Service Pack for Windows ME

[the_guy]

I plan on making beta 4 released in a few days.

I have included 918547, 917344, and the newer versions of usp10.dll and riched20.dll included in MDGx's riched9x.exe files.

A couple of questions first:

1. Should I add all of the files from MDGx's cryptme.exe file? (offtopic, it's missing start.exe and nircmd.exe)

2. Should I add the rest of the files from the riched9x.exe file?

I also need some help.

If anyone has a qfecheck issue, please let me know. If it's a not found error, please let me know if the updated file is on your computer. If it is not, just disregard it. If it is on your computer, or you receive an invalid error, please let me know. I don't know how buggy that part of the sp is right now, but I hope to have it sorted out in the coming days and weeks.

the_guy

[erpdude8]

dont add the files from CRYPTME. some ME files are original versions. however, be sure to REGSVR32 the CRYPTUI.DLL, CRYPTDLG.DLL, MSCAT32.DLL, MSSIP32.DLL, RSAENH.DLL, SCHANNEL.DLL, SOFTPUB.DLL & WINTRUST.DLL files. Include lines to register these DLL files in the SPUPDATE.INF file to fix the IE Crypto problem.

[the_guy]

Thanks erpdude

1 question remains: does anyone want the rest of the riched files from riched9x.exe included?

Also, is there a need for the installer to copy the files to %windir%\Options\Install\ and %windir%\Options\Cabs\? If not, let me know and I'll remove the references.

Does anyone want seperate 918547 uninstall information available, like the 891711 uninstall?

the_guy

[eidenk]

Does anyone want seperate 918547 uninstall information available, like the 891711 uninstall?

I guess it's a good idea.

1 question remains: does anyone want the rest of the riched files from riched9x.exe included?

I also think it is a good idea.

Also, is there a need for the installer to copy the files to %windir%\Options\Install\ and %windir%\Options\Cabs\? If not, let me know and I'll remove the references.

I think they can be removed after all. Well maybe not.

Well, it is subject to discussion. Here are my thoughts and observations :

I believe that those files are used by setup in case of reinstalling the OS over itself. My observation has been, when reistalling ME over itself, that the hotfixed files remained updated but the KB references disappeared from the registry so that a reinstall of the updates was necessary to have the KB hotfixes referenced in the registry.

The original MS KB hotfix installers also install a cat file which is apparently part of the on-the-fly mechanism used to prevent SFP from immediatelly replacing the hotfixed files by the original ones. Maybe those cat files are also necessary when reinstalling the OS over itself, I don't know for sure if yes or not.

Also those files in the %windir%\Options\Install\ and %windir%\Options\Cabs\ are probably used by SFP instead of those in the cabs in case SFP needs to restore a file I guess.

Edited June 23, 2006 by eidenk

[Drugwash]

Jinx: my 98SE-ME-RP4 HDD has just crashed yesterday, so I won't be able to test or report anything related to such installation.

But on my primary machine (which is a 200MHz Pentium I) with 98SE + USP 1.x, I've been using for a while riched20.dll v5.50.30.2002 and I had no problems with it that I know of. It's a slightly newer build number than the one in the riched9x.exe (5.40.11.2218), but I suppose that one would work too (didn't have time to test it).

The one I have misses a delayed import MSO.dll, but it doesn't seem to affect its normal usage.

If more positive reports would come, it would be possible for you to leave the old version aside and only include the newest.

Edited June 23, 2006 by Drugwash

[MDGx]

Well, I must admit it's getting pretty confusing having that many service packs, upgrades and whatnot installed. However, looking in Control Panel > System, I surprinsingly found that after all the upgrades, my system is now recognized as Windows ME 4.90.3001 A, instead of Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222.

I believe 98se is identified as WinME v4.90.3001 A because of some WinME files installed from the 98SE2ME pack (such as kernel32.dll and sysdm.cpl).

Actually I have hexed sysdm.cpl to display "Windows 98 Second Edition (SE) 4.10.2222 A"...

- patched WinME SYSDM.CPL 4.90.3001 modded:

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=272620

available at:

http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm#WME

into %windir%\SYSTEM [usually C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM].

Replaced "Me" with "98 Second Edition" text in Control Panel -> System

Properties -> General tab using eXeScope [crippled shareware]:

http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA003525/emysoft.htm#6

Sysdm.cpl installs only as part of 98SE2ME options 1 + 2.

More details in READ1ST.TXT under the "98SE2ME.PIF COMPLETE GUIDE" section [scroll down to "* Option 2:"]:

http://www.mdgx.com/9s2m/READ1ST.TXT

If you installed only option 3, you won't have the modded sysdm.cpl 4.90.3001 in %windir%\system , and it will probably show Windows ME... etc... , depending on other files you may have installed [?].

Please notice that...

* Win98 SE OS build/edition/release/revision/version does NOT change no matter

which NOR how many (hot)fixes/patches/updates/service packs/etc you install,

including 98SE2ME, Gape's Service Pack 2 (SP2), Maximus-Decim's Cumulative

Update, Maximus-Decim's Native USB and even Tihiy's Revolutions Packs.

