Here's mine: one thing I strongly disliked when I first got my hands on XP was this "safety procedure" of copying all the files on HDD, thus taking up space. While nowadays, generally, HDD space is not a problem anymore for most users, there may still be a certain amount of people that for some reason are stuck with old hardware, including small HDDs.

Personally I have a couple of 1.2-2GB HDDs that I intend to use for various tests, and having the installation archives copied on the HDD would take up unnecessary space, possibly preventing me from installing other needed packs/applications/etc. But even if this wasn't the case, I still can't see why I would waste that space with files I'll most probably never need again, when I could simply insert the CD/DVD if I would ever have to.

If possible - and I can't see why it wouldn't be - the best solution would be for you to add an option for the user to choose whether the installation would use the optical drive as a source or the archives would be copied to the HDD. When the latter is chosen, please allow for the user to specify a path for the source archives to be copied to, as I imagine someone might want to select a different drive/folder for the source files.

Soporific:

There seems to be a problem with your hoster for the 1.7 package. I have been trying to download the file for days and all I get is an error page. Can't get into the mega-file site. You might want to look into this.

Bayou75

Hey,

I make a folder C:\WINDOWS\OPTIONS and then a CABS folder within the OPTIONS folder. Then I copy the contents of the 98SE cd's Win98 folder into it and in regedit change the source locations of OLS to C:\WINDOWS\OPTIONS\CABS\OLS and the source directory to C:\WINDOWS\OPTIONS\CABS.

So I install from the cd but then copy the files to the hard drive so I needn't be bothered inserting it again.

But this doesn't do the trick for Internet Explorer updates. Those look for the location of Windows Update, which becomes the Internet Explorer cd if I install IE6 SP1 from that cd.

I just installed 98SE into VMWare and just installed the 98 Plus! pack, the Windows 98 Resouce Kit Full, the System Policy Editor, WinZip 10 and WinRAR 3.62 (so I could extract the auto-patcher Alpha 7 update), and the Creative SBPCI VXD drivers and software.

Then I ran auto-patcher and this time turned off/on the stuff I wanted from it. I turned off the 98SE2ME and 98MP10 as I will be installing those myself. I installed Dialup Networking 1.4 when prompted by auto-patcher and installed WebFolders update after auto-patcher was finished. I had activated the WMEncoder, Explorer slowdown copy big files fixes and VBRun stuff and deactivated the 137GB fix, Command Prompt Here, CopyTo/SendTo, and Add/Remove tweaks. What is that Add/Remove control panel applet tweak? I didn't want to install it without knowing what it did.

One overlap you should be made aware of is the Windows Me ScanFrag installation. When a user installs 98SE2ME full version, that program installs the Windows Me versions for ScanDisc and Defrag. You might want to make ScanFrag an option you can toggle on or off in auto-patcher. Those who want to install the full version of 98SE2ME after auto-patcher would then get the Windows Me versions.

I'm going to install DotNET 1.1, 1.1SP1 and DotNET 2.0, then install 98SE2ME and 98MP10. Let's see whether I experience powrprof.dll errors or weird XP style explorer toolbars and icons or device/startup item problems. I don't mind so much since it's in VMWare and I didn't spend a lot of time installing things before auto-patcher. I CAN tell you that WMP 9 opens and runs fine at this point.

As far as the Internet Explorer cabs go, I'm not certain where you could put them where Windows Update would find them. I'm not certain exactly how that works, but I wouldn't mind them being on the hard drive. Even in VMWare, I made the virtual hard drive 32GB with all allocated initially. That's plenty of room for stuff if I don't copy my mp3 music collection into it. In a real system, I would use a minimum of 80GB for 98SE (sometimes giving it 120GB) and then I do copy my 17GB music collection to the My Music folder. No need to in VMWare. I'll probably use XP to listen to music mostly in this case.

But if this works without errors I will be wiping everything and installing 98SE to a real hard drive. I think. Still squeemish about that IOS bootup error I got a lot of times. That never happens in VMWare.

Good news. I successfully installed 98SE2ME and 98MP10 without any weird errors or toolbar antics. So whatever I deactivated in auto-patcher to avoid duplication worked. Windows Media Player 9 runs fine and has the mp3 codec from WMP10.

I notice that 98SE2ME installs the nice Windows 2000/Me color scheme without the font style change that Gape's Unofficial 98SE Service pack has. That's nice. I disliked the unusual looking font the last time I tried it. So I'm happy there too.

One strange thing is back though. The My Computer desktop icon is the normal default 98SE icon but once again Display Properties and the Theme Manager both show the newer icon that Explorer.exe uses.

Instead of messing around to change it I'm going to leave the old icon there. As long as they are all old, it looks proper. So I don't mind that. If I want to change them all to the Windows 2000/Me style I have a Windows Me theme that has those, so I could change to them with the Theme Manager.

Now lets see what happens when I install my printer and Microsoft Works/Office stuff. I used to do that first but didn't want to take the time until I saw how the auto-patcher and MDGx updates worked out.

Eck, I'll try out the "IE setup files on the hard disk" thingy and get back to you... is there a quick way to check if this works? What can we do to force the OS to try to refer to the place it thinks the IE cab files are kept?

NEW QUESTION:

regarding MDGx's latest version of NUSB24.EXE ...

I am now including this as a proper install within auto-patcher (instead of a manual install) but to properly code for it I need to create a new routine. I have eliminated virtually all installs that will go out of date but to do this for NUSB24.EXE is a bit tricky. The problem is how to differentiate between NUSB24.EXE and NUSB23e.EXE, but also future-proof the title. A problem will occur if i only check for the file size of USBSTOR.INF --- if a future version is released and someone installs this manually, and then tries to run the existing auto-patcher, the method above would try to re-install the old version. This probably won't matter too much (the old version just wont install anything if the hotfix is compiled properly) but it breaks the philosophy of this project --- nothing should be installed if it isn't needed. And the report function would give false reports about this title, which is a no no.

