Gape
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Gape
-
-
just an opinion - I think that the Service Pack for Windows SE should not be collection of freeware applications.
I have no idea why you decided to add Metapad to the final release.
There are thousands of similar possible replacements and it may be created some option pack with selectred applications - but in Service Pack?
And for other freeware applications - they are used just during the installation, right?
Are they open source? Who is the author? Will they work reliable in all environments?
I know there were long discussions about recommened installation order. Was there any consensus what is recommended? SE SP 2.0 contains many components of various packages, but not full packages, and also hotfixes to them. Sometimes the hotfix has the same version number as the original file so the preservation mechanism will not work I suppose (Maybe to increnet the version number?)
And example of packages that could be installed before or over SE SP 2.0
dun 1.4, dcom 98, dsclient, direct x (various versions), ie (various versions), wmi, nusb2.2, mdac, jet3.5, jet4.0, odbc drivers, vga drivers, chipset drivers, disk drivers, usb drivers, audio drivers, media player, office, upnp, various runtimes... or projects like se2me or revolutions pack.....
It is easy to find some death end.
Petr, you're right about that SP should not contain any freeware product, but I think Notepad should be a exception. I don't want to add any other freeware product into the SP. This Metapad totally free and freely distributable, and of course it's optional, however, we can change it with another open source alternative on the next version.
As I said before, I don't want to modify any file, so this is one of the reasons to add a Notepad alternative.
About your comments on preservation and installation order, do you have any example? I'm not sure that I understand it. You know, this pack (2.0) has installed on LOTS of systems, and it has tested since October 2004.
0 -
I'm sorry, I forgot to look into the SED file.
I just entered TargetWin9xVersion in Google and found one reference only - eGorZ's post on board.ru - nothing else.
Not problem. Maybe I should make some web page about SED files and my INFEx tool. But there're many things to do (table for hotfixes, next version, forum, web page, school, work etc.) and I don't have time enough.
0 -
TargetWin9xVersion=4.10.2222
TargetNTVersion=4.10.2222
I'm only not sure how these options work - they seems to be completely undocumented. Or didn't I catch something?
It would be also very nice to be able to limit the installation to specific language version only too.
This check is in the SP since the version 1.2, probably eGorZ saw it in the SP. They're undocumented, but I tested them, they works.
Language checking is a good idea, but it's not as easy as version checking.
0 -
High priority:
- Add new updates and hotfixes.
- Replace modified EXPLORER.EXE and SHELL32.DLL files with patchers and make optional Windows 2000 look.
- Better uninstallation support with batch files.
- Optional fix for IE 6.0 SP1 file deletion problem with IE 5.5 SP2 files.
- Install "MaxFileCache" fix on only 512+ MB of RAM systems.
- 137 GB HDD limitation fix [with FDISK + FORMAT tools].
Low priority:
- Tweak: Change the Number of Simultaneous Connections.
- Add IPROP.DLL from DCOM98 [?].
- Add Q816093 MS Java VM update [5 MB!].
- Language checking for non-English systems.
- Checking of free HDD space.
- Add QFECHECK info.
They are only ideas, they are NOT certain features of the next version now.
0 -
Miko
If there were some legal problems with M$, I think we would know of it already.
It would be interesting to know to what extent the guys at M$ are watching the progress of the SP...
Does anyone know anything about the SP's legality? It is here since January 2004, and Microsoft have never requested removing of the pack from the net.
0 -
Needed updates (We haven't got them):
* Q265528 - vnetbios.vxd
* Q323708 - nscirda.sys
* Q329128 - ndis.vxd, vip.386, pppmac.vxd
New updates (We have them, I haven't added them yet):
* Q282949 - wbemprox.dll
* Q295629 - cbss.vxd
* Q307004 - grouppol.dll
* Q314941 - ssdpapi.dll, ssdpsrv.exe, upnp.dll
Updates that have problems:
* Q252187 - esdi_506.pdr - Causes lockups on some systems
* Q318307 - msmouse.vxd - Causes mouse lockups on some systems
0 -
I didn't have Q307004, thanks. About Q230766 and Q243174, I probably don't have them (, but if you install DirectX 7+, you don't need them).
