Jump to content

98 SE SP 3.32


Gape

Recommended Posts

That being the case, about this is the home for the sesp21a maybe you guys can help. I installed this over my functioning 98se setup and I can't get back into it now. I boot, avg boot scanner runs, thats ok, then the windows screen appears, as it should then eventually it goes into the registry checker screen and starts backing up system files, this is without any prompting at all, then restores them, it says from a previous backup as there was an error in the system files, as you'd expect, then says to restart, and when I do I just cycle through the whole thing again. I can get into safe mode only by pressing F5 during boot, everything looks ok when I'm in there but I can't see anything to fix! It looks ok, no glaring errors or anything. So I'm at a bit of a loss now. there's no sign of the sp in control panel so I can't unistall it, what to do, mes amis? I can only think to sfc everything but that seems laborious!

I'm managing to send this via my new and unfamiliar XP machine, I can't even get email or newsreading going on that yet. ****!!

BB

Try this:

modify C:\MSDOS.SYS [attrib -r -s -h it 1st] using EDIT.COM from native MS-DOS:

attrib -h -r -s c:\msdos.sys

edit c:\msdos.sys

and add/change the line to read:

SystemReg=0

under the [Options] section.

Reboot.

MSDOS.SYS guide:

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

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I may have to have your babies.

That'll be ok, won't it?

Big Bill :-)

:D ...as I always say, the Highly Worshipable, Guru Gods!...

>;]

(... and now, naturally, the [kinda] bubble-burster: that fix is ok for now, but it's really just cosmetic: for the registry scanner to be doing that (especially continuously), that [usually] means sumthin big is bogus about your registry (unless Guru Gods are aware of this particular thing as being a false alarm)... it's for the GG's to decide...)

Edited by PsycoUnc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Installing the SESP2.1a on a machine already containing many updates. During the install was prompted to replace hhctrlui.dll (recommending to keep current file) because it is version 5.2.3664.0 [per se, this makes sense because the SP uses 5.2.3635.0].

My question is: what update has this file in it that is past the SP? Should this version be included in a future release? Any way to figure out what update installed this file?

Nothing appears to be wrong, just I thought SP is supposed to be at latest rev on everything [is that wrong?] like this, other than newer-still recently released updates [which I can't find any contributing this newer file!].

If this helps, the file is in \windows\system\mui\409.

cjl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-I have the newer ver. installed, here, as well... (no problems)

...

-I always stick w/the latest versions when that warning comes up... vast majority of the time, it's good...

...

-well, the sp2.1a has gone 6 months w/out an update... and it didn't [always] have all the absolute latest updates, back then, either (...some still in "testing" phase, back then, perhaps; etc)...

Edited by PsycoUnc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-I have the newer ver. installed, here, as well... (no problems)

...

-I always stick w/the latest versions when that warning comes up... vast majority of the time, it's good...

...

-well, the sp2.1a has gone 6 months w/out an update... and it didn't [always] have all the absolute latest updates, back then, either (...some still in "testing" phase, back then, perhaps; etc)...

Not the point, since yes, of course you keep the newer version.

The problem here is that some update NOT in the SP is already installed, and it's at a higher rev on the particular file, in this case hhctrlui.dll. The SP is attempting to do the work of 323255 or, better still 811630, both common updates that also would cause the same result. I am asking if anyone knows what this even newer update not found in the SP is that supports the even newer file rev. This is solely for the purpose of the future of the SP, not anything else.

Other than a known sore-point update [known to cause problems where not warranted, and to be applied only on certain laptops], the SP tends to be the latest rev of just about any system file it affects. [Actually, there was a mouse-support file that had a similar problem, but in this case the revision was grossly newer, and actually part of a package, not an O/S update, for which the other files had to accompany this "too-new" rev file to avoid problems. Fortunately, the issue was solved by obtaining the proper rev file as intended in the update it was derived from, etc., so this isn't even a current issue within the SP, etc.]

If someone knows what other update [perhaps an XML or MDAC update? or perhaps IE 6.0 SP1 + updates] perhaps it would be justified to be added into the next release.

This is similar to the issue about the 269388 update. If that is installed first, you get a similar warning because the SP is actually attempting a lower rev than that update. However, 269388 is already scheduled to be in a future update already. To my knowledge, the hhcrlui.dll file doesn't have the same status, thus the need to discuss whatever the actual source of this file is, etc. It's just not always true that a newer file can be used just because it's newer; in this case, since apparently it was installed by some other update, it is likely true in this instance.

The file in question seems to be part of some help center update; the revision is curious because 323255 and 811630 have other files at the same relative revision, almost as if this file was "intended" to be updated to this still-higher level.

cjl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I've always noticed that help update "do you want to keep the newer file" pop up. I always just kept the newer file (answer yes) and haven't noticed help problems.

