DLF

@Bashrat Stop wriggling, you are obviously guilty as charged, no prob before your packs! All sorted now and the big plus is when I get a customers box with dodgy drivers that normally DONT get installed without hunting in the net for hours - now they do, and first time every time. The benefits of messing about a little to get the driver packs onto my XPCD definitely outweigh the negatives of not having them. Thanks Bashrat, good work.

@nologic What do you think?

@Bilou_Gateux @sleepnmojo Thanks for your help.

You can shake your head and defend your boyfriend all you like but I repeat: directing me to a website that doesnt contain info re: XP. How come is that helpful? I get all this flaming because I dared to ask about a "FLAGS" command that I didnt understand. You lot really are helpful. Thankyou all.

By directing me to a website that doesnt contain infor re: XP. How come is that helpful?

@MHz That proves what sort of a person you are - you've refused to answer a question - but directed us to a M$ website that doesnt even contain info about WinXP Pro. I rest my case - thanks for nothing. If you havent got anything POSITIVE to contribute - keep your comments to yourself. We can all post SEARCH-SEARCH-SEARCH thats hard isnt it, but it doesnt help if you've searched like I have and come up with nothing. I thought that this was the purpose of the forum - search and then ask. 99.9% of people on this forum have helped me but you have got a serious attitude problem. Please get some psychiatric help.

@ et al Big probs with this project, tested a lot of options and things aren't as easy as some folk are theoretically assuming without testing. This is the problem - a lot of people have got THEORETICAL answers to this project, but they aint tested it! The problem lies with the fact that SP2 is the first thing to get installed. Then if you DONT restart all the other hotfixes cant get installed via war59312' s method. With 4 of the hotfixes you get a "incorrect command line parameters" error. If SP2 is already on the machine there's no prob. But if you try and install all the post SP2 hotfixes before SP2 has had a chance to restart the machine, then 4 of the hotfixes wont have it. But if you install SP2 and let it restart then you get the windows security centre applet running and the batch file doesnt continue. I thought it might be to due to the fact that SP2 hadnt restarted then it was because an older vers of update.exe req different cmd line params, but you still get the error with the "old" cmd line params for these 4 KB's. Input anyone? How to install SP2 and then restart and carry on the batch but WITHOUT the windows security applet running?

@ Bashrat Step1 The ONLY thing I use nLite for is integrating RyanVM pack and SP2 to a WXPVOL_EN SP0 image. I dont use nLite for reducing size. I have a fully working UA XPCD. Step2 Add your 3 packs - after a bit of trial and error (see posts in this thread) get them integrated OK. Step3 Now my UA XPCD gives me a Windows File Protection error when installing WindowsMediaPlayer V10 during RunOnceEx!!!!!!!????????!!!!!!!!! Didnt have this before installing your packs. Step4 Followed instructions for installing the patched SFCOS.dll here= http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=35727 Step5 UA XPCD Working fine again. Your packs are doing the business fine. Thanks.

If no-one tells you how to extract them - and I doubt they will - you can get 19 of 'em here in one .rar archive.http://homepage.ntlworld.com/john.wagstaff...p2_hotfixes.rar Please also see thread http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=34793

@ Incroyable Hulk, Bashrat et al = looks like a bag of bull**** to me - wont be adding it myself. And thanks to Soulin for the answer on what it actually does. @MHz = If you knew what it does, would it have really hurt you to say so? Instead of writing more words directing people to a dodgy M$ site than it would have took to explain it. It wasnt as if I was asking why my $OEM$ folder hadnt been copied over. Get a life and get out more man.

@MHz What does it actually do then????????? That ACTUAL syntax is copied from Bashrats' Basic Driver Pack instructions!! If you look at Stage 5 editing your RunOnceEx.cmd or Batch_file.cmd of Method 1 it appears on his example too. So how many people are actually now using it withour knowing what it is or does! And if you say its wrong, then I believe you. So if you know the syntax is bad, you must know what it does - can you tell us?

Whilst searching and browsing the threads I have seen this line of code directly under some peoples' TITLE key in their RunOnceEx.cmd examples. Can someone enlighten me as to what it is and does? I have recently changed over to RunOnceEx from batch_file.cmd on my UA XPCD with the help of the recommended "RunOnceEx Creator" and it doesn't create this key for me.

Sorted, this was the prob. I already had my $OEM$ dir in root of XPCD dir. Loaded Win OK on a test machine, now I'm getting a Widows File Protection error popping up halfway thru my RunOnceEx part of install! Didnt have it before so this must be a DriverPack issue as well. Will have a look at it later. Ideas anyone?

