Drugwash

First thing I do is move the taskbar at the top of the screen and auto-hide it. One of the first things I do on a fresh install is disable Recycle Bin and remove it from the desktop. Then I replace the My Computer icon with a blank one and rename the shortcut to a blank non-printable character (ALT+0160). I set my Logitech mouse's middle button to double-click, install TweakUI 1.33, Mike Lin's StartupCPL 2.8 and CodeStuff Starter and disable unnedeed startup items, optical drives' autorun and other available tweaks. I also add the following lines to autoexec.bat (can't disable it, it's needed for regional and keyboard locale): @deltree /y c:\windows\cookies @deltree /y c:\windows\history @deltree /y c:\windows\tempor~1 @deltree /y c:\windows\temp @md c:\windows\temp There are other registry tweaks I perform, such as maximize icon cache, HDD read-ahead cache, CD-ROM cache, disable Low Disk Space warning and so on.

Off-topic: MDGx, please note that the direct link to DirectX Eradicator (DXE) v2.0 on your page linked above is no longer working - it leads to a 404 (page not found). Apparently, the home page is also gone.

I was referring to AutoPach.bat 1.90.02, the update that broke the report and... you get it. I hope you added the missing :MISSING routine in the new version, otherwise there would be some "bad command or file name" when the script doesn't find ASET.EXE, GETVER.EXE, NSET.COM or any of the main batch scripts (AutoPach, MainCode, Run-Mod). I even started to draw a flowchart for AutoPach.bat, but I got tired after a few hours and also my machine was complaining about too low memory when trying to save it (31MB bitmap). Ask and you shall receive. That said, let's check on the new version... P.S. One more thing: don't you dare call for IEXPLORE.EXE directly. Ever! Some users keep IE only for its core, while having other applications that need it and/or a browser front-end to it. IEXPLORE.EXE may very well be blocked in the firewall settings. So better search for default browser setting and launch that one. I really hate apps that launch iexplore.exe directly.

@ soporific: Looking through AutoPach.bat, I see you're checking for DUN 1.4 presence by %windir%\msdun\msdun98.cat. One glance and I noticed MSDUNSE.INF in the same folder, which contains the following lines: OLD_DUN_VERSION = "2.1" NEW_DUN_VERSION = "2.2" I guess this would be enough information to know both previous and current versions of DUN, in case you decide to raise report verbosity or just to make sure the right version is installed. However, you're looking for the string 6,660 (representing file length) in DIR "%windir%\msdun\msdun98.cat" | Find /i "6,660" >nul, which it cannot find, because of two reasons: 1. Syntax is incorrect - the right one is DIR "%windir%\msdun" | Find /i "6,660" >nul (without the catalog file name) 2. My regional settings that swap the decimal symbol with the digit grouping symbol. So the right string to search for would be "6.660", but this is only available on certain Windows setups. Apparently you have to change the detection routine to something that doesn't rely on variable settings, or at least perform the same operation twice, with the two different strings. I'll do further digging.

I've already given examples in my posts earlier: DUN 1.4, DS Client, 7-Zip (that one actually is a newer version, not older), 2GB patch (checkable only by extra version string, maybe)... I also offered the registry paths where their installation can be checked. I'm thinking there may be - rare or not - reasons for someone not to install a certain version of an update, while he already has one installed that would serve the purpose and not interfere with the other updates. In the case of DUN 1.4, for example, running the report would return "DUN 1.4 not installed" and then running it, auto-patcher would ask for its installation. The user may forget for a moment that he shouldn't do that (for some reason such as software conflicts or whatever) and he borks the system. There's no need for deep digging if it would take too much; just saying "older version found" instead of "not installed" would be enough in such cases. Or just the version of the checked file, as in the above DS Client case, so the user would have a clue on what he got and what he should do further. If you can't/won't do it, fine - it was just an idea.

