users tend to use other tools AFAIK. I posted: Which OS is it? but I actually meant to post: Which OS is it? XP? Are you sure? to express my surprise. However the possible issue is about the availability of cmdkey. I don't think that cmdkey runs on XP, and I don't know of a command line suitable tools to access Credentials Manager, the excellent Nirsoft thingy: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/network_password_recovery.html should be able to, but it is GUI only/has not a suitable command line parameter. One could use the built-in rundll32.exe keymgr.dll, KRShowKeyMgr but that is still GUI only. Which is good , since I also don't use it, and the combined effect is to further lessen chances that we will ever have a video conference. jaclaz

And if you want I can even give you a logical explanation for it. (you can use it as an excuse ) Somehow one of the pins (or socket) had a very thin layer of oxidation, just enough to act as insulator. By just disconnecting and reconnecting you "broke" it and everything worked after. jaclaz

The WMIC will surely slow down much the operation , but the script does look "simpler", and since all in all the "whole" original batch is "interactive" the overall time to execute will be much more dependent on the user response to the SET /P's. I interpreted the "optimize" more as "making it simpler" than as "making it faster". Versions "prior" that will execute a .CMD (not a .BAT) will mean either WIndows NT 4.00 or WIndows 2000 aka 5.00, adding a couple of labels as I did in post #18 won't do much harm, and IMHO if someone is running Windows Whistler Server, he/she has much more serious problems than these . I remember having noticed some time ago that IF's were actually slowing down execution, as well as CALLs, cannot really say how they compare with SETs and FORs loops. I will try putting together another small batch to time the execution of the various versions posted, possibly in a x100 or x1000 loop it will be possible to see which one is actually faster, though set apart the slower WMIC version I doubt that there can be much differences among the others. jaclaz

I would check some of the other alternatives, first. http://alternativeto.net/software/vlmc/ I am not at all into video editing, but last time I checked PiTiVi, it seemed to me like nice: http://www.pitivi.org/ (or does it need to be Windows?)

Yep, this is also - sometimes - because of "commissions" or "collective design". Just in case, there is a site that helps making your own Tree Swing Cartoon or "How Projects Really Work" http://www.projectcartoon.com/ Of course, ironically, the originally version 1.0: http://www.projectcartoon.com/cartoon/3 was updated to 1.5: http://www.projectcartoon.com/cartoon/2 and to 2.0: http://www.projectcartoon.com/cartoon/1 jaclaz

I am not sure to understand. You mean this? http://www.voip-connections.com/howto/how-to-purge-lync-temporary-cache-files/ That would involve a batch (or *whatever* script) that: deletes some files deletes some Registry entries uses *something like* cmdkey http://technet.microsoft.com/it-it/library/cc754243(v=ws.10).aspx to remove data from credential manager and (possibly ) add the *fake* Which OS is it? jaclaz