Gape
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Gape
-
-
I recommend that you should install SP on the last step.
Example:
1- Install Win98 SE.
2- Install drivers.
3- Install IE 6.0 SP1.
4- Install DirectX 9.0c or 8.1b.
5- Install SP.
0 -
All, you should know that Win98 SE is bundled with IE 5.0. SP contains only updates for this bundled IE 5.0. It doesn't contain any IE 5.5 or 6.0 update. Microsoft's SPs have a similar approach.
0 -
OK, all. I'm back now.
I'm sorry for being away. But, I was ill.
Now, please be patient, because I have to do lots of stuff for my job and school, and I have to read all posts by you.
0 -
Guys, I'm ill. I hope I'll return soon.
0 -
couldn't you do like what litepc does n add stuff to the add/remove and if you want it check it or if not uncheck it to remove it?also could you add the Windows 98 Critical Update Notification 4.0 as an optional component?
soldier1st, I have almost finished the SP 2.0 RC, and you're requesting new things.
We can discuss new things for 2.1.
Please, wait for 2.0 release, after that, you can ask them, again.0 -
Now only Desktop Icons feature is missing. Notepad and Regedit patching seems working properly. Desktop icons feature is not difficult, but I try to add 98lite-SLEEK compability. Hope it will finish soon.
0 -
BUG: Swenum.sys PortCls devices do not work correctly in Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition
Inside of SP1.6.2 there IS a reference to Portcls.sys [4.10.2224] as coming from 321467. Can you give any details to explain this?
You have already answer of your question
Portcls.sys is EXACTLY from Q321467.
Thanks for the link. I'll update the hot-fixes-list and file-list, after releasing 2.0 FINAL.
0 -
The stock system apparently has DCOM98 at revision 1718, same as 98 "Gold" [or as we call it 98FE].
Should the SP 2 apply DCOM98 1.3 [which is available as a "crackerjack prize" within Q315575] which raises the rev to 3328?
SP 1.6.2 has already a complete version of DCOM98 1.3. Please look at "features" on my web page. Of course, SP 2.0 has it, too.
About registry setting, probably I have missed it. I will correct it in SP 2.0.
0 -
Regarding SHELL32.DLL: Can I therefore assume that the replaced icon/bitmaps are smaller, but the STANDARD ones are NOT smaller? Thus, after installation, what size is SHELL32.DLL relative to choice of original or replaced icon sets? And what about compatibility with that translucent icon modification [covered on Axcel216 site about how to patch the Q313829 shell32.dll to be functionally compatible with the original shell32.dll. If feasible, it would be desirable to NOT introduce additional incompatibility, etc. Also, it is conceivable that the translucent icon patch could depend on the overall file length?]
From what I read about the notepad key bindings enhancements, it's clearly a matter of patching it to get a quite similar binary, thus you only need to patch the original; I assume there are no official updated notepad.exe files to otherwise consider, etc.
In 2.0 which EXPLORER.EXE will be used? The original or the one from IE50SP2? Also I believe there is somewhat of an icon/bitmap consideration within this file as well? What was the advantage [if any] of using the IE50SP2 version?
Regarding transculent icon modification: Yes, you can apply Axcel216's fixes for removing Q313829 SHELL32.DLL "desktop shortcut icon". There are four ways to remove it, all of them should work with modified or non-modified Q313829 SHELL32.DLL. In the SP 2.0, the patcher of SHELL32.DLL produces same SHELL32.DLL in the SP 1.6.2's.
Regarding EXPLORER.EXE: SP 2.0 contains a patcher for stock EXPLORER.EXE currently. But I can add a patcher for IE 50 SP2 version, too. Thus, the version of EXPLORER.EXE depends to the user's installed EXPLORER.EXE, not depends to the SP 2.0. Many users generally use stock EXPLORER.EXE, but some IE 5.0 SP2 and/or Office 2000 installed systems contain a newer EXPLORER.EXE.
If you have any idea for better 98lite SLEEK compability, please let me know.
0 -
I located the PCPLUS article on the notepad.exe control-key shortcuts; thus the similarity between the stock notepad.exe and the one provided in SP1.CAB. I assume this is the one that will be in SP2.CAP as well? If so, I do have the patch that makes it compatible with 98lite SLEEK [V1], which is essentially just doing what 98lite does to the original, i.e., if you compare my patched new notepad.exe to the unpatched one, you get the same differences listed as comparing the original notepad.exe to the 98lite-SLEEK [V1]-patched version of the original notepad.exe, etc.
Can you indicate where EXPLORER.EXE comes from? I believe it's not the stock one from 98SE. [Again, is it the same base in SP2.CAB as in SP1.CAB?]
SP 1.6.2's EXPLORER.EXE is from IE 5.0 SP2. The reason of SHELL32.DLL length difference is replaced icons/bitmaps are smaller than originals in size.
[sP 2.0 does NOT contain NOTEPAD.EXE and EXPLORER.EXE, because of patching method. The patcher of Notepad in SP 2.0 produces same Notepad in SP 1.6.2.]
