Can some specific be made about CAB files in the OemPnPDriversPath cause I have more than usual added cab in my directories?

MSDOS 5 manual states running a bat (ie cmd) file from a bat file requires "CALL nameof.bat". CALL is used by cmd.com as a keyword to run batch files. Does this help in instances?

Is there a way to get a complete list of hotfixes without going through the whole forum.

Thanks for the good work also.

It's already been said that this replaces 832894. But does anyone know for sure what other updates are replaced, if any? I want to make sure I'm not applying anything I don't have to. Just for the heck of it, here is my svcpack list:

JS56NEN.exe /q:a
823182.exe /z /q
823353.exe /q:a
824105.exe /z /q
824141.exe /z /q
825119.exe /z /q
826939.exe /z /q
828035.exe /z /q
828741.exe /z /q
832894.exe /q:a
831167.exe /q:a
835732.exe /z /q
837001.exe /z /q
839645.exe /z /q
840315.exe /z /q
840374.exe /z /q
841873.exe /z /q
842773.exe /z /q
DX9NTopk.exe
WMP9MM2.exe
828026.exe /z /q
qchain.exe

Then later on I apply:

832483

839643

816093

870669

So am I applying anything extraneous? And while I'm at it, am I missing anything?

Is there a way to get a complete list of hotfixes without going through the whole forum.

Thanks for the good work also.

its a idea but ermmm..... what do you think of the FIRST page of THIS topic? i think it is a great idea.....

It's already been said that this replaces 832894. But does anyone know for sure what other updates are replaced, if any? I want to make sure I'm not applying anything I don't have to. Just for the heck of it, here is my svcpack list:

JS56NEN.exe /q:a
823182.exe /z /q
823353.exe /q:a
824105.exe /z /q
824141.exe /z /q
825119.exe /z /q
826939.exe /z /q
828035.exe /z /q
828741.exe /z /q
832894.exe /q:a
831167.exe /q:a
835732.exe /z /q
837001.exe /z /q
839645.exe /z /q
840315.exe /z /q
840374.exe /z /q
841873.exe /z /q
842773.exe /z /q
DX9NTopk.exe
WMP9MM2.exe
828026.exe /z /q
qchain.exe

Then later on I apply:

832483

839643

816093

870669

So am I applying anything extraneous? And while I'm at it, am I missing anything?

look at the first post. if there is a hotfix what is not listed then it is replaced or changed into other hotfixes or unneeded....

please note the first post last lines aaron write what is changed or replaced....

for example the 839643 also OPK/Dx9b (or lower) is unneeded by use the new redist 9.c because it replaced them all.....

From ChiDragon

"2) DirectX.cab and BDA.cab may be excluded if your application is not

supported on version of Windows 95, 98, 98 Second Edition or Millenium."

Does that mean that we can delete those files if we're running Windows XP?

Response from prathapml

QUOTE (ChiDragon @ Jul 28 2004, 12:25 PM)

Does that mean that we can delete those files if we're running Windows XP? 

Yes, and you can delete those files for win2k as well.

at the same time:

1) ManagedDX.cab may be excluded if support for DirectX for Managed

Applications is not required for your applications.

Soooo...how important is it to include "ManagedDX.cab," or can that 3+MB file be safely excluded as well? I can't begin to fathom which, if any, of my applications require such support.

how important is it to include "ManagedDX.cab"

Well, I delete that one too.

I haven't come across a single app that wanted managedDX to run (managed DX will only really take-off with the release of longhorn) in all these years of running a zillion things of all sorts!

You can delete that CAB if you're sure you won't run dxsetup.exe with the "/manageddx" switch - and that switch is something I haven't ever used, and everything has been fine and normal.

@prathapml: You, sir, are a scholar and a gentleman. Thank you.

how important is it to include "ManagedDX.cab"

Well, I delete that one too.

I haven't come across a single app that wanted managedDX to run (managed DX will only really take-off with the release of longhorn) in all these years of running a zillion things of all sorts!

You can delete that CAB if you're sure you won't run dxsetup.exe with the "/manageddx" switch - and that switch is something I haven't ever used, and everything has been fine and normal.

does this mean its safe to delete these files (when used in an unattended xp) from the redistributable version:

ManagedDX.CAB

BDA.can

DirectX.cab

i have already saved 18+mb worth of files exluding these which is cool! i was wondering, any other files that are safe to exlude other than this?

so far i have retained the following files:

BDANT.cab

BDAXP.cab

DSETUP.dll

dsetup32.dll

dxnt.cab

dxsetup.exe

My dX setup is only 13.5 MB, and these are the files I retain (for win2k):

dxnt.cab
dsetup.dll
dsetup32.dll
dxsetup.exe

As for winXP, just wait a week and slip-stream SP2 (which has integrated directX 9C) into your install-source. Attached is an icon for directX - which is nice to use if you are SFX'ing your directX install (winrar allows you to use an icon for the resulting SFX).

dx.ico

Anyone notice how this was re-released:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/MS04-025.mspx

another question, i was planning on sfx-compressing the dx9c-setup files, is it okay to call an sfx-compressed file (that will autorun dxsetup.exe /silent) via svcpack.inf?

another question, i was planning on sfx-compressing the dx9c-setup files, is it okay to call an sfx-compressed file (that will autorun dxsetup.exe /silent) via svcpack.inf?

No, that is not okay, because the SFX will de-compress itself and autorun the "dxsetup /silent" properly - but as a different process. So your svcpack.inf assumes that the directX install has already finished (when it has only just begun) and moves on to the next item - which will clash with your directX install.

Use cmdlines - it is the best option for non-hotfix packages. Get the SFX to *ONLY* de-compress to a pre-determined path silently, and then have your next command install directX.

I hope I was clear enough to put the point across.

i see... i was wondering how was the OPK distributable version of DX9b got into svcpack.inf? was it an SFX-compressed file?

i really would want to pack the DX9c as an archive (SFX possibly) and call it (its okay if its already uncompressed but...)... i was wondering if would it be possible that after decompression (before svcpack.inf), can i run applications from the HDD via svcpack.inf on an unattended xpcd?

PS: im sorry if my question's a bit confusing.