The way I've worked out is to perform 2 checks ---- the main difference between all the releases of NUSB seems to be USBSTOR.INF and so one of the checks will be checking to see if the size in bytes of USBSTOR.INF is exactly 20,387 bytes but in order to future proof it, I should also check the file version of one of the files. So my first question is: ... which of the files included in NUSB24.EXE that we can check the file version of, is MOST LIKELY to be updated in a future version of this title???

Or can people think of another way to solve this problem ... let me re-state it just in case --- the problem is: how can we see if this title has already been installed WITHOUT stopping future versions of this title from being installed? If we can differentiate between NUSB24.EXE and NUSB23e.EXE then the problem should be solved. Its just that it seems that all the files that we can check the file version of --- they are all exactly the same in both NUSB24.EXE and NUSB23e.EXE --- hopefully I'm wrong because this would solve the problem, but it seems not.

What's a guy to do?

Oh, and the next release of this project i want to be a BETA release --- can anyone see a problem with this?

Also, a new dedicated hoster for auto-patcher will be available soon -- as soon as I can get a CD to a guy in Canada, it will be available.

And I will also be releasing a combined version of the unattended boot Cd project and auto-patcher. I'm just testing it now, but it is SOOOOO GOOD to be able to set whichever custom version of Windows 98 I want (ie keyboard & regional setting, etc) and then start the install and two hours later have a completely patched and ready to go clean installation of Win98se. No MSN icon on the desktop, Dial-Up Networking 1.4 gets installed automatically (it installs nicely with a RUNONCE command just before the last reboot of the installation process), and AutoPatcher, sorry I mean auto-patcher, starts automatically and runs all the way to the end. Jolly good show it all is. BUT ..... I'm sure this could do with more collaboration. Whoever wants to join forces with me to make a really kick-arse version of the combined UBCD and AP, IS MORE THAN WELCOME!!!! We will completely split the credit.

Went through what I toggled off in posts in 98MP10 and 98SE2ME threads. I just didn't want to type all that again. Mostly it was just toggling off 98SE2ME and 98MP10 in auto-patcher and installing them myself afterwards. I mentioned the rest in those other threads.

Just real happy with the result being a fully patched. working system and not one with weird malfunctioning like last time.

It's a riot watching this thing work. It zips through everything it used to take me hours and hours to install.

I think one of the reasons for insisting the program check to see if an install is needed before installing, is so all my coding work can be seen!!! All the other service packs just do their thing regardless and all the magic is hidden away ...

The main way I check to see if all the checking code works is to run auto-patcher twice. It is only when I have nothing installing the second time around that tells me if it works. So, i'd be interested to know the results of running auto-patcher a second time after the first run has finished. Your log file should report that nothing was installed. Can you do this for me and post the result? Or just report that nothing installs if that is the case.

Cheers man. I also re-edited the post before yours, re-read it can ya?

The broken link to v1.7 --- maybe I should lay off the green stuff ... there were orignally 2 links to the v1.7 update --- so what do I do? I delete the one that works, leaving the link to nowhere as the only place to get v1.7 --- D'OH !! --- and I nearly couldn't find the URL !!!! I found it near the bottom of my history list in firefox .... geez I love my firefox!!

Wow! Your PM appeared on my screen as soon as I returned to the forum. Never saw that before, but it sure made things fast.

Anyway, I wish I knew about the Internet Explorer source files secret. I know where the 98 OS source file registry entry is, the HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Current Version\Setup place. But no idea where IE looks for its stuff.

This could get dangerous if we find it. I remember that the error box pops up when I choose to install the particular language a website needs saying something like, "couldn't locate Windows Update." I insert the Internet Explorer cd and the thing takes off and installs the language stuff it needs.

I would hate to change the Windows Update source location only to find that the real Windows Update would be fubar'd by that!

Maybe if your Internet Explorer installer would include the whole full version it could be set to extract all its files permanentely to a particular folder and setup from that folder. Then if one needs language files or an Intenet Explorer repair it would know that's where it gets the files from. Perhaps it will know automatically? It finds the cd automatically (no need to browse to it) if I have it in the tray when having it install a language. But maybe that's just because Windows is checking the cd drive first for any installation files. In XP you can add to a list in the registry entry for installation sources, but I don't think 98 has that.

Is your IE install set to install Full or Typical? When running the cd version I always change it to full. That way I get all but the language stuff. I don't want all those languages installed, especially not the input stuff. I hate the language systray stuff that eats up resources if the input items are installed.

I see your point about the USB updaters. Nearly all the updaters for this stuff will install what's included no matter what had been already installed on the system. I think your installer is nearly unique in that it checks to see what's there and then skips things if they've already been installed.

Microsoft installers for their software packages such as Office will install everything it's been designed to install. The only things prevented are built in Windows protections regarding dll's. Windows (even 98SE) is supposed to check the version being replaced and not do it if it's newer than what the software installer is trying to put there. Of course, often times this breaks stuff as the setup program installed a whole bunch of related files that depend upon the version Windows balked at. Windows is supposed to put the older file in the program folder where the software will look first. But this doesn't work when there's a lot of sharing of dll's, files being used, etc.

Ha! Dll hell caused paragraph hell!