@Alanoll My last post wasn't meant to be the ultimate buyers' guide for purchasing harddisks! Go with what you're confident with. It was just a report of the facts in my personal experience of harddisk failures. It wasn't a scientific experiment and results from other wholesalers may be different. I think its a very classic case of you get what you pay for. The results virtually mimic the value.

Just d/l Bashrats 3 packs & BasePack and followed Method 1 and I'm getting same errors as you lads. I've now got a folder called $1 in root of my XPCD! Can someone who knows what they are talking about please confirm then that all I REALLY need to do to correct things is just put the 3 folders named L, S & M inside my XPCD\$OEM$\$1\Drivers\ folder and everything will be OK?

Try searching on the M$ Office site, they must be aware of it if like you say so many people are getting same error. P.S. Simple solution = get Office 2003 (with SP1 slipstreamed in of course).

Should be UnattendSwitch="yes" Also under [GuiRunOnce] all you should have is an entry giving the PATH to your batch file e.g. %systemdrive%\Install\batch_file.cmd The entries you have under [GuiRunOnce] should be actually in your batch_file.cmd file which should be placed inside the Install folder. Quite a few very basic mistakes here - suggest you take more time reading and UNDERSTANDING the main site http://unattended.msfn.org/

@maxXPsoft I used to work at a PC wholesalers in UK, (fairly small firm with a turnover of GBP16M) as a test engineer on the customer returns dept and let me tell you we used to get a min of 25-30 hard disks physically fail a WEEK. @et al Yes we did get more Maxtors back than anything else, very closely followed by Hitachi, then Samsung, then IBM (although to be fair IBM tended to fail in whole batches - does this make 'em ok then?!). 1. Western Digital and 2. Seagate (in that order) are the most reliable IMHO.

@war59312 Big sorry to all for the bump on this thread, but really thought I ought to say mega-thanks to war59312 for the amount of effort you've put into my thread req' for help. And a very big thanks to leviathan, cartoonite et al. Testing tonite! And will obviously post results and a bit of a conclusion/summary tomorrow. Will burn about a dozen of these cd's then so I can get round all those boxes like some sort of a relay race!

Done all the work for you, the answers are here: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=31253 http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?act=Search&mode=adv&f=70

@durex re: 4th post in thread - I've known different technicians at work remove the same things from their install cd's @work and get different results. That's why I never use nLite for reducing size of source. Its too unpredictable. Sorry if this upsets the nLite dev's but thats' our personal experience with it - we just use it as a slipstreaming tool. Some people might/will disagree with me but from past dodgy experiences I will not use nLite as a reducing tool. I use the original guide = http://unattended.msfn.org/xp/space_saving_tips.htm and manually del all the mentioned directories there and haven't had any issues from doing so, especially the prob you are experiencing. nLite V0.99.4b2 M$ WinXP Pro (with no SP's applied, just "bare") M$ SP2 RyanVM pack full V104 P.S. For the same reasons - unpredictability - we also don't use VMware or VirtualPC for testing. Just a dedicated testbox. It just adds extra clutter to find what-went-wrong-where if issues arise. Rule 'em out from the word go.

@ durex I use nLite for integrating SP2 and RyanVM Pack V104, and I dont have prob. Thats all I use nLite for though, just those 2 ops. I manually delete folders to reduce size of source. (Lang, Win98update etc). I dont use nLite for reducing size as I know too many people (service techs @work) who've had issues with doing this. HTH.

Test Disk V4.5 is on Hirens Boot CD V6. @slip400 = would be interesting to hear what you used in the end and whether you had any success.

@ ankap @raverod Neither of you have read or understood the project. These are customers machines, 100's of them, NOT networked and UNABLE to reformat due to cust req. They contain basic Windows XP. All must be updated to SP2 and beyond i.e. the 19 post SP2 hotfixes. It will take me weeks to do this, so I need a CD that I can stick in the machine, let it autorun install SP2 and then all the post SP2 hotfixes without any user input. I've already stated this in previous posts - if I could have run my latest UAXP CD on them they would all be done by now. I know how to integrate hotfixes into a Windows source. But I dont know how to make a CD that will do this. Cartoonite and a number of other forum regulars are helping me work on this project and I would appreciate your input too - but PLEASE understand the project before making posts that dont help because you've not read the requirement.

@Mhz If you've included it in I386 folder - as blasted has - and it contains incorrect info then it could be the cause of his prob. You either leave it out - as most of us do - OR if you use it, it must contain the correct info.