That is because core system files like KERNEL32.DLL + KRNL386.EXE canNOT and

should NOT be replaced.

Therefore when installing MS Windows Updates:

http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/

http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/

and/or MS (security) patches or (hot)fixes:

http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm#98SE

http://www.mdgx.com/add.htm

http://www.mdgx.com/ietoy.htm

http://www.mdgx.com/wmp.htm

http://www.mdgx.com/dx.htm

you will be able, just as before, to install ONLY system files created

specifically for Win98 SE, and MOST ALL OTHERS (except certain hardware

drivers designed for all Windows 95/98/ME releases) will probably be rejected.

... quoted from READ1ST.TXT, the "FAQ" section.

I hope this answers your questions.

PS:

Sorry about your HD crash.

Esti binevenit. Si multumesc pentru aprecierea ta. Cele mai bune urari.

Edited June 23, 2006 by MDGx

[MDGx]

dont add the files from CRYPTME. some ME files are original versions. however, be sure to REGSVR32 the CRYPTUI.DLL, CRYPTDLG.DLL, MSCAT32.DLL, MSSIP32.DLL, RSAENH.DLL, SCHANNEL.DLL, SOFTPUB.DLL & WINTRUST.DLL files. Include lines to register these DLL files in the SPUPDATE.INF file to fix the IE Crypto problem.

You need to add only these files from cryptme.exe:

CRYPT32.DLL

CRYPTDLG.DLL

ENHSIG.DLL

MSASN1.DLL

XENROLL.DLL

which BTW is now fixed:

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

Please download cryptme.exe again:

* Unofficial Windows ME CRYPT32.DLL 5.131.2133.6, CRYPTDLG.DLL 5.00.1558.6072,

CRYPTUI.DLL 5.131.2133.2, ENHSIG.DLL 5.00.1877.8, MSASN1.DLL 5.00.2195.6905,

MSCAT32.DLL 5.131.2133.2, MSSIP32.DLL 5.131.2133.2, RSAENH.DLL 5.00.2133.2,

SCHANNEL.DLL 5.131.2133.2, SOFTPUB.DLL 5.131.2133.2, WINTRUST.DLL 5.131.2133.2

+ XENROLL.DLL 5.131.3659.0 128-bit SSL Encryption Security Vulnerability

Fixes:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/ms04-011.mspx

Direct download [721 KB, English]:

http://www.mdgx.com/files/CRYPTME.EXE

All other DLLs are from WinME setup CD-ROM = notice the 6-8-2000 date stamp for all files extracted from CABs.

You can cut + paste lines from CRYPTME.INF into SPUPDATE.INF if you wish.

FYI:

Practically you can use the start + nircmd sections for all other files in your SP, so you don't have to prompt users to manually disable system restore.

HTH

[the_guy]

i will add enhsig.dll to the SP ASAP.

@MDGx: I already have the installer disabling SR/SFP.

@all: I plan to have a new version available on Monday. It will include an uninstaller for 918547.

the_guy

[Drugwash]

Thanks, MDGx, I got the part with sysdm.cpl. There's only one thing that's still bothering me:

98SE2ME options 1 + 2 build the ultimate Windows 9x OS by "transplanting" ~ 700 newer ME system files onto 98 SE.

Well, if there's an update for any of those ~700 ME files that I copied from the CD to my system, how would I go around getting and installing it?

That is why I thought that the ME Service Pack could have the ability to recognize and update such an installation with only the needed updates.

AFAIR, I installed 98SE2ME with full option, so I should have (theoretically, now, unfortunately) all the said 700 files in my system; could the ME Service Pack upgrade any of them, if available?

That was my initial question, and I apologyze if I haven't been clear from the very beginning.

Ah and I almost forgot: my regional settings have been set to Romanian from the very beginning, in 98SE (at install time). After I installed 98SE2ME, I noticed that my fonts were back to the Western encoding, instead of the Central European one. Luckily, I had the Fonts folder backed up somewhere, so I copied all the contents back to the Fonts folder, and everything went back to normal.

Now, is it possible to add such a 'fonts backup/restore' function to the 98SE2ME package, so the installation would work flawlessly for users with regional/font settings different than English? It would be very helpful, although - unfortunately - little people know or bother to install 98/ME with the correct regional settings around here.

Edited June 23, 2006 by Drugwash

[the_guy]

Hey guys,

I'm sorry but I don't have beta 4 ready right now. Maybe by the end of the day?

A couple of quick questions:

Would you guys like to see Macromedia (now Adobe) Flash, Shockwave, both, or neither? Personally, I'm leaning towards just flash, as that's already installed with Windows. If you want any of them, I am unsure about whther they'd make it into beta 4 or they'd have to wait until beta 5/RC1 (still unsure).

Also, is anyone experiencing an issue with qfecheck? Start->run->type qfecheck, and click the plus sign (+) for the main update to see if there is any issues. If there is, please tell me.

