Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


  • Content count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About justacruzr2

Profile Information

  • OS
    none specified
  • Country
  1. Need help with Config.sys and Autoexec.bat

    Never mind. I'll figure it out myself.
  2. Awhile back I had asked for help with a problem in getting sound out of DOOM95. I had to do a clean install of Windows 98SE retail and after applying all the updates, etc. I went through everything (all the programs on the START menu) to be sure everything was working. When I got to DOOM95 I noticed that there was no sound and no mouse support (only the keyboard). I searched the web for an answer to this and tried various suggestions but nothing worked. Just the other day it occurred to me that I should look at the Config.sys and Autoexec.bat files since DOOM95 is a DOS game. Config.sys is completely blank and Autoexec.bat has only a few system directives in it. I'm thinking this is the problem. With DOS based games shouldn't there be some "device = " entries that load a sound driver and a mouse driver? I think Win 95 and Win 98 FE & SE make no assumptions for DOS and I have to specify what is needed. When I installed the game on Win ME it worked perfect from the start without touching Config.sys or Autoexec.bat but then Win ME has DOS "sucked" into it and it probably does know what to load. The install program for DOOM95 makes no entries in those files for you. It might have been mentioned in the manual that came with the game but I don't have that manual. So, if this is the problem, what sound and mouse drivers should I be using for the "device =" entries? I did a "find files" in Explorer and it comes up with several sound and mouse drivers but which ones should I use....the ones with a ".drv" extension or the ones with a ".sys" extension? And I should probably also add HIGHMEM, UMB AND EMM386 to give it some memory to work with. Any thoughts?
  3. Software Update for Web Folders kb892211

    @ Commodore/Jumper/Drugwash/sdfox7 Thanks for your replies and thanks to you guys that found the original article. I wrote the following before I came here today and saw your replies and I'm going to leave it unchanged (mostly because I don't have time to rewrite it as I have to leave for work soon). Also, I was using the update from the AutoPatcher so I think it probably is the original one which included 98/ME. *********** I believe I found that on a website that had an archived Microsoft webpage for kb892211. However, I am having trouble finding that page right now. Here is one website that still lists the original target OS's for this update: http://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/software-update-for-web-folders.63562/ At the bottom of that page it includes a link to the original MS webpage for kb892211: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;892211 But now that link goes to: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/892211 which might mean that the original page was modified/changed probably after support for Win98/ME was ended Here is another website that lists this update for win 98SE: http://kbupdate.info/windows-98-second-edition-se-d.php Further, if you look at "The Complete List of Hotfixes, Updates, and Addons for Windows 98 Second Edition" on this site, you will see kb892211 listed. It's also in the AutoPatcher. And I believe that if this update was not for 98SE, it would have aborted the install with a "This update is not intended for your operating system" message. Anyway, this is no big deal. I was just trying to find out why the update doesn't include pkmres.dll or where it's supposed to come from.
  4. Software Update for Web Folders kb892211

    @ Nomen Thanks for your reply. Same here. Never been a pkmres.dll on my system either. Not even in the setup cabs. This update is intended for 98/ME/XP. The following comes from the same KB article webpage at MS: System Requirements 1) Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows ME, Windows Server 2003, Windows XP 2) Microsoft Windows Installer version 2.0 or later. File information The update contains files with the versions that are listed in the following table. Date Time Version Size File name ------------------------------------------------------------- 25-Mar-2003 05:52 618,605 Fp4autl.dll 19-Nov-2000 10:28 450,669 Fp4awec.dll 28-Oct-2004 22:03 11.0.6715.15 843,472 Msdaipp.dll 18-Jul-2003 18:05 11.0.5510.0 160,320 Msdapml.dll 28-Oct-2004 21:50 11.0.6715.15 1,293,008 Msonsext.dll 18-Jul-2003 18:05 11.0.5510.0 80,448 Pkmws.dll @ submixc Know what your talking about or do some research before you comment.
  5. After running this update I ran Norton WinDoctor to check the registry and it found 16 incorrect entries all related to the same thing....missing file pkmres.dll. I checked with the Microsoft support page for this kb article and it lists the following files which are included in the update: The update contains files with the versions that are listed in the following table. Date Time Version Size File name ------------------------------------------------------------- 25-Mar-2003 05:52 618,605 Fp4autl.dll 19-Nov-2000 10:28 450,669 Fp4awec.dll 28-Oct-2004 22:03 11.0.6715.15 843,472 Msdaipp.dll 18-Jul-2003 18:05 11.0.5510.0 160,320 Msdapml.dll 28-Oct-2004 21:50 11.0.6715.15 1,293,008 Msonsext.dll 18-Jul-2003 18:05 11.0.5510.0 80,448 Pkmws.dll That's also exactly what is in the update package I have. So, where is pkmres.dll supposed to come from? Is it already supposed to exist or are those registry entries (created by the update) a mistake that should be deleted?
  6. 98SE MS updates

