cluberti

The only other thing to worry about is your Ultimate ISO - did someone make a new WIM with only ultimate in it? You can find out by extracting the ISO to disk, remove ei.cfg completely, and use oscdimg to re-ISO the contents (or you could put them on a USB key, of course).

Go to your ultimate ISO and modify ei.cfg

Considering sandboxie is 32bit only, it's not useful for those of us who have migrated to 64bit Windows. Just something to consider if you're thinking about sandboxie and you're running Windows 64bit.

Agreed - your options are somehow set to outline. Switch it to standard or linear+ to change it.

I've noticed that it seems to want it in both places so as not to ask (technically using the specialize pass won't "set" it for the user, whereas OOBE will - not sure why it's in both places, but it seems like it wants them in both to unattend the settings.

There are really two options - either in the specialize settings pass, via component "Microsoft-Windows-Deployment" as a RunSynchronous section's RunSynchronousCommand command, or in the oobeSystem settings pass, via component "Microsoft-Windows-Shell-Setup" as a FirstLogonCommands section's SynchronousCommand. Here's a snippet from one of my unattend files, showing the relevant passes and sections only: <settings pass="specialize"> ... <component name="Microsoft-Windows-Deployment" processorArchitecture="amd64" publicKeyToken="31bf3856ad364e35" language="neutral" versionScope="nonSxS" xmlns:wcm="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WMIConfig/2002/State" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"> <RunSynchronous> <RunSynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <Description>EnableAdmin</Description> <Order>1</Order> <Path>cmd /c net user Administrator /active:yes</Path> </RunSynchronousCommand> <RunSynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <Description>EnableAdmin_ploc</Description> <Order>2</Order> <Path>cmd /c net user Administrator_ploc /active:yes</Path> </RunSynchronousCommand> <RunSynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <Description>UnfilterAdministratorToken</Description> <Order>3</Order> <Path>cmd /c reg add HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\System /v FilterAdministratorToken /t REG_DWORD /d 0 /f</Path> </RunSynchronousCommand> </RunSynchronous> </component> ... </settings> <settings pass="oobeSystem"> <component name="Microsoft-Windows-Shell-Setup" processorArchitecture="amd64" publicKeyToken="31bf3856ad364e35" language="neutral" versionScope="nonSxS" xmlns:wcm="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WMIConfig/2002/State"> ... <FirstLogonCommands> <SynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <CommandLine>cscript.exe C:\Scripts\MyFirstScript.wsf /start</CommandLine> <Description>Run first WSF script from C: drive</Description> <Order>1</Order> </SynchronousCommand> <SynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <CommandLine>cscript.exe D:\Scripts\MyFirstScript.wsf /start</CommandLine> <Description>Run first WSF script from D: drive</Description> <Order>2</Order> </SynchronousCommand> <SynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <CommandLine>cscript.exe E:\Scripts\MyFirstScript.wsf /start</CommandLine> <Description>Run first WSF script from E: drive</Description> <Order>3</Order> </SynchronousCommand> <SynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <CommandLine>cscript.exe F:\Scripts\MyFirstScript.wsf /start</CommandLine> <Description>Run first WSF script from F: drive</Description> <Order>4</Order> </SynchronousCommand> </FirstLogonCommands> </component> ... </settings> Obviously this is just a snippet of these sections - use the WSIM or MDT+WAIK if you need a GUI to try and configure this.

I have a Win7 Ultimate RTM box here, and I just installed the RTM RSAT tools and the RTM WAIK, and the command seems to work fine. Not sure why it's failing for you, but it does work as it's supposed to here. Seems like perhaps your install is ... behaving oddly?

good article. "the situation is, it's surprisingly difficult to get enterprises to upgrade. Many companies have old software... " Microsoft may just have trouble selling their new products. I personally don't need new bells and whistles. The whole thing of a new browser being pushed reminds me of a conversation I had 30 years ago in a bar with an IBM salesman. "And then I had to sell this EDP guy a new computer, I needed a new Mercedes". Part of the reason Microsoft supports it's "enterprise" products for 10+ years is so that businesses can count on using it for that long, at least under support, if they desire to. It actually sells software, but with the side effect of also having 10 year old tech out there that generally works fine. It's a driver of sales, and it's also sales' biggest enemy (itself). It's a catch-22, although you still bought a copy of Windows, so Microsoft got it's money. It just may not get more money from a lot of businesses (we'll see on Win7, although it does look like people want it in droves so far) for a good while yet.

