Paul 365

If i recall correctly this card installs two drivers and appears twice in the control panel - something to do with the dual dacs it uses to provide dual monitor/tv output with seperate resolution/refresh rates. I don't know much more about it but this could have something to do with your problem.

@yazoo COPY "%systemdrive%\Install\Tools\psshutdown.exe" "%systemroot%\" i think that should be "%systemroot%\system32" for it to be included in the path But why are you copying this file along with all the theme stuff? Why not place them all in - $OEM$\$$\system32 and $OEM$\$$\Themes and let the text setup part of the install copy them for you.

No i ment same problem IE as in it dont run.

Sorry dude - Same problem. I am here for another 20 mins then ill be gone for several hours.

Nope - Still no go. I have now installed all hot fixes and it still wont run - with b1 or the new b2 I get the time machine and the counting down clock but when i click on the "let me Decide" i get the error the in picture. As i said this is a fresh install done in VirtualPC with the magic uxtheme added and nothing else. Keep up the good work as this does look like a great tool. PS: it runs fine on my normal pc but thats been in use for months now and god knows whats installed.

On a clean install of xp pro with all the critical hotfixes applied but with no other fixes I get this error.

Some Background first. On my last install cd that I made (well before I found MSFN) I used to use an alternative kernel file with an edited orange swooshing graphic. I did this by including the alternative kernel file in the $oem$ folder and copying it into place during the guirunonce section of the install process, it was called ntsokrnl and so avoided any wfp problems. I then used a batch file to add the relevant boot instructions to the end of the boot.ini file. Now the possible problem. I never had a problem with this method and did hundreds of installs this way. However recently I have changed my entry level pc to a Hyper threading model and instantly found a problem. When the pc booted for the first time after the replacement kernel was put in place it would hang at the usual boot screen, just like it would if you used a ntoskrnl.exe from a pre sp1 install on a sp1a install. I used a copy of pebuilder to access the boot.ini file and edit out the offending line and all was well. Now in one of the post sp1 hot fixes there is a new kernel file along with a couple of similar named files and I am led to believe that in some case the install process can rebuild or replace ntoskrnl.exe with a fresh version from one of these extra files. I am speculating that if the install process finds a cpu that supports hyper threading then the kernel gets replaced with one built from one or the other of these extra files. The purpose of this is to warn anyone that maybe attempting to replace there kernel with one that is pre modded for images during the start-up process that the install could potentially fail depending on weather the pc supports HT technology. Unfortunately I didn't keep a copy of the kernel file from the HT machine and don't have one to hand to compare with one from my non HT machine so all this could just be a waste of your time and mine If you got to the end of this well done

Thanks dude, this is just what i was looking for

@webmedic could you post an example of your inf file that installs the extra non crytical hotfixes and maybe the .net add on please. I dont understand the inf format properly, but i can modify real good Thanks And if you have time please could you give us a break down on the opening few sections of these infs i am trying to understand them but am strugling.

Thats what it says when you try and install virtualpc on virtualpc

"you just had to try didnt you"

mtee should be in the bin folder and the do.cmd is spelt with a o and not a zero. I dont know if either of these will cause it to exit though, but mtee not being in the correct place will cause the no log problem.

Is there any reason why you use cmdlines.txt as opposed to the guirunonce section in winnt.sif ?

Are you talking about the .inf files that you posted? if so where are you installing the .net stuff?

Ill try the uk side of it as well

Its all becoming clear.....Errr I think so that means before this file was hacked we could not turn off wfp with a just a reg key ie we had to patch the file first and then the key would work. now we can just use the key to turn it on and off.

So with this file in place wfp is completely turn off? Does this now mean that we dont have to worry about signed cab files during install, if so it could mean a lot of very dodgy cd's around. or am i on the wrong track here. As an example if we had this file on our cd would we need the hacked uxteme file? Or is it that .dll files that get replaced with the wrong ones will now not be automatically replaced by wfp and if so couldnt we allready do this with a reg key? as i said, its dumb head night tonight...

I must have my dumb head on tonight - what does this hacked version bring to the table ?

Bad Link dude. Oh and what does SFC_OS.dll Do ?

Bit late to this path problem but i have found that its best to allways put these kind of builders at the root level, spaces in folder names allways screw them up. Barts Pebuilder and its counterpart erdbuilder both have this issue.

No the difference will be in the .dl_ file not in the extracted .dll as its not the compressed uxtheme.dll that is signed but the cab (.dl_) file itself...(theory) I ran that check to see if the uxteme.dll could be poison. When you compare it to a cleam ms uxtheme.dll there is alot of changes. As for the clean uxtheme.dl_ and the magic one i havent done that - ill give it a go.

Try This link if not you will have to go to www.grc.com and navigate to shields-up Then click on the first toolbar called File sharing - about halfway down the page you will see your mac address if you are revealing it.

I just ran a beyond compare between the uxtheme.dll extrracted from this file and the one installed on my pc and patched in the normal!! way. There is a very small 2 character change, i dont now what that is but its so small i doubt there could be anything dodgy in it.

Guys, Your MAC address has allways been shared, a normal browser enquirery has allways been able to get it, Go to www.grc.com to see what a standard xp client is revealing.

Yes, it can be used on the cd with no problems.......so far