Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


tomasz86

Unofficial SP 5.2 for Microsoft Windows 2000 (WIP)

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, zcarrt said:

How can I add IE8 and WMP 11 in HFSLIP ?

To Windows 2000? That is unfortunately not possible :(

Unless new development has taken place in the last few months which I do not know about, the maximum you can get is IE6 SP1 with several IE6 SP3 files (already included in my updates list) and WMP10, but the later requires the BWC kernel and is itself non-slipstreamable.

Edited by tomasz86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have finally pushed a small update to my site and the Updates List for Windows 2000. I have added the IPv6 update mentioned by @Anixx and have also removed one old update that I found out to be obsolete. I have also been doing a lot of internal testings to check what files are exactly added by each update / hotfix in order to list them on the site later. I have also been working on the HFSLIP 2000 script a lot. I was actually motivated by the @bphlpt's comments and have started to rewrite many parts of the code. It takes time though so do not expect any quick updates in this field in the near future. You can follow the progress on GitHub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know project is dead, and I tried to find it but i can't find Windows2000-UURollup-v10c-x86-ENU.exe

Is it still recommended to install this or no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Destro said:

I know project is dead, and I tried to find it but i can't find Windows2000-UURollup-v10c-x86-ENU.exe

Is it still recommended to install this or no?

Isn't latest v11-d20141130?

http://sdfox7.com/2000/Important_EOL_Updates/

or you want specifically the very old v10c? :unsure:

tomasz86 has done (and it is doing) a lot of very good work :thumbup for the (unfortunately very few) people that still want to run 2K, but he has a "quirk" about "reorganizing" that resolves as moving everything from here to there, from there to elsewhere, deleting and removing files, making links obsolete, etc. etc. without leaving behind proper aechives, let alone clear, univocal, complete howto's. :(

Thank goodness, there is around Sdfox7 who keeps some bits and pieces "static" :).

jaclaz

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks.  So i Guess the proceedure is.  Sp4+IE6+Dx9+Wmp+ect, etc+update Roll up 1 +all official post update 1 hotfix to 2010 + Unofficial Update Roll up 1 + KernelEX?  Am i more or less right?

 

Most people just throw away old computers, while I don't.  I'm not going to use 2000 on an everyday basis though.  i might use it for some lite classic gaming and I plan on putting an older copy of wsus on it. I maybe will run some legacy server applications on it to support my DOS boxes and stuff.   I have a legit copy of 2000 Server and this is the best use I can find for my old Dual PIII 1ghz workstation.  I got it as a computer dump for like 20 dollars about 15 years ago.  It's this http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/twin,243-3.html

It wont run recent OS very good, but i will fly on win2k.

Edited by Destro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2017 at 3:52 AM, Destro said:

I know project is dead, and I tried to find it but i can't find Windows2000-UURollup-v10c-x86-ENU.exe

Is it still recommended to install this or no?

On 12/10/2017 at 7:41 AM, Destro said:

Ok thanks.  So i Guess the proceedure is.  Sp4+IE6+Dx9+Wmp+ect, etc+update Roll up 1 +all official post update 1 hotfix to 2010 + Unofficial Update Roll up 1 + KernelEX?  Am i more or less right?

I do not recommend using UURollup anymore. It is old and outdated now. The BlackWingCat's extended Core and extended Kernel are the modern solution for extending Windows 2000's capabilities. Mixing UURollup with them may work but I would not do it. UURollup will install old versions of the BlackWingCat's files, so you can never be sure what the result will be. Nevertheless, you can still find the old UURollup files in the depths of my Download Archive, if you really want to ;).

As for the other (official) updates, I recommend following my Updates Lists under http://windowsarchives.com/updates/. The only way to use all of them though is to slipstream everything with HFSLIP2000 and then install the OS from scratch. After that you can just install the BlackWingCat's packages manually.

 

On 12/10/2017 at 5:50 AM, jaclaz said:

tomasz86 has done (and it is doing) a lot of very good work :thumbup for the (unfortunately very few) people that still want to run 2K, but he has a "quirk" about "reorganizing" that resolves as moving everything from here to there, from there to elsewhere, deleting and removing files, making links obsolete, etc. etc. without leaving behind proper aechives, let alone clear, univocal, complete howto's. :(

Well, I must somewhat agree with what you are saying (although reluctantly :P). Especially in the beginning, I used to start a lot of small projects that ended up being scattered here and there (and thus difficult to manage). In my defence though, I can say that since around 2014 I have been trying to keep everything as concentrated and concised as possible. Correct me if I am wrong, but during the last 3 years the only major "reorganizations" were the forced domain change (which naturally broke all the old links) and the move to MEGA as the main file hosting (caused by the lack of space on Google Drive). I did discontinue and remove many old files with time because, well, most of them were just that, i.e. old, outdated, and obsolete.

At the moment there are really only two places where I am active, which are http://windowsarchives.com for all information and updates, and this very thread for other news and discussion. The only two unofficial projects that are still alive and not mentioned on my website are the combined .NET Framework installer (too experimental) and the HFSLIP2000 FullPack package (somewhat risky...). I am also aware that there is lack of proper how-to and I have been working on it. It is a one-man job though, so please understand :). I am always open to feedback and suggestions on how to improve the current state of things.

Edited by tomasz86
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how to could be easy.  Just make a video and put it on youtube.  Start from scratch in the video and then go through a complete build like you are doing it, in real life.  Then all someone has to do is watch the video.  You know just use a screen recording software and talk into it.

Edited by Destro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, tomasz86 said:

... I did discontinue and remove many old files with time because, well, most of them were just that, i.e. old, outdated, and obsolete..

Exactly, but since you did that without PROPERLY documenting the changes, the end result is that half the internet points to "your" files that are nowhere to be found since you moved/renamed/deleted them.

How much would have costed to put *somewhere* on your current http://windowsarchives.com/updates/ a simple page saying:

18 hours ago, tomasz86 said:

I do not recommend using UURollup anymore. It is old and outdated now. The BlackWingCat's extended Core and extended Kernel are the modern solution for extending Windows 2000's capabilities. Mixing UURollup with them may work but I would not do it. UURollup will install old versions of the BlackWingCat's files, so you can never be sure what the result will be. Nevertheless, you can still find the old UURollup files in the depths of my Download Archive, if you really want to ;).

AND once having given people the above warning, actually provide a §@ç#ing working link instead of sending people on a treasure hunt or worse a wild goose chase?

The whole point of critique (not about you particularly, there are lots of people that do the same with their projects) is the deletion/erasure/removal of the past, something that is old (but that worked at the time) is not necessarily "worse" or - conversely - somethign that is new (even if it works) is not necessarily "better".

Someone that wanted to update Windows 2000 in 2013/2014 would have used the UUROLLUP? Yes.

Did it work just fine? Yes.

WHY (the heck) do you want anyone to be prevented from replicating that (and not another one [1]) success? :dubbio:

jaclaz

[1] just using the UUROLLUP is much easier IMHO than going the whole way of the HFSLIP routine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I am smart enough to go through the HFSLIP routine,   I have used NLITE and ryan VM for years to upgrade XP ISOs but I think kernelex for 2k doesn't give u all the unofficial updates provided UUrollup.  Would be a benefit to the community to make uuprollup more compatible with kernelEX then we have an all in one solution that makes 2k good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jaclaz said:

[1] just using the UUROLLUP is much easier IMHO than going the whole way of the HFSLIP routine.

But UURollup was just a compilation of BlackWingCat's files plus several other XP/2003 files, fonts, etc. Hence the name "Unofficial Updates Rollup". It was never a replacement for the whole HFSLIP updates list! I think you may be thinking of the unofficial Update Rollup 2 which was indeed a compilation of the official M$ updates and hotfixes released between 2005-2010. The problem is that the package ended up buggy and there was no easy way to rebuild it as I had added all the updates manually, one by one. It was also not multilanguage and thus, all in all, inferior to the standard HFSLIP procedure of slipstreaming all the single updates.

I may indeed have to add such an explanatory note about the obsolete updates to prevent further confusion though.

 

1 hour ago, Destro said:

I think I am smart enough to go through the HFSLIP routine,   I have used NLITE and ryan VM for years to upgrade XP ISOs but I think kernelex for 2k doesn't give u all the unofficial updates provided UUrollup.  Would be a benefit to the community to make uuprollup more compatible with kernelEX then we have an all in one solution that makes 2k good.

As I said above, UURollup in its core was basically a compilation of the BlackWingCat's Extended Core and Kernel. It has no real advantage to the original packages, especially now, as the Extended Kernel has received a lot of updates in the meantime.

Edited by tomasz86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2017 at 1:08 PM, tomasz86 said:

The only two unofficial projects that are still alive and not mentioned on my website are the combined .NET Framework installer (too experimental) and the HFSLIP2000 package (somewhat risky...).