Ping uses ICMP, web browsing uses HTTP over 80 or HTTPS over 443. I've seen issues where antivirus and firewalls have caused problems on the standard ports whilst ICMP was unaffected. I've also seen crappy wireless drivers do this as well, for what it's worth. It's obviously not a DNS problem, but unless you can install Vista SP1 (or SP2) with a clean IE and repro, it'll fall down on drivers or add-ins (or hooked BHOs or shell extensions) causing the problem in IE. I'm assuming this doesn't repro in another browser?

It's being considered due to considerable spam and problems from users arising from this particular forum section, and the trend is quite disturbing. It is likely that a few bad apples have spoiled the bunch, but I cannot say yet whether or not this will occur. It's being considered, however, as cursory review of our problem list and warnings/banned user list (that aren't 1st time spam forum drive-by spammings) come from users who are most active in the 9x forums (yes, we keep track of this stuff). It is as it is, and I'm not sure how I feel about it, but it's being considered. We believe our DDoS attack today was from said members who used to be a part of that forum as well who were banned (and apparently haven't grown up). I'm leaving this open for an open discussion on the matter, but keep it clean. Flaming, harassing, not providing respect to other poster's points of view, etc. will get you immediately banned, with no warnings. I have no tolerance for these things, and neither do any other mods.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/compatibi...n&os=64-bit According to the compat site, it's compatible, but you need "Epson EasyPrint 3.10" installed on x64 Vista as well as the driver before it'll work. Not sure how accurate it is, but I'm guessing it's fairly accurate.

Please post the output of ipconfig /all and route print commands. Also, it is a valid question - why have multiple NICs enabled on a desktop box if you aren't teaming them?

Open a (elevated, if UAC is enabled) command prompt, and run the following commands: bcdedit /enum bcdedit /set {current} description "<Whatever name you want here>"

Took a quick look earlier: // Appears IE's tabproc that you pressed F12 in is waiting for messaging from another process, perhaps the IE frameproc: 0:003> k ChildEBP RetAddr 00e2e870 77cf7bbc ntdll!KiFastSystemCallRet 00e2e874 75e86878 ntdll!ZwWaitForMultipleObjects+0xc 00e2e910 7615f08a KERNELBASE!WaitForMultipleObjectsEx+0x100 00e2e958 7615f20a kernel32!WaitForMultipleObjectsExImplementation+0xe0 00e2e974 7680ffc6 kernel32!WaitForMultipleObjects+0x18 00e2f9a0 7681480e iertutil!CForeignProcessToCurrentProcessMessaging::_vThreadProc+0xa1 00e2f9a8 761610dc iertutil!CForeignProcessToCurrentProcessMessaging::_sThreadProc+0xd 00e2f9b4 77d11e9e kernel32!BaseThreadInitThunk+0xe 00e2f9f4 77d11e71 ntdll!__RtlUserThreadStart+0x70 00e2fa0c 00000000 ntdll!_RtlUserThreadStart+0x1b // The handle to the event we're waiting on, and the info about it: 0:003> !handle 18c 7 Handle 0000018c Type Event Attributes 0 GrantedAccess 0x100000: Synch None HandleCount 3 PointerCount 6 Name \Sessions\1\BaseNamedObjects\Isolation Signal Registry Event (4198AE21-8B34-11DE-97ED-00E09122C80B, 0) 0:003> !heap -x 0xa5b48 Entry User Heap Segment Size PrevSize Unused Flags ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 000a5b40 000a5b48 00070000 00087a58 10 - 8 LFH;busy 0:003> dc 000a5b40 000a5b40 1a6eada1 88000000 00000174 0000018c ..n.....t....... 000a5b50 1a6eada3 8c000000 747b1c28 00000000 ..n.....(.{t.... 000a5b60 1a6eada5 8c000000 0000018c 00637072 ..n.........rpc. 000a5b70 1a6eada7 8c000000 76819918 0000544c ..n........vLT.. 000a5b80 1a6eadb9 88000000 747bd998 747b1772 ..n.......{tr.{t 000a5b90 1a6eadbb 88000000 747bd968 747b1772 ..n.....h.{tr.{t 000a5ba0 1a6eadbd 8e000000 00000000 00000000 ..n............. 000a5bb0 1a6eadbf 8e000000 00000000 00000000 ..n............. Honestly, though, this doesn't actually look like anything is "hung", as this is completely normal behavior in IE8 on Win7. There were some bugs for F12 tools in IE8 fixed in the later 72xx builds before RTM, so perhaps trying this on a non-RC box (preferably RTM) would be in order, to see if it still reproduces. Assuming this also repros with iexplore.exe -extoff as the command starting IE, I'm not sure what's happening here, because IE does not appear hung at all in these dumps.