0 -
I have checked comments in the main INF file and here are some possible changes:
...
Maybe you will correct me.
Please also move to "Localizable strings" section:
"0409" LCID
"EN" locales
"Show Attributes in Detail View" text
"Registering " texts
to make localization easier.
Thanks for the corrections. But I want to explain that these comments state the source of the file, they are not for listing all related updates. And I try to give a KB-number instead of a name.
I have already added localizable strings. (Maybe I don't reply all posts, but trust me I read all posts carefully.
)0 -
I want to make a detailed table for all updates & hotfixes for Windows 98 SE...
It should contain:
- KB number (and link to MS's KB page)
- KB title
- Multilanguage?
- Known Problems
- Deprecated By
- SP Version
Any more idea?
0 -
Maraba, komshu
Why? Were there any bugs???
USB mass storage device suport is very usefull in 98.
Is it possible not to uninstall them when uninstalling RC1 and then install RC3?
Or to put them in the next version?
Merhaba
Yes, there are some bugs, and some problems.
You can use Maximum Decim's USB drivers, they're very good. Or don't uninstall RC1, install RC3 over RC1.
0 -
Wow !
Firstly, I don't like to modify any file of Windows. I always try to avoid it. (However, I don't avoid to modify a file to fix any serious bug, for example, annoying 137 GB HDD problem).
Secondly, IMHO, the only problem of SP about its legality is modified files. SP 2.0 RC3 has only two modified files, EXPLORER.EXE (icons, bitmaps, 256-color tray patch) and SHELL32.DLL (icons, bitmaps). Because of they're very small changes, it seems that it's not problem for Redmond. I have tried to remove these modified files.
I think it should include:
- An (optional) patcher for 256-color tray icons.
- A good free (optional) Notepad replacement like MetaPad, instead of modifying it.
- An (optional) icl file for Windows 2000 icons.
But I have some problems:
- I haven't found a good patching tool.
- Changing icons w/o modifying files doesn't look good as Petr explained above, (and there's lots of icon references on the registry).
SP has carefully chosen updates (not only 98SE updates), and registry settings to make a more stable and secure Windows 98SE environment. It is a succesfull result of years of experience and feedback of lots of users. But I don't claim that SP is perfect, of course you can prefer Windows Update instead of SP.
I feel that every version of SP will be better with your excellent support and feedback.
0 -
- RUNPOST.BAT goto end bug corrected
- 2_4date removed
- Q891711 2nd release added
- Q888113 added
- Q891781 added
- REGSVR32.EXE updated to version xxx from yyy
- REGEDIT patch removed
- Qxxxxxx will not be added because of yyyyyy
- Q329128 will be added when available
So always when anybody will think that found some new patch or bug, he could check this table and see if you already know about it or not.
OK, I'll try to write more detailed changelog.
0 -
This file (msmouse.vxd) causes mouse lock-up, and slowness problems on some systems.Yes. But I'm not sure with msmouse.vxd. Q254660 contains version 4.10.2223, Intellipoint 4.12 contains 11.40.852 - but surprisingly this file is missing from Gape's SP2RC3. My archive shows that this file (11.40.852) was in Gape's SP version 1.2, but not in newer. Was there any problem with this specific version? Then why not to use 4.10.2223? Do you know why? I see in my archive also version 11.30.393.I'm not sure why the newest version of cbss.vxd 4.10.2226 (Q295629) is not in the SP?Maybe it would be good to have somewhere the list of
- hotfixes that will be added in the next release
- hotfixes that will not be added because they are buggy.
I agree. I will make a detailed table for hotfixes... For 1.6.2, you can look these links:
0 -
BUT DO NOT INCLUDE TIHIY'S VERSION IN YOUR SP, GAPE!!!
Installing both 891711 fixes (both Tihiy's and MS's) is a VERY BAD IDEA!
