Jump to content
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. ×

How to do raid drivers and hotfixes correctly.


Recommended Posts

Gosh! Who'd have thought my original script and guide would have become so popular! "What are you talking about royalbox, who the hell are you?" I hear you say.

Well I must apologize to webmedic here as I did say to him in another thread that I didn't want any credit, but I've just read this very long topic and downloaded the zip on page one and thought to myself: "sod it!" If no-one else will give me credit them I'm going to do it myself.

I posted in THIS TOPIC about a script I'd made that automates the process of adding hotfixes. I asked for people to improve it and post back. I've been away for a while but had that topc book-marked to see if anyone had improved it and was dissapointed that they hadn't. I posted yesterday asking if anyone had managed to improve it and webmedic pointed me here! It's great to see that people are interested in it and are improving it but I'm afraid that the ego I didn't think I had has gotten the better of me and I'm posting the original topic so you can see the code and know where it originated.

"So what?" You say. Well, it won't bother anyone else but I wished this had continued on that same thread rather than starting a new one and accepting all praise for it. Just wanted to get that off my chest. I know webmedic added support for the 'other' hotfixes with the picture icon which was good.

Anyway, it's good to see that webmedic and others are working hard on it and I look forward to trying these improvements myself. I don't know why I needed to post this, but for some reason, I really did! No offence to anyone carry on the good work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, waita minute, does't anyone read my posts?

Thanks, Royalbox. Credit where credit's due
in response to your post in THIS THREAD. You certainly have a right to your pride, and I understand that it would have been better in that thread. I would have liked to have seen it from the begining as well. If it is of any consolation, I think what happened is that during the MSFN down time of a couple of days earlier this month, people lost their train of thought. So that it does not go unsaid: Jolly good show, RoyalBox, and thank you for sharing your work with us! And thank you for being the cause of these lively discussions! (What good is an ego, if you can't show it once in a while?)
Link to post
Share on other sites

@GreenMachine

Thanks, yes I read your post. I did post after it and said I would try your modfied script. Still haven't had a chance as I'm giving the computer a bit of a clear out at the moment, you know how these things get!

Jolly good show, RoyalBox, and thank you for sharing your work with us! And thank you for being the cause of these lively discussions!

is that called "massaging my ego"? That's good I could get used to that! And there's me thinking I was imune to ego problems. :)

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
@GreenMachine

Thanks, yes I read your post. I did post after it and said I would try your modfied script. Still haven't had a chance as I'm giving the computer a bit of a clear out at the moment, you know how these things get!

Jolly good show, RoyalBox, and thank you for sharing your work with us! And thank you for being the cause of these lively discussions!

is that called "massaging my ego"? That's good I could get used to that! And there's me thinking I was imune to ego problems. :)

Thanks again.

oh no problem I think i stated I got it someplce else. I'm sorr I could not rememer were welcome back royal blue any help or input would be apriciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

some of the hotfixes as packaged from micrsoft are not packaged very well and are not compatable wiht this script at this time. I'm working with them now to to try and get it

1) down in size so the install is smaller and faster

2) install a little bit different then now so that all the hotfixes show up correctly

3) work in hotfixes like this that have issues.

4) work in other things like dx9 and windows media player.

now having said that make sure you have that hot fix in the proper directory if it is and still doeds not work then remove it from the 2 dir for now till we get the potehr issues worked out.

I need to state here this is not a problem wiht the script but rather an isue wiht some of hte hotfixes them selves which we are working through rihgt now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK webmedic I think anyone would have felt the same if they'd spent a lot of time on something. I tried to download your new version yesterday but I don't have the 7z thing at the moment.

For what it's worth, I PMd you my copy of your work. I'm done, so the balls back in your court.
Thanks I'll check the pm thing then once I've found out where the link is!
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know whether this has been mentioned or sorted out as there are many pages of this thread to check.

As I said when I posted the script originally in the other thread, you should do one hotfix at a time, or else you should be absolutely sure that the same file doesn't exist in 2 or more hotfixes or you could get an older version of the file. I tested this myself with a bunch of hotfixes doing one at a time, then all at once and using directory compare to compare the two folders. One file was older in the 'all at once' folder. Only one but that could be enough to cause errors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again green machine,

I had a good look at your script and noticed you xcopy the files after each is expanded using the /d switch which I thought was a good idea, so you can do all hotfixes at once without fear of overwriting new files with old.

Actually, I've been writing a script from scratch and have used your xcopy idea. I've changed it quite a bit from my original -- moved things around and got rid of some redundant stuff, I didn't use the %PREPDIR% variable I got full path another way. I'll post it when finished.

I'm a bit concerned about 'hotfix type 2' as it's become known. There's no official guide from microsoft about slipstreaming these as far as I know, is everyone sure that these are being installed properly? what problems are outstanding.

thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RoyalBox!

My base version of the RHSM (Royal Hotfix Scripting Method) is your original post, plus changes added by others to include HotFix Type 2. I ran into issues with all KB hotfixes running first, and then all Q hotfixes, and then the same thing with type 2 hotfixes. They were not in chronological order, and I did see some incorrect overwrites. I thought about nameing them all Q######.exe, but I remember reading on MS's site that the hotfix number itself could not insure correct component versioning. XCOPY was the best I could come up with, though it would be ideal if it could do a version check instead of a date check. I extract them each to a seperate directory (Q######) so that I can look at them afterwards, should the need arise.