Moving to the vLite section.

Yes, these use IE's COM components to display their contents, so a broken IE install can break these (and other) apps on an XP box. Usually mshtml.dll and ieframe.dll are involved in UI display with IE8 on the machine, and both are found in the %windir%\system32 folder. The script host engine isn't a part of IE, so these should have no bearing. IE just uses these components when parsing script in a page, but the WSH is not a part of IE (nor would it be involved in the current problem you are having). If you've repaired XP SP3, I would suggest installing the latest IE update and perhaps running regsvr32 afterwards on both mshtml.dll and ieframe.dll in \system32 for starters.

Your workaround isn't really sustainable, and subst wasn't meant to work that way (it does, but it may have bugs I'd guess). Usually a server freezing when you map a drive to itself falls back on loopback support in the network card driver being substandard (even though you are doing it local, it still hits the network stack) or a layered service provider (LSP) driver like a 3rd party antivirus or firewall driver messing with the IRPs as they pass through the stack. I'd suggest building a server in a VM and trying to reproduce the issue to see if it reproduces - assuming it doesn't, start narrowing down the differences in software until your TS is as similar to the (hopefully) working VM. Once you've eliminated software, start looking at the drivers on the TS itself, beginning with network and antivirus.

Officially supported, no - but works, yes.

The problem stems from the fact that the paging file for the OS isn't actually on the OS volume, it's in the host OS. This causes problems for things that would normally use the paging or hibernation file to store contents of RAM. Due to the limitations of the design, hibernation doesn't work (although sleep still does, just not hybrid sleep).

Take a look at the properties of kernel32.dll in %windir%\system32. On the details tab, check the File version line - RTM is 6.1.7600.16385.

I moved it here because the section is more for unattended installations, but can be used for using the tools for in-OS scripting unattended work as well (same tools), so the best knowledge will be here. Anyway, that's the RTM version of the RSAT tools - is this also an RTM Windows 7 install, or the RC1 build (7100)?

Error 1063 says "Error_Install_Failure", specifically that the feature named "RemoteServerAdministrationTools-ServerManager" wasn't found when it walked the feature tree: 2009-08-17 14:22:48, Info DISM DISM Package Manager: PID=6116 Encountered an unknown option "featurename" with value "RemoteServerAdministrationTools-ServerManager" Is this the RSAT RTM package on Win7 RTM, or are either of these the release candidate versions?

Because XP is the old NT3.x/4.x style of OS, whereas Vista and Win7 have a totally different servicing and install engine. Upgrades (in the classic NT sense) aren't really possible anymore due to the rather large architectural differences.

You are correct - you can "upgrade" XP to Win7 with upgrade media, but it's not a classic upgrade, it's a fresh install of 7.

The problem with booting from VHD is that the bootloader and kernel for the OS that is actually booting inside the VHD must support it and all the virtual calls made (including running with a paging file in the host OS, etc), which Vista does not. You might be able to hack in Windows 7 boot files and kernel, but at that point what is really the point - why not just run Win7?