    @ jaclaz, dencorso, Drugwash et al Thanks for your suggestions. It's funny because just after I replied to jaclaz's post I remembered that I do have a ftp program and it's the one that dencorso mentioned. I have WS_ftp LE 6 installed on all 3 of my systems. I used it to transfer files back and forth between my mainframe PDS and my PC. I had forgotten that I had it because I haven't used it for a couple of years now. And it never occurred to me to use it for ftp sites with my PC. Also have QWS3270 which emulates an IBM 3270 terminal for TSO sessions.
  7. 98SE MS updates

    Sure . But the problem (which is anyway EXTREMELY rare) would not exist and the cure wouldn't be needed at all, if you use the "right" approach which is "use a FTP client for FTP access". Pre-preventative medicine. jaclaz Here's part of what Microsoft Support has to say about that problem: Your Account Is Locked Out When You View an FTP Server with Internet Explorer 6 SYMPTOMS When you are using Internet Explorer to view an FTP server that has many levels of folders and you view folders that are five or more levels deep, your account may be locked out. This symptom only occurs on an FTP server that does not allow anonymous logons. CAUSE After the first logon, a new logon attempt is made when you connect to another folder. Because Internet Explorer does not keep the password, a blank password is sent, and a logon that is not valid is recorded. If an account is set to lock out after three failed logons, the account is locked out when you go five levels deep in the folder structure. So I would agree that it's EXTREMELY rare. And it's similar to the problem of accessing a file 8 folders deep on a CD. So what do you suggest for a FTP client keeping in mind that I would like it to be compatible with 98SE, ME & XP (if that's possible)?
  8. 98SE MS updates

    Yes. Hi dencorso. I found the problem with the Q326728 update and it was indirectly related to SP1. I actually have 2 IE6setup.exe packages. One installs IE6 version 6.0.2600.0000 and the other installs IE6 version 6.0.2800.1106. I had installed the latter one (before I ever started doing the MS updates) since it was the highest and the last version of IE6 released by Microsoft. Here's what I found when I opened up the verinst.exe file, from the Q326728 package, in my hex editor. I found a line of code in it that looks at the value "MinorVersion" in the registry key HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings and expects to find a "0" (zero). What was in that value was "SP1;q313829". So it seems that the last version of IE6 already had SP1 rolled into it and I didn't know that. And the q313829 was one of the updates I had applied. Didn't know that SP1 was included in the IE6 version I installed and that q313829 affected that entry in the registry and that the verinst.exe file from the Q326728 package was looking at "THAT" value to determine whether IE6 was installed or not. Seems kind of backasswards to me. Why Microsoft doesn't just look at the "Version" value in HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer is a mystery. Guess they had their reasons. Anyway, didn't think that anything I had done so far had affected IE6. It's the kind of thing nobody would probably know offhand until they did some serious investigating. So the cure was to copy that current value out, save it, put a "0" (zero) in its place, rerun the Q326728 update again and then re-enter the "SP1;q313829" value back into the reg. So thanks for that thought about SP1. It's what prompted me to do some deeper investigating.
  9. 98SE MS updates

    I have done every official update on that list, up to the end of 2002, which is where I am at now, obsolete or not. The purpose I have in mind is so that when I am finished with that list I can go to Windows Update and let it give me a once over. That way I won't get a mile long list of recommended updates. This very thing was suggested in the complete list for Q242975 (the USB update) so as to trick Windows Update into believing it had already been done. This suggestion can really be applied to all the updates. When I actually do visit Windows Update I expect little to nothing in the way of suggested updates. This way I can be sure I did everything there was to do. Why does it bother you so much how I reconstruct my system that your every reply is some jab at me?
  10. 98SE MS updates