It will be nice when a newer version of the Service Pack will handle some of these questionable (meaning, we're not exactly certain we're installing precisly the needed versions) files. I do think it's proper to wait until the end of use is here and we see how things are when the smoke clears following all the last updates from Microsoft. We'll also be familiar with what to do with all the needed fixing and work arounds and Gape can just put all that into the pack so it'll just do all that for us. (Wishful thinking?)

Sure, though. Just using the Service Pack isn't enough at this point. Maybe if someone isn't going on the net, but otherwise there's plenty of other updates we have to manually install (and then, sometimes, fix up so things'll still work!) No biggie, though. Plenty of help here.

Bless the guru's!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify:

SP 2.1a wants to install:

hhctrlui.dll 5.2.3635.0 20-May-2002 11:09:38 AM [presumably derived from Q323255 and/or Q811630.]

Before installing SP 2.1a on this system, OTHER updates primarily outside of the SP were installed [iE 6.0, XML and MDAC updates, etc. to name a few]. As a result of these OTHER updates [but I have no idea which particular one of them at this point], the SP 2.1 allowed me [correctly!] to prevent modifying the file already present:

hhctrlui.dll 5.2.3664.0 26-Jul-2002 11:02:46 AM

Considering the "age" of both of these files, I would suspect that this newer version of hhctrlui.dll is a stable file to be included within the SP in a future release. Anyone have any comments here, i.e., which specific update provided the file, and whether the inclusion into a future SP makes sense, etc. [Note: While I don't know where the file exactly comes from, I am certain it is official MS release for something known to be compatible with 98SE.]

cjl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a result of these OTHER updates [but I have no idea which particular one of them at this point], the SP 2.1 allowed me [correctly!] to prevent modifying the file already present:

hhctrlui.dll 5.2.3664.0 26-Jul-2002 11:02:46 AM

It is part of IE 6.0 SP1.

Petr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a result of these OTHER updates [but I have no idea which particular one of them at this point], the SP 2.1 allowed me [correctly!] to prevent modifying the file already present:

hhctrlui.dll 5.2.3664.0 26-Jul-2002 11:02:46 AM

It is part of IE 6.0 SP1.

Petr

the newer hhctrlui.dll file should be included in the next release of 98se SP 2.x. the hhctrlui.dll is NOT included in the KB896358 updates. note that the KB811630 update for NT4 is no longer listed in MS KB article 811630. NT4 users can obtain the updated HTML Help module here:

http://download.microsoft.com/download/c/c...d3623/HHUPD.EXE

It's been almost 6 months since the 2.1a release of the 98se service pack.

Edited by erpdude8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a result of these OTHER updates [but I have no idea which particular one of them at this point], the SP 2.1 allowed me [correctly!] to prevent modifying the file already present:

hhctrlui.dll 5.2.3664.0 26-Jul-2002 11:02:46 AM

It is part of IE 6.0 SP1.

Petr

Thanks Petr

I almost missed it in HHUPD.CAB because it's inside of the mui.cab inside of that, and only the 0409 [ENU] version is that date [the rest are much older in the release!]

Anyone know why the main IE cabs [the ones with an S in the name, IE_S1.cab, etc.] are wholely imbedded within as another complete cab file [same name only the S is removed]?

cjl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Anyone know why the main IE cabs [the ones with an S in the name, IE_S1.cab, etc.] are wholely imbedded within as another complete cab file [same name only the S is removed]?

cjl

That is one question only Microsoft can answer.

Anyone heard from Gape as to when a new version of the unofficial 98se service pack will be posted? It has been six months since v2.1a came out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

assuming the project isn't dead (i hope not),

i'm going to lay down a guess that he's now waiting till 98SEs last stage of support offically ends on July 11th (and/or posssibly the release of IE7 and therefore the end of IE6 updates) so he can present a 'final' 'done and dusted' version.

thats what i would be doing in his shoes at this point, the date's too close now for an incremental to be worth the hassle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

assuming the project isn't dead (i hope not),

i'm going to lay down a guess that he's now waiting till 98SEs last stage of support offically ends on July 11th (and/or posssibly the release of IE7 and therefore the end of IE6 updates) so he can present a 'final' 'done and dusted' version.

thats what i would be doing in his shoes at this point, the date's too close now for an incremental to be worth the hassle.

That's what I've guessed too (assuming it's not dead, as you say). Perhaps the end of 98 SE support will coincide with Gape's summer break from university too, allowing him more time to spend on the next (and maybe 'final') release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...