I forsee a lot of obsolete updates wrecking havoc on my system when I install my Works/Office stuff now, after having used the auto-patcher and 98SE2ME/98MP10 with all the latest updates. Well, it's VMWare. Let's see what happens.

That's kind of why I like XP's System File Protection. "Usually" that will prevent Windows from breaking.

I'm a bit confused by this point...

1) doesn't ScanFrag install the ME versions of scandisk and defrag?? this is what my Updates list tells me:

ScanFrag - 2005 Mar 23 - 521kb - dl I - Unoffical update of Defrag and Scandisk to Windows ME versions (highly recommended)

2) this situation is unlike the duplication in the XP mp3 codec and MDGX's WMP replacement pack --- in that situation, both can be installed from AutoPatcher, sorry i mean auto-patcher, but in this case, the user doesn't have the option to install the full Win98 to ME pack --- but if I'm wrong about point 1, then it will be good to offer it as an optional install ... maybe I should do it anyway (make it optional) ... I'll decide after some feedback

Hmm. Not sure what happens. I suppose ScanFrag installs the Windows Me versions then a seperate install of 98SE2ME would just replace them with the same files. However the backup created by 98SE2ME would have the Windows Me files there instead of the 98SE ones. Not that we'd ever want to reinstall the 98SE versions!

Yeah, I suppose this one shouldn't matter much but it is an overlap of features. Everyone should get the Windows Me versions but it's just a question of when they get it, or in this case get it twice.

Sorry only had time for a quick glance, but could you check in Usbstor.inf at these lines
;Modified - 06/01/2006, 01.01
;Maximus Decim modified - 06/14/2006, 01.02
for nusb23e
whilst
;Modified - 06/01/2006, 01.01
;Maximus Decim modified - 06/14/2006, 01.02
;Maximus Decim modified - 08/31/2006, 01.03 add iPod, fix Sony Digital Camera
;Maximus Decim modified - 09/02/2006, 01.04 add LayoutFile
For nusb24

Actually, this seems to be the best bet ... I can use NSET to search for the line containing 01.04 and if it can't find then the title can be installed, if it is found, I then check the next line to see if its blank or has something there --- I don't even have to do any math because as long as Maximus Decim keeps the same style of reporting which version it is, shouldn't be a prob.

So thanks for the tip!!

EDIT: I have tested the above method and it works a treat. Hardly any code, and no math calculations. Here's hoping Maximus D keeps the same format for versioning the INF file.

Ok, the version I used to have for Internet Explorer 6 sp1 was the "full" version --- but that was still missing all the language packs -- -all the Full version installs is the auto-language selection thingy ... so it seems the best thing to do is actually include all the language packs and these files will be copied tot he hard disk before installation. This should solve all potential probs. It does however double the size of the package. So if there's no reason to include the language packs I'd like to hear it to save space.

Hmm, ScanFrag has a text readme linked to from the Accesories\System Tools Start Menu folder. I guess that is pretty cool as it installs a lot more than just the Me ScanDisk and Defrag. It has a whole list of stuff there. I don't know if this got installed by auto-patcher or by either 98SE2ME or 98MP10. I know I left it toggled on in auto-patcher. All good stuff. Leave it there.

I just installed my Frankensteinish combo of WorksSuite 2005 and OfficeXP full. Then I updated Office to SP3 and Works to 8.5.

All that went well. I left out support for fast searching and alternative user input to avoid the TSR's those run (ctfmon and mosearch). Then I unchecked enable debugging in Internet Explorer advanced options and deleated the mdm debugger from Run Services.

As soon as I restarted after deleating that mdm registry key I got a Windows Protection Error, please restart Windows boot up error.

I restarted and it went fine, then I restarted and got the Windows Protection Error again. So I went into the Windows folder and deleated all the ff...tmp files that stupid mdm.exe had left there when it was running and deleated all the .tmp files from the Windows\Temp folder. I then restarted twice successfully.

Who knows? Maybe it was all the junk temp files that thing leaves on the system when running. Or maybe there's a problem.

System File Checker showed only a few updated files (I had run it before the Works, Office stuff so I could check this very thing), so nothing but those and a few hundred new added files there.

No hardware problems in Device Manager or problem devices in System Information. Everything looks fine.

I checked out the IOSUBSYS folder and did see that all those Adaptec plugins are there. Those and the newer Roxio ones from WMP9. Any way you could deselect the Adaptec cd burning plugin from installing with your Windows Media Legacy files but leave the newer one (a full install) of WMP 9? I doubt that's the culprit in my case since removing them totally never helped me out when I had Windows startup problems in the past. It might not matter, but you never know. WMP 9 installs the newer, problem free version of the Roxio plugin anyway. But I think it leaves the older one there, but doesn't use it. Better off not having it in the first place. Maybe you can set WMP 7.1 (the legacy files) not to install just that item. (Or, maybe not. I don't know how you do it without the GUI install.)

So maybe everything's okay after I deleated all those temp files, or maybe the good restarts are short lived.

I have to break away temporarily from playing with the system. I'm awaiting retail boxed versions of the older McAfee VirusScan 2006 (VirusScan 10), Personal Firewall 2006, and I've already got AntiSpyware2006 and the last QuickClean. I'm going to experiment with using them on 98SE in VMWare. They are still supported and the last McAfee products that support Windows 98SE. I've heard that having VBRun6SP6 installed eliminates the problem McAfee had with wininit.ini when it restarts Windows after an update, but I'll check that file to see if it does type in only what it needs, and not a bunch of gibberish that caused Windows not to start. If it's there I can deleat all the gibberish and just leave the proper lines so it will work. Just gotta say no to reboot now and check that file. Hopefully VBRunSP6 IS the fix for that.

