Also, clean your Hotfixes, you have redudant ones, eg: 972260 and 974455...

Sorry... With the O version i have the wpdshext problem, but not the mfplat.dll and wmp11.inf.

Edited October 16, 200916 yr by emzendron

p version fixes the wpdshext.res problem. works 100% for me (though I'm not including MSI 4.5)

Although that's weird, rev m and rev p work fine. it's rev n and o that give the wpdshext.res error.

You should re-check your HF list and clean it up.

Edited October 16, 200916 yr by jvidal

Also, clean your Hotfixes, you have redudant ones, eg: 972260 and 974455...

But they will appear in WU...

No, they won't: KB974455 is a cumulative update, it REPLACES KB972260.

PLEASE recheck your HF list.

I'd tested 2 times... Anyway.... Do you have a list (site) where i can see wich new HF replaces the old ones?

Thankz.

I'd tested 2 times... Anyway.... Do you have a list (site) where i can see wich new HF replaces the old ones?

Thankz.

hotfix 099 - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/current.aspx

I remade the process... and guess what? Now it's working... I don't know what cause the error, but i should have done something stupid...

Thankz.

Edited October 16, 200916 yr by emzendron

yeah, like including unneeded/obsolete/redundant hotfixes.

Just for kicks, I rebuilt using beta q and everything went just fine, no errors whatsoever.

Although I didn't include MSI 4.5 (is it really necessary??? I don't think so)

bye!

(and thx again, tommyp)

Edited October 16, 200916 yr by jvidal

Many thanks for Windows Installer 4.5 support!

I have tested Windows Installer 4.5 using Dutch Windows XP Pro SP3 including Windows Media Player 11, Internet Explorer 8 and all security and other hotfixes and everything works flawlessly!

HFSLIP_revQ.zip

It's a shame Microsoft still haven't fixed their Windows Installer 4.5 installer as all included files have no valid digital signature. When installing Windows Installer 4.5 manually you would get big trouble whenever sfc reverts to Windows Installer 3.1 files.

Using HFSLIP SFC reports no errors to the user or asks for CD's, except the event log will contain notices.

@jvidal. MSI 4.5 isn't required, but is much faster than MSI 3.1 and contains additional features.

Edited October 17, 200916 yr by Acheron

It is?

I have it installed, but I did so manually, I do not put on my slipstreamed CDs.

Maybe I should...now that it is handled correctly...

thx!

New beta R is up that addresses some 2k WMP and WM hotfixes. The changes do not affect XP.

nice release tommyp, MSI 4.5 is neatly slipstreamed ever since downloading DX9 August 2009 I just realised some DX11 runtime is included. The new dx11 dlls are slipstreamed perfectly and there is also a new library d3dcsx.

So I've got a feature request for a d3dcsx slipstream if you don't mind. The following modification is just a suggestion and most probably not be the best way of doing things.

Line 2144 needs to be modified to

IF EXIST HFCABS\*d3d*_x86.cab FOR /F %%I IN ('DIR/B/A-D/ON HFCABS\*d3d*_x86.cab') DO EXPAND HFCABS\%%I -F:* WORK\DX9EXTRA >NUL

and the following should be added to line 2167 (after D3DCompiler slipstream)

IF EXIST WORK\DX9EXTRA\d3dcsx* FOR /F "TOKENS=2* DELIMS=_" %%I IN ('DIR/B/A-D/ON WORK\DX9EXTRA\d3dcsx*.dll') DO (
	REN WORK\DX9EXTRA\d3dcsx_%%I d3dcsx_%%I
	ECHO>>SOURCESS\I386\TXTSETUP.SIF d3dcsx_%%I = 1,,,,,,,2,0,0,d3dcsx_%%I&ECHO>>SOURCESS\I386\DOSNET.INF d1,d3dcsx_%%I
)

Hello,

Just wanted to let you know that in a another hfslip run (with version "r" this time) I had several files in the textmode phase of setup with the "could not be copied" error message. Files seemed not to be related to each other or to all belong to the same patch. Nothing changed compared to my previous attempts (except that I this time installed on a real system instead of a virtual one), so I'm really puzzled.

Not a big problem, as all these files (6 or 7 IIRC, among them "advpack.dll.mui", "jscript.dll.mui") were translation files only, i.e. "<something>.mui", but strange nevertheless. By the way, "wpdshext.res" was not affected this time.

What's going on here? Can someone confirm, or is this something only I experience with the new beta?

Have you actually checked if all these extra DirectX dll's are actually installed by default on Windows XP?