It was very old version of Service Pack (1.x). I am sure that all versions of Service Pack 2 and 3 doesn't change About box logo.

Thanks Gape for the beta.

The version of OLEDLG.DLL in this beta seems to be 1.0, not 5.0.1601. That is what's reported in the file properties window. The "Product Version" is 2.01.

I noticed you are using KRNL386.EXE ver 4.10.1999. MDGx has a newer version (4.10.2000) that claims to fix some kind of memory corruption bug. I love that your service pack is slim and not bloated. For people who want a kitchen sink approach, there is the excellent autopatcher. You solution, while not as comprehensive, is much lighter, and dosen't install unnecessary stuff.

Win98SE SP3Beta1
Alternative download facility

http://www.celticsurf.net/easyhost/dropsite/sesp30b1-en.exe

It is working well for me. No problems.

While you're at it please try out the versatile CelticSurf toolbar!

http://www.celticsurf.net/easyhost/dropsite/CelticSurf.exe

Thank you.


Shell32.dll in v2.1a has the altered logo.

Hi, Gape!
Very nice to see that you are still updating uSP! Very nice job.
I had posted a long time ago (see previous pages) the list of fixes found and those not found in uSP3. HTHed.

Fred.

Excellent news that SP3 Beta 1 now includes support for +137GB hard drives

Did you decide to use version .2222 or .2225 of LLXX's ESDI_506.PDR (Hopefully .2225)


ANSWER: It is .2225 and its in the SP2.cab file (perfect for slipstreaming) THANKS GAPE!!!!

Hi Fred,

Already included in Beta 1:

Will NOT included in uSP:

Will probably include in the next beta:

Uh? No LLXX fix?

Thanks for this info, Gape.
That's a good thing to know what will NOT be included so that we won't ask why it's not there in the future.
I'll check this out once I have time.

Could you please clarify
That's important because some system, like mine, supports only the .2222 version, while others prefer the more recent .2225 version.
Using an unsuitable version cause hard drive to work on Dos compatibility mode (until ad-hoc version are reinstalled). It's an annoyance detected since uSP 2.01a.
As it may be difficult to automaticaly detect which version each computer requires, idealy there should be a place where the user could choose and/or the possibility to manualy replace one file by another if the problem appears.

The version of msvcrt.dll included in uSP is older then mine - I have 6.10.9359.0 - any particular reason to not include that in uSP?

A later version is included in the unofficial 932590 hotfix, which includes MSVCRT.DLL 6.1.9848.0 (from the Win2000 Q932590 hotfix):

http://www.mdgx.com/files/Q932590.EXE

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=932590

MDGx lists it in this thread.

Because of version consistency:

atl.dll - 3.0.9782
mfc42.dll - 6.0.9782
msvcirt.dll - 6.0.9782
msvcp60.dll - 6.0.9782
msvcrt.dll - 6.0.9782

Dated Feb, 2004.

Source.

If I include 6.1.9848 version of msvcrt.dll, I need to update to 6.1.xxxx versions of these files. Does anyone know latest 6.1.xxxx versions of these files ?

The 98FESP2 version 2.40 contains the 6.10.9848.0 version of msvcrt.dll. It also contains:
Atl.dll - 3.00.9782
Mfc42.dll - 6.02.4131.0
Msvcirt.dll - 6.10.9845.0
msvcp60.dll - 6.02.3104.0
msvcrt.dll - 6.10.9848.0

Rick

Hey Gape,

Just wanted to applaud both this project and all the effort being put into this.
Nice to see you reached beta stage , looking forward to play around

I have updated two computers so far with 3.0 Beta 1 without any trouble, and so far the systems have been rock solid.

Two thumbs up!

French version of the Service Pack 3.0 Beta 1 is available here:
http://www.matze.fr/traductions-systeme.html#trad99

HiH

I've just installed SP 3.0 BETA 1 on a clean install of 98 SE and everything worked perfectly. Nice work, thanks

Just to report a prblem i found on my system, the logo.inf doesn't seem to work, the logo files aren't copied.
I replaced the logo.inf with the one from the SESP2.1a and the logos are installed correctly...

I've installed this pack (SP 3.1 BETA 1), but when I go to Add/Remove it says that I have Unofficial Windows98 SE Service Pack 2.1a. Why so? During the installation, I kept some files which were recommended. Is this the cause? Then, do I need to reinstall it and let those files be overwritten?