Might be sometime next week before I get the McAfee products. So aloha until then! (Unless I chicken out and just install Avast and ZoneAlarm.)


Edit - Ooh! You posted while I was typing!

Well, we don't want the language packs to be installed. The Full install doesn't do that. If one does want any they need to check the ones they want and then it becomes a Custom install. We DO want the files copied to the source folder for potentally needy websites though. (Well, at least I do.) Yes, the Language auto-selection is normal. But not all those language packs. Like I said, they include input support that causes the keyboard language applet to run at all times in the system tray and startup with Windows.

So, no need to install them but do include them in the source folder so they can be installed when needed.

I always install all display support files in IE, but never the input support ones, as I don't need any, currently. Honestly, I'd rather have a few MB on my HDD occupied with those files, than have IE pop up messages stating that it needs this or that update to be able to display the page properly or - having such warning disabled - to see a weird page layout due to lacking proper support.
AFAIK, IE setup will recognize any path the install has been started from. So if IE6-SP1 has been installed directly from the auto-patcher CD, the language add-ons would be installed from the same path when required and will ask for the CD.
If the language files are not in the IE6-SP1 setup while installation has been performed from the CD, an eventual web update will not be carried out, because IE setup wants to save the respective files to the known path which would be the CD path.

So to wrap it up: personally I would like all language display support files to be included with the IE6-SP1 package and to have the possibility to choose between direct CD install and files-on-HDD install. Obviously, I would choose the former, for reasons I've already explained in a previous post.

And BTW, having UBCD and auto-patcher on the same CD and being able to batch the install would be the ultimate goal. I wish I would be able to help more, but currently my motivation has been blown out of the water by some recent unfortunate events.

Yeah, that would be okay. Just all the display support but none of the input items would not cause the language application to be running all the time. I've done that in the past but since I so rarely go to sites that need anything except English I've just been changing the IE setup from Typical to Full and not bothering to install languages until I need them.

Since it's easier to just have auto-patcher install Internet Explorer my preference would be the regular full install with the install files, including the languages, placed on the hard drive and setup run from there. Then if a page needs a language it'll know where to get it from. Maybe once a year I see a Japanese web page and need to get that East Asian language pack installed. Sometimes I check some Israeli web sites and need the Hebrew language pack. Still, I never had a problem waiting for a minute for Internet Explorer to install it.

But we do need it to be able to find the source files otherwise the install will fail. Either way is okay, as long as you don't set it to install the language input support.

Please also take into consideration that an (admittedly narrow) range of users may have a slow Internet connection or no connection at all. Especially for the latter, they may need additional language display support for offline browsing. I have one of my neighbors as example, which has no Internet connection but needs IE as default browser and Pan-European text display support installed, for a medical application (had Firefox as default and the application wouldn't launch at all).

Okay, back in business. McAfee, with the exception of the firewall (can you say fatal exception in mpfbocks.vxd 3 times fast?), works fine. Eh. So I installed ZoneAlarm, no loss (except for a few $).

Here's what Windows Update says isn't installed -

KB916281 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 6 SP1
KB891711 Security Update for Windows 98
Windows Share Level Password Update
Q323172 Security Update (Windows 98) (Flaw in Digital Certificate Enrollment Component Allows Certificate Deletion)
Security Update, May 19, 2000 (IP Fragment Reassembly)
Security Update, March 17, 2000 (DOS Device in Path Name)

Hmm, I guess they for some reason want the older IE Cumulative DLL update installed. No idea why since we have the newer one installed by auto-patcher.

The KB891711 we know about. Don't need that since the unofficial one is installed and that would remove the Microsoft registry entries and files from this older one anyway.

The other 4 I have no clue about. Do we need these? Or have thay been made obsolete by updates in the auto-patcher or been found to be troublesome in some way so purposely been left out?

Other weirdness -

As soon as I installed McAfee that My Computer icon became the newer, WinME, 2000 one. Well, at least it matches what Display Properties and Plus! Theme Manager say it is now. What the heck did McAfee software fix up there? And how do we do that without installing McAfee? Obviously something was out of whack when everything said the new icon was applied and the current one that was being used, but the old icon was really there.

That is Maximus-Decim's NUSB 2.4, I only uploaded it at my site.
____________________________

Yes, it does.

BTW:
You may want to download SCANFRAG.EXE again, I've added some more files:
http://www.mdgx.com/add.htm#TLS

* Microsoft Disk Defragmenter (DEFRAG.EXE 4.90.3000 from Windows ME), Hardware Diagnostic Tool (HWINFO.EXE 4.90.3000 from Windows ME), System Configuration (MECONFIG.EXE 4.90.3001 from Windows ME Q272719 Hotfix), Disk Scanner (SCANDSKW.EXE 4.90.3000 + SCANDISK.EXE from Windows ME), Registry Editor (REGEDIT.EXE 4.90.3000 from Windows ME = modified to work with all Windows 95/98 releases), Registry Scanner (SCANREGW.EXE 4.10.1998 + SCANREG.EXE from Windows 98 SE), SCANREG.INI Editor [SREDIT.EXE from Windows 98 Resource Kit (RK)], MSDOS.SYS Editor [BOOTEDIT.EXE 1.0.0.1 from Windows 98 Resource Kit (RK)] + System File Checker (SFC.EXE 4.10.2222 from Windows 98 SE) Tools for Windows 98/98 SP1/98 SE [733 KB]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/SCANFRAG.EXE

HTH

That's a bummer ... oh well, the update is included but only in the manual installs folder. Thanks for hosting it!!


Yep, i keep a close watch of your updates thread these days and I saw that. Thanks for pointing it out again tho.

