GreenMachine Posted September 19, 2003 Share Posted September 19, 2003 Oh, Man, I should never have let you look at my code. In less than 24 hours, you busted my program execution order in svcpack.inf, and now my files are no longer correctly digitally signed!Of the four type 2 fixes I do, I think two are IE and OE updates. I renamed them to the corrosponding KB article because ... because I'm that way. I do almost all the critical and recommended upates. When I go to Windows Update, there are only 4 (was three until a couple of days ago) recommended updates: (I just checked: now there is a new 5th recommended). These are: Journal Viewer, Windows Messenger, Advanced Networking Pack (Q817778), and now Windows Right Management and KB822603.I wonder about the sp1.cat file. It would help to know how the installer works: if t finds a newer version in I386 (newer than that inside the cab file), could it use it instead? Even if it does not like the versioning, there is only one single version in the possible multiple copies. so what's it going to do about it? The newer versions do have a signature somewhere, in some .cat file. Could that be found?On a side note: We build the svcpack.inf file. What about adding everything else there as well: Java, WMP/MM, IE6.1, MDAC, RegEdit /S?Also, perhaps when building the svcpack.inf, list the directory by date in the loop to create the file names, after having merged the two types of fixes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now