Windows 2000 Unofficial SP 5.1.2195 Question

[Monroe]

I would like to know if this Windows 2000 Unofficial SP 5.1.2195 update is safe to use on Windows 2000 SP4 to update it further? ... any warnings or things I should be aware of ... if I decide to go ahead with the SP5 install? ... Do you "highly recommend" ... "be careful" or "pass" on this update?

Major Geeks:

http://majorgeeks.com/Microsoft_Windows_2000_Unofficial_SP_d4817.html

Microsoft Windows 2000 Unofficial SP 5.1.2195

Author: Gurgelmeyer

Date: 2006-04-27

Size: 237 MB

License: Freeware

Requires: Win All .... (I don't know why it says "Win All" ... would think it should be for Windows 2k only.)

Microsoft Windows 2000 Unofficial SP5 combines 403 hotfixes into a single hotfix - fully automated. It's not just a matter of determining file versions, there's much more to it. The Microsoft Windows 2000 Unofficial SP5 interface is very easy to use since it's identical to a normal Windows update setup.

... just recently decided to set up Windows 2000 Pro SP4 on a notebook and I would like to have everything as updated as possible post SP4 ... been getting some "unofficial" updates at MDGx's site. ... however, I don't see this SP5 update at the MDGx site, so that's why I would like to know if it's a good update to install. ... of course, the MDGx site is large with just about everything, very easy to miss something the first time. ... thanks

----------------------------

Update: ... not hearing anything from anyone about this update, I decided to install it. The only thing I am noticing so far is with using Belarc Advisor. Before I installed the SP5 update, Belarc Advisor would list all the updates for Windows 2000 with green check marks for all the good updates and a red "x" for updates that needed to be reinstalled. After installing the SP5 update, I no longer see any updates with green check marks ... now there is just a list of 15 critical updates that need to be reinstalled. I really would like to see the whole list of good and bad updates, like before .... to compare or actually see what updates have been installed. Still working on all this.

Update 2 ... I installed the latest version of Belarc (Version 8.1p) and all the Windows 2K updates are listed again with the green check marks showing on some of them ... I ran another set of updates and had only one critical update listed as a failure ... found it and manually installed it ... all updates are now 100% OK.

Edited March 18, 2011 by duffy98

[fdv]

Sure, it is safe to use.

Gurg had to leave the board in 2006 due to health problems. No one took up the project because:

1. he had access to MS proprietary hotfix creation binaries that he did not share

2. the HFSLIP project was in full swing (HotFix SLIPstreamer). We were in friendly competition and were sorry to see him go.

It's very dated but safe, sure. But then again you have to install everything from 2006 forward....

If you search, you'll find Gurg's thread in the win2k forum IIRC documenting what hotfixes he used.

[Monroe]

Thanks for the reply ... sorry to hear about Gurgelmeyer. It really seems like a nice project he had going. I am not familiar with the HFSLIP project (HotFix SLIPstreamer). I guess something for Windows 2K ? ... I will research it all out unless you can add a few things about the project as it pertains to Windows 2000 or any other OS. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

[fdv]

HFSLIP was a slipstreamer for Windows 2000, XP, 2003, and XP 64 bit. A variant was even developed for Windows NT 4 to create a SP7.

It was a beloved and very active project until people kept openly admitting they were using it commercially in business settings, despite the author's wish that it be only for personal use. It was GPL2. The GPL site specifically disclaims applicability to terms of use, meaning that the author can set his own terms of use. It was fully open source, but people kept saying, incorrectly, that open source means they can use it for business use. So the license got changed. It was still open source, still personal use only, and once again people simply claimed open source = business use. The author, TommyP, was also not getting one dime from the software despite putting in hundreds of hours and getting very little help -- he got more and more demands to fix bugs. He finally snapped when someone, for the twelve thousandth time, insisted that open source means "I can use this for business." So he stopped all support and decided not to offer the download here.

You can find it around the 'net. It's still open source, still usable. He just doesn't want it hosted here... and of course people claimed:

1. open source means he has to keep supporting it as long as they want him to

2. open source means he has to offer it for download here at MSFN as well as email a copy to them whenever they ask

3. open source means whatever people want it to mean

So after great fireworks and drama it came to an end. Unfortunate.

[Monroe]

OK ... thanks for the information ... I kinda found the same stuff when I went into Google. I saw where all the links were removed from MSFN ... just decided to pass on it for now.

[pointertovoid]

This unofficial SP5 for W2k integrates on-request patches that are bugged, more or less heavily, nearly all of them.

I tried those for USB, bugs range from not detecting an inserted flash card to not ejecting it to plain BSOD, something I hadn't experienced with W2k.

For USB, there are just half a dozen patches. I imagine 50 of them must make W2k unusable.

I regret to make this comment to Gurg's admirable work.

Integrating all post-R1 patches would be useful, but only the widely distributed patches.

To add them to the installation Cd, if you keep the original dX, IE, WMP, you can stick to the standard MS method.

To update dX, IE WMP and more as well, use HfSlip (or nLite, they say).