OK, this is quite annoying. At least 6 of the 7 updates Windows Update thinks are needed, are NOT needed. In particular, for the official cumulative update for Internet Explorer 6, I tried very hard to get this installed but also keeping Windows Update happy when the unofficial cumulative update is subsequently installed. No luck --- all I managed to do is get the files installed properly so when Windows Update "re-installs" kb916281 all it does is tell *itself* that it has now been installed. Sheesh!! All the updates (except q323172 which I'm investigating further) are in this category -- i.e when Windows Update re-installs these updates, nothing of value is added to your system.

If there was a way to stop Windows Update giving these false readings I would definitely employ that way, but it seems not. So I will put a disclaimer somewhere advising that this is the case and not to worry about the results of using Windows Update.

KB891711 wants to find files in the system\KB891711 directory. The unofficial update puts them in system\U891711. That might be the problem.

the_guy

After finally getting my DSL connection to work, I could download the large 180MB file overnight. Alas, the link for the Version 1.7 update, http://z31.zupload.com/download.php?file=g...;filepath=18522 is not working. Repeatedly clicking on "Download File" gives no results. I am eager to test this package on a new Win98 system, and then repackage it into a "Windows 98 Final Edition" install CD, for any future reinstalls. Are there any other 'mirrors' from which the update file is available for download?

just re-checked the link --- it works in both Firefox and Internet Advertising Companion (otherwise known as Internet Explorer) ... i'd prefer to only have the one working link at the moment ... i get to know how many people have downloaded the file .... 252 at last count ... can you please confirm that this behaviour exists for at least 2 of the browsers you have installed on your system (you have at least 2 don't you?) ... the other alternative is to wait for the v1.8 release ... coming soon ...

Soporfic,

I've been lurking for some time and just want to take this time to thank you for your autopatcher. Like others, I've used exuberant and so don't need to use anything else until I manage to crash this laptop one more time. One thing I particualrly like about your design is the concept of only installing those patches that your system is missing. Nice...very nice.

Much thanks,

N

P.S. I'm on of many fans of K-Meleon, the light Gecko browser and many of us over there are also W98se users. You might want to stop by sometime!

I'm not sure where to find this info at...

Where can I find a listing of *all* updates applied by this package?

I have a program (HPJobber) that has *severe* problems with the updates applied.

I nailed the issue down to the version number of Win98SE... Can anyone tell me which updates change that value to specific values? And how to manually override the version setting to read 4.10.1998? Fully updated, the version is like 4.?NOT 10?.2222

If I do not select ANY Media Player crap, or the DUN1.4, it doesn't keep that number down...

If I don't select to install IE6 SPwhatever, most of the updates won't install.

From what I can gather, HPJobber doesn't like one of the updates, or perhaps it is as simple as the version returned not being expected... I don't know.

HPJobber is a total business 'solution'. Invoices, payroll, etc.

The issues it has with the updates:
All user data (that is added at install, but locked out after first use- like employee names for instance), is missing. The program acts as if it is an illegal install... which, AFAIK is impossible to do... the programmers told me themselves that all files are in the program folder, and to "copy" the folder to another PC... If I use an older PC with I believe 1.6Auto-patcher installed, there's no problems.

I am using a brand new P4 3.2 tower (x5 units) with *full* Win98SE support from Gigabyte... and even *without* Auot-patcher, they still refuse to show total price on invoices... the field is empty... but all other prices and taxes are filled in automatically by the software.... if I use the older PC, the values are properly placed... HP Jobber runs over the network from one of the new towers to 4 other machines... including the older PC that has no issues....

I don't know what 'updates' Gigabyte installs for proper support on 98, but I think ONE of them killed the invoice price listing...


Any ideas?? I am totally stumped... All the issues are resolved without Autopatcher (except the invoice total missing)... HPJobber support wants $75 an hour, a high speed internet connection (not feasible in the shop with this prob), and an "upgrade" to the newest version for $365 a year... methinks they just hard coded the version string into the program, and it causes issues like these to get people to upgrade... (They have in the past... the version in use here is the *only* one without a real-deal freakin' TIME-BOMB embedded in it to detonate every year...)

Why not scrap the software altogether? It's an older business, with older owners... And the software is already overpowered for their use... but it is what 'they know'...

I'm surprised the auto-patcher runs at all on 4.10.1998. That's Windows 98 First Edition or Windows 98 Gold, the initial release of Windows 98.

Can't use 98SE updaters on that. You need the Unofficial W98 First Edition Service Pack instead.

No wonder your system gets messed up. Lots of these updates don't work properly on 98 First Edition. No need to go into details, as it would be expected that everything got messed up. Gotta format and install the proper updates for your operating system.

I got one of the towers setup with 98SE (hologram CD), and it reports 4.??.1999

the same thing happens with auto-patcher... the OS and everything works *great*... but same issues in this one particular program...

on 98 gold, the drives got thrashed *really* bad... sorry for missing that detail in my post...

(now, the whole office is running standard 98SE... no updates at all installed.)

Anyone know if they changed something with the date functions? Or the region money settings? I just can't pin it down...

I *really* want to patch these towers... I know the date stuff isn't handled properly (still only 2 digits used for years), but other than that I am stumped.

Do you know how to 'force' Windows to report a specific version? I know 'ver' returns it, but can it change it? I used to be a great 98 guru, but since I use XP daily the last 5 years, I lost much of what I knew...

Or a list of official updates I can select in Auto-patcher? I enjoy the extras, but I can't figure out this problem on a stock machine, let alone a customised one...

Well, all the official updates included should be installed anyway. Obsolete updates that Windows Update might install have been eliminated. In other words, nearly all the guess work has been eliminated.