OK, I scoured through all the official and unofficial updates I have around and I found a dsclient.exe package that contains negotiat.dll 5.00.2195.4784 - I suppose that's what the patcher's looking for. Haven't installed it yet, will do later on. But now there's one question that springs to mind: could you make so that the report - as it should be as accurate as possible - would say that there is some version (and exactly which one) of the respective update installed, but not the latest? I suppose that'd clear out some misunderstandings such as the current situation when user knows he's got something installed, the Add/Remove panel confirms, but the auto-patcher denies it. I agree it would add to the report's length, but IMHO it's worth it. Tell me what you think. Oh and while we're at DS Client update, I've read somewhere around that the correct install order would be: 1. IE6-SP1 2. DUN 1.4 Upgrade 3. DS Client for Windows98 I hope this sequence is being followed in auto-patcher.

Moving the source file between two locations on the same partition is indeed quick. But moving it between two different partitions would require the same amount of time as copying it, I assume. Moreover, if the source file is somehow locked by another running application - some file sharing apps do that, AFAIK - then the operation would fail. I may be wrong here in my assumptions, but if I'm right, maybe an option called "Use a copy of the file" (or similar) could come in handy in the above-mentioned situation or just for safety.

Disable FlashGet on that host, it won't work - it's a tricky download system. There's no need for it anyway, the file is a few kB.

Why "move" and not "copy"? Whatever happens during (attempted) extraction, the original file would still be in it's location. The worst that could happen would be to be left with two copies of the files. Right now the alternative is the file may be left in a different location, unknown to the user and a hardware failure of some sort may lose or corrupt the file. The only issue would be when manipulating huge files while free space is scarce.

Regarding superceded reports (and not only, I may add), maybe it'd be best to keep the verbosity low, thinking from the log's length point of view. I've been thinking of something like: 15:18:08 superceded: q260067 (Mapped Drives Update) C:\WINDOWS\system\user32.dll Current: 4.90.0.3001 Attempted: 4.10.0.2227 HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Setup\Updates contains information about currently installed updates. Could be used to check for succesful/broken updates. A tad below Setup is the Uninstall key, containing keys with the paths to the uninstallers for each application that has one. Those paths can be used to track down currently installed software, such as 7-Zip, DUN 1.4 or DS Client for Windows98, that I currently have installed but are not detected by auto-patcher's report routine. About the other suggested features, I think I'd agree with pouring beer, for now.

Unfortunately. Otherwise, why would I be mentioning that in this topic? They happened during the scanning of the system for the report creation.Of course, while running auto-patcher with the purpose of actually installing it, all other applications should be closed, however there may still be the chance of having one background app still running - such as a firewall or something - and if that one is linked to VS2005 libraries, it will spoil the party. If anybody else would be able to test this situation, please do. I'd be happy to know that it's only my setup that behaves while everyone else is fine, however if not, there may be the need to dig into this issue and find a quick and reliable fix. Softpedia will give this project the boost it deserves. Keep up the good work, soporific - you're in the light now!

Took me about 10 minutes to download it in FlashGet from Softpedia's romanian mirror. It's now shared in eMule, together with previous 1.5, 1.6 update, 1.7 update, 1.7 full versions. 512kB/s national traffic vs. 8kB/s international... talkin' about freedom. Freedom to walk inside our cage, maybe. Here's the report for 1.8 PR. Nothing's changed regarding the previously reported modules, however after reconsidering, the report may be accurate with the exception of DUN 1.4, 7-Zip and Directory Services (maybe), as the other reportedly broken updates are older versions. Please post the names of the files/folders you're checking in the above packages, so I can check their existance/versions and report back. [EDIT] I forgot to mention a critical piece of information: winoldap is crashing constantly when msvcr80.dll is already loaded in memory by some application. I have one plug-in of Miranda IM's dynamically linked to msvcr80 and the application was running when I ran the report. If I say I clicked on the "Close" button in more than 200 subsequent error boxes, it's not at all an exaggeration. However, this is not a direct issue of auto-patcher's, but more a MS incompatibility between Win9x's DOS and the Visual C 2005 runtime libraries. I get the very same behaviour when opening a DOS prompt or trying to run any DOS-based application under Windows (such as ping a.s.o.) while msvcr80.dll is loaded in memory. Here's the crash dump as reported in the error box: WINOLDAP caused an invalid page fault in module MSVCR80.DLL at 0187:78131637. Registers: EAX=928f2000 CS=0187 EIP=78131637 EFLGS=00010286 EBX=00000001 SS=018f ESP=928f8738 EBP=928f063c ECX=928f05b8 DS=018f ESI=00000000 FS=7aef EDX=819657c8 ES=018f EDI=000088ae GS=0000 Bytes at CS:EIP: 85 00 eb e9 cc cc cc cc cc 51 8d 4c 24 08 2b c8 Stack dump: 78130000 78131d73 928f8778 781321f8 40f16eac 00000000 78130000 81965804 0000000a 00000004 928f8748 928f8550 928f8940 78138ad1 aa65a28c fffffffe DeadDude, we're in a Win9x subforum. What makes you think anybody here would use XP?

