mark49

I thought the problem "first use file in driver.cab/sp1.cab/sp2.cab stead of file in \i386" only occurs when TXTSETEUP STEP, when in GUI setup system will re-scan HW.IDs and use newer driver (such in \DP) .BUT why at end when xpsetup finished, system has also used the driver file in driver.cab/sp?.cab ?? strange...

@BTS, this artikel auch exists in ref.chm from deploy.cab from XP setup cdrom. and is for windows HOTFIX slipstream ,and what problem do u mean ? EDIT: U mean here ?

which one? above i mean post15 is wrong for post12,should del post15 but now both 12 and 15 exist..

Thanks for your test. Would u have a next test, just del the entry of ultra.sys in drvindex.inf and reinstall streamsliped XP ← EDIT: what STEP? after windows go into DESKTOP or only GUI setup? -------------- SORRY, i use quote by wrong stead "edit" . and how to del this replay?

when MS update the driver (in driver.cab) to one newer (save to SP1.cab/SP2.cab) and lazy to del the ori file in driver.cab ,he direct del the filename in [driver] and write to [sp1] or [sp2]. so i thought maybe this also pass to the situation of folder \i386. BUT digned LAYOUT.INF is a problem, when we overwrite the file in \i386,but cannt modify layou.inf with the new filesize .

when overwrite by older .sys etc file ,it can also pass though WHQL verification ,i just think no problem. but maybe use newer file is good.

Thanks for your test. Would u have a next test, just del the entry of ultra.sys in drvindex.inf and reinstall streamsliped XP EDIT: what STEP? after windows go into DESKTOP or only GUI setup? I just thought the problem only occued when TXTSETUP. when GUI setup,system rescan HW and should use newer driver in \DP....

I think it so. when TXTSETUP hardware scan(at the time display u press F6),more hardware entry MAYBE need more time (at least more HW name to dispaly ).

@BTS, I found a interresting thing: I have verified the si3114r5 driver uploaded from Dynaletik (he donnt know where from ,and that is different from the officel. driver from SI), with si3114r5.cat the file si3114r5.inf passed and si3114r5.sys not. see blow (i del the info about verifacation of si3114r.inf , si3114r.sys etc ) C:\3114r>signtool verify si3114r5.cat Successfully verified: si3114r5.cat si3114r5.cat is valid. next i verify the offi. si3114r5 driver: of cause this si3114r5.cat from offic.web is valid. ------------------- next i copy the si3114r5.sys office. (v1.1.0.0) to overwrite the non-off. si3114r5.sys(v1.2.0.0) ; SilSupp.cpl (v3.0.0.15) overwrite v3.0.0.18; SilSupp.cpl (v1.0.0.8) overwite v1.0.0.11 and verify , then interresting thing came: All passed include si3114r5.sys !! ----------------------------------------------------- Both si3114r5.inf is valid verified, and is the same version but different from HD.IDs So i think the r5 driver (from Dynaletik) maby updated by some OEM Factory base on SI offic.Driver , danach some file (excluded inf)cannt pass though verify with .cat file. but strange thing is why SI use the old INF file stead use the new si3114r5.INF(including more Hd.IDs ),this also WHQL signed.....

newer is kb888111 ? and at MS web i found no link to download..

should edit the entries in drvindex.inf ? It seemed, when there r same driver file (such ultra.sys) both in \i386 and in driver.cab(or sp2.cab), system will use the file in CAB FIRST. so should del the entry in the drvindex.inf .

i think th idstring: PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3149&CC_010400 = "viamraid" PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3149&CC_0104 = "viamraid" is usefulless, with CC_0104... it become a compatible ID . and have a lower order of suitability to PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3149 = "viamraid" and have a same suitability Range with PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3149 = "viamraid"

in the xp ori setup CD ,there's no file name viaSraid.sys or viaMraid.sys ,so i think the effect of RENAME is nothing... EDIT: i want to know , arry just only rename the file viamraid.sys to viaSraid.sys that be copy to \i386 , and the file in the $OEM...\driver\... also ?

BTS, i wonder the 3114r5 driver (came from ??? ) can use for all 3114 and 3114r controler or not ?

in some old sis mainboard i got some problem , when GUI installation after file copy, it says : “Windows需要继续安装的一个组件无法安装。 清单分析错误：在文字内容中找到一个无效字符。” 查看安装日志文件： “错误： SXS.DLL： *** 错误： Installation Failed：F:\I386\asms.Error Message:清单分析错误：在文字内容中找到一个无效字符。” ------------------------------------------------------------------------ below is in Chinese ,in ENG is: a compoent needed by windows installation can't be installed List anynised error: find a unvalid char in the words. in the log file of setup: "Error: SXS.dll: **** Error: Installation Failed：F:\I386\asms.Error Message:List anynised error: find a unvalid char in the words.” "

Then how to solve this problem? maybe we should use another filename for the entries in the txtsetup.sif ,such as ultra1.sys instead of ultra.sys . but.... because of digital singned xxx.inf with .cat ,we can't modify the installation filename in the xx.inf or like nLite ,use another folder stead of i386 to copy the file(need to be overwrite,or all new driver) to ?

i found ids blow in si3114r5.inf uploaded by Dynaletik [SI_HDC] %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_71141095 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_81361043 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_81671043 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_902A1695 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_310215BD %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_052FA0A0 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_104A147B %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_104B147B %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_B0041458 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_71001462 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_71251462 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_471015D5 %PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114.DeviceDesc%=SI_3114, PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_0C25105B but the ids :PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3114&SUBSYS_81361043 is auch belong to si3114r.inf! maybe Dynaletik's ASUS 's id is this one ,but i want to know his txtseup.sif has this id entry twice or not?

BTS, i've a Q: in the layou.inf there r the originall file size ,which included in txtsetup.sif (or drvindex.inf?), when we overwrite the .sys file into \i386, the file size should different from the sizeinfo in layout.inf , then any problem?

soryy i just want to know the ids

sp2.cab is digitaly signed with sp2.cat file. and layou.inf also D digned? drvindex.inf ?

xp sp2 not includ this fix?

pls post your sis controller's HWids such as PCI\VEN_1039&DEV_xxxx displayed in normally runing windows

can u post your si3114r controllers HW.ids ?

i think viaSraid.sys is the name of old driver (v2.20E) file . and in the newer driver VIA change it to viaMraid. but strange thing is in readme.txt partly also use the file viaSraid.sys

is "PCI\VEN_105A&DEV_3373.DeviceDesc="WinXP Promise FastTrak 378 Controller" (FASTTX2K.inf) ? it should use FASTTX2K.SYS not ulsata.sys.......