The updates are listed in the first post of this thread. The choices available to toggle on/off are within each module of the auto-patcher program.

Er, it would be advantageous to you to ensure none of your not updated yet machines are connected to the internet!

Make sure you download 1.5 AND 1.7 and run both (closing the first one without starting the patching), then go ahead and run it.

If you get out of environment space error messages at the beginning you can stop it and right click all the batch files on the desktop and in the root auto-patcher folder in the Windows\Temp directory and on the memory tabs just select the largest choice for Initial Environment. I still got the first screen warning of using too much, but when I told it to go ahead and run anyway there were no more errors. The log showed all the environment spaces to be within normal parameters.

I've only just read about your issues --- and will try to provide some more information soon.


Yep, there is a check for Windows 98 second edition when the program is first run so I'm not sure how DeadDude managed to proceed. I'll check the code again ...

The patching goes through without a hitch... my problem is I need to know what updates increases the Windows version number to what values?

Or, if there is a way to force Windows to report a particular version number, I think this by itself may allow me to use all the updates without HPJOBBER having issues.

The updates work great, the problem is HPJOBBER doesn't want to work properly for some reason when 98 is fully patched.

Thank you for pointing out the list at the beginning, but I need to find out how those updates change the version reported.

It seems as though HPJOBBER will not work properly *at all* if certain updates are applied- at one point I saw that an update didn't change the first two sets of numbers- methinks those updates won't breake HPJOBBER... I was just hoping someone had a table or something with the version numbers being updated with whatever updates being applied...

I hope I have put this in a way that is properly understood... Sometimes I fumble with my words...

(I believe the errant program, HPJOBBER, is somehow hard coded to specific versions of files... but I don't have all the version info involved... got a list of this involved with the updates in Auto-Patcher?)

These computers **NEVER** go online. There is no internet connection even available on the site, so 'security updates' don't apply...

Thanks for the attempts at help, it is greatly appreciated... I just hope I can get the actual problem across... those are good shots, but not quite on target... take another step or two, that's where I hit a wall...

No Microsoft Windows Updates change the version number of Windows with the exception of the long discontinued Microsoft Security Updates Cd. That did play havoc with some programs and some updates.

None of the unofficial updates included in the auto-patcher or the major unofficial update packages on this site such as 98SE2ME and 98MP10 change the Windows version either.

Now, dll file versions are something else entirely. Nearly ALL are changed when you apply the updates. For details you would consult the readme's for the assorted unofficial updaters, and the Microsoft KB articles for the cooresponding updates.

MDGx's website provides a wealth of information regarding all available updates, fixes, addons, etc. mdgx.com is his site.

If you are having a problem with a certain program or process I would suggest accessing the website of the publisher of that software or process. Searching the net with Yahoo, Google, etc can also at times yield answers from users who have experienced similar problems to yours.

I would suggest that it is more important to have Windows updated and patched than to run any one software program, so if it becomes impossible for it to get along with an updated Windows then perhaps it is time to upgrade the software or choose a different vendor's program. But first see if it can be fixed. First step would be consulting the support sections of the manufacturers website, I would think.

Are you serious??? NOTHING in the auto-patcher changes the Windows version?!?!

WHat I am referring to is when you choose properties on my computer... it lists the owner of the PC, the vendor (if present), the amount of ram, and the Windows Version.

I know the dlls are different versions....


So, if no updates can change that version string data.... how the hell did I get 5 towers all reporting 4.xx.2222???

This blows my mind... are you 100% positive?? **nothing** was installed other than auto-patcher with **EVERY SINGLE** update applied... even the 'manual' installs...

Has anyone ever heard of software drivers somehow changing this data? It is literally the only thing installed besides the updates.... (although I know it isn't the drivers, since a non-updated tower reports 4.??.1999 still)


This is really weird. Can more people confirm this statement? (no offense intended, I seriously am shocked with this revelation... what the hell changed the version?!)

OK lets try to clear up some confusion!!

if you type VER in a DOS box in any Windows operating system, you get the version of the operating system.
In Windows 98se it should read:

Windows 98 [Version 4.10.2222]

and if you do the same for Windows 98 gold (or first edition) it should say:

Windows 98 [Version 4.10.1998]

for more info on Window 9x versions go here:

http://users.iafrica.com/c/cq/cquirke/win95ver.htm

- even if you applied every single update you could get your hands on, if you have Windows 98 first edition installed, it should still be Windows 98 first edition at the end. You can confirm this by typing VER into a DOS box.


and in other news, I HAVE JUST HAD A BRAINWAVE !!! The most annoying thing about this project is the confusion generated when visiting Windows Update after completing a full auto-patch of your system. WU says there are still at least 7 updates your computer needs which is a pile of doggie doo doo, as absolutely NOTHING of value is added to your system after installing these "missing" updates. Anyway, while researching why this happens to one particular hotfix (323172) i noticed that the INF file that is left behind after the hotfix is installed was missing when WU checked my test system to see if the update was needed. When the hotfix was first installed, the INF file is copied over to the \INF folder in the Windows directory, but it seems that some of the subsequent hotfixes delete the INFs for updates that are superceeded. I haven't confirmed this for any other updates, but it does give me an idea: put the INFs back !!! I may have to use the registry entries that are created for some of the hotfixes, but i'm hoping I can just use the INFs. I'll report back probably tomorrow how I went.

Be careful there with the VER command.

