Alanoll

I shall start work on it as soon as I take my shower for the morning

http://unattended.msfn.org/advanced/cosmetics/logon.htm

unless you were using a managed language like .NET or Java, you won't get back your code. The BEST you'll get back is assembly, which can be a pain in itself to recode to a higher level code

I find it interesting that the 8 people that have voted for the XML creator didn't voice their opinion in post form... Between teh people posting, I'd say it's a tie between conditional statements and command grouping (S0mE0nesMiNd1 is probably right)

all his posts that I've brought up use QUOTE tags, and not CODE tags. Relook at them again, and you'll see the difference in his post and mine above and you'll see they're QUOTE tags as well

most likely what Yzöwl is talking about would be [b]this[/b] rather then this. Notice the difference? to use formatting options within a "code" tag, use the quote tags instead. Same formatting effect.

@Vippis studio.xnf in the Winamp folder is used to control placement and sizes of the Media Library

Of course taht won't work. The slipstream program is meant for XP based installs because it comes with WMP9. 2000 comes with 7.0 if memory serves, and it's files are radically different. No idea what you're talking about. http://unattended.msfn.org Everything in there is compatible across all the platforms (except the /INTEGRATE switch for hotfixes). The only thing NOT covered in there is IE6, in which there are MANY posts on it in this and the WIndows 2000 forum. Some deal with direct integration while others create an SFX file that installs IE silently.

are you using an original XP cd, and not an OEM cd?

I just have to comment on this... Have a small percentage of the market share isn't neccesarily a definitiion of "used so much". The fact that is isn't attacked nearly as much is simply because it is such a small population. If you take the current populace of Firefox/Mozilla users, most of those aren't the common computer users and as such know how to guard their systems adequately. But there are those that used it simply because others said to, but they do not have adequate protection. So in reality if we take that assumption, you're getting MAYBE 40-50% of the firefox populace (i'm guessing) with any browser attack. Figure 6% market share (which i don't think Firefox is even close to) and you get maybe 3% of the users. By comparison to the number of IE users out there, IE is vastly the larger target. Now i don't mean to get into a discussion of whether it's Microsoft's fault for installing IE with their OS, but think of it honestly...The average person doesn't know that CAN use another browser. They use a computer to surf the web and email and MAYBE chat using messengers. Their Microsoft allows this right out of the box with their software. True, they should allow other software to interact with the system and allow to be installed, but that does not mean they shouldn't provide a working base system for the average customer. Once Firefox get's on par with IE's market share we will undoubtedly have a level playing field between IE and Firefox attacks. It's simply a matter of numbers and getting the most out of the attacks on users. IE plain and simple is the obvious target. As previously stated, end-users are left on their own for security (atleast up until SP2 of XP and SP1 for 2003). Whether or not that is wise is another discussion, but they should atleast be warned. But then again, shouldn't listening to the news and reading it online sort of beg to question whether or not you're safe? I will give this to Firefox, they are faster with their patches. But they're still patches, and so the argument that Microsoft should provide a fully working and safe product is mute as both have the problem. If it's one thing I don't like about Firefox is simply the fanboys, wait that goes for ALL browsers. They simply come out say one is better then the other, flame it for all it's worth, but never actually provide any substantial proof that one is better then the other. The statement that it's "safer" then IE, is as stated before is a cause of numbers and not really a target as of yet. The statement that Microsoft shouldn't provide a browser with their product says that you think Microsoft should have an OS that is bare of any additional applications and the User is left to decide. But wait, you say that Microsoft also include safety precautions to prevent attacks on the user...doesn't that negate the issue that Microsoft shouldn't include programs? I'm up for a real discussion on browsers, but when people start flaming or just come out as fanboys....then everything just turns to idiocy and nothing is really said from that point on (FYI - I have no preference for browser. I tend to use both throughout the day, just depends on the mood I'm in) I should also note, most sites that have ActiveX controls that install with damaging effects are sites that probably should be avoided. Reputable sites shouldn't be distributing ActiveX controls or any other software to damage you system knowingly. Anyone have an example of a site that installs Adware/Spyware without your knowledge?

whoops, sorry. I just assumed people would know. Hopefully I don't forget this during the update....i have a really long list of things to do

rebuild ISO, retest. If burning to media, try a different media if possible.

FYI - You forgot the attachment

If i do not recieve a reply from GM by Friday (5 days), I'm going to go ahead with my plans to get XPCREATE into your hands in as legal a way as possible. I will be setting up a new eMail address that you will send your request to using the same file that GM requests. Once I recieve the eMail, I will send you back a link to the XPCREATE EXE to your MSFN Username via PM. I will ONLY be distributing the FREE version. ANY commercial requests will be forwarded to GM for his consideration when he gets time. I will NOT be updating this program and will be provided AS IS with no guaranteed support other then replies in this forum. ANY emails requesting help will be deleted on the spot.

You'll have to check that out yourself. I don't know if nLite preconfigures WINNT.SIF with the OEMPreInstall=YES entry or not. If during your test you find that your fiels aren't copied over, that's the problem, so just fix the file (use Notepad) and remake the ISO (just select the ISO button from nLite's main screen so you don't redo the entire process)

You could perhaps reward the creator and purchase a license for the software that does NOT have this limitation.

latest of nLite does NOT support copying a folder over into the Windows source. If you continue down this route and you have everything working properly, ALL you have to do to "combine" the $OEM$ structure witht he structure nLite creates, is once you reach the screen to make the ISO, don't press the button. Manually copy over your $OEM$ and other needed files, then press the Make ISO button.

are you sure you're following the RyanVM site's manual instructions precisely? Not altering the file in ANY other ways?

what's running is sfc.exe /scannow i believe. This isn't directly related to WFP deactivation. sfc.exe /scannow must be either manually called (via Run box or similar) or one of your programs is initiating it. Windows shouldn't be automatically doing it.

next question is: Was teh MST file created based off of THAT setup.msi? If it was made for an earlier/different version it won't work.

that's slightly inaccurate. If he had per say used an .REG file to import the entries or an INF file, then RunOnceEX would have gone off without a hitch. RunOnceEX is controlled by rundll32.exe and setupapi.dll among others, and NOT REG.EXE. REG.EXE is simply a commandline version of REGEDIT.EXE, and as such allows us to import command prompt variables without hardcoding paths in the CMD files. I personally use a INF file to import my entries.

I'm moving this into the Driver Packs forum as Bashrat will have a better idea then me (atleast off the top of his head, I'd have to go rummaging around the packs and I'm trying to recover a 250gig hdd failure for a friend)

why don't you move your CMD file to a point to where it's execute AFTER the DP stuff is...

are you executing the CMD or Windows itself?

why are you trying to use an XPlode variable? are you using the variable or XPlode? (#XPlode# is the directory where XPlode is located.)