Drugwash

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.

You could try Miranda IM (check my signature). There are a few voice plug-ins under development, check the addons page as well as the forums. All open-source.

According to DeadDude's post #191: • windows 98 ASP0210 X05-39104 (NM.05) 08 IFPI L894 BARCODE • At the rights side of the hole it says For distribution with a new PC only. For product support, contact the manufacturer of your PC. SECOND EDITION According to Eck's post #189: • Windows 98SE: 0499 Part No. X04-14310 • Windows 98Gold + SE Update: 0499 Part No. X04-12707 • Windows 98SP1: 0499 Part No. X04-64496 According to DeadDude's post #187: • No Auto-patching at all, and it reports 4.10.1999 • Only installed files were Win98SE (after the Gold fiasco), driver CD from GigaByte, and Auto-Patcher 1.7, then 1.8... and that sequence boosted it to 4.95.2222 According to oscardog's post #195: • "With few exceptions, Windows 98 hotfixes are stamped with a version number of 4.10.1999 or greater, which indicates that the file is a newer version than the file that had been originally included with Windows 98. Windows 98 Second Edition hotfixes are generally stamped with a version number of 4.10.2223 or greater" My conclusions: • The CDs are definitely OEM versions • They are Windows 98Gold with hotfixes (and possibly SP1) included • It's possible that they're preliminary versions of 98SE (attempts at) - limited series • The cause of version boost to 4.95.2222 must be found and dealt with

Pardon me for barging in. I noticed that everyone here says: Win98FE (Gold) is 4.10.1998 and Win98SE (Second Edition) is 4.10.2222. Then, what is 4.xx.1999, repeatedly reported by DeadDude? Isn't it possible that at least one of the updates included with the package has a broad range of Windows versions allowed for install, which includes 4.10.1999 and - by changing the kernel, or shell or whatever else - it boosts the WinVer to 4.10.2222? Another question that springs to my mind is why does he say 4.xx.1999 and not 4.10.1999? I may be off-track here, but hopefully someone gets a good idea out of this.

Regarding newest DST update package: how would one go around clicking OK in an unattended installation? Any commandline switch for that? I'm thinking about projects such as auto-patcher and similar, which would incorporate this update. Sorry if I'm out of track.

A quick profiling of Sigcheck in Dependency Walker shows the following errors: • GetProcAddress(0xBFF70000 [c:\windows\system\KERNEL32.DLL], "IsTNT") called from "c:\windows\system\OLEAUT32.DLL" at address 0x77A23F12 and returned NULL by thread 1. Error: The specified module could not be found (126). • GetProcAddress(0x65F00000 [c:\windows\system\OLE32.DLL], "DcomChannelSetHResult") called from "c:\windows\system\OLEAUT32.DLL" at address 0x77A0FAB3 and returned NULL by thread 1. Error: The specified module could not be found (126). • LoadLibraryW("Riched32.dll") returned NULL by thread 1. Error: This function is only valid in Win32 mode (120). I guess it's the last one that prevents it from sending any output, as it cannot load the richedit32 library. Apparently it tries to load it using a Unicode function (LoadLibraryW), which obviously fails under Win9x.

Welcome back, erpdude8. Sorry to hear about a bad start off; hopefully you'll get over it soon. And thanks for the heads up, will download the updated COPY2GB.EXE right away. @ MDGx: VS6SP6U.EXE dated 28 Nov 2006 at your site is rebooting on finish without warning; you may wanna revise it when possible.

Soporific, you may wanna replace NUSB23e with NUSB24, unless there's a strong reason to keep the older version on the list (can't see any reason though). Keep it up! ;-)

Here's a Miranda IM Wiki (work in progress). I've been fighting for the backwards compatibility to be kept (I myself being a Win98SE user), but honestly - it appears that Win98/ME user base is pretty low and the Win95 user base is almost nonexistant. Therefore it's hard to say what is still working under Win95, and for how long. Another issue here is that - while the core may still be Win9x compatible (in the ANSI version) - most of the plug-ins, which are developed by third parties, are slowly dropping Win9x support, which is sad for an open-source project that at least theoretically should not be under MS politic's pressure. But it's hard to create Win9x-compatible products using VS2005, and - most of all - it's hard or impossible to test the products when there's no Win9x environment available for the respective developers.

How many levels of installing/uninstalling would this system allow? Would it also take into account broken (interrupted/unfinished) installations/uninstallations? I'm asking because with all these power/ultra/super/extra/etc-packs, there might be a chance of multiple installation of the same patch, which might wreak havoc as is or while trying to uninstall (if needed).

Please also take into consideration that an (admittedly narrow) range of users may have a slow Internet connection or no connection at all. Especially for the latter, they may need additional language display support for offline browsing. I have one of my neighbors as example, which has no Internet connection but needs IE as default browser and Pan-European text display support installed, for a medical application (had Firefox as default and the application wouldn't launch at all).

I always install all display support files in IE, but never the input support ones, as I don't need any, currently. Honestly, I'd rather have a few MB on my HDD occupied with those files, than have IE pop up messages stating that it needs this or that update to be able to display the page properly or - having such warning disabled - to see a weird page layout due to lacking proper support. AFAIK, IE setup will recognize any path the install has been started from. So if IE6-SP1 has been installed directly from the auto-patcher CD, the language add-ons would be installed from the same path when required and will ask for the CD. If the language files are not in the IE6-SP1 setup while installation has been performed from the CD, an eventual web update will not be carried out, because IE setup wants to save the respective files to the known path which would be the CD path. So to wrap it up: personally I would like all language display support files to be included with the IE6-SP1 package and to have the possibility to choose between direct CD install and files-on-HDD install. Obviously, I would choose the former, for reasons I've already explained in a previous post. And BTW, having UBCD and auto-patcher on the same CD and being able to batch the install would be the ultimate goal. I wish I would be able to help more, but currently my motivation has been blown out of the water by some recent unfortunate events.

Or get StartupCPL 2.8 (zip version) from here, unpack, install, go to Control Panel > Startup and carefully check the items in each tab. Disable the ones appearing suspect or -if unsure- list the items here so we could advise. Personally I consider StartupCPL a little more friendly than msconfig, but it's all a matter of taste.

Please try a search at Wim's BIOS board, maybe they have something for you. If you can't find your BIOS/Computer model in any of the topics, you may open a request thread.

My problem appears to have been fixed too. Many thanks and have a wonderful year!