[98SE2ME = Killer Replacements: ME -> 98 SE]

-reguerra: let us know if and how that ADSL/network prob gets resolved, I have a friend who could REALLY benefit from 98se2me...

>;]

[completely Silent process killer]

-dman, is that proc killer OS-independent? (I use win98se)... ?

[98SE2ME = Killer Replacements: ME -> 98 SE]

--re: regedit w/EBD:

-DOH! it's working fine, it was a typo when specifying the /L /R paths (my "C" and "D" drive letters swap, when booting from EBD... bios stuff)... I was so used to typing "c:\windows...", shoulda been "D:\windows...". SO sorry to waste your time here...

[98SE2ME = Killer Replacements: ME -> 98 SE]

-I did try the /l /r switches, with full path, along with of course being in the same dir as the .dat's (/windows), and of course did the attrib -r -s -h *.dat to make sure they were available...

-it's the same w/all versions of regedit.exe, 98se/ME/updated/"fixed"...

-combined size of user.dat + system.dat is 7mb... (old-install test system, lotsa installs/uninstalls... but I do clean/optimize it regularly)

-and nope, no batch file to back it up, just standard/auto...

-it's no big deal, was just curious... I also keep many generational copies of reg, prob won't ever need it, but was thinking of all poss. emergencies, it'd be nice to be able to edit the reg from real-mode if windows won't boot... but I also keep "safe" copies of windows on C, so prob won't ever need this, but just in case...

[98SE2ME = Killer Replacements: ME -> 98 SE]

-MDGx, I have need of your infinite wisdom yet again: when trying to export the registry in real-mode dos (from ebd, using regedit), I get "unable to open registry (1,016)..." ? -I was only trying to test the registry editor for my new modified EBD, on a good-working system, in case of a need to edit the registry in real-dos mode emergency... MS has an article, but of course all they say to resolve it is "do it in protected-mode"... that's not helpful, as usual... do ya know of any real-mode dos registry editors that actually work with real-sized registries?

[A Idea]

windows 98 exists still. *shivers*

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...windows XP was EVER ALLOWED to exist. *shivers convulses & pukes*

>;]

[98SE2ME = Killer Replacements: ME -> 98 SE]

MDGx,

Installed 5-19a and sysdm.cpl went to WINDOWS/SYSTEM32/drivers and old version in WINDOWS/SYSTEM was still there--SYSTRAY.EXE was not installed at all

but USBHUB.SYS did install? Also only 709 files installed not the 710 ?

THANKS again for all the work and help.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

-confirmed: windows/system/systray.exe is still 3001, not 3002. Option #1 didn't update it, tho usbhub is updated... the only 3002 version of systray.exe on my HD is in \9!M... (707 files copied)

[98SE2ME = Killer Replacements: ME -> 98 SE]

-MDGx: uh oh....

? I was curious if 98se2me updated the std windows screen savers (in particular, Blank Screen.scr, which I use and seems to maybe cause long-term bogging and potential instability, especially w/ the memory-leaky WinMX), so I went searching... and oops, Start/Search/Files would not find Blank Screen.scr, or BLANKS~1.SCR (both did show up on manual searching) ? And, System File Checker (& extracter) couldn't find it either, neither for win98se nor winME (options/cabs)... ??? -Any ideas? Any chance 98se2me messed up the searches or 8.3 filename searches?

*update: oh yeah, I do now recall, 98se2me does kill "~" searches (8.3), thru Start button... just like Properties no longer shows the 8.3 filename, either... but what about sfc? are the screen savers maybe grouped into something that won't be found by sfc?

**update2: I can't just use the monitor power saving, because of instability of power saving in my Matsonic 9327e+(usb) icky mobo... lol... -any suggestions for more reliable blank screen savers (which don't kick the cpu into 100% mode) ?

[98SE2ME = Killer Replacements: ME -> 98 SE]

MDGx,

Great stuff and thanks!

I just wanted to report a problem I had.

I had just finished setting up my new system and had installed 98SE2ME from 5-14, the bugless edition!

Coming here to browse around as usual, I noticed today's update.  Not knowing exactly what to do, I uninstalled 98SE2ME from your shortcut and reinstalled the new one.

It ran fine and rebooted, but nothing appeared at startup and none of the changes were made.  I rebooted again and noticed that your line in autoexec.bat "IF EXIST..." was placed at the end of the "Set qtjava..." line instead of on its own line.

I cut and pasted it in sysedit to its own line, rebooted, and then I got the "7 hundred some odd files copied with 0 errors" at bootup. 

Upon checking autoexec.bat, the "IF EXIST..." line had been removed properly as well.

Now, when running System File Checker, the changes of files occured as advertised in the readme.

So, I had repaired the operation myself but just wanted you to know what had happened.  Some folks will think the update installed and might not even notice nothing had installed and might wonder about the "IF EXIST..." line sitting there at bootup at the end of another line's command.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

-Eck, why do you uninstall first? I always install on top, just in case the uninstall isn't quite "clean" enough... any chance that's your problem? Because this update worked perfectly for me, 710 files copied (note the TEN), and it DID update the files he mentioned...

>;]