Some users [for example PsycoUnc] prefer to use a 3rd party shell environment which replaced COMMAND.COM, like 4DOS:
http://www.jpsoft.com/download.htm#free
Direct download [1.22 MB, Windows based installer, freeware]:
http://download.jpsoft.com/4dos/4dos.exe
More info:
ftp://ftp.jpsoft.com/4dos/files/readme.txt
4DOS lines in CONFIG.SYS to replace COMMAND.COM [use INSTALLHIGH only if using an upper memory area (UMA) manager like UMBPCI.SYS or EMM386.EXE or QEMM386.SYS or RM386.EXE]:In such cases, VER returns something like this [example]:

4DOS version 7.50

Therefore in such cases VER is not useful for detecting the Windows version from DOS.
The only solutions I know of to work around this problem:
A. use a 3rd party DOS tool which can detect DOS version independent of installed shell environment [good place to start]:
http://short.stop.home.att.net/freesoft/
More like this here:
http://www.mdgx.com/dos.htm#DOL
B. or:
- backup original config.sys [rename it to let's say CONFIG.A-P].
- add this line to CONFIG.SYS from within a batch file using ECHO:

ECHO SHELL=C:\COMMAND.COM C:\ /E:1024 /P /F>>C:\CONFIG.SYS

or from within an advanced INF:

[Version]
AdvancedINF=2.5

[DefaultInstall]
UpdateCfgSys=CONFIGSYS.Section

[CONFIGSYS.Section]
; if COMMAND.COM located in C:\ root:
SHELL=%31%\COMMAND.COM %31%\ /E:1024 /P /F
; or if COMMAND.COM located in %windir% :
SHELL=%10%\COMMAND.COM %10%\ /E:1024 /P /F

Then, after your app does its thing, you can prompt the user to reboot in order to restore their original CONFIG.SYS .

But this last solution is problematic, there cannot be 2 SHELL= lines in CONFIG.SYS.
So you may want to completely replace their config.sys [after you back it up] with a custom one.

Easy to spot 4DOS into memory, if you wish:

mem /c | find /i "4DOS"
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 GOTO Label_1
IF ERRORLEVEL 0 GOTO Label_2


HTH

Pardon me for barging in.
I noticed that everyone here says: Win98FE (Gold) is 4.10.1998 and Win98SE (Second Edition) is 4.10.2222.
Then, what is 4.xx.1999, repeatedly reported by DeadDude?
Isn't it possible that at least one of the updates included with the package has a broad range of Windows versions allowed for install, which includes 4.10.1999 and - by changing the kernel, or shell or whatever else - it boosts the WinVer to 4.10.2222?
Another question that springs to my mind is why does he say 4.xx.1999 and not 4.10.1999?

I may be off-track here, but hopefully someone gets a good idea out of this.

Thank you for the replies... sorry to confuse with the xx, I didn't remember the actual numbers but I knew it wasn't 10.

the actual version reported (I had to go check at the guy's shop this morning) is:


4.95.2222

That's right... NINE FIVE. (sorry for the confusion, old and new and ancient standby pc version numbers got confusing late last night)

What the heck happened here?

Once again, GREAT MANY THANKS for all the help on this....

didn't mean to cause confusion, but now y'all know what I'm faced with here....

I *know* somthing boosted the version to 4.95... but what the hell did it? Does anyone know of *ANY* M$ OS with a x.95.xxxx version? Perhaps some file (ntkern.vxd or something?) isn't actually a 98SE version, but "works" and hasn't been found yet?

I don't know.... but it doesn't cause any issues except in HPJOBBER.... oh yeah, and the computers were MANY TIMES faster with that version returned....

Only installed files were Win98SE (after the Gold fiasco), driver CD from GigaByte, and Auto-Patcher 1.7, then 1.8... and that sequence boosted it to 4.95.2222

No Auto-patching at all, and it reports 4.10.1999.... but that *still* can't be right, since it should be 4.10.2222, correct??

Could one of the driver packages for the mobo be causing the change? It is the same board I posted in another thread.... this board:
http://tw.giga-byte.com/Support/Motherboar...8I865GME-775-RH


(Did I install the updates properly? ran AP1.7, then ran AP1.8 immediately afterward.)



Some extra info on the ORIGINAL OLD machine *without issues* in the shop:

This tower had 95, updated (with upgrade CD) to 98 Gold, then once again to 98SE. It gave a fuss, but manually deleting one or two files made it work. I used AP 1.5 or 1.6 on it a looong time ago (I'm starting to wonder if the same project name was used elsewhere, as this was back in 2002/3). This machine does everything 100% correct. It also properly reports as 4.10.2222



To Summarize:

Current setup, with almost correct version (4.10.1999):
I have 5 brand new towers built with the above linked motherboard. I built and installed everything... standard crap, boot from CD, fdisk&format, scandisk, copy cabs, setup with switches for no extras, couple of reboots then desktop in crappy VGA, pop in mobo CD, it does *everything* automatically...

Messed up setup, with 4.95.2222 reported:
same as above, but instead of driver CD, I used the updated drivers from the company site (link above also gets to the drivers). Comparing the two (CD to site), they should be identical... but the file sizes are a little off (I assume from compression and the 1000k/1024k web bug) STILL installs similar to above, except I picked the order... INF Chipset, SVGA, USB, Sound, DX 9, Sound (to enable *all* functions... I watched the 'proper' install to learn to do this)

Originally, I had updated the sound card drivers with a W2K version driver, but it is now only on ONE of the 5 (to nail this issue down). The versions reported all match still. (so this supports the claim that updates and drivers won't change that number)

Now I want to know how that version could be changed... I mean, is M$ the only people with the knowledge of how to do it? Or could the Intel INF installer do it or something?

