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

15 hours ago, win32 said:

Here is the HFSLIP-info from the new version of HFSLIP. The SETUPREG.HIV in this case is very close if not the same as the one from my SP4 source: https://mega.nz/#!stsnGAjQ!pk3XQYhngBHX91_xOmbNnwuTx5O1lLv5iMB-VLv7GNo

Thank you. As I mentioned above, the difference between the two SETUPREG.HIVs does not seem to matter though. There is, however, another difference in the two HFSLIP-info files of yours. Could you please upload HFSLIPWU.INF from the i386 folder - both the old and the new one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2019 at 9:59 PM, tomasz86 said:

...I am suspecting that this may be the host OS (which is Windows 10 in your case) to mess the things up.

 

1 hour ago, win32 said:

Maybe I should try HFSLIP on Windows 2000 instead of Windows 10?

I consider it axiomatic that if Windows 10 can't mess something up, nothing can.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, win32 said:

OK, here you go: https://mega.nz/#!U0synYDD!HKbkV6VvRxKPLGOkOD3Iy9m2uQoKLBrDHEqJCOLePDc

I installed the copy made with the new HFSLIP last night and it still identified IE as 5 and DX as 7. Maybe I should try HFSLIP on Windows 2000 instead of Windows 10?

Yeah, so the only difference between the old HFSLIPWU.INF and the new HFSLIPWU.INF is the HFSLIP2000 version number included in one of the strings (1.0.2 vs 1.0.3BETA), which does not matter also. Right now there seem to be basically no differences between your and my copies of the updated Windows 2000 source, but mine installs perfectly here, so I am quite confused.

I myself am using Windows 7 (fully updated) as the host OS, and testing the installation in VirtualBox (v5.2.28). Where are you installing your Windows 2000? Is it a real computer, or a virtual machine?

I will try to test slipstreaming under Windows 10 (1809), and will also try to find out why that experimental version of HFSLIP2000 fails (because it is the only case where I can reproduce the IE/DX versioning issue).

Edit: Slipstreaming under Windows 10 makes no difference for me. The resulting source folder is exactly the same as the one slipstreamed under Windows 7. It installs correctly too.

Edited by tomasz86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After installing the original HFSLIP-created ISO in Hyper-V, I noticed that IE6 and DX9 reported as such.

I failed to state that I deviate from this form of installation by integrating AHCI drivers in nLite and then installing from USB on real hardware. Sorry for leading you on this wild goose chase :wacko:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, win32 said:

After installing the original HFSLIP-created ISO in Hyper-V, I noticed that IE6 and DX9 reported as such.

I failed to state that I deviate from this form of installation by integrating AHCI drivers in nLite and then installing from USB on real hardware. Sorry for leading you on this wild goose chase :wacko:

Ah, so I guess that we have found the culprit then!

Even though you did take some time away from me, it is all right ;). At least now we know that slipstreaming with HFSLIP2000 works fine under all versions of Windows, and I myself will definitely make use of the HFSLIP2000-info script in my future testing. You kind of motivated me to actually write the script, and for that I am very thankful.

I would guess that it is nLite adding those drivers to cause the IE/DX issue. Installing from USB should normally not affect anything, unless you have used some kind of a fancy tool which tampers with the system files. I do not use nLite anymore, but as far as I remember, there is a special instruction on using it after HFSLIP.

Please check https://web.archive.org/web/20171220125454/http://www.vorck.com/windows/2ksp5.html, especially "Step 13".

Quote

Using nLite after HFSLIP?
(Copied from HFSLIP.ORG). If you plan on using nLite, please do so on the SOURCESS folder after running HFSLIP. Some items to consider:
Do NOT remove sound drivers. If you remove sound drivers, Windows Media codecs won't work.
You have to add some file names to nLite's "keep" box. Please use this utility to generate a list of new files slipstreamed by HFSLIP.

"This utility" can be found here:

Edit: I just want to say that I have not forgotten about the .NET incomplete installation problem. If you look carefully at the progress bar during the Windows setup process, you can clearly see that the .NET Framework components are being processed extremely quickly. I would say - too quickly. This likely means that the INF files responsible for their installation are simply being skipped there. I will try to troubleshoot the problem, but I may need some time to investigate all the possible causes.

Edited by tomasz86
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello! What about porting the BlueKeep patch from XP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2019 at 10:33 PM, Anixx said:

Hello! What about porting the BlueKeep patch from XP?

Unfortunately I do not have the skills to do it. In case of Windows XP, M$ has released a new version of the file termdd.sys. The file itself is OS specific, so it is impossible to use the XP file in Windows 2000. The file in our OS would have to be reverse engineered and patched accordingly to the XP file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I recently came back into Windows 2000 testing again and decided to finally make a new install medium containing the latest HFSLIP version and noticed a few things. Aside from the unofficial updates not being integrated into the install (unless I imagine, you put them there), it doesn't appear SP5.1 is included anymore either. I'm wondering why this is. Is it because many files, or all files, are superseded by those other updates in the package?