I hope to have beta 4 ready by the end of the day.

the_guy

[eidenk]

I'm sorry but I don't have beta 4 ready right now.

Don't worry for that. Take as much time as you need.

Would you guys like to see Macromedia (now Adobe) Flash, Shockwave, both, or neither?

Both.

Also, is anyone experiencing an issue with qfecheck? Start->run->type qfecheck, and click the plus sign (+) for the main update to see if there is any issues. If there is, please tell me.

I don't seem to have problem but I stress that my system is not updated by your pack.

I think I have noticed a few files in your previous pack that are either missing or could upgraded to higher versions.

I am thinking about triedit.dll 6.1.0.9227 and mfc42.dll 6.2.4131.0.

Edited June 26, 2006 by eidenk

[the_guy]

Thanks eidenk.

I was leaning towards putting them in anyway. Still, if anyone doesn't want them in, let me know.

Where could I obtain those files at? If they are just on a CD, I don't think i'd put them in.

Also, please post any problems with qfecheck. As well, please post what you think about getting rid of copying files to %windir%\Options\Install and %windir%\Options\Cabs.

the_guy

[eidenk]

Where could I obtain those files at? If they are just on a CD, I don't think i'd put them in.

Which files are you speaking about ?

Do you mean triedit.dll 6.1.0.9227 and mfc42.dll 6.2.4131.0 ?

If so, I don't know where I got them from. I regularly install a lot of software and it probably came with one of them. I collect any MS files from those installers whatever the version even if I know I have got a file of such or such version number already as I found out that there are quite a few of those files that are not binary identical.

For mfc42.dll - 6.2.4131.0, I have two different files for example :

mfc42.dll - 6.2.4131.0 - 1,028,096 bytes - 04 August 2004, 01:57:24 - 6a420038c8f8fde9048a569d1663b908

mfc42.dll - 6.2.4131.0 - 1,028,096 bytes - 09 November 2005, 09:21:22 - 4602907535fd682195dfff9117365826

Differences are quite big as a binary compare finds 29.000 differences or so but I had both running without apparent problem.

Certainly the one you install is safer as I know only of one binary of build 6.0.9782.0.

As for triedit.dll, as dhtml.ocx is updated, I thought it could be a good idea if triedit.dll was updated as well. I know two versions more recent than the one in IE6SP1, 6.1.0.9211 and 6.1.0.9227 (currently installed on my system). But I don't exactly know where they do come from.

There is also a msvcp60.dll more recent than the one in your pack. It is version 6.2.3104.0. I have 4 different binaries of it. For version 6.0.8972.0 (the one you install), I have six different binaries.

It is a bit beyond topic but I'd appreciate anyone who's got as little a clue as to what this mess is about with different binaries for the same version number.

Also I am currently looking into your previous pack and it seems it seems it is already beta 4 : mesp202en-b4.exe (91e2d0a6943632c574f68f473545844b). So please make your next one to be beta 5 and not beta 4 again.

If you want any of the above files, if only to look at them or test them, just PM me with an email and I'll send them to you.

[the_guy]

I just found out that those files (i believe) come from XP sp2. Those files will be included in beta 5.

Also, I am including flash and shockwave, but in a separate option in case people don't want to install them. I might even include dhtmled.ocx from xp sp2 update 916216.

the_guy

EDIT: I think I will also include msvcp60.dll in beta 5.

@Eidenk: could you also check that msvbvm60.dll version 6.0.96.90 (from xpsp2 i believe) works properly on ME?

Edited June 26, 2006 by the_guy

[MDGx]

I just found out that those files (i believe) come from XP sp2. Those files will be included in beta 5.

Also, I am including flash and shockwave, but in a separate option in case people don't want to install them. I might even include dhtmled.ocx from xp sp2 update 916216.

the_guy

EDIT: I think I will also include msvcp60.dll in beta 5.

@Eidenk: could you also check that msvbvm60.dll version 6.0.96.90 (from xpsp2 i believe) works properly on ME?

Be careful, NT4/2000/XP/2003 [NTx] DLLs may be Unicode, which means they won't work on 9x/ME.

On the other hand, if you install various software packages, some developers don't account for other OSes than the ones intended to install their software on, so if they bundle Unicode versions of DLLs/OCXs/etc, some of those might install on 9x/ME [because some setup packages don't include OS version check], but the problem is that they won't work unless installed on NTx OSes.

And the bigger problem is that when they install such unicode DLLs, they don't even check for previous versions, so if theirs are newer, they will overwrite the older ones you might have.

That's probably how you ended up with newer versions of those DLLs.

If you wish, I can check them if they work ok on 98SE + ME, just send them to me in email, please [you know my email].

BTW:

Shockwave has been updated last week to new version:

http://www.mdgx.com/toy.htm#SHFL

FYI:

All Adobe packages installed from the internet now bundle Google toolbar for respective OSes.

Example: Shockwave 10.1c [10.1.3.018] bundles Google toolbar 3.0.131.0 [last release for 9x OSes].

I guess by 916216 you probably meant 906216:

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=906216

HTH