    Yes I have used IE to access FTP sites with ME and XP. It's one of the few things that IE 6 and 8 can still do. That is until I try the IE9 spoof in the registry. that was mentioned in a different article here - tips and tweeks is something I will look at at the very end of this reconstruction. And no I haven't experienced it to date. But I had already done this update in ME and XP. I haven't gone anywhere yet with 98 and will not until I am finished with the updates. 98 is only 1 of 3 operating systems I have, ME and XP being the other 2, and is not needed as my primary OS. It's more of a fallback should anything nasty happen to my other 2. Since this problem is known to exist in IE6 why wait until it does happen when there is a cure? Preventative medicine.
  11. 98SE MS updates

    Thanks for your reply dencorso. It's the first straightforward answer I've received. So far all I've done regarding Internet Explorer is install the IE6setup.exe standalone package. The install was over IE5.5 which is what the Win98SE setup puts on the computer initially. There is no provision to uninstall IE5.5 before doing the IE6 setup. Trust you know how that works if you have no previous version. I have not applied any of the updates, patches or cumulative fixes that Microsoft provided yet. I am almost to that point in the list of updates I have. That list is the complete list from this website. All I did was put it in date order and proceeded from the beginning. Currently I am at the end of 2002. I believe the first cumulative patch is the Feb 2003 one which will be coming up soon. Do you think I should wait until I apply that before trying the q326728 patch again?
  12. 98SE MS updates

    Why do you want to install something that has a replacement/newer? Yes I saw that but I haven't gotten that far yet. I've been doing the updates in date order. Still doesn't answer my question why q326728 thinks I don't have IE6 installed when in fact I do.
  13. 98SE MS updates

    "M-kay". Had to Google that. Although I used to watch South Park back in the day I forgot about that joke about Mr Mackey. Now I remember it M-kay? So, if I am not running on a network (LAN/WAN) and I am just using my computer as a stand alone at home then I should not have to bother with the following updates: 1). q314941 (12/17/2001) - 223kb - Unchecked Buffer in Universal Plug and Play can Lead to System Compromise for Windows 98. (changed my mind on this one. If it's only for computers on a network then why bother). 2). q315575 (4/17/2002) - 1.3mb - DCOM Program Hangs After Server Reboot Creating DCOM Object. 3). q323455 (9/30/2002) - 2.96mb - Directory Services Client Update for Windows 98. Re: Conexant You're right about that. I found that out too. I have a couple different Conexant modem driver packages. One is the SoftK56 version and the other is the SoftV92 version. Currently I have the SoftK56 installed on my 98 system because when I tried updating it to the SoftV92 it didn't work. Yet I had the SoftK56 originally on my ME system and updated it to the SoftV92 version (same package as I used on 98) and it worked just fine. Hmmmmmmm........ New Question/Problem: q326728 (7/26/2002) - 219kb - Your Account Is Locked Out When You View an FTP Server with Internet Explorer 6. When I ran this update I received a message box stating that I needed to have IE6 installed to run this update. IE6 "IS" installed on my system. Version number :6.0.2800.1106. What's up with that?
  14. 98SE MS updates

    Hi Submix8c. Thanks for your reply. I was about to post an addendum to my previous post when I saw that you replied. Um...NO! "q314941" may have those versions, but it is SPECIFICALLY for Win98!From the INF - Quote So, it had a "problem" and you're ignoring stuff by simply looking at Versions of the files. No...what I am doing is investigating when I run into a problem. The setup file is a good place to start. Additionally yesterday when I had a little extra time I pulled the q314941 update out of the AutoPatcher utility and saw that it had been modified. This was not the version of 314941 that I ran. Most of the updates I obtained from the links in the "Monster List" that were still good. The remaining few that I didn't have came from the AutoPatcher utility. This is probably what happened with the q314941 update....it came from the link in the "Monster List". I also now have the original Microsoft q314941 update since that is still available from Microsoft on the KB314941 support web page. Part of what I do when I prepare to run an update is check to see if the files to be updated exist on my 98 system. This is to avoid wasting time running an update that will do nothing if you don't already have existing files. Found that out from a previous update that is mentioned above in one of my posts. What I found was that they didn't and it occurred to me that 98 didn't come with UPnP. The kb314941 web page at Microsoft's Support website confirmed this. Here is an excerpt from that page: "Computers can use the Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) service to discover and use network-based devices. Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition (Me) and Microsoft Windows XP include UPnP services, but Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition do not. However, the UPnP service can be installed on a Windows 98-based or Windows 98 Second Edition-based computer by installing the Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) client that is included with Windows XP." Further "Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition There is no built-in UPnP support for these operating systems. Windows 98-based or Windows 98 Second Edition-based computers would only be affected if the ICS client from Windows XP had been installed on the computer. If you do not have the Windows XP ICS client installed on your Windows 98 or Windows 98 Second Edition computer, you receive the following error message when you attempt to apply this patch: This update is not designed for your version of Windows. Windows 98-based or Windows 98 Second Edition-based computers that have installed the ICS client from a Windows XP-based computer that has already applied this patch are not vulnerable." So it seems that to properly run this update (the original MS one), one needs to install the Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) client that is included with Windows XP. I realize that the setup inf for this update was modified to bypass that and will work but I am also thinking why not install the ICS from XP and do it that way as well. Of Course, if you're not on a network you really don't need UPnP as per above Microsoft statement. Re: HARDWARE Yes. But I didn't know exactly what you were talking about. Since we were discussing refreshing the CATMAST and HASMAST files I assumed you were talking about the HWINFO.DAT, DRVDATA and DRVIDX files. Re: DUN14 I had already realized that and mentioned that in a previous post (see above): "However, I was also mistaken about DUN14. It is something different than a modem update." I will try running that again late after I backup what I've already done. Didn't know about this: "There's even a Topic about MS' stupid version schema that "fools" you, even to the point of having an older Version# for a NEWER file!" Re: 1003775 "Side note: Here, also, is that HSF Modem CAB file for WinME. " According to the text file included in the cab by Conexant, those drivers are general purpose and should work with any modem.
  15. 98SE MS updates

    This is just a follow up to my last post 1). This is quoted from the website that I found some possible info on how to refresh the CATMAST and HASHMAST files: "Incidentally I still don't think we have entirely solved the problem and that the real solution, rather than renaming the catroot folder, is to establish how to regenerate the catmast and hashmast files contained in the catroot folder. This is probably done by running sucatreg.exe It could then be as simple as deleting the damaged cat file and regenerating the catmast and hashmast files. A little more experimentation is still required." However, upon further investigation, I don't think that is the answer. I used a hex editor program and loaded up a Csetup.exe file from one of the updates. Almost all of them have one. Here is part of what I found: ÿÿÿÿw.@.Ž.@.....CAT File registration program...j.ÿ.ìP@.hP5@.j.j.ÿ.èP@.…Àt.ÿ.ä and .............SimpleMindedCSetup..*.cat...CryptCATAdminReleaseContext.CryptCATAdminReleaseCatalogContext.. CryptCATCatalogInfoFromContext..CryptCATAdminAddCatalog.CryptCATAdminAcquireContext.MSCAT32.DLL...........@.runtime error.. It looks as though, from this, that CSETUP is what handles the catalog registration using, at least, MSCAT32.DLL for assistance. It may be possible to use this by listing all the catalogs in CATROOT in the setup INF file and tricking CSETUP into thinking that all those catalogs are part of the update. It's an interesting idea that I will try some time. 2). q285189 (5/10/2001) - 459kb - Windows 98SE Dial-Up Networking Upgrade v1.4. All the files in this update are dated 4/23/99 and are the same exact size as all the same files that come with 98se and are already on my computer from the initial install so this update must be for 98fe. 3). The ME modem update I mentioned above is Windows update 1003775 which I have. It's a cab file and in it is the familiar Microsoft self extracting executable signed by Microsoft. If anyone would like a copy of this, for perhaps inclusion in a ME update package, just let me know. 3). Somebody changed the "Q" number on the q314941 update. It's just q314757 for ME in disguise. When you run it you get the "This update is intended for a different version of Windows" message and the update aborts. Opened it up in WinZip and extracted it and found that all the files have version 4.90.3003 on them. Then looked at my collection of ME updates and found that it was the same as q314757. As it is, it will not install on anything but WinME. 4). This is a new question. If you are not running on a network then it's not necessary to install the q315575 DCOM update correct?