PsiMoon314 Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 Hi RyanVM Other than calling in a "Post SP2 Update Pack" or even a "Pre SP3 Update Pack" I'm not sure there is anything you could do to make things clearer Somewhat off topic; what would it take to allow your Update Pack to be applied after XP installation? Would there be an easy way to apply the hotfixes files and registry settings post OS installation?The reason I ask is that clearly all of the information required is inside your pack; it would just need some method to apply it.Just a thought ... Kind RegardsPsiMoon
RyanVM Posted November 21, 2004 Author Posted November 21, 2004 That would be considerably more difficult, since you'd have to deal with WFP getting in the way.
PsiMoon314 Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 That would be considerably more difficult, since you'd have to deal with WFP getting in the way.Indeed, that did occur to me; however hotfixes clearly are able to replace system files which are protected by SFC so it can be done I was really just "wondering out aloud" as to what it might take. If we (you/me/someone) could create a mechanism to allow you to use your Update Pack to modify an existing installation then it would have a "double" use.I suspect that just creating a batch file which calls the hotfix files with the correct paramaters and then runs qchain at the end would be easier though B) Kind RegardsPsiMoon
RyanVM Posted November 21, 2004 Author Posted November 21, 2004 That would be considerably more difficult, since you'd have to deal with WFP getting in the way.Indeed, that did occur to me; however hotfixes clearly are able to replace system files which are protected by SFC so it can be done Hotfixes are also created by Microsoft. I have a feeling they know a bit better how communicate with the WFP API I suspect that just creating a batch file which calls the hotfix files with the correct paramaters and then runs qchain at the end would be easier though B)Yes, that's the easiest way if you ask me.
Acheron Posted November 22, 2004 Posted November 22, 2004 RyanVM Update Pack 1.04 NLWarning: This update package is only mentioned to use with Dutch Windows XP (Not MUI)Changelog 1.03 Lite -> 1.04 NLAdded Microsoft Remote Desktop Client 5.2.3790.0Added KB831240 - HighMAT CD Writing WizardAdded KB888240Added KB886677Added qfecheckFixed wscript.hlp is now dutchDownload:RyanVM's Update Pack 1.04 NL.cab 9.5 MBDownload is supported by Tweakers.net P.S. I will no longer bring out any Lite packs of RyanVm's Update Pack, because it's not that light anymore.
RyanVM Posted November 23, 2004 Author Posted November 23, 2004 It should be noted (as I told him via PM) that my 1.0.4 release will not be matching his when I release mine. I don't consider the two recent hotfixes to be significant enough releases to warrant a new release.hp38guser, as I told you in PM, please name it something other than 1.0.4 to avoid confusion. 1.0.3a would be fine with me.
nakira Posted November 23, 2004 Posted November 23, 2004 Just a question. Why do you include such an ancient version of cabarc.exe? The version found in XP's Support tools (in CD\SUPPORT\TOOLS\SUPTOOLS.MSI) is much more recent.
RyanVM Posted November 23, 2004 Author Posted November 23, 2004 Just a question. Why do you include such an ancient version of cabarc.exe? The version found in XP's Support tools (in CD\SUPPORT\TOOLS\SUPTOOLS.MSI) is much more recent.Same reason as I included the makecab from the CAB SDK.(From CAB SDK, doesn't mess up file dates)The versions that come with Windows have a bug where files added to a cab archive have their file creation date changed to the date they were added to the archive.For what it's worth, I performed numerous tests between the CAB SDK version and the version included with XP SP2 and there was little to no difference in file sizes.
MAVERICKS CHOICE Posted November 23, 2004 Posted November 23, 2004 It should be noted (as I told him via PM) that my 1.0.4 release will not be matching his when I release mine. I don't consider the two recent hotfixes to be significant enough releases to warrant a new release.hp38guser, as I told you in PM, please name it something other than 1.0.4 to avoid confusion. 1.0.3a would be fine with me.Very confusing do we really need this? Couldn't this be put in another thread maybe?
nakira Posted November 23, 2004 Posted November 23, 2004 Just a question. Why do you include such an ancient version of cabarc.exe? The version found in XP's Support tools (in CD\SUPPORT\TOOLS\SUPTOOLS.MSI) is much more recent.Same reason as I included the makecab from the CAB SDK.(From CAB SDK, doesn't mess up file dates)The versions that come with Windows have a bug where files added to a cab archive have their file creation date changed to the date they were added to the archive.For what it's worth, I performed numerous tests between the CAB SDK version and the version included with XP SP2 and there was little to no difference in file sizes.OK thanks, I just wondered what the reason was. EditHm, does this bug only happen under certain conditions? I just unpacked several cabs and found the original file dates.
RyanVM Posted November 23, 2004 Author Posted November 23, 2004 It should be noted (as I told him via PM) that my 1.0.4 release will not be matching his when I release mine. I don't consider the two recent hotfixes to be significant enough releases to warrant a new release.hp38guser, as I told you in PM, please name it something other than 1.0.4 to avoid confusion. 1.0.3a would be fine with me.Very confusing do we really need this? Couldn't this be put in another thread maybe? That's why I didn't want him using 1.0.4 as his version number. It's only going to confuse people. Which is why I wish he would have done what I asked him to do. Not that I have any right to dictate such things Hm, does this bug only happen under certain conditions? I just unpacked several cabs and found the original file dates. It happens when you create new cab archives (at least with makecab). If you really want to see for yourself, send me an IM and I can send you some batch files which will allow you to easily see the issue.
MAVERICKS CHOICE Posted November 23, 2004 Posted November 23, 2004 Well the way I see it your work is flawless, don't change it if its not broke!
RyanVM Posted November 23, 2004 Author Posted November 23, 2004 I obviously agree with that I'll release 1.0.4 when there's a significant enough update to warrant a release. Creating a new release for two crappy little hotfixes which fix issues hardly anyone will ever experience is a waste of bandwidth in my opinion.
prathapml Posted November 23, 2004 Posted November 23, 2004 That would be considerably more difficult, since you'd have to deal with WFP getting in the way.Indeed, that did occur to me; however hotfixes clearly are able to replace system files which are protected by SFC so it can be done I was really just "wondering out aloud" as to what it might take. If we (you/me/someone) could create a mechanism to allow you to use your Update Pack to modify an existing installation then it would have a "double" use.Right. So here's info for you (and RyanVM) to chew on, if you want to use this update pack for an installed version of windows.Changes:HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Setup"SourcePath" and "ServicePackSourcePath" will be temporary delete during the patchand (if nothing real bad happens) restored if it's finished.
Acheron Posted November 23, 2004 Posted November 23, 2004 Ryan, there seems to be some problem with new KB887742 update;http.sys is replaced by new version, but http.sys does also exist in Driver.cab. How are you gonna replace that file insite Driver.cab?
Recommended Posts