cluberti

Well, inter-process communication via OLE uses RPC. It's not just distributed COM - COM happens locally on the box as well, and anything that uses OLE will use Local RPC (lrpc), regardless of what Gibson thinks.

It means check the RAM in the system, and if you find problems, investigate there. If the RAM turns up clean, start looking at the outpost firewall driver as the culprit.

Well, you've got everything from an Outpost firewall crash, to a win32k.sys glyph error, to NTFS flush errors. The only common thread is that in each case. the memory manager is reading memory pages, and an invalid page has been passed. I don't know if this is an actual memory error, or if you have a driver problem, but I would definitely run memtest86 against the RAM in that machine. I'm leaning towards bad RAM, but on the off chance your mem test does come back clean, it is possible that these crashes might be caused by Outpost firewall: 1: kd> kb ChildEBP RetAddr Args to Child WARNING: Stack unwind information not available. Following frames may be wrong. bad03898 b978f8cb 00000000 88d6a638 bad038d0 AfwCore+0x1b250 bad038a8 b9790a8a 00000001 00000000 88c51188 AfwCore+0x1b8cb bad038d0 b979fe0c 88d6a638 bad039cc 88c458b0 AfwCore+0x1ca8a bad039d8 b97a6767 000006eb 00000000 00000000 AfwCore+0x2be0c bad03ad0 b97834c9 88c458b0 8a2f1350 88c458a8 AfwCore+0x32767 bad03af0 b9776df7 bad03b1c bad03b2c b9777781 AfwCore+0xf4c9 bad03afc b9777781 00000001 8a2f12b8 b9781d90 AfwCore+0x2df7 bad03b2c b978283d 8a060f18 88eb8858 88eb88e4 AfwCore+0x3781 bad03b48 804ef19f 8a060f18 88eb8858 88eb8908 AfwCore+0xe83d bad03bb4 804ef19f 88da78c0 88eb8858 88eb8858 nt!IopfCallDriver+0x31 bad03bc4 80583953 8a2fef10 000000a8 8a692ad0 nt!IopfCallDriver+0x31 bad03bf4 805bca16 8a66fa00 88da78c0 0012019f nt!IopCloseFile+0x26b bad03c28 805bc33f 8a66fa00 00000001 8a692ad0 nt!ObpDecrementHandleCount+0xd8 bad03c50 805bc3dd e1000eb0 8a2fef28 00001fd8 nt!ObpCloseHandleTableEntry+0x14d bad03c98 805bc515 00001fd8 00000000 00000000 nt!ObpCloseHandle+0x87 bad03cac 8054162c 80001fd8 bad03d3c 804fff41 nt!NtClose+0x1d bad03cac 804fff41 80001fd8 bad03d3c 804fff41 nt!KiFastCallEntry+0xfc bad03d28 b69c7bff 80001fd8 88b65390 b69c4cb6 nt!ZwClose+0x11 bad03d3c b69c7bbc 88b65390 b69c67a8 bad03d68 afd!AfdFreeConnectionResources+0x28 bad03d4c b69c486a 88b65408 8a294540 89772858 afd!AfdFreeConnection+0x5c 1: kd> .bugcheck Bugcheck code 100000D1 Arguments 00000000 00000002 00000000 b978f250 Again, I don't know if this is a victim of another problem, or the source of the problem, but since you have memory dumps that are all over the place in terms of callstacks and bugcheck codes, I'd start with the memory and not drivers on the system.

Are you saying Win9x doesn't have RPC? It doesn't have a service, per se, but Win9x does have RPC (otherwise OLE and COM would not function, for instance).

Please try to follow the rules.

2008-12-06 19:56:58, Info CSI 00000131 [SR] Verify complete 2008-12-06 19:56:58, Info CSI 00000132 [SR] Verifying 100 (0x0000000000000064) components 2008-12-06 19:56:58, Info CSI 00000133 [SR] Beginning Verify and Repair transaction 2008-12-06 19:57:00, Info CSI 00000134 Hashes for file member \SystemRoot\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft-windows-user32.resources_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6001.18000_en-us_9a1c934de37aab43\user32.dll.mui do not match actual file [l:28{14}]"user32.dll.mui" : Found: {l:32 b:bD37MoBsvaXMfJo0ILgtakSb1k8v0L8p9J5K3VpzK3w=} Expected: {l:32 b:bKmVggbFL5/S3upCIlWZvQy/+gxWRC2PSyxD/FY/SHg=} 2008-12-06 19:57:00, Info CSI 00000135 [SR] Cannot repair member file [l:28{14}]"user32.dll.mui" of Microsoft-Windows-User32.Resources, Version = 6.0.6001.18000, pA = PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE_AMD64 (9), Culture = [l:10{5}]"en-US", VersionScope = 1 nonSxS, PublicKeyToken = {l:8 b:31bf3856ad364e35}, Type neutral, TypeName neutral, PublicKey neutral in the store, hash mismatch 2008-12-06 19:57:02, Info CSI 00000136 [SR] Repaired file \SystemRoot\WinSxS\Manifests\\[l:28{14}]"user32.dll.mui" by copying from backup 2008-12-06 19:57:02, Info CSI 00000137 Hashes for file member \??\C:\Windows\System32\en-US\user32.dll.mui do not match actual file [l:28{14}]"user32.dll.mui" : Found: {l:32 b:bD37MoBsvaXMfJo0ILgtakSb1k8v0L8p9J5K3VpzK3w=} Expected: {l:32 b:bKmVggbFL5/S3upCIlWZvQy/+gxWRC2PSyxD/FY/SHg=} 2008-12-06 19:57:02, Info CSI 00000138 [SR] Repairing corrupted file [ml:520{260},l:58{29}]"\??\C:\Windows\System32\en-US"\[l:28{14}]"user32.dll.mui" from storeThis is the only error in the CBS log about a file that could not be repaired, but it was restored from backup.