Hey, maybe MS could not implement the 891711 fixes in the user.exe/user32.dll files for Win98/ME and that's why the fixes require additional files.
They have lost Win98 code.
erpdude8, maybe you're right. (There's no need to scream). But coders like Tihiy should be encouraged. Microsoft are not supporting Win98 well now, they will also stop Win98 support totally someday, and we always need coders like Tihiy and Petr.
In fact, SP 2.0 final will probably contain Microsoft's 891711 fix only, but the reasons to add Microsoft's revised fix are "working OK", "official", and "its compatibility of possible future updates from Microsoft" like ssmokee said.
Anyway, thanks so much for your efforts, Tihiy.
0 -
But what's wrong with Win32FilePatcher - http://www.skybound.nl/products/apps/ - that is used at present?
Sometimes it produces very big EXEs, and it requires that the original and modified files must be in same size.
I have just send an email to Restorator's author, waiting for the answer...
0 -
@Tihiy, Petr:
It looks like to create ResPatcher with Restorator is free for non-commercial products. But the trial version doesn't contain ResPatcher function. Do you know anything about this problem?
0 -
Some files are changed for the next version:
Files from Windows 2000 SP4
REGSVR32.EXE
Files from Windows XP SP2
EXTRAC32.EXE
RICHED20.DLL
I keep them in the SP2.CAB for semi-slipstreaming support. But maybe installing twice is not necessary.Files from Microsoft Installer 2.0CABINET32.DLL 5.00.2147.1
SHFOLDER.DLL 5.00.2919.200
They seems to be installed twice, as a part of INSTMSIA.EXE and also separately.
BTW, what is the right version of EXPLORER.EXE? Both IE 5.5 SP2 and IE 6.0 SP1 contain version 4.72.3612.1700, but I still have original 4.72.3110.1 version on my system, even though I have IE 6.0 SP1 installed? And SP 2.0 contains this patched version only.The latest version is 4.72.3612.1700, and IE 6.0 SP1 doesn't contain it. But IE 5.01 SP2, and Office 2000 has it, and installs it.
No. you've listed all changes properly for EXPLORER.EXE, SHELL32.DLL and NOTEPAD.EXE.Any other change?Maybe I'd add Ctrl-W for for "Word Wrap" and Ctrl-Q for "Exit".Nice idea.
Regedit fix was strongly recommended by MGDx. But because of your examination, it looks like it is not necessary.But why to have this patch in this SP for SE?One question to changed icons. Is it OK to change the order of size within one ICON?IMHO, the order is not important.
I haven't found a good and free patching tool.The last question - why two files are distributed already patched, and for two files there is a patch only?I think it is not very good idea to put into the registry the information that the patch was appied even if it was not.So if I install Hyperterminal later, Windoes Update will think that the update is already installed - but I will have old vulnerable files on the disk.
Or no?
Because of preserving mechanism, it's not a bad idea. Search the forum for more information about the preserving.
I have kept some (not ALL) msinfo32 registry information for the Windows Update. Maybe to add ALL msinfo32/qfecheck information is better, but I can add them only for the next future version (2.1).
Q269601It wouldn't be good to have unreliable hotfixes in SESP2.0.
No, generally they're very important updates. For example, 269601 is necessary for supporting AC3/DTS properly.
We have found them from other sources (for example, IBM, Toshiba, HP.. etc.) I think Microsoft doesn't want to support them directly.
0 -
The problem is that original 98SE file from setup CD [build 5.00.2614.3500] is buggy, one cannot have FTP folders view properly turned on [iE -> Tools -> Internet Options -> Advanced tab -> "Enable folder view for FTP sites" check box], unless MSIEFTP.DLL is newer.
Folkert and I would like to suggest that you include MSIEFTP.DLL 5.50.4807.2300 from IE 5.5 SP2 into the next SP 2.0 [RCx] release.
When I have updated MSIEFTP.DLL on a freshly installed Win98 SE, I couldn't find "Enable folder view for FTP sites", but there is a option titled "Use Web Based FTP". However, this option didn't activate folder view for FTP sites.