The PREPDIR thing, as I am sure you figured out, is just to alow runing the script from anywhere, as the type 2 hotfixes, unlike the type 1, require a complete extraction path. This enables me to get them into a subdirectory of my working directory.

As regards the type 2 hotfixes working, it seems they do, but in any event ALL these hotfixes are run during setup, so the changes get there one way or another, and the updated files will be present on the CD, so I think it's OK. I have the most faith in the hotfix itself, and that is why I will never install without them, as suggested in another thread. I only do 4 this way: KB814078, Q327405, Q330994, Q822925, and have not had any problems (that I noticed ...) Bottom line is, I don't think it hurts.

The other system updates: .Net, MDAC, JavaVM and combined WMP/MM, I consider special items, and do not attempt to slipstream them. I run those 4 items, plus the WMP update, from the batch file called in CMDLINES.TXT.

On a side note, I was bothered that the Q817287 hotfix did not seem to accept the uninstall switch, and it would leave behind a C:\Windows\$NTUninstall.....$ folder. It was the only one I had, so the imperfection bugged me... I extracted the hotfix, and it seemed to me that the type 2 hotfix setup was just a wrapper for a type 1 hotfix. The setup basicaly stopped a service, called the type 1 fix, and restarted the service. I just use the extracted type 1 fix, and it works fine as such, as the service in question was never started anyway. No entry in the uninstall list, no hidden uninstall directory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks GreenMachine.

RHSM? I like it!

That's interesting what you say about the hotfixes not running in chronological order with the kb onces running first. I did read something at microsoft's site about qchain and how it's now incorporated into xp hotfixes, but some older hotfixes can still cause a 'wrong file version' problem and they suggested to still use qchain. I've been using that but is there still a problem if you install in the wrong order? Because of the way the svcpack.inf is created, the hotfixes are obviously entered in alphabeticle (sorry, I haven't got a spell checkert!) order.

I noticed on webmedic's script that he renamed the files using ????????.exe and I tried that out on it's own in a test.cmd thing but I had problems with one hotfix I tried it on. I tried q330994.exe that you just mentioned, and it wouldn't have any of it because the file name only had seven characters. In the end I used xcopy to copy and rename then to the short file name with the /n switch. It doesn't look so pretty having q12345~1.exe but I won't be spending much time looking at them! Do you see any problem with this?

Just to be different, instead of using PREPDIR I used %~dp0 which gives the full path. So the full path to 'myfolder' is "%~dp0myfolder" which looks horrible but I used it throughout just in case.

I agree with you about leaving the hotfixes themelves in. That's the way microsoft

suggest and there must be a reason.

As for type 2 hotfixes, I think I'll have to have a good look at them. The one I tried had a dummy.cat a q123456_me.cat (or something like it) and a few other things that I don't know whether are junk of not. I know the files won't hurt if they're compressed and left in i386 but it would be nice to know for sure.

Anyway, I'll keep at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed the risk because the file advpack.dll was the wrong version. It was listed in the setuperr.log (or .txt) file, and that started me looking. Even then, it did not seem to harm anything. Still, better safe than unsure.

I had not really given a thought to the fact that they were run the second time out of order, in svcpack.inf. Oooops. I think I will be renaming them so that alphabetical and chronological order are the same.

I do not care about automatically renaming them, because I like to scrutinize the hotfix before deciding to use it, and the renaming is not a big issue - I've already got my hands in there. The Q12345~1.exe method works fine I think, but I never quite swallowed how poorly windows went from 8.3 to long files, so I (almost) exclusivly use 8.3 from the get-go.

If I'd've known about %~dp0 I would have used it, but I am probably better at assembler than DOS batch commands.

You said you had a good look at my code. Did you notice, like I did, that is becomes much clearer between the first and second pint?

Once you get the kinks out of your new script, please do share (again)

Link to post
Share on other sites
You said you had a good look at my code. Did you notice, like I did, that is becomes much clearer between the first and second pint?

Your's is tidy, you wait untill you see my latest! if I leave it for an hour or two and come back I look at it and haven't got a clue what it's about. The trouble is I tend to do it all in lowercase and it all blends in.

I've got my new script working well with hotfix type 1 and it doesn't overwrite newer files with old when you do them all at once like my original script did because I'm using xcopy like you do. I did a directory compare again with all at once and one at a time to make sure.

I'm Still having a problem with hotfix type 2. Out of the one's you listed only two of those I have -- unless the names are different. Minus the java, mdac and others you mentioned I'm left with IE and OE patches. Maybe with different systems you get different updates. I only have xp home oem with sp1 (2002) already slipsteamed. I'm left with:

q330994.exe

q822925.exe

And that's it, apart form hu1002_per.exe help update which is not critical.

One other thing that concerns me is updating sp1. I added that to my original and posted it in that other thread because someone asked for it, but there is a sp1.cat file in i386, so what happens if you update a file in sp1.cab? Surely the version will no longer match with that in .cat file. I don't know a lot about .cat files but as I understand it, the file versions are in there. Actually, I did a compare after adding all the type 1 hotfixes and 5 files were updated in there.

Anyway, I've gone on long enough for now.

Link to post
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...