By the way, does this pack have an animated boot logo? I only saw a splash screen when the computer was booting. Thanks for any reply.

Edit: I forgot to say that I installed SP 2.1a and RP7 before this pack. Some files it recommended to keep are:

File name: Advpack.dll
Description: ADVPACK
Your version: 6.00.2900.2180

File name: Comctl32.dll
Description: Common Controls Library
Your version: 6.00.2600.500

And Explorer.exe, Shell32.dll too.

Especialy in your case, but also in general, I strongly DO NOT recommand uninstalling any uSP (2 or 3).
Better make a windows reinstall-over (over the already installed windows).

I haven't had any problems yet, so I think I will keep these files. I'm not sure if any of them comes from RP7. I don't want to mess up with it at all. Whether the version is 2.1a or 3.0 beta 1, this SP was created by the same person, right? If reinstalling and overwriting these files can result in reinstalling RP7, I would rather not risk. Thanks for your reply, Fredledingue.

OH NO! I strongly disapprove of this, Gape.

BOTH the 2_4DATE.EXE file AND "sShortDate" are needed to make ALL programs that have date functions use the
"m/d/yyyy" format.

The "sShortDate=M/d/yyyy" in WIN.INI is used by 16bit programs like File Manager (WINFILE.EXE). File Manager does NOT use the date format settings from the Windows registry.

While the 2_4DATE.EXE file only updates the Windows registry to make only 32bit programs like Windows Explorer use the m/d/yyyy format. 2_4DATE does NOT make 16bit apps like File Manager use the 4-digit year date format. That's why "sShortDate" is still needed.

So you will need to put back WIN.INI sShortDate into the next beta release of the 98se SP.

OR better yet, try KB941029 which has 6.0.98.02 of msvbvm60.dll and MS KB article 941029 has keyword "kbhotfixserver" near the bottom of the article in the Keywords: section; one tell-tale sign that there may be a hotfix available for it. MS KB article 934602 doesn't have keyword "kbhotfixserver" on it.

Success! Thanks.
I don't know if the CRLUPD.CAB gets applied.



@Gape... Do the whole 2_4date update or not. It's your call.

I use Office2000, Adobe, & other 90's vintage apps
on several 98SE computers, all with no problems.
All without the 2_4date update.
And with no issues I know.
--
If anyone doesn't know...
Applying the 2_4date update is equal to choosing
the Short Date Style -
MM/dd/yyyy -
in the Control Panel --> Regional--> Date tab.
This updates both the registry and win.ini.
--

Hi guys [and gals],

Added links to SP2 3.0 Beta 1:
http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm#SPX

* Unofficial Windows 98 SE Service Pack 2 (SP2) installs ALL previously released Hotfixes, Patches + Updates (free):
http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=61749
- 98 SE SP2 3.0 Beta 1 Test [20.5 MB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/spx/SESP30B1.EXE
- 98 SE SP2 3.0 Beta 1 Test [18.6 MB, French]:
http://www.mdgx.com/spx/SP30B1FR.EXE
98 SE SP2:
http://exuberant.ms11.net/98sesp.html

Enjoy.

The German version of 3.0 Beta #1 is available here:
http://www.nandlstadt.com/win98sp.htm#ziel2

Known (localisation) problems:
Fdisk.exe, Format.com & winfile.exe are (still) in English
infex.exe is not 100% translatable (description-textbox & cancel-button)

how can i slipstream this?

yes you can, check the enclosed readme.txt for details

Does 98 SE SP 3.0 BETA 1 support USB thumbdrives still?

I did a fresh install of Win98SE, then installed this Service Pack, then plugged in my USB Thumbdrive and I couldn't get it to find a driver.

I asked the driver installer to check C:\windows\system and c:\windows\inf with no luck.

Any help would be appreciated.


EDIT: I installed NUSB 3.3 and the drives were detected and drivers installed immediately. So why doesn't SP3b1 detect them?

Added link to SP2 3.0 Beta 1 German:
http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm#SPX

98 SE SP2 3.0 Beta 1 Test [17.9 MB, German]:
http://www.mdgx.com/spx/SP30B1DE.EXE

Enjoy.