I'm so p!$$ed off right now, that I really consider dropping my Internet connection unless a better alternative comes up - chances for that happening being very slim. My ISP simply sucks big time lately. Now to the point, while I'm still around: - negotiat.dll 5.00.2195.1 (Win2000) - dscsetup.dll does not exist on my system However, in my Add/Remove panel I can clearly see "DS Client For Windows 98". Maybe it's an older version? About the 2GB and 137GB patches, I manually installed the corresponding files, without using any installer, but now, looking at the files, there's a complete mess: esdi_506.pdr is back to the original version (4.10.2222, dated 1999) and the kernel shows the field "Fixed by: LittyX" but it's 4.10.2222 (as it originally was), not the 4.10.2225 that's packed with MDGx' installer. Dunno what's going on... Forgot to say: I still couldn't complete the auto-patcher download and there was no complete source anymore, last time I checked. eMule is dead right now.

The idea is a GUI with a wise choice of fonts may bring together more options at once, thus offering a beter overview of everything available and making it easier to choose the desired options. Obviously, none of the current options should be removed - only rearranged a little. As for download speed, maybe I should change ISP, but I don't quite like the terms of the contract provided by the other available ISP. Gotta think about it and also have a serious talk with my current ISP. Uploaders' speed is just another variable in this equation.

Nice speech. However, the main idea behind this package is not to perform redundant work, meaning not to install again what is already installed, in terms of (un)official updates and not only. This is the forte of the package and this is what should be recognized and appreciated in first place. You are right about not many people out there knowing about it, nor these forums. But even those that may have stumbled upon MSFN might have gotten scared by the huge wealth of knowledge here and considered themselves not up to it, so they chickened out. However, regarding auto-patcher, I'm pretty sure that when it gets to the stable stage, it will find its way to Softpedia, MajorGeeks and many other similar "launching pads". It does deserve to. If I may add a bit of constructive criticism here - solely from my point of view, but applicable to others as well - maybe the DOS routine at the start, with selecting options and all that, could be replaced at some point with a simple GUI, with radio buttons, checkboxes, maybe an edit box for the temporary (or any other) path... I'm saying this because Win98 is a GUI OS and whoever is using it now must have used it for quite a long time and got used to GUI controls in favor of DOS batch/command-line navigation. My personal opinion is that a few mouse clicks on a screen full of more visible options could avoid the disorientation of a user presented with a black screen and a couple of text lines, where he doesn't immediately understand what to choose/type. All this said, I still have to complete the download so I can test this build. [insert some "nice" words here] to leechers that downloaded it on eD2k and removed the package from share or closed the client, as well as to my ISP that cut my download bandwidth down to an 8 kBytes/s at most.

You my try this solution. Hmmm... not sure if there's a Lite version or just a trial one. Just noticed the ($) after posting here.

Nope, no Shareaza. As I said before, it's eMule - the official one, latest version. Anyway, my connection's been more and more sh!tty this month, with frequent disconnections and ever lower bandwidth. So it will tak some time, with ot without friend slot. Thanks anyway for the good intention.