Why do you say the HFSLIP2000 package isn't mentioned on your website?  And doesn't the HFSLIP2000 Full Package already include all of the individual updates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bluebolt said:

Why do you say the HFSLIP2000 package isn't mentioned on your website?  And doesn't the HFSLIP2000 Full Package already include all of the individual updates?

Oops, I meant the FullPack not being mentioned on the site. The HFSLIP2000 script itself is, of course, the core component of the whole Updates List project :). I have actually been moving / rewriting the whole HFSLIP how-to to my site for the last few weeks, and hope to finish it soon.

I consider the FullPack risky, not to use though, but risky to overly advertise as there are some people who do not like the fact that M$ updates can be downloaded from 3rd party sources. At the moment it is also English only too.

 

Edited by tomasz86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey tomasz86, thanks for the SP5 software. I've just managed to use it correctly, and I hope you'll not interpret this as "whining" or not being grateful, but HFSLIP is hard for a novice to use. It's easy and robust once you figure out where the download is, what the software does, and how to run it, but all of that information was hidden from me behind pages and pages of forums postings. There is too much learning required to use your tool, versus the level of learning required to install official Microsoft service packs (just double click).

To make your program easier to use, I would do these three things:

  1. Update your original post on this thread (which has a high google ranking vs your website) to more obviously point the user in the correct direction for someone who arrived by searching for "Windows 2000 SP5".
    • Either take out the apology for SP5.2 not being completed and history behind the project, or hide them underneath a bolded "Go here for the current best Windows 2000 SP5 Solution" with a link to your website. Users shouldn't have to read so much. I only figured it out after going to the last page in the forum and reading the above mention of the "HFSLIP 2000 full package" and googling that.
  2. Let the user know the exact steps necessary to run HFSLIP 2000
    • Once I found the download link for the HFSLIP 2000 full package, I was confused because there was a "full package" and also a folder of updates. I found the obsolete HFSLIP directions you link to on archive.org, which mention that you have to place the updates in various HF directories. With the HFSLIP 2000 Full Package, this is not necessary; you helpfully bundled only updates applicable to windows 2000 and placed them in the proper directories for us. I didn't realize this fact until after downloading many updates. The documentation must be updated.
  3. Let the user know what HFSLIP 2000 actually does
    • I was personally surprised once the program finished that HFSLIP 2000 only created an iso to install Windows 2000 SP5, not actually install it on the system that HFSLIP 2000 is run.
    • Reading that HFSLIP 2000 would also install some updates from Windows XP, I was worried that "maybe this is bad and will make things unstable". But once I read the short descriptions of each update on the main page where you (confusingly, given that the Full Package exists) offer the option to download each individual update one at a time from archive.org hosted microsoft updates, I was put at ease that "these are actually pretty small things and probably do work well with Windows 2000. You should make a summary of all those non-windows-2000 updates and offer "only windows 2000 updates" and "windows xp updates that seem to work fine with windows 2000" as two different packages.

Additionally, to expand your website, consider that a user just installing SP5 now would probably be interested in software that supports Windows 2000. Many projects have discontinued support for Windows 2000, and having links to the newest versions of the software that still have Windows 2000 support (can link to archive.org) would be helpful. e.g. Firefox 12.0, Firefox ESR 10.12, notepad++ 6.7.5, jre 6u27, putty 0.61, teamviewer 8, K-Lite Codecs 7.10... go to ninite.com and look for other useful utilities there. Even links to useful software that still support Windows 2000 like 7zip 1801 would be useful, but more difficult to maintain... I would just say "as of $DATE, the latest 7zip found here still works with Windows 2000" for those programs that are still supported.

If you want any help implementing any of these changes, reach out to me on discord: Logg#0886. I can help write initial drafts of this documentation for you to revise, and can edit/expand website files.

Edited by Logg
add contact info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Logg said:

Hey tomasz86, thanks for the SP5 software. I've just managed to use it correctly, and I hope you'll not interpret this as "whining" or not being grateful, but HFSLIP is hard for a novice to use. It's easy and robust once you figure out where the download is, what the software does, and how to run it, but all of that information was hidden from me behind pages and pages of forums postings. There is too much learning required to use your tool, versus the level of learning required to install official Microsoft service packs (just double click).