AH SHOOT! KB941029 MSVBVM60.DLL 6.0.98.02 hotfix is no longer available.
However, v6.0.98.02 of the msvbvm60.dll file is included in Windows Vista Service Pack 1 and Windows XP Service Pack 3 (woo-hoo!)
If anyone wants this newer version of the msvbvm60.dll file, ask me for it.

Are the below updates in SP3 B1? Windowsupdate showed me these are still needed after SP3B1. OK, the DX9 update shouldn't be in SP3, but the other two should, or if they there, why does windowsupdate telling this?

TIA

Security Update for DirectX 9 (KB904706)
Download size: 567 KB

Security Update for Windows 98 (KB891781)
Download size: 152 KB

Q329048: Security Update (Windows 98)
Download size: 267 KB

Hi, only 891781 is included in uSP 3.0 B1. Did you install IE before or after uSP ?

About Q329048, it will be probably included next beta.

Thanks for feedback.

I'm not sure if this is related to the unofficial service pack or if it's strictly a windows update problem. Every time I have WU check for needed updates, it claims that I need 823559 and Security Update, March 7, 2002. WU says the install is successful each time, but it always shows them as needed.

If it matters, Internet Explorer was installed after the unofficial service pack.

Rick

Thanks for the quick reply. IE6 was installed before B1. Great program, BTW.

Any idea GAPE why your service pack didn't automatically find my USB drives but manually installing NSUB 3.3 after your patch did?


I thought you included NUSB 3.3 into your Service Pack?

I didn't include NUSB in any version.

Oh.....


Don't you think it would be a good idea?

Giving Win98SE native USB support would very much appreciated by most users I would imagine.

Gape already asserted some time ago that he would only include official, unmodified updates in his Service Pack. No third parties, no elements belonging to other operating systems.
It's the man's choice and we can only respect it.

On the other hand, nobody stops one from installing soporific's Auto-Patcher for Windows 98SE which offers all colors of updates, NUSB included.

3.0 has lots of unofficial updates. BTW, the fact is that I don't like to add ME files into uSP, and NUSB has lots of ME files.

I think I should reconsider this decision, some ME files are the only way to fix some problems in 98 SE.

Oh, please forgive my Swiss (as in swiss-cheese) memory, Gape. Was just trying to help.



Thing is, my system has a lot of ME, 2000, XP, 2003 files - whatever makes it roll without hiccups.

Dunno if anyone (MS especially) would care anymore. As much as we strive, we 9x users are a dying breed anyway...

I think including a USB driver like NUSB 3.3 would make your Service Pack complete.

- Official and Unofficial Win98SE updates / fixes
- Native USB Storage Device Support
- Copy files larger than 2GB
- Use Hard Disks Bigger than 137GB

It would be the ultimate and only patch 90% of Win98 users would need.


I'm all for you including NUSB

I disagree with the 'kitchensink' approach. While many people may end up installing both, I think NUSB is a different product, and it should be handled accordingly. Makes testing and maintenance simpler, methinks.

I don't want everything added, but I really do think USB support would go along way towards making 98SESP the ultimate update and provides a feature most people would add anyway. It also makes it a simple option for Win98SE noobs. One patch that basically does the lot.

I wouldn't recommend adding too many other updates. But this one I think is highly beneficial. Even make it option on installation of the Service Pack.

I would love to hear what other think.

MD makes a great patch, there is no need for Gape to duplicate his work. Installing the NUSB patch seperately is not hard at all for the user to do. I think Gape should stick to OS only updates. If you want a patch that includes everything, there is already the 9x autopatcher by sophorific

EDIT: I almost forgot, Gape has a strict no windows ME policy. There are a lot of files that are from windows ME in NUSB.

Good guy though he is, soporific puts a lot of unneeded "xtras" in and I have to waste a lot of time removing them.

Agree. Gapes Service pack in comparison is lean and mean. USB support would just give it a crucial feature that I'd assume most users would appreciate.

Beta 2 is released. Have fun !

I have Win98 SE, IE 6.0 SP1, and a mixture of RP7 and Renovatio. I hope it will be OK too. Ah, do I need to uninstall the previous pack, 98 SE SP 3.0 beta 1 before installing the new one?

Thanks for upgrading your pack, Gape.