Off we go! But... no sources. Please check link and make sure eMule is running and the file is shared. One thing - this package is supposed to be installed on all kinds of configurations, not only freshly installed systems. Some of them may be heavily tweaked already, with much newer file versions than the ones to be installed by this package. I'm curious if anybody checked all components against automatically overwriting newer file versions. Another thing is that my autoexec.bat contains the following (and I may not be the only one using this trick): @deltree /y c:\windows\cookies @deltree /y c:\windows\history @deltree /y c:\windows\tempor~1 @deltree /y c:\windows\temp @md c:\windows\temp If this package unpacks itself in the temporary folder set by environment variables and that folder gets wiped out on each reboot, that'd be a bit of a problem. Yes, the user could remove/comment those lines, if he knew about them, but if he doesn't (system tweaked by a friend/specialist/etc.), he'd report a broken package. So, would it be possible to create and use a folder of its own instead, just to be on the safe side?

What's that a TV?! You're way ahead of me, I ditched it only about 2 years ago, together with the radios. I got enough instant messaging IDs to ask people when I need to know something. And eMule is good too for documentaries that would never get on TV or elsewhere public. And not only, but let's not push it. Anyway, where's the eD2k link for v1.8?

soporific: eMule is running here about 24/7 - I'm official translator for my language and I'm playing a lot with it. So an eD2k link is always welcome, as far as I'm concerned. It does take a while to complete a download - that's the idea of the network - but at least I get it integer. My connection is not that good to allow me downloading almost 200MB in one shot from within the browser, and I don't have Premium accounts on public hosts. Plus I'm testing alpha/beta software and crashes/freezes happen on a regular basis. Analada: As for "ghosting"... problem is: (2) When you have a working stable win98SE system [...]. That almost never happens, because there's always some tinkering to do, some application to install/replace/uninstall, some hardware to change, etc. Just like Eck above said. But yes, there are people that might like preserving certain configurations and Ghost may come in handy. Not me, for now. Eck: I've been foolin' around with a few live Linux distros myself: Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Knoppix. Not bad, but I'm missing a certain "feeling", plus a few key (IMO) options/features. Still planning to dig deeper into the concept, but I'm either lacking the time or the will to do it.

I'm no Link21, don't worry. I like people who have the sense of humor. Information is nothing but that: information. People decide what to do with it. As for "redoing" a machine... my 200MHz PentiumMMX has its Windows 98SE installed since November 2004. That's because my old HDD crashed, otherwise it would have been much older. I just hate (re)installing. I see XP people reinstalling every few weeks/months and I wonder why... Is that the way a computer should work? Should the user waste time reinstalling every whatever amount of days/weeks/months? What kind of an operating system is that, that requires reinstalling so often, regardless of users' (lack of) computer knowledge? Oh... sorry for the off-topic. It's almost 5 AM in Melbourne...

Out of curiosity, I ran a report on my current system, which only has a few official updates and some manual upgrades installed. The list of *not found* updates is impressive, however I found some of the items that I do have installed are still reported as uninstalled. Grrrrr... So here we go: • dun14-se: Dial-Up Networking 1.4 for Windows 98se (official package installed) • DirectX9: DirectX 9.0c (October 2006) (August 2006 installed; does it know it's August and not October?) • q323455: Directory Services Client Update for Windows 98 (official package installed) • UCopy2GB: Unofficial Fix for Bug When Copying Files Over 2gb in Explorer (manually installed) • 48BITLBA: Unofficial Update for Drives over 137gb (not for IBM portables) (manually installed) • 7-ZIP: 7-Zip 4.42 (file archiver) (already installed 4.43 beta - don't ask where from, it was out there) That's all I can do for now; I don't have a testing machine yet, will try to put one up soon. Eck: http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/2006-11-29/

AFAIK, the "free" hosts you mentioned above do not support resume and/or download managers. Given that not all of us have blazing speed Internet connections, the eD2k solution might be a good compromise. As for torrents... it's just a bit more complicated, with seeding and all - I never understood the system nor fancied the clients, so I can't offer detailed explanations, but I've read answers to a very similar question recently.

DeadDude, here's a hint on animated Win9x logos: XrX Animated Logo Utility. Check this out for SciTech driver and other stuff.

I remember reading about some script/tool somewhere around, that could act like the user were actually clicking some button in a GUI window. Simulated clicks are possible, and I know it may look like an overkill, but for a true unattended install, this might be needed. But I can't remember this tool's name, for the life of me.