Gape Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 Regarding SHELL32.DLL: Can I therefore assume that the replaced icon/bitmaps are smaller, but the STANDARD ones are NOT smaller? Thus, after installation, what size is SHELL32.DLL relative to choice of original or replaced icon sets? And what about compatibility with that translucent icon modification [covered on Axcel216 site about how to patch the Q313829 shell32.dll to be functionally compatible with the original shell32.dll. If feasible, it would be desirable to NOT introduce additional incompatibility, etc. Also, it is conceivable that the translucent icon patch could depend on the overall file length?]From what I read about the notepad key bindings enhancements, it's clearly a matter of patching it to get a quite similar binary, thus you only need to patch the original; I assume there are no official updated notepad.exe files to otherwise consider, etc.In 2.0 which EXPLORER.EXE will be used? The original or the one from IE50SP2? Also I believe there is somewhat of an icon/bitmap consideration within this file as well? What was the advantage [if any] of using the IE50SP2 version?Regarding transculent icon modification: Yes, you can apply Axcel216's fixes for removing Q313829 SHELL32.DLL "desktop shortcut icon". There are four ways to remove it, all of them should work with modified or non-modified Q313829 SHELL32.DLL. In the SP 2.0, the patcher of SHELL32.DLL produces same SHELL32.DLL in the SP 1.6.2's.Regarding EXPLORER.EXE: SP 2.0 contains a patcher for stock EXPLORER.EXE currently. But I can add a patcher for IE 50 SP2 version, too. Thus, the version of EXPLORER.EXE depends to the user's installed EXPLORER.EXE, not depends to the SP 2.0. Many users generally use stock EXPLORER.EXE, but some IE 5.0 SP2 and/or Office 2000 installed systems contain a newer EXPLORER.EXE.If you have any idea for better 98lite SLEEK compability, please let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLASYS Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 [98lite SLEEK [V1], [V2] and MICRO compatibility issues handled separately]'nother one:The stock system apparently has DCOM98 at revision 1718, same as 98 "Gold" [or as we call it 98FE].Should the SP 2 apply DCOM98 1.3 [which is available as a "crackerjack prize" within Q315575] which raises the rev to 3328?cjl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLASYS Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 I looked within the SP1.6.2 .inf file, and it appears there is a second reference to the file Rpcltscm.dll after the one associated with Q315575; dunno if this is a mistake or whatever [just me meddling!]In any case, I notice a lot of file replacements from DCOM98 1.3 release. Thus the questions:Is this a COMPLETE equivalent release of what DCOM98 1.3 accomplishes? And if not, what has to be missing/why?Assuming that this is complete, is there any reason the registry version isn't updated beyond 1718?[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{BDC67890-4FC0-11D0-A805-00AA006D2EA4}\InstalledVersion]@="4,71,0,3328"Is what belongs if DCOM98 1.3 is installed; but you find it's at 4,71,0,1918 etc.cjl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gape Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 (edited) The stock system apparently has DCOM98 at revision 1718, same as 98 "Gold" [or as we call it 98FE].Should the SP 2 apply DCOM98 1.3 [which is available as a "crackerjack prize" within Q315575] which raises the rev to 3328?SP 1.6.2 has already a complete version of DCOM98 1.3. Please look at "features" on my web page. Of course, SP 2.0 has it, too.About registry setting, probably I have missed it. I will correct it in SP 2.0.File list of SP 1.6.2. Edited December 8, 2004 by Gape Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLASYS Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 [Note to other readers of the thread: Gape and I are pm'ing each other as we are posting here!]ok, 'nother one:On the exuberant website is a reference to an update Q321467 which is without an MS link.However, there IS a link to Q321467:http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;[LN];321467 and I believe it has been recently added by MS! [Note to reader, the forum software doesn't underline the complete link above ][As previously published as Q321467]BUG: Swenum.sys PortCls devices do not work correctly in Microsoft Windows 98 Second EditionThis will help your list of 70 [eventually 73 not counting other "adjustments"!]However, the contents of the article doesn't indicate any updated files; just a procedural work-around for a problem that cannot otherwise be fixed but gets an adequate alternate result, etc.Inside of SP1.6.2 there IS a reference to Portcls.sys [4.10.2224] as coming from 321467. Can you give any details to explain this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gape Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 BUG: Swenum.sys PortCls devices do not work correctly in Microsoft Windows 98 Second EditionInside of SP1.6.2 there IS a reference to Portcls.sys [4.10.2224] as coming from 321467. Can you give any details to explain this?You have already answer of your question Portcls.sys is EXACTLY from Q321467.Thanks for the link. I'll update the hot-fixes-list and file-list, after releasing 2.0 FINAL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acheron Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 Gape, have you decided yet which ntfs-support you gonna us with Service Pack 2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chankya Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Dear Gapei have got some hotfixes u like the link is http://www.windowsecurity.com/mssecure.asp?ProductID=151may be it's helpful to u Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scankurban Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Author Turkish man (Mr. Alper) but Turkish version doesn`t exist.Why Alper?I think just your name is turkish,not much more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldier1st Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 and that means what exactly?so what if he is turkishi bet you don't know what a turkish isif so don't post offtopic replies,there are other places for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azagahl Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Maybe 2.0 final should have this cool maxcache.reg feature from mdgx's website:http://www.mdgx.com/newtip16.htm (look for "max cache speed")This lets you go beyond the "Network Server" setting under Performance.I am using the "Super Cache" setting myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volthezz Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 It would be good if u'd find a way how to enable ipv6 under win98. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldier1st Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 that feature is availible under xp,if you want it install xp,why do you want it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volthezz Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 No possibility to install xp, ipv6 is just something i need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldier1st Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 then install xpfrom what i know that won't install or work under 98,xp has it,i know it does(i use xp and 98) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now