Can you get a complete memory dump of it happening? We might be able to tell you what's causing it if we could see the .dmp file.

From the EULA, section 2A (I've bolded the important bits): No further discussion about OS X on non-Apple hardware will be permitted here as per forum rules and Apple's EULA.

Routing and Remote Access - aka, the "VPN" service.

Server service isn't needed to get in over all protocols, just protocols like SMB and RPC. If something was able to get on the machine, it can listen for incoming connections on it's own, without the need for the server service. Disabling the server service basically disables SMB and RPC incoming connections, but other protocols would still work fine. Win9x does have some safety due to it not having some of the newer Win32 APIs introduced in Windows 2000 and Windows XP, but it does have a flat memory design, meaning any user-mode address can write to any kernel-mode address (and vice versa) with zero protections. 9x is less prone to the newer viruses, but old ones still exist - due to the memory model alone I still think running a 9x system without antivirus or a firewall is a little crazy, but to each his / her own.

WHS *is* based on Server 2003, but it's really only a file server with some app functionality added on (thus *home* server). It cannot run Exchange (thus no OWA) amongst other things, so it would be a waste of your money. If you want a standalone server that can be a firewall, do RRAS for VPN, and OWA, consider Small Business Server 2003 R2 Premium (standard does not have SQL or firewall).

Fedora or CentOS are good RedHat-based distributions of Linux, but I still prefer Debian for everyone (noob to master). It provides arguably the best package system for Linux, is EXTREMELY stable (the maintainers are downright anal about packages before they make it into the stable tree), but does allow someone who's daring to run testing or unstable versions (nonclemature, unstable is usually quite stable) of the distro. And upgrades are easy - apt-get dist-upgrade.

The official release is 1H '09. Once it starts to hit RC, we're likely to see an *actual* date.

Note that this would have less to do with Vista and more to do with the video driver, unless you were using 1GB or less of RAM (in which case the behavior you state would be something I would expect with 1GB or less of RAM - only Home Basic has a minimum requirement of 512MB of RAM, and all other versions state 1GB, and running "minimum" requirments gets you "minimum" performance).People tend to complain about Vista being "slow" on 512MB or 1GB RAM machines compared to XP, and that is true - but one has to remember that the XP codebase is much closer to the original NT codebase than Vista is, has fewer features (yes, these do use resources), and the code is 8 - 9 years old in most cases - it is leaner, and runs faster (it's also less secure and has fewer features, but that's the trade-off). That versus Vista's codebase, which is circa 2005/2006 code (and it could be argued Vista SP1 is the "real" Vista, circa 2007/2008). Regardless of how you feel about it, running Vista on an older CPU with less than 2GB of RAM *will* likely end in frustration.

What tool are you using? ORCA, or something else?

What happens if you completely disable USB on the new machines, then run setup? I see lots of errors pop up in the setup log when hardware detect is looking for USB device drivers to install, specifically that files it is looking for to copy from source cannot be found.

Well, the fact is some programs are just written to assume the user is an administrative user. You could run process monitor whilst trying to use the software (you'll have to runas process monitor) and see what kinds of Access Denied messages you see, and to what registry key(s) or file system folder(s) they are to. You can try to loosen permissions to get these apps to run, or replace them with ones that run under a limited user account.

weEvil - grow up. You've been warned - shape up or ship out.

As the banner says, and in keeping with forum rule 1b, posting links to download any component of the WAIK other than the link from Microsoft to the WAIK itself will warrant the banhammer. The EULA from the WAIK in section 3 expressly forbids providing components of the software for others to copy, and as such we are respecting Microsoft's wishes and directives with regards to their software. You have been warned. Failure to heed this warning will acquire you a visit from a mod's banhammer.

Does it do the same thing if you start ie as "iexplore.exe -extoff" from start > run?

From the WAIK EULA: 3. SCOPE OF LICENSE. The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the software only as expressly permitted in this agreement. In doing so, you must comply with any technical limitations in the software that only allow you to use it in certain ways. You may not • work around any technical limitations in the software; • reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software, except and only to the extent that applicable law expressly permits, despite this limitation; • make more copies of the software than specified in this agreement or allowed by applicable law, despite this limitation; • publish the software for others to copy; • rent, lease or lend the software; • transfer the software or this agreement to any third party; or • use the software for commercial software hosting services. This would fall under "publish the software for others to copy". Removing links, closed thread. If you know of any other links, please let us know. I will shut them down as well.

Ahh, that makes more sense. If you are seeing hangs or restarts, obviously checking memory is a good start - although it sounds more like a deeper hardware problem. I would say that unless you have this problem with your installs on other machines, this particular machine has a hardware problem.

Well, only if you need the 100W .

Define crash - are we talking bluescreen/bugcheck issues, or a complete failure to boot? English requires you to be specific, because we have many vague words that mean lots of things (especially once b@stardized by being used to describe "computer" terms).

Actually, the latest version of ntfs.sys for Windows 2000 SP4 is 5.0.2195.7049 (includes the above update), and can be found in KB 905590: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...kb;EN-US;905590