Also, I'm wondering, would it ever be possible to ever include the DirectX 10 stub from Blackwingcat or would this be one of those things that unless the unofficial packages were integrated, then it wouldn't work properly because of the missing dependencies? I made a few changes to his packages. Like the one released only for the Japanese language of extended core (16d), that contained a small fix for dual monitor support that the latest English version (16a) did not. There was a glitch in videoprt.sys that prevented dual monitors from working at all and all you could do is replace videoprt.sys manually or remove the extended core entirely, I think 14b was the last package that worked correctly and 14c and 16a both had the bad file in it. My new batch based on 16a includes the newer 16d videoprt.sys since it is language neutral and doesn't require any translating. I also eliminated the WDM Windows XP audio driver files because I don't like that the audio doesn't work after you install new drivers after these were installed and so you'd have to reinstall extended core to have audio start working again. I'm going to continue peeking into these files and seeing what I can change around and have work better with each other. I'm remember winsta.dll caused issues with the Intel Pro Set wireless client because when you'd restart the computer, you'd have to do a "reinstall" of the client software for it to pick up your wireless adapter and to reconnect to your network, so I'm going to replace that with a vanilla SP4 version and see what happens with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2019 at 2:24 AM, Tommy said:

So I recently came back into Windows 2000 testing again and decided to finally make a new install medium containing the latest HFSLIP version and noticed a few things. Aside from the unofficial updates not being integrated into the install (unless I imagine, you put them there), it doesn't appear SP5.1 is included anymore either. I'm wondering why this is. Is it because many files, or all files, are superseded by those other updates in the package?

@Tommy, I am not sure when you used my packages before, but according to the changelog on my website, I removed the unofficial updates from the updates lists in 2014 :P. I do not remember exactly when I removed them from my FullPack, but I would guess that it was around that time too (maybe a little bit later, but still ~4 years ago). I decided not to include them, as I wanted to focus mainly on providing a stable base with all the official updates integrated, and leave the unofficial modifications to the more skilled people (who were @WildBill and @blackwingcat at the time). As for the USP 5.1, it is not included because it installs buggy USB 1.1 drivers, and also is English-only while I want to eventually provide my packages in all languages supported by Windows 2000. Also, while I do not have the hard data right now, judging from my testing in the past, I am almost 100% sure that all the updates and hotfixes included in the USP 5.1 (excluding the buggy ones) are covered by my updates list.

 

On 7/29/2019 at 2:24 AM, Tommy said:

Also, I'm wondering, would it ever be possible to ever include the DirectX 10 stub from Blackwingcat or would this be one of those things that unless the unofficial packages were integrated, then it wouldn't work properly because of the missing dependencies?

As you said, DX 10 or even any unofficial drivers would require to have the unofficial kernel / core installed in the first place, thus I am not including any of them. While there are a few unofficial packages listed on my website, they are mainly just repackaged versions of official system components, such as the .NET Framework addons, or the additional system fonts, both of which work in stock Windows 2000. Unless I decide to include the unofficial kernel / core, or any other modified files on my website, I do not plan to include any such unofficial packages for now. If I ever change my mind, they would become a separate list, as I want to keep the main updates list stock.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@tomasz86 Hey bud, great to hear from you again after all this time!

I did give your unofficial drivers a spin a long long time ago. But we have another discussion going on here which is what brought it up again starting here:

So I just built a newer computer with newer hardware and I bought a Gigabyte GeForce GTX 650 and I was extremely disappointed when I saw that I couldn't get dualview to work with them properly with Blackwingcat drivers. So your unofficial drivers were brought up here and I just happened to have a copy on my external hdd to my surprise. I've tried working on Blackwingcat drivers but as you mentioned much earlier in this thread that the driver itself is broken and is not the registry. I think if we had the skills, we could add those missing things back in to bring dualview back and allow much newer cards to work with dualview. Right now I just received an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 video card and it works just fine with dualview so for now I'll be sticking with it but I still have the GTX 650 just sitting here.

Tagging @win32 in case they'd like to chime in here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tommy said:

@tomasz86 Hey bud, great to hear from you again after all this time!

+1. :yes:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I wish I could help more than I could, but I don't even have the room for a second monitor to test 306.81 dualview support for myself. :(

Have you been able to actually test 306.81 with your card? Provided that it is fully extended core-compatible, with either the new or old sets of files.

Windows 2000 supports something else inherited from win98, called MultiMonitor, which is similar to DualView but forces each graphics card to only provide one video output each. Although videoprt.sys from XP recognizes DualView in addition to the old standard, other components of the OS may still not recognize DualView. It could be a matter of replacing the display control panel applet with the one from XP for all I know. Other stuff is beyond my level.

Edited by win32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...