0 -
I should tell you what I did. Following mostly the guide to the order of installation in the stickied link, just before running the service pack I thought I might as well update MDAC. I installed MDAC 2.5, rebooted, installed the Jet Service Pack, rebooted, installed MDAC 2.6, rebooted, installed MDAC 2.8 and rebooted. So far, everything is going fine. I then rebooted again before installing the Service Pack 2.0 RC3. It installed completely without any errors and I rebooted. To the errors listed above! Goodbye Windows!
Eck,
It seems a registry corruption problem according to MS KB article. Did you installed IE 6.0 SP1? Because IE 6.0 SP1 contains MDAC (I'm not sure about the version).
Installing only MDAC 2.8 is enough. You should not install old versions before installing the new version.
0 -
I forgot to reply - UPDATE.SYS supports Intel processors only.
Why UPDATE.SYS size doesn't match with the original?
Your UPDATE.SYS: 60,576 bytes.
Original UPDATE.SYS: 60, 592 bytes.
Do you know any good free patching program (supports silent patching)?
0 -
Thanks Petr!
Are these microcodes for only Intel processors?
I think Xeon / Pentium Pro microcodes are useless for Windows 98 / ME, they can be replaced. But what about "Mobile Pentium II" microcodes? Still lots of users have old Pentium II laptops with Windows 98.
0 -
One out of ten times doing a cold boot I receive a "Windows Protection Error - You need to restart your computer". After a reset everything works fine.
Booting in safe mode doesn't give any hint.
Any ideas? Thanx in advance.
I have no idea but SP 1.6.2 is very old now. I recommend SP 2.0.
On the other hand, if you get this message again, please write the full error message with your detailed hardware list on this topic.
0 -
It may - (or not?) be good idea to add also updated driver with micocode updates for Intel processors. It is very simple patch replacing not so often used microcodes with new ones.
Windows 98: 7
Windows 98 SE: 27
Windows ME: 49
Windows 2000 SP4: 81
Windows XP SP2: 94
Windows 2003 SP1: 101
There is only limited space in the current driver so some limitation has to be applied.
Updated UPDATE.SYS for Windows 98 SE, version changed to 4.10.2223
http://www.code.cz/x/update_sys-w98se.zip
Contains 26 microcodes for Pentium II, Pentium III and Celeron with cores: Deschutes / Covington / Mendocino / Katmai / Coppermine / Tualatin in Slot 1 and FCPGA-370 packages and for Pentium 4 Willamette and Northwood. No Xeon, EE and mobile processors.
Petr, that's excellent work, Thanks! I think I'll add this work into the SP.
I have a question. To add new microcodes into UPDATE.SYS, which old microcodes are removed/replaced?
0 -
Can you explain me how I did successfully format the C:\ Drive to 200 GB (183 in fact. 200=183 because 1024=1000 in fact I think.) with fdisk from the the WinMe CD when the nforce motherboard drivers weren't installed.
As well, after install of Win Me the drive was recognized as a 183 GB though the nForce motherboard drivers weren't installed yet.
200=183 because 1024=1000 in fact I think.
As well I have looked in device properties and it does not seem to me that nForce has installed any driver to handle HDDs. The IDE controllers are standard Microsoft.
I have unpatched ESDI_506.PDR in my IOSUBSYS folder.
Windows ME's FDISK supports big HDDs. So partitioning and formatting is not a problem. The problem is not the detection, too. The problem is to cross the 137 GB barrier.
Look Petr's comments, and 48bitlba.com for more information.
0
Not problem. 
)
Maraba, komshu 
New ideas for the next version
in Windows 9x Member Projects
Posted
I'm still not sure that I understand it. Can you and/or Petr try to explain it?
Also note that, preserving mechanism is mainly based on registry keys, not on the version number. If Windows tries to install anything from Windows' CAB files, firstly it looks at the preservation list in the registry. For example, it want to install HyperTerminal files, it will install them from SP2.CAB. (So this should be noted that this preserving mechanism replaces original CAB files only.)