Aaron Posted October 21, 2003 Author Share Posted October 21, 2003 AaronXP,Given this quote from GreenMachine:Of the three .MSI pacakges I have re-packaged (DotNet FrameWork, Windows Messenger and Journal Viewer), I recieived an error from both Windows Messenger and Journal Viewer when installed from the SVCPACK.INF section, and no errors when run from the GuiRunOnce sectionI am still concerned about your svcpack.inf... Did you fix those errors GreenMachine talks about? I'm not using Windows Messenger or Journal Viewer from svcpack.inf, only MSN Messenger.Finally, if your DOTNET1_1.EXE and MSNM6.exe files are trouble free, is there any chance at all you might post them for us to download? (Going for broke on that one!)You should be able to easily create them yourself. Its too large for me to upload to some space. IExpress.exe is in Windows XP, all you have to do is extract the dotnet framework you download, take out the cab and msi and load up those two in iexpress. Same applies for MSN Messenger (just the msi file) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willpantin Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 AaronXP,Ok, thanks for all your answers...!By the way, the reason Windows Update does not bring up Hotfix 816093 as missing, even though I did not install it, is that it is equivalent to the MSJavx86_3810update.exe file as posted on your Unattended XP CD Install Guide...!*Therefore, I renamed my 3809 Build and my 3810 Build MS Java files to "JVM3809.exe" and "JVM3810.exe", and now install them both from my svcpack.inf file, which now looks like this:[Version]Signature="$Windows NT$"MajorVersion=5MinorVersion=1BuildNumber=2600[setupData]CatalogSubDir="\i386\Update"[ProductCatalogsToInstall]KB826939.cat[setupHotfixesToRun]update.exe -q -nJVM3809.exe /Q:A /R:NJVM3810.exe /Q:A /R:NDX9opk.exeWMP9opk.exeQ330994.EXE /Q:A /R:NQ819696.EXE /Q /U /Z /NQ824105.EXE /Q /U /Z /NQ828026.exe /Q /U /Z /NQ828035.exe /Q /U /Z /NQ828750.EXE /Q:A /R:NJS56NEN.EXE /Q:A /R:NQ823182.EXE /Q /U /Z /NQ824141.EXE /Q /U /Z /NQ825119.EXE /Q /U /Z /NQCHAIN.EXE*NOTE: My svcpack.inf is designed for a Slipstreamed SP1a setup...!I'll now get to work on that IExpress.exe, and lie low for a while...!Thanks again, AaronXP...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMachine Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 AaronXP,Given this quote from GreenMachine:Of the three .MSI pacakges I have re-packaged (DotNet FrameWork, Windows Messenger and Journal Viewer), I recieived an error from both Windows Messenger and Journal Viewer when installed from the SVCPACK.INF section, and no errors when run from the GuiRunOnce sectionI am still concerned about your svcpack.inf... Did you fix those errors GreenMachine talks about?I believe those errors are limitations (features?) of the Messenger and Viewer installers, that require the shell to be loaded to work (which it is not during SVCPACK.INF parsing). As they work at a later stage, I have not researched it further.The repackaging of Messenger and DotNet is easy: just connect the dots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willpantin Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 Thanks, GreenMachine!Your IExpress Guide was great, all went perfectly, just as described... Edit: AAaaargh! I ran my install, testing on Virtual PC, and "MSN Messenger 6" came up with the following error:On the other hand, ".Net Framework" installed perfectly from svcpack.infWhy didn't MSN Messenger 6 install right? (It was created using IExpress, as GreenMachine's Guide instructs.) :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMachine Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Hmmm. I never tried MSN Messenger. I believe that is the same message I got with Journal Viewer and Windows Messenger when installed from SVCPACK.INF, and I figured it was due to the shell not being fully loaded during execution (as MS mentioned in an article inked to previously). Strange, as Aaron seemed to have it working ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted October 22, 2003 Author Share Posted October 22, 2003 Strange, got no answer for this error on MSN Messenger 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XtremeMaC Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 sorry to bother where is greenmachine's guide on the forum I searched for the sting this topic came up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted October 22, 2003 Author Share Posted October 22, 2003 http://www.MSFN.org/users/GreenMachine/XPC...TE/iexpress.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willpantin Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 AaronXP quote:Strange, got no answer for this error on MSN Messenger 6No biggie, MSN Messenger is not a big priority. In fact, I decided not to include it at all in my installation CD.On the other hand, I am really glad that ".Net Framework 1.1", "DirectX 9.0b", and "Windows Media Player 9 + Movie Maker 2" do install from SVCPACK.INF...!I am pretty set. Only room for improvement, would be to figure out how to do a DVD install disk.I really must be rather lousy at doing searches, because I am having trouble finding good links to posts regarding what should be done differently regarding a DVD install disk...!The ISO file is different on a DVD installation disk, I presume. Any good links on tips regarding its creation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rys Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Noted that the "makecab svcpack.inf svcpack.in_" step was missing. (or removed?)When I skipped turning svcpack.inf into a compressed file, the update Q828750 failed to install during unattended installation.Anyone else have this problem?-Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geckotek Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Once again I have to ask....why are you guys jumping through hoops to do these installs via svcpack.inf when a simple batch file works fine and IMHO is easier to apply?I don't do ISOs, so I can't comment on that. But as far as the bootable DVD, it's exactly like making a bootable CD. Pretty darned easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMachine Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 File Version StabilityThat is all I see to gain: I pay in CD creation time, CD total size, CD installation time. But when I'm done, the risk of picking up an outdated file, from the CD, or from a .cab file, is reduced to the minimum. It works for me ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geckotek Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 So, in the case of doing a repair from CD, you don't have to worry about getting older versions of files right? It seems to me that would be the only time that would be a worry. Tell me if I'm wrong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rstryker Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 snipI am pretty set. Only room for improvement, would be to figure out how to do a DVD install disk.I really must be rather lousy at doing searches, because I am having trouble finding good links to posts regarding what should be done differently regarding a DVD install disk...!The ISO file is different on a DVD installation disk, I presume. Any good links on tips regarding its creation? DVD is no differant...you just get more room to add stuff!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMachine Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 @Geckotek: Anytime you insert the system CD into the drive, you are at risk. I am at less risk than you. What are the chances that it will pick up a bad file, I don't know. I'm sure if you uninstall IIS and then re-install it, you will not have the latest versions of all files. I am not sure I will, either, but I am at least 90% (or so...) protected. I admit that this is really not important to many, and the price to pay is more than many like in terms of size and speed, but I do know it is the most stable. For that reason, if you notice, I have not tried to "convert" any of you. However, if I can help, explain, or disagree in a gentlemanly fashion ... I will. As I've said before: If you think your way is better, it probably is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts