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. 


MDGx

98 FE + 98 SE + ME updates + patches + (hot)fixes

Recommended Posts

Thanks for this info.

It happens that I have Word XP and RICHED20.DLL 5.50.99.2014 installed. Thought I almost never use Word, I made a test at the moment and no crash and no line of pixels on the text.

Could you describe what operation you are doing exactely, what settings and after how much work it freees?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought MS Office used its own copy of RichEdit... :unsure: I just performed a search and indeed found one at

C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Office10\RICHED20.DLL

Its version is 5.40.11.2220 and is most likely the original one installed by Office XP.

On this occasion I found out that PhotoScape installs its own copy of riched20.dll in its main folder. Version is 5.30.23.1215.

My system-wide RichEdit version (in the System folder) is 5.30.23.1221 and I chose that one due to some quirk with newer versions and the SpellChecker Miranda IM plug-in (issue that I've mentioned some time ago in these forums).

At this time I wonder if RICHED9X replaces or not the original copy of riched20.dll in the Common Files folder and also if MS Office checks for a newer version of it in the System folder and chooses to use that one instead of the original copy in Common Files. :unsure: With my current setup, I just checked and WINWORD.EXE loads the Common Files copy. Anyone who has a newer version of riched20.dll in System than the one in Common Files, could you check which version is loaded by Word on your system? (I've used Codestuff Starter for that)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have RICHED20.DLL 5.50.99.2014 installed and C:\Program Files\Common Files\...\RICHED20.DLL is version 5.40.11.2220.

Word loads the dll from comon files (the 5.40.11.2220 version).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After you locate all of them, rename all but the one in %windir%\system to riched20.old and every program will use the newer version. The renaming is best done in DOS mode, from real DOS. Then again, any .dll that is not in use can be renamed from inside Windows, so, just after starting the system, you may search all the duplicate files and rename most of them from windows (right in the Find Files result window) and just go to DOS to rename the few, if any, that refuses to be renamed because of being in use. HTH

Edited by dencorso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought MS Office used its own copy of RichEdit... :unsure: I just performed a search and indeed found one at

C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Office10\RICHED20.DLL

Its version is 5.40.11.2220 and is most likely the original one installed by Office XP.

...

That is correct! I orginally updated my version in Windows System from the Common Files 5.40.x version.

I did not actually check that Word was loading the System version when I was using 5.50.x.

All I know is that Word and Windows was guaranteed to hang after a short time every time I used it.

Copying the Common Files version 5.40.x back into System solved the problem.

Edited by RetroOS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you try dencorso's advice (only one copy of riched20.dll, located in System) with v5.50.x.x?

I wonder if there's a conflict between simultaneously loaded versions of RichEdit or if v5.50.x.x has issues.

Also if anyone else has such a combination of RichEdit on their system, please post about your experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been running Java 6 update 6 for three weeks... It appears to me to be unstable and causing Internet Explorer to crash...

I've rolled back to Java 6 update 5 that was totally stable.

Will post results...

I did have the Early Access version of Java 6u6 installed... (jre-6u6-windows-i586-p.exe)

I have now reinstalled Java 6u6, but this time the standard release (jre-6u6-windows-i586-p-s.exe)

So far it's been stable. I'm not sure what, if any, the differences are between Early Access and standard release versions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATED · 7-1-2008

Enjoy.

P.S.:

The files at my web site seem to be [finally!] restored by my web provider.

Thanks for your patience.

Best wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the updates! :thumbup

Just one/two question:

I see that Maximus Decim's MDIECU6 includes Q950759 and that DXM9X comes from Q950759.

Does that means that if we install MDIECU6, we don't need to instal DXM9X?

I also see in my archves an IE6 updater called IE6UPD. Is it an older version of MDIECU6?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just one/two question:

I see that Maximus Decim's MDIECU6 includes Q950759 and that DXM9X comes from Q950759.

Does that means that if we install MDIECU6, we don't need to instal DXM9X?

I also see in my archves an IE6 updater called IE6UPD. Is it an older version of MDIECU6?

1. Maximus-Decim's MDIE6CU installs DXM9X according to his log:

http://www.msfn.org/board/Maximus-Decim-In...-Co-t97816.html

Quoted:

*Unofficial DirectX Media (DXM) 6.0 Update
That means installing MDIE6CU also installs DXM9X.

2. IE6UPD is an older IE cumulative update [similar to MDIE6CU] but older, has not been updated lately to my knowledge:

http://www.msfn.org/board/Unofficial-Inter...dat-t82003.html

the_guy's last post says October 2007 was last update he made to IE6UPD.

HTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noted the 98/ME updates that need to be created [tx a lot guys!]:

- Jet Q950749 [to be posted at www.mdgx.com/add.htm]:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/ms08-028.mspx

- Outlook Express Q941202 [to be created to replace OE923694.EXE]:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/ms07-056.mspx

- HTML32.CNV, MSCONV97.DLL & MSWRD832.CNV from Q923618 [Office SP3] [to be included in GRPHFLTS.EXE]:

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=923618

- CRYPTDLG.DLL 5.0.1558.6608 [to be included in CRYPT9X.EXE].

Question:

Please post here or PM me what update/hotfix is CRYPTDLG.DLL 5.0.1558.6608 part of [url please]?

Thanks.

UPDATED 7-10-2008:

CRYPTDLG.DLL updates now up @ 1st post:

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=46581

Tx a lot sleffing.

I will make iexpress installers for these files soon, and will post them here when ready.

P.S.:

Seems that [most of] the files at my web site have been restored [finally!].

Please let me know if any1 discovers any files/links that still do not work at www.mdgx.com , so I can contact my web site provider to have them fixed.

Best wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- CRYPTDLG.DLL 5.0.1558.6608 [to be included in CRYPT9X.EXE].

Question:

Please post here or PM me what update/hotfix is CRYPTDLG.DLL 5.0.1558.6608 part of [url please]?

Thanks.

That is from win2K SP4 (W2KSP4_EN.EXE).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UPDATED · 7-1-2008

Please see the top of this topic for most recent updates.

:thumbup

After applying latest updates from 7-1-2008, Internet Explorer (especially Flash plugin) is running *much* faster. I cannot explain it. Would be interesting if anyone else reports same result.

:thumbup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...

After applying latest updates from 7-1-2008, Internet Explorer (especially Flash plugin) is running *much* faster. I cannot explain it. Would be interesting if anyone else reports same result.

:thumbup

Yeah, I noticed that too...

It's running faster than the previous unofficial (win2k) IE update 947864 that was already faster than before!

I'm running Flash 9.0.124.0.

Bleeder, what version of Flash are you running?

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...