Gape
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Gape
-
-
hotfix xxxxxx installs 4.10.2223 of a file; hotfix yyyyyy installs 4.10.2224 of same file; hotfix zzzzzz installs 4.10.2226 of same file. However, if xxxxxx is installed BEFORE yyyyyy or zzzzzz or the SP, then the file stays at 4.10.2223! If the file is manually deleted, QFECHECK info for each hotfix correctly state what rev of the file they require. Yet, if xxxxxx gets installed, then each QFECHECK section gladly accepts 4.10.2223 as the revision they "like".
If xxxxxx is never installed, all else works as intended. Apparently, something within the installer for xxxxxx makes the installation of the file at 4.10.2223 too "permanent".
I don't understand the above problem. Is it a particular hotfix? Which one?
If a file's revision 2223, it contains only one fix. If it's 2224, it contains two fixes etc. Of course, 2224 revision has 2223's fix.
Adding QFECHECK information is a difficult process because of the SP's mechanism. I need a more powerful installer such as InnoSetup or NSIS for these complex processes. But they are some disadvantages, too. (For example, you can't see inside of a InnoSetup file with WinZip/WinRar).
0 -
I'm still slightly confused:
1) How did you test an uncompressed version if it's a compressed file? What process makes it an uncompressed variant? Or is this just the "natural" result of adding in the updated component .VXD files necessitated by the SP?
2) What performance improves? Is this possibly merely because there is redundant resources being used, i.e., for both the VMM32.VXD monolith being in memory as well as the authoritative drivers also being in memory [i.e., the ones you added because they are updated per the SP, etc.] "wasting" memory space?
3) Can I assume that if we carry out the infinisource-based method on the updated collection of files [after the SP] we can get both the performance and the resources back?
Part of why I ask is that my test example indicates at least the possibility that Tarun suggests, i.e., the installation failed to make a non-corrupted VMM32.VXD. Thus, to fix the problem, I have no choice but to rebuild the VMM32.VXD file anyway. Thus, it would be best to defer this to the point where all the driver considerations are stable to avoid having to do this multiple times, correct?
cjl
You can uncompress VMM32.VXD with DEVLIB.EXE or VXDLIB.EXE. Both of them are available on Axcel216's site.
For example, a compressed VMM32.VXD is 800 KB, after uncompressing it, its size is more than 2 MB. It is still ONE file. I didn't extract any VXD file into VMM32 directory. I tested uncompressed VMM32.VXD with WinTune98 and PCPlayer 3D Benchmark on the April 2000. The results were:
Compressed VMM32.VXD: PC Player Direct3D Benchmark - 38.4
Uncompressed VMM32.VXD: PC Player Direct3D Benchmark - 42.8
You're right about the resource problem. Updated VMM32 files in the SP 2.0 is approximately 500 KB, it was 1 MB in the SP 1.x. The reason of difference is VMM.VXD file. I use RPLCLDR.EXE tool (it is also available on the above link) in the SP 2.0 for replacing VMM.VXD (one of the VMM32.VXD files).
If we reconstruct the VMM32.VXD with updated files, we can get resources back. But I think the performance doesn't change.
0 -
zoem,
Could you try to delete VPICD.VXD and VMCPD.VXD from \Windows\System\VMM32 ?
0 -
6) The SP will include several VXD files in part because it is necessary as the files are updated by the SP itself, and partly because Gape believes that there is a performance boost if certain others are additionally added in "loose" form despite not being updated. Are there any other files that would be considered as a portion of VMM32.VXD beyond this set?
7) Most importantly, what is the method the SP will use to best implement a stable result after applying it?
Part of what I read here is that unless you can prove that VMM32.VXD isn't corrupted, it's always safer to run with all of the "loose" files, albeit it boots slower. Conversely, rebuilding VMM32.VXD to a known non-corrupt state should be as good as having the loose files with the added benefit of shortening boot-up times. However, some report that VMM32.VXD eats some resources as compared to some form of perhaps selective override at least some "loose" files, etc.
VMM32.VXD is a compressed file of a collection of VXD files. Its contents depend on system configuration.
Because it's a compressed file, any corruption affects most of VXD files in it. For example: Assume that you have a ZIP file which has 10 files in it. If this ZIP file corrupts, you cannot extract ANY of these 10 files with using normal ways.
On my tests, an uncompressed VMM32.VXD file (still ONE file like a TAR package) has a small performance improvement. But, the booting process is slower a bit, too.
In the 2.0, I only copies updated VXD files onto VMM32 directory. Perhaps, a reconstructed VMM32.VXD will be better, but it is not an easy process. Perhaps it will be on the future versions.
0 -
Still working on patching process and uninstallation. I can't find a good patcher.
I hope I'll release it in this week.
Sorry.
0 -
zoem,
If the reason is your Xircom card, you should revert back to original cbss.vxd file from \Windows\System. Extract cbss.vxd from BASE5.CAB, and copy it into \Windows\System.