I don't understand your comments about NOTEPAD.EXE. Does 98lite SLEEK modify NOTEPAD.EXE ?
0 -
i'd like to take the unofficial service pack use it to make a 'slipstreamed' 98 disc. i've read that it's as simple as using the files in sp2.cab, however i would also like to make some changes to the registry. i've been searching around for information on how to go about this to no avail. if anyone knows of a site with some guides, it would make my day.
besides that, keep up the good work on the service pack. i think that 98 still has it's uses and it's great that some people still improve upon it. thanks.
You should try to find more information about MSBATCH.INF
0 -
Can you elaborate on what about it is better? Assuming we are talking about the file notepad.exe within SP 1.6.2. I notice that it is the same length as the standard one, but clearly different internally, etc.
Replace %winbootdir%\EXPLORER.EXE with the one from that 98lite directory and replace %winbootdir%\SYSTEM\SHELL32.DLL with the one from that 98lite directory as well.
NOTEPAD.EXE was only modified with Resource Hacker for adding some new key-bindings. SP 2.0 does not contain this file, it use patching method for adding new key-bindings.
To use SP 2.0 on the 98lite SLEEK, you only have to replace SHELL32.DLL. Because SP 2.0 does not contain the EXPLORER.EXE.
["Patching" method only patches Windows 98 SE's original EXPLORER.EXE, so it does not touch if you have older EXPLORER.EXE like on the 98lite SLEEK.]
If you replaced NOTEPAD.EXE with an another program such as METAPAD, "patching" method will not touch your current NOTEPAD replacement, too. Because it only patches original NOTEPAD.EXE.
0 -
To Gape:
I posted something on the "Better Notepad" thread, and I assume you saw/will see it [when you get a chance].
I noticed that the SHELL32.DLL file seems not to be the one associated with Q313829 in that it's a different length. I know there are the icon considerations that are hard-patched in SP 1.6.2 [where I am still checking things out; end in sight soon!] but is this based on the same file as the hotfix or what? I am concerned because I read something a while back on Axcel216's site about someone complaining that the Q313829 version broke someone's idea about how to add transparent icons or somesuch using the original released SHELL32.DLL file, and that there was a way to patch the Q313829 version of SHELL32.DLL to regain the former functionality. However, these instructions have absolute offsets, so unless we can get an update for the file you prefer to use, is there any reason to break this compatibility yet again? [Or is it already handled by yet something else I don't grasp?]
Or is all of this irrelevant because 2.00 is different from 1.6.2 regarding the SHELL32.DLL issues?
cjl
SP 1.6.2 has some modified files. The modification is done by Resource Hacker. These files are:
EXPLORER.EXE: 256-color tray icons hack, and desktop icons hack.
SHELL32.DLL (based on Q313829): Desktop icons hack.
NOTEPAD.EXE: Key-bindings hack.
SP 2.0 doesn't contain ANY modified file, it will use patching method for the modification. So it will contain a not-modified version of SHELL32.DLL from Q313829.
0 -
I don't know any conflicts, but which version do you use of ZoneAlarm? Have you ever tried to reinstall ZoneAlarm?
0 -
Hi all,
I have just found a proper patching tool. I hope I'll finish 2.0 RC in a few days.
I need a web space for the file. Could anyone help me about it?
What's new in RC?
NEW: Windows 2000 Desktop Icons as optional feature.
NEW: Generic USB Mass Storage Device Drivers as optional feature.
NEW: "DOS Prompt Here" as optional feature.
NEW: Better Notepad.
NEW: Fixed REGEDIT.EXE.
NEW: More than 10 new hot-fixes.
NEW: Some small fixes and improvements.
ADDED: Uninstallation.
0 -
Been having issues with Explorer crashing and locking up on my system after getting some recent windows updates.
Also scandisk is finding more problems than it ought to, probably due to the system lockups that force me to reboot. Also if zclient from Zone Alarm is running, scandisk keeps re-starting.
I am running the unofficial win98 service pack 1.6.2 and it is acting like it did during the Win98 Shutdown problem. Could that patch have been "bumped" by recent updates. Should I re-install the unofficial service pack after the windows updates?
Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Explorer version is 4.72.3110 in C:\Windows while version 4.72.3612.1700 is backed up by SFC in Help Desk folder. Shell32.dll is 4.72.3812.600
Could you try to re-install the SP 1.6.2 ?
Don't forget to close all open programs before installing it, and when the SP asks for reboot, don't accept. You should manually reboot your system.
0 -
So, other than not seeing the license agreement, right-click INSTALL on SPUPDATE.INF is the same as running the .exe of the released SP? Correct?
ps: Is MSINSTaller pre-needed for this to work?
Yes, correct (for 1.x) and no, you don't need MSI.
Note: For 2.0, there is a tool called INFEX.EXE which is written by me. IExpress calls this INFEX, and INFEX calls "selected" INFs.
0 -
Hi Gape,
Are you still working on the FINAL release? When is it going to be out?
