Marztabator

What extras exactly are bundled inside the OPK version? Does it include the WMP9 Bonus Pack? I recently burned an unattended XP CD with the seperate WMP9 OPK referenced in svcpack.inf and existing in "I386\Update". Am I gonna have problems now when I test it?

It would be interesting to see the contents of MSI files at last...

I can't really see myself having this thing auto-install from my unattended XP CD for the time being. I've only installed it in the past a few times because of an app or two that required it existed on my system. Is it meant to provide more system protection, or is it to add advanced ways of communicating with others?

Because, Daveyboy, I doubt my nVidia GeForce 2 MX/MX 400 and DX 9.0b would get along 100%. Isn't it for newer cards?

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...&displaylang=en The file name seems to mention 'update', and it references the SDK a tad. The redistributable link at http://mirrors.edskes.com appears to be broken now, so this could be the new release. It just seems so confusing though, what if it's something for the SDK only?

How come your guide doesn't say anything about cabbing the new svcpack.inf afterwards? I thought that was mandatory.

Wonder what made willpantin think his svcpack.in_ was still in I386, if he had run file.bat? And another thing, are you sure you don't need to compress svcpack.inf afterwards? Will XP detect the inf when the CD is booted from DOS?

Thanks ever so much for the help, generous fellow!

However, I did experience occasional problems where IE seems 'stuck' in loading pages up, and I have to reload to get them moving again. Don't know if this has anything to do with the tweak, but still.... Is it REALLY compatible with everyone's computers? Should I just not use it?

I was trying to find that little post of yours, Aaron, in which you mentioned that /n switch, but I haven't been very successful so far. I just want to re-read just in case my mind's playing games with me....

I've made a rather depressing discovery...... it appears you can only get the "one-line status message" effect if you run Setup.exe in the actual Windows - not during the initial install setup. You could've reminded me that those previous shots were all taken from the real Windows Setup!

Did he mean "entries" by something else then? I'm thinking that not using the /n switch would result in a less cluttered A/R list.

But I thought Aaron told someone recently that to prevent the hotfixes from being added to the Add/Remove list you should leave out the /n switch???

Oh jesus, this only just makes things more complicated for me. Basically, here's how I'm setting up my XP: Uattended, with the exception of the partition select. Only intend to install hotfixes (and optionally WMP9 and/or DX9, I may make another CD for one of these two or both for another occasion). No third-party applications will be automated (I prefer to choose where they should be installed ). The majority of the registry tweaks applied in the Hive files, with the CMDHere tweak and some HKLM (mostly Service) tweaks applied during the GUI Setup. Is slipstreaming the hotfixes a very complicated thing to pull off? Will it guarantee me far better results?

Shouldn't that be "Don't use the /n switch if you don't want backups and entries in add/remove."?

Strange. This is how my CMDHere tweak is written: ;This adds the "Open Command Window Here" on the right-click menu for drives and folders [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Directory\shell\cmd] @="Open Command Window Here" [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Directory\shell\cmd\command] @="cmd.exe /k \"cd %L\"" [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Drive\shell\cmd] @="Open Command Window Here" [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Drive\shell\cmd\command] @="cmd.exe /k \"cd %L\"" Am I failing to notice a simple mistake, anyone? His command looks pretty much like how I inputted it.

Oh dear.... looks like we're both getting confused with each other on describing this situation. I'd better explain it a bit better - here's how my svcpack folder is currently laid out, listed in alphabetical order after renaming them. js56nen.exe KB329441.exe KB821557.exe KB823559.exe KB824105.exe KB824146.exe Q323255.exe Q328310.exe Q329048.exe Q329115.exe Q329170.exe Q329390.exe Q329834.exe q330994.exe Q810565.exe Q810577.exe Q810833.exe Q811493.exe Q811630.exe Q814033.exe Q815021.exe Q816093.exe Q817287.EXE Q817606.exe Q819696.exe q828750.exe qchain.exe But here's how it was laid out when they all had their original names: js56nen.exe MSJavWU_8073687b82d41db93f4c2a04af2b34d.exe Q323255_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q328310_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q329048_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q329115_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q329170_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q329390_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q329834_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe q330994.exe Q810565_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q810577_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q810833_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q811493_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q811630_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q814033_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q815021_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q817287.EXE Q817606_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe Q819696_WXP_SP2_x86_ENU.exe q828750.exe WindowsXP-KB329441-x86-ENU.exe WindowsXP-KB821557-x86-ENU.exe WindowsXP-KB823559-x86-ENU.exe WindowsXP-KB824105-x86-ENU.exe WindowsXP-KB824146-x86-ENU.exe As you can see, the KB ones, without renaming, were officially last on the list. I'm pretty sure someone on this thread once said that it was recommended to install Qs first, then KBs. I'm not sure where MS get their six-figure numbers from, but all these various Qs and KBs could've been released in between each other, making noting the date/order of release for each one very confusing. I do apologise if I seem to be making a mountain out of a mole hill, but I'm just a bit jumpy about not doing something exactly right.

So, judging by how practically everyone does it, I should install them in numerical order and not letter rank order???

*Sigh* Honestly, why the foke do MS have to spread all the important settings away from each other like this?

It was mentioned on both the article for Q822964, and in the first WMP9 Deployment Pack thread from a while back, that you could attach the Q822964 patch to the new build alongside the app itself. But can you attach all of the known WMP9 patches to this build and have everything working smoothly?

You can do it that way if you want. There's no issues from using Qxxxxxx.exe instead. Also if you list your hotfixes in numerical order, its likely all the new KB named ones will be last on the list. Actually, to be more precise, the KB ones will be listed last in alphabetical order in their original file names, yet will be first if you rename them to the 8.3 format. Should I install them in numerical order, no matter what letter rank they are, or should it be Q ones first then the KBs afterwards?

I thought I had them comfortably set up in my two themes, but I checked them and they seem to be showing "43" (the default) on both settings. Will I need to adjust them seperately for my uattended CD? Any advice will suffice, thank you.

Thought I'd ask - will installing lots of hotfixes slow down system performance in any way? I'm kinda worried that having too much things installed on the system may make things slower.

I was taking a look at your D/Lable svcpack.inf, Aaron, and noticed you gave "Q"s to the KB patches as well. But aren't you meant to install the Q ones first, *then* the KBs? I'm thinking about whether to shorten the KB ones to an 8.3 filename that includes KB still.

Thanks - do you mean to execute them during the GUI Setup or during GUIRunOnce?