0 -
i actually use cpad, but i was just wondering why notepad was better in the service pac. not seeing the correlation that it is better.
It's only better than original Win9x/WinME's Notepad. I've only added some missing shortcuts.
0 -
It also happens with Windows ME.
Windows ME with IE 6.0?
0 -
This problem comes from IE 6. Because if you use IE 5.5 or older version, you don't have this problem.
Problem files are BROWSEUI.DLL and BROWSELC.DLL. The only fix I know is that you must replace these two files with IE 5.5 SP2 versions.
For more information, please look at this link.
A fix for this problem is not in the SP 2.0, because adding a IE 6.0 specific fix is difficult. I hope I can add it in the 2.1.
0 -
Watch out, it has a GNU public license. This can cause big headaches and is definitely not "free".
For example, it means I have the right to make a modified version of them mp3 extension, and Gape must provide me with some SP source so I can distribute my own SP with the modified mp3 extension. Otherwise Gape is violating my rights.
But if you do include it please make it optional, its nonstandard and e.g. some of like oggs not mp3 files.
It is a good tool, but as I said, generally I don't like to add any 3rd party tool into the SP. If I add a 3rd party tool, it must be useful for most of users. So, this tool is not suitable for the SP.
0 -
Announcement:
After releasing 98 SE SP 2.0 final, I hope I will work on Windows ME Service Pack.
0 -
Only patching process and uninstallation are missing now. Perhaps, if Tarun finds a better way for recreating of VMM32.VXD, I'll add it , too.
I hope I'll release RC (Release Candidate) in this weekend. If RC works good, I hope FINAL will released in 1 December.
0 -
2 Gape 'bout infex.exe
how about to make short description frame (or like a frame) for each selected item in add/remove list? Of course all "descriptions" have been described in infex.ini in special section...
egorz,
Good idea, but I think it's not necessary for 2.0. I can do it for 2.1. I'm very close to finish 2.0, so I'm working on only missing features and testing now.
Workaround: Write the option name in a long format. For example, we can write "Adaptec ASPI Drivers Update (Version 4.60.1021)" instead of "ASPI Update".
0 -
-
is this fixed regedit from http://www.mdgx.com included?
perhaps you can provide 2 versions of the servicepack ... one generic and one optimized for the people wit me ....
What's fixed in this regedit?
About Defrag, I should research legal issues, after that perhaps I can add some Windows ME files into the version 2.1.
0 -
...Windows Installer 3.0...
Windows Installer 3.0 does not support Windows 9x/ME.
0 -
As far as the license issues go, to my knowledge there is no such harm using those files, as you have a Windows OS license and it is simply software. Therefore you already technically own these software titles and if you were to begin using the ones from Windows ME it would be the same as updating your software. Nothing illegal in that. Intel makes the defrag utility (not Windows or MS) and everything that people want to add already exist in Windows. No one has to pay to buy just Scandisk or the defrag utilities, as they come with all Windows. So I would see no harm in using the Windows ME versions, as I would personally view it as being like freeware in a sense.
Tarun, just for clarification: you say "adding -ANY- WinME file into the Unofficial Service Pack is not a problem". Right?
0 -
why are u too vary about adding me and xp's file in unofficial ver. u don't have me or xp ver or anything else.
Adding Windows ME files in a downloadable software is not legal. I think I can only add Windows ME files, if I have to fix a serious Windows 98 problem, so it will be probably in "fair use".
0 -
Why not follow the instructions on that page to construct a new vmm32.vxd and use that as the primary distributable file?
Tarun, I think reconstruction of the vmm32 is a difficult and risky process. Is there an easy way to do it? I have to read information from registry, and INF technology cannot do this.
0 -
I don't understand the problem. Can you try to explain? Perhaps, you can add a screenshot...
0 -
Tarun, you're right.
However, I have to copy these 5 files into \Windows\System\VMM32, because they're updated. But I will only copy these updated files, I will NOT copy other VXD-Fix files.
0 -
ujjwal, with the version 2.0, conservative swap file is in the "Performance Tweaks" option.
soldier1st, we can discuss this task manager for 2.1.
0 -
All drivers of Windows 9x are in the \Windows\Inf.
Extract it somewhere. Copy INF file into \Windows\Inf, SYS file into \Windows\System32\Drivers, PDR file into \Windows\System\Iosubsys.
To remove these drivers, delete these files.
0 -
Q. but this updates not appears in system information like when we update it downloaded from ms network it shows all patch and update in sysinfo section softwares updates service pack win98se then displayes all updates and patch etc.
SP registers only necessary WindowsUpdate information. It doesn't register QFE information. So you can't see all installed updates on some tools.
Sorry, it's difficult to create a reliable QFE information with my installing method (single INF - single EXE for all updates).
0
2.0 Final Delayed...
in Windows 9x Member Projects
Posted
soldier1st,
No, not yet. I already announce any news on this forum, you don't have to ask.