Patching does not work properly. For making optional "new desktop icons", I have to use "patching"... I have not found a good patching tool yet.
If I can't finish it before this Sunday, at least I'll release a BETA 3.
0 -
Nope. I run Morrowind with both expansions and 1.4 GB of mods installed and it runs like a charm. I don't use MaxPhysPage setting, but I do use MaxFileCache=524288 setting installed by your SP; I believe this is required.
Do you have any problem with DirectX based applications like Games? One user reported that he have some problems with DirectX Games on a 1.5 GB of RAM system. I recommend that he should add your settings, but the problem have not solved.
0 -
With WinTune98 I couldn't detect any performance difference between compressed (0.8 MB) and uncompressed (2.2 MB). Also I could not detect a DOS memory difference. BTW my system is Athlon64 3400 with 1 GB RAM, and old ATA100 hard drives.
I'm guessing boot time would depend on CPU and hard disk speed.
So my vote is for the compressed vmm32, with smaller footprint, probably faster loading (CPU 's are always much faster than hard disks) and higher danger of corruption.
Thanks. Do you have any problem with your 1 GB of RAM ? Your system's specs are very high. Perhaps, a low-end system may show the difference. But the difference should be very small.
So I think a compressed and single VMM32.VXD should be best for averal.
0 -
I see the pieces [used powerarchiver on the .exe] but I don't see what ties it together. Where does it start?
cjl
IExpress's EXE-header simply calls SPUPDATE.INF for installation. For more information about IExpress, look at this link.
It's similar to install a INF manually. (If you select a INF with right mouse button, you'll see the "Install" option on the menu.)
0 -
I tried the new vmm32.vxd compressed as well as non-compressed (2+ MB). I never noticed any difference in bootup speed or resource usage, but I didn't measure it either. I have backups if you guys can recommend a method for measuring these things so I can try all methods (original + seperate vxds, combined compressed and combined uncompressed).
azagahl,
Could you test your system with compressed and non-compressed VMM32.VXDs? You can use a simple benchmark program such as PCPlayer 3D Benchmark or WinTune98.
For testing bootup speed, you can use a chronograph
0 -
Currently, we don't see what you are working with, just the "innards". I assume that for the W32 self-extracter package itself you are writing some kind of script file to for it to carry out a few list items [run batches, use .inf files, etc. I would presume], and it supports EULA's and options like /C, etc.
Can you give us an example of "what's under the hood" that particularizes the package as you are releasing it currently [say for 1.6.2 since 2.0 is not yet stable, etc.]?
For the future, what's wrong with just using self-extracting .ZIP archives? That way we can unzip and not execute [analogous to /C] or just let 'r rip, etc.?
cjl
SP's installer (both 1.x and 2.0) is totally based on INFs and a BATCH script. You can easily see these files inside the SP's EXE.
To build EXE, I use IEXPRESS package which uses Microsoft's CAB/LZX compressing technology.
With INF, you can detect only THREE state of a file when you copying it.
1- COPY IT (NO RESTRICTION).
2- COPY IT, ONLY IF FILE EXISTS.
3- COPY IT, ONLY IF FILE OLDER.
Generally, my INF installer is based on 2 and 3 (you can use both of them for a file). If a file doesn't exist, installer doesn't copy it. But because of "preserving" mechanism of Windows 98, if system needs this file later, it is copied from SP1.CAB, not from setup CABs. Preserving mechanism is not mine, it's from Microsoft. So, its details are not totally clear. But it works.
On the other hand, Microsoft's hot-fixes installs all files without checking ANYTHING. (You explained this in detail on your first post.)
Some hot-fixes has problems. For example, Q311561 has a registry corruption problem on some systems. I found a fix (a MSDOS.SYS setting) for eliminating it, and added this setting into SP 1.6.x and 2.0.
Of course if you want, you can install each hot-fix seperately. I don't claim that SP is perfect.
About future, I can't detect with INF that a file is installed or not installed. But for adding properly QFE information, I need to know that.
0 -
Follow up on the problem on deleting a large number of files and causing
Windows Explorer to hang. I've done some tests on this on two of my
computers at home. One using WinME & IE6 SP1 and the other using WinXP SP2.
I copied a lot of files totaling almost 600 Mb from a CD on both systems onto
a temp folder in Windows Explorer. I reboot and reload Windows Explorer.
Then I deleted the temp folder where I copied all those files. The problem happened
on my WinME computer but not on my WinXP machine. Guess the problem was
fixed in WinXP SP2. Note that at the www.frankprovo.com site he does NOT mention
Windows XP. Not sure if the problem happens with XP SP1 or the original release
of XP.
erpdude8,
Thanks for the feedback. But I'm afraid of that 2000, XP and XP SP1 don't have this problem. It occurs only if you use both Windows 98 and IE 6.0.
0
Please, wait for 2.0 release, after that, you can ask them, again.
To do list for 2.0 FINAL
in Windows 9x Member Projects
Posted
Sorry, but Arabic and Hebrew versions' problem cannot be solved on English version. A localized version should be prepared.