Alanoll

more info

untrue. If it hadn't been said before, I would have replied originally. Instead, I know it's been said before... how? because I said it.

I guess I'll update it to included the 3 modified files... (that's all that's changed according to the changelog)

It's server load, and alot of guest (asked xper)

could be a DDoS attack. I've been experiencing problems as of late as well. Next time I see xper online, I'll ask him

SEARCH next time. http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=16709 This was in a sticky, you didn't even NEED to use the SEARCH button. No Excuse.

please use CODE tages. They're not hard to figure out, just press the code button, paste the text, press the button again.

did you buy XP in a shrink wrapped box straight form Microsoft? ie, not off teh street. You most likely have a "pirated" version of Windows XP, and as such, you won't recieve help. Perhaps you could return it. Quick check - Go to System Properties and in the middle it should have a PID number. *****-64*-*******-***** If it has 64* and you bought it off the street, it's almost definately pirated.

http://unattended.msfn.org Read that, then come back. It tells how to do hotfixes.

They're now maintained by Bashrat. THere is a sticky at the top of thread. "DriverPacks"

indeed. Instead of adding them to the OEMPnPDriversPath, just call the SETUP exe's for both pieces of hardware from CMDLINES.TXT. They're both most likely InstallShield setup routines. Side note, I didn't see ANY inf drivers for USB2.0 in the 4in1 pack I downloaded.

Looks good. You could use some of those unproductive hours at work for me... I'm hoping to finish by the 17th (when I go back to school)

@Yzöwl Oh, i saw that in the INF. Guess we'll just have to wait and see what he's trying to do...

you mean align right?

out of curiosity, why not create the registry entries as REG_EXPAND_SZ instead of normal strings? That way, Afterdawn can use he %systemdrive% without problems. I dunno why he would need it, but....

just out of curiosity, does the rest of the Unattended process work? did you rename the file before uploading? If not, remove the .TXT extension at the end, and try again.

man.... I like the components section....however, it should be noted, not ALL of the components work for some reason. besides that I dunno why people would need to see a WINNT.SIF file. http://unattended.msfn.org/xp/examples.htm http://unattended.msfn.org/xp/reference.htm Details most common sections, excluding the firewall I believe.

AFTER driver packs.

But it's not a modified binary, and the deployment is NOT specified as an included binary. He REPLACED the installer, he did not MODIFY it. Still means the current version can have a modified setup package however.

Incorrect. Under copyright law, the holder is not allowed to remove content unless it VIOLATES the license per which it was distributed. 1chaoticadult has done neither. If this were in fact the case, then the EULA should also include the license for each individual package as well. As the EULA does not, it is in fact PETER who would be found liable for breach of contract, as 1chaoticadult operated under the terms of the EULA of foobar2000 Problem with this statement. The ONLY vendors that should have been contacted, if in fact their license was ALSO included in the EULA, would have been the commercial parties (AAC decoding, and a few other libraries included in foobar) as ALL of the GPL/LGPL parties loose that privelege when distributing under the GPL AS LONG AS the source is not modified and credited. As the source was again editing by PETER, 1chaoticadult did not have to renotify the coder.The fact that the foobar2000 community was not made aware of the projects existence does not add merit to the case. They are not required to be notified of any off spring projects that arise, nor are they required to thoroughly test the new projects. The issue with WIndows 98 here is nonimportant, as the project was directed at NT systems, and even if a Windows 98 user HAD come across the project, a simple disclaimer onsite would have eleviated the issue. The point with the UTF8API.dll however could have been solved if someone had reported the bug in the installer. As no one reported it, it wasn't fixed and is NOT an issue. True it's there, but could have been rectified when brought to light. According to the CURRENT license of foobar2000, 1chaoticadult is under no obligation to make ANY contact with Peter nor to make contact with the foobar2000 community. As such, he is not technically in the wrong legally. Morally, perhaps, but not legally. If you had does THIS in the proper way, then there would not be this discussion. You did not have to hijack a thread to get this project removed. A PM to the member in question would have sufficed. You didn't. You did THIS in the inproper way.

@tguy You suggested him to use a program he doesn't wanna use

@cn0saj I'll do some research But it'll be after the Unattended Site update. (week or two hopefully, I've been putting it off for too long now) But yeah, should be changed, or an option added or something.

umm....to be quite honest.... probally after the first officiall release of XPlode4. As taht's what the PHP should be done about as well. The rest of the site could very well be uploaded Wednesday if I'm done writing, but the DB and related stuff won't be in place, and I'd have to reupload almost EVERY page of the site again. granted it's not much, but it's doing something twice...

sure.... look up top, where the MSFN logo is... just below there, is a link entitle "Unattended CD/DVD Guide Homepage" click it. Or to be faster : http://unattended.msfn.org/

@Canar Please post the EULA as Peter is refering? (I removed the indivual Copyright notices of the individual packages included as they don't really matter on this issue) I'm not familiar with this package, as I never used it. However, it this is just a repackaged installer, then 1chaoticadult has not failed to adhere to herein End User License Agreement (EULA). Assuming of course that he did NOT modify any of the binaries, nor did he forget to include herein EULA, nor did he refer to any authors as endorsees. IF 1chaoticadult has indeed met these conditions, then he is perfectly within his right to redistribute the package as he sees fit. The EULA makes no mention of the installer as a distribution nor as an included binary. The aforementioned EULA is present in botht he v.8.3 installer of foobar2000 as well as http://www.foobar2000.org/license.html