The File-Checker (HFSLIPFC) for HFSLIP

[Mim0]

hi Mim0! the link to Update for Internet Explorer 8 Compatibility View List for Windows XP (KB978506) in the table does not point to the dl ... the link posted by Parseus does. cheers!

Hmm.. for me with IE8 it works. Which page do you see?

My link:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...de-b13d80877558

Parseus' link:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...;displaylang=en

should be the same...

PS: what's with the openDNS-test (the last PM to you?)

[My2GirlsDad]

2010-01-27b

- Fixed: KB951978 is NOT obsolete when IE8 is integrated

MimO,

FYI, KB951978 does not show missing if not in HF folder.

M2GD

[Mim0]

FYI, KB951978 does not show missing if not in HF folder.

Have you set

OPT=1

in the INI? Reporting optional updates are not the default-setting.

Regards, Mimo

[Kiki Burgh]

hi Mim0! the link to Update for Internet Explorer 8 Compatibility View List for Windows XP (KB978506) in the table does not point to the dl ... the link posted by Parseus does. cheers!

Hmm.. for me with IE8 it works. Which page do you see?

My link:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...de-b13d80877558

Parseus' link:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...;displaylang=en

should be the same...

PS: what's with the openDNS-test (the last PM to you?)

hi Mim0! both links from the 2010-01-27 row lead to: A Compatibility View list update is available for Windows Internet Explorer 8: January 26, 2010 & Description of the Compatibility View list in Windows Internet Explorer 8 ... comparing it with the other entries from activity log table, the others lead to dl page ... however, the 1 from table 4 does link to the dl page ... sorry if i wasn't very specific ... my apologies too for not getting back to you rightaway via pm ... appreciate what you provided me ... the link now though to the update list from windows update thread comes up now with no problem ... cheers!

[jvidal]

FYI, KB951978 does not show missing if not in HF folder.

Have you set

OPT=1

in the INI? Reporting optional updates are not the default-setting.

Regards, Mimo

But Mimo, 951978 is NOT optional, should be reported if not present.

[Mim0]

Have you set

OPT=1

in the INI? Reporting optional updates are not the default-setting.

Regards, Mimo

But Mimo, 951978 is NOT optional, should be reported if not present.

Yes... it's a kind of naming. In my tables all updates which are not "security-updates" are "optional". I can change the name of the "OPT"-setting to "LIST-ALSO-NON-SECURITY-UPDATES" but it will have the same result.

I know MS also have the "important" state (like WGA which is "very important", yes ). But I don't know which update is "important".

PS: I have it ready to check for an update of hfslipfc and download it automatically (all can be configured in the INI)

Edited January 30, 2010 by Mim0

[jvidal]

I believe those are called "Important" in your tables...Optional means optional...

[Mim0]

I believe those are called "Important" in your tables...Optional means optional...

I confirm that it can be missunderstood... There are two ratings from MS. A security-update (MS..-...) has a severity (written in the bulletin article). This is listed in table two of the update-list.

But when you visit Windows-Update or Microsoft-Update the updates are categorized only in "important" and "optional". Of course, the security-updates are in the "important"-section. But also non-security-updates. And other non-security-updates are "optional".

And I don't know where it's written wich non-security-update is "important" and which non-security-update is "optional".

I thought about that and to avoid missunderstandings I will remove the word "optional" from the list. But when someone can tell me for all non-security-updates if it's important or optional - I will list it.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Mim0

[Guest]

They are categorized into High-Priority and Software, Optional. I do my list using this method. Anything else doesn't really make sense to me, You could setup Windows with all important updates and WU/MU will have a bunch of updates wanting to be installed. High-Priority is the way to go IMO.

[Mim0]

They are categorized into High-Priority and Software, Optional. I do my list using this method. Anything else doesn't really make sense to me, You could setup Windows with all important updates and WU/MU will have a bunch of updates wanting to be installed. High-Priority is the way to go IMO.

Yes, "High-Priority" I wanted to say (in German the "high-priority" category is call "important" - of course the german word for "important"). So, as far I understand, I have to install a plain SP3 (w/o) any updates and see in which category the update is listed. OK...

[Mim0]

They are categorized into High-Priority and Software, Optional. I do my list using this method. Anything else doesn't really make sense to me, You could setup Windows with all important updates and WU/MU will have a bunch of updates wanting to be installed. High-Priority is the way to go IMO.

Yes, "High-Priority" I wanted to say (in German the "high-priority" category is call "important" - of course the german word for "important"). So, as far I understand, I have to install a plain SP3 (w/o) any updates and see in which category the update is listed. OK...

---EDIT---

Oh, or I look into YOUR list

[jvidal]

I think the point is to keep MU completely happy with all high priority updates, that's the whole idea behind hfslip. So, if an update is listed under "high priority", like 951978, then IT IS high priority and NOT optional...

bye!

Edited February 1, 2010 by jvidal

[Mim0]

I think the point is to keep MU completely happy with all high priority updates, that's the whole idea behind hfslip. So, if an update is listed under "high priority", like 951978, then IT IS high priority and NOT optional...

Yes, so everybody has it's own understanding about integrating updates in the installation-media (for me, e.g. WGA can be listed 1000x as high-priority but I would never integrate it). But to make it more clear and easier to understand I will modify the list and the file-checker by splitting the currently "Optional" updates to "Priority" and (really-) "Optional" and I confirm that this categorization can help others to decide wich non-security update shall be integrated.

Thx for your suggestions

Edited February 2, 2010 by Mim0

[jvidal]

Of course there are a few exceptions, like that OGA or WGA crap, but this is not the case.

I think that naming convention change is appropriate.

[Mim0]

- Added: DirectX 9 Feb 2010

- Removed: DirectX 9 Aug 2009

- Removed: Extra-check of WMP11-installation-file against extracted WMP11

in HF\WMP11-folder (it's done now with the configurable

dependency-check).

- Added: Dependency-check for WindowsXP-KB967715-x86.reg: only listed

as missing when using KB967715.

- Added: Adds a new type: H for high-priority-updates. For this the INI-

settings was modified. With "HIGH-PRIORITY" and "OPTIONAL",

listing missing updates can be (de)activated.

OPT is obsolete now (when using it, a hint will be displayed).

When still using OPT it sets both new INI-settings ("HIGH-PRIORITY"

and "OPTIONAL") to be compatible with the old behaviour.

- Added: Checks for updates of hfslipfc and d/l it (all with corresponding

INI-settings).

Because of some new INI-settings the easiest way is to let hfslipfc create a new ini (if you don't want to use the new features you can use the old ini). Each new setting is well-documented enough inside of the INI (hopefully ).

Regards, Mimo