No problem. I do not take anything personally. I am aware of the HFSLIP's complexity, especially since it is no longer mainstream but rather a very niche piece of software with its documentation incomplete or spread here and there. I have basically finished rewriting / moving the old, original HFSLIP documentation from http://web.archive.org/web/20100523023650if_/http://hfslip.org:80/_left.phtml to my site, but, to tell the truth, I do not really like it. I think that it is either too complicated in some parts, or too brief in others that actually require a more detailed explanation. My goal is to incorporate the documentation into my site completely, so that all the required information will be available in one place. In order to do this though, I also have to reorganize the layout / structure of the site a little bit. I also want to separate the 2000 and XP updates lists, etc. In short, I do know that the whole project in the current state is difficult to use, and I have many plans on how to improve it, but unfortunately time (or lack of it) is the main obstacle.

 

22 hours ago, Logg said:

Update your original post on this thread (which has a high google ranking vs your website) to more obviously point the user in the correct direction for someone who arrived by searching for "Windows 2000 SP5".

  • Either take out the apology for SP5.2 not being completed and history behind the project, or hide them underneath a bolded "Go here for the current best Windows 2000 SP5 Solution" with a link to your website. Users shouldn't have to read so much. I only figured it out after going to the last page in the forum and reading the above mention of the "HFSLIP 2000 full package" and googling that.

 

I agree that the original post should probably be more concrete and informative. I would also greatly appreciate any specific tips on how to structure the post in order to make it more accessible and easy to understand for someone who is not really accustomed to HFSLIP and everything related to it. I would not like to make it a replacement for my website though. What kind of information (and in what order) exactly do you think I should include there?

 

22 hours ago, Logg said:
  • Let the user know the exact steps necessary to run HFSLIP 2000
    • Once I found the download link for the HFSLIP 2000 full package, I was confused because there was a "full package" and also a folder of updates. I found the obsolete HFSLIP directions you link to on archive.org, which mention that you have to place the updates in various HF directories. With the HFSLIP 2000 Full Package, this is not necessary; you helpfully bundled only updates applicable to windows 2000 and placed them in the proper directories for us. I didn't realize this fact until after downloading many updates. The documentation must be updated.
  • Let the user know what HFSLIP 2000 actually does
    • I was personally surprised once the program finished that HFSLIP 2000 only created an iso to install Windows 2000 SP5, not actually install it on the system that HFSLIP 2000 is run.
    • Reading that HFSLIP 2000 would also install some updates from Windows XP, I was worried that "maybe this is bad and will make things unstable". But once I read the short descriptions of each update on the main page where you (confusingly, given that the Full Package exists) offer the option to download each individual update one at a time from archive.org hosted microsoft updates, I was put at ease that "these are actually pretty small things and probably do work well with Windows 2000. You should make a summary of all those non-windows-2000 updates and offer "only windows 2000 updates" and "windows xp updates that seem to work fine with windows 2000" as two different packages.

Yes, I agree with this 100%. The lack of proper documentation on HFSLIP (and HFSLIP2000) is the culprit. The whole Windows XP/2003 updates idea should also be explained more thoroughly, so that there is no confusion on why these updates are included in the Windows 2000's updates list.

The FullPack is kind of a side project though. The reason why it is not mentioned anywhere publicly is because a) many people prefer to download the updates from official sources only, b) some people have very strong feelings against sharing M$ updates through 3rd party sources, and c) the FullPack is currently English-only and I want to keep the whole project 100% multilingual.

 

22 hours ago, Logg said:

Additionally, to expand your website, consider that a user just installing SP5 now would probably be interested in software that supports Windows 2000. Many projects have discontinued support for Windows 2000, and having links to the newest versions of the software that still have Windows 2000 support (can link to archive.org) would be helpful. e.g. Firefox 12.0, Firefox ESR 10.12, notepad++ 6.7.5, jre 6u27, putty 0.61, teamviewer 8, K-Lite Codecs 7.10... go to ninite.com and look for other useful utilities there. Even links to useful software that still support Windows 2000 like 7zip 1801 would be useful, but more difficult to maintain... I would just say "as of $DATE, the latest 7zip found here still works with Windows 2000" for those programs that are still supported.

I like this idea a lot, but there is already a thread for this: https://msfn.org/board/topic/133014-last-versions-of-software-for-windows-2000/. I am not sure if it is necessary to list the software directly on my site, or maybe it is better to just link to the thread for details. If I ever decide to include such a list on the site though, I would really want to check each program myself in order to determine whether it is really incompatible with the OS. In some cases a simple registry change can "make" the software compatible, while in other cases the software may simply just require particular M$ updates to run.

Edited by tomasz86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×