eidenk

I have three different msvbvm60.dll version 6.0.96.90 that I can try. Is that newer/better than the usual 6.0.97.82 (of which I know only one binary) ?

Which files are you speaking about ? Do you mean triedit.dll 6.1.0.9227 and mfc42.dll 6.2.4131.0 ? If so, I don't know where I got them from. I regularly install a lot of software and it probably came with one of them. I collect any MS files from those installers whatever the version even if I know I have got a file of such or such version number already as I found out that there are quite a few of those files that are not binary identical. For mfc42.dll - 6.2.4131.0, I have two different files for example : mfc42.dll - 6.2.4131.0 - 1,028,096 bytes - 04 August 2004, 01:57:24 - 6a420038c8f8fde9048a569d1663b908 mfc42.dll - 6.2.4131.0 - 1,028,096 bytes - 09 November 2005, 09:21:22 - 4602907535fd682195dfff9117365826 Differences are quite big as a binary compare finds 29.000 differences or so but I had both running without apparent problem. Certainly the one you install is safer as I know only of one binary of build 6.0.9782.0. As for triedit.dll, as dhtml.ocx is updated, I thought it could be a good idea if triedit.dll was updated as well. I know two versions more recent than the one in IE6SP1, 6.1.0.9211 and 6.1.0.9227 (currently installed on my system). But I don't exactly know where they do come from. There is also a msvcp60.dll more recent than the one in your pack. It is version 6.2.3104.0. I have 4 different binaries of it. For version 6.0.8972.0 (the one you install), I have six different binaries. It is a bit beyond topic but I'd appreciate anyone who's got as little a clue as to what this mess is about with different binaries for the same version number. Also I am currently looking into your previous pack and it seems it seems it is already beta 4 : mesp202en-b4.exe (91e2d0a6943632c574f68f473545844b). So please make your next one to be beta 5 and not beta 4 again. If you want any of the above files, if only to look at them or test them, just PM me with an email and I'll send them to you.

Hey, program files as well has a space in it and I told you a way to do it right just two posts above.

I'm sorry but I don't have beta 4 ready right now. Don't worry for that. Take as much time as you need. Would you guys like to see Macromedia (now Adobe) Flash, Shockwave, both, or neither? Both. Also, is anyone experiencing an issue with qfecheck? Start->run->type qfecheck, and click the plus sign (+) for the main update to see if there is any issues. If there is, please tell me. I don't seem to have problem but I stress that my system is not updated by your pack. I think I have noticed a few files in your previous pack that are either missing or could upgraded to higher versions. I am thinking about triedit.dll 6.1.0.9227 and mfc42.dll 6.2.4131.0.

You must be in 8.3 format as it's Dos. C:\PROGRA~1, instead of C:\programs files should work.

You must create the folders not copy them AFAIK : Here for batch file : CD C:\windows\ mkdir folder CD \ copy file C:\windows\folder\file The above creates a folder named folder in C:\windows and then copies a file named file from the batch file folder into the newly created one. For inf, just look in the docs, it should be easy.

Try eBay, example : http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/MICROSOFT-FRONTPAGE-...1QQcmdZViewItem The problem now is that it is not possible to buy any commercial software that works on 98/ME from their manufacturers if they release only for 2K/XP AFAIK.

I haven't got a clue. But surely you'll easily find yourself in some tuts or help files. I haven't got a clue either.

Why do you have two inf files now ? Can't you do just with one and have it as the main setup command of the installer ? Obviously you could add your infs to the batch file if you wanted to, after all. You can try this in your batch file : rundll.exe setupx.dll,InstallHinfSection DefaultInstall 132 %1 and replace %1 by the name of the inf you want to launch. You must try and experiment yourself and see what works best or what you are more comfortable with but going entirely with inf (without a batch file) is not only more elegant, as there is no command window that will appear, but also likely to be more stable IMO. Anyway I think you got the basics now, isnt'it ?

You are able to copy and paste I believe, so there should be no problem with your reg files. You can either merge all your reg files into one and convert it all at once with Willy pad or use copy and paste between two instances of it. What you need to do is declare an AddReg section in the DefaultInstall section, create that Addreg section and add the values to it. [DefaultInstall] AddReg=Something [Something] What you have converted with WillyPad Or as you say, I guess you can include all your regs + bat and then run the batch file as the post setup command. You must try it to see if it does work for the second method because I have never tried that.

You didn't follow the instructions as to what to do with your reg files in a previous post and you ask again so let me take it as a joke or as as a game you play. You snap in your fingers and you expect to be instantly answered for stuff that has already been answered. I said : And you later asked :

I guess it's a good idea. I also think it is a good idea. I think they can be removed after all. Well maybe not. Well, it is subject to discussion. Here are my thoughts and observations : I believe that those files are used by setup in case of reinstalling the OS over itself. My observation has been, when reistalling ME over itself, that the hotfixed files remained updated but the KB references disappeared from the registry so that a reinstall of the updates was necessary to have the KB hotfixes referenced in the registry. The original MS KB hotfix installers also install a cat file which is apparently part of the on-the-fly mechanism used to prevent SFP from immediatelly replacing the hotfixed files by the original ones. Maybe those cat files are also necessary when reinstalling the OS over itself, I don't know for sure if yes or not. Also those files in the %windir%\Options\Install\ and %windir%\Options\Cabs\ are probably used by SFP instead of those in the cabs in case SFP needs to restore a file I guess.

Uh ?

I thought you were too busy giving your blessings to Israel those days :

90% of items unchecked in that Autoruns won't make the slightest difference in my experience.

That's what is showing up in your task/process manager but in reality you have many more "services" running that you don't see.KRNL386.EXE and gdi.exe for example and also reams of VXDs. If that was the case, I would have gone to another OS since a long time, believe me.

What's the benefit of IE6.1 over 5.5 ?

Have you tried to hex or reshack browseui.dll and replace 5.50.4948.700 by 6.00.2800.1692 ? And same for browselc. I guess it is file version checking that is responsible for your "problem".

Yeah, unlike POS Win98SE/ME that are just POS 16-bit operating systems with POS 32-bit extensions.

There is a shareware program that claims to be able to do this but it is not cheap and must (most probably) be running as a backround task to allow that : http://peccatte.karefil.com/software/WinTo...nTopMostENG.htm I don't know of any freeware that does this nor of any registry tweak but both may exist.

What do you think about Windows Vista link21 ?

In the United States in 2004, Georges W. Bush got finally elected President in flagrant contradiction with exit polls who gave the victory to John Kerry. They had been voting on something called Diebold machines which are no more than network connected MS Windows XP or 2003 boxes with some spreadsheet software. Something that could not have happened if Win98/ME had been used IMO.

We all wonder how you manage that with all those cigarettes you smoke and junkfood you eat.

All free CD burners should be listed here : http://www.essential-freebies.de/board/vie...0d9a28bf507ec9b It's in german but most software they link to is in english.

If you remove the ,4 from each line it should maybe process the files normally. I have added that as it is a flag that is supposed to force overwrite in any circumstances but I certainly did put it at the wrong place or used a slightly wrong syntax. Why I did put it is because I guessed the files you want to install will maybe not be of a newer version than the targets, and by default the installer will not replace them if they are not of a newer version I believe. Look into all that and experiment a bit just like I do ATM. Have some PROBLEMCHYLD to test them for you. And search the forum for downloads links for inf doc. There are some.