Thanks for the help! Sorry for any extraneous confusion! (this issue is confusing itself, I don't need to goof up from lack of sleep)

On Friday I will have two of these towers to 'play' with...

So, if you can think of anything you would like me to run or screenshot, just ask.

(is it possible to move or delete these posts? I just realized I am basically spamming the hell outta this thread with my OT issues... I didn't know it was OT until now)

EDIT:::: (posting 2 or three times is even worse than loooooong edited posts, right?? don't wanna step on toes)
@MDGx
Dude, you must have been uber in the womb... Do you know if 4Dos is cross-platform? It isn't involved in this particular situation, but your extremely knowledgable post on it made me miss my old Win3.11 w/Calmira Online! II shell and 4Dos.... Ever heard of Calmira II? It was a darn good 9x shell clone for 3.11

@All
I just started browins the various posts on updates, and I've concluded that I somehow have a few key files that are hacked between ME and perhaps 2k? This is quite interesting to note, because the only files installed are OEM drivers. I have yet to examine all the file versions of all the dlls, but if someone knows a quick and easy way (batch file anyone?) to pull this list, please share it. I don't want to have to manually look each file up and copy it down... but I could... I know dxdiag will show dx files, but I don't think those are the culprits...

If it really matters, 2 of these machines installed with 2 hiccups (locked during hw detection), while the third did not. On first installs, the 2 with hiccups did not boot, vmm.exe errors. Reinstalled after fdisk again, and 1 hiccup each but no more issues.

The other two machines have been 'built' a few times, but 98SE always locks up on install. It is odd, as *all* of the components are identical between the 5... and swapping parts between all 5 will make those 2 boot properly... (swap harddrives with 2 that are setup)

The device manager all appears O.K. no exclaimations anywhere... or red 'x'

Don't worry. It's not off topic since you originally were wondering about what updates are in the auto-patcher and whether this contributed to your version difficulties with a program you use.

Are you sure your Windows 98SE cd's are authentic Microsoft OEM or Retail cd's? They would have a bluish/grey color to them and the Microsoft flag across the whole thing just in the cd's clear silver color. If retail they would be 0499 Part No. X04-14310 (at least one of mine I'm looking at has that number). There would be a hologram around the center cd hole with stuff like Valid and Microsoft and a few flags in the hologram.

If you start from Gold (First Edition) then use the $20 Second Edition Updates cd then it would be 0499 Part No. X04-12707. Same look and hologram around the center.

Now there was also a Windows 98 Service Pack 1 cd. 0499 Part No. X04-64496. That installs needed updates from Second Edition into a Windows 98 Gold installation but does NOT make the system Windows 98 Second Edition. If you or your OEM somehow included that in your OEM cd then it is possible that you have 98 First Edition with the Service Pack 1 pre-installed. It is possible (not sure though) that this results in that weirdly numbered version you have.

However, that does not make it 2nd Edition so you cannot use the auto-patcher. For systems like that you could use the Unofficial 98 First Edition Service Pack that is in another forum thread. You would need many updates besides that pack to upgrade whatever software is not included in that Unofficial Service Pack.

Anything with 1999 in the version is NOT 98 Second Edition.

soperific,

In addition to the updates I listed a few posts above that Windows Update erroneously reported I needed, there were a few in the Recommended Catagory as well. Didn't write them down, but the Internet Explorer Start Wave fix was one of them. The crappy Update Notification (sure don't want that thing) and the Euro Fonts were there too. I didn't install anything as I figure that between my OfficeXP install, the auto-patcher, 98SE2ME, and 98MP10, I've got what 98SE needs to be updated.

Just wanted to let you know since I forgot to mention them.

It may not be wise to start messing with entering items manually, as you suggested you might try above. I'd hate to have manual entries screw up something, as is certainly possible with Microsoft software!

Why not just include in your documentation somewhere to ignore old updates that are reported by Windows Update to be needed?

I thought they were originals...

The entire CD face is a hologram...

The background is a globe, with north america on the top left side. The background also says Genuine Microsoft tiled everywhere.
At the rights side of the hole it says

For distribution
with a new PC
only. For product
support, contact
the manufacturer
of your PC.

SECOND EDITION

left side of hole says
Do Not Make Illegal Copies Of This Disk

under the hole it says Microsoft (raised above the rest) Windows 98
under that is the Microsoft certificate sticker thingy (hologram as well, it is ALL hologram, hard to see in the dark, looks blank)

Isn't this a legit original?

The otherside (data side) has a ring around the hole, with more holograms
VALID smms diamond GENUINE logo logo windows 98 ASP0210 X05-39104 (NM.05) 08 IFPI L894 BARCODE

4.10.1999 is a hotfixed Windows 98 FE, version number changed via update no doubt, easily done.

Heh, all hologram eh? Newer cd's are like that, XP and such.

Never saw a 98 one like that, but who knows? The only OEM 98 I have is a 98 First Edition one which looks the same as I described my Second Edition cd's. My Second Edition cd's are all retail box ones.

Sounds like Microsoft made it, but you're saying it doesn't say 4.10.1998 once it's installed? Weird. Maybe they made some for OEM's that were just prior to 98SE being finished but that had the First Edition Service Pack as part of it.

Still, if it's official no program should have a problem running as long as it supports 98 First Edition. That's still what it is, and always will be unless you have a 98SE cd to upgrade it with once the original one is installed. Or. Cough, Cough, a Windows Me cd.

So, what oscardog said. Some hotfix's have been applied and are already on that disk.

Any 98 First Edition updates should work, but not Second Edition exclusive ones. Don't know what to do about your malfunctioning program. Do other programs work fine?

I don't believe. 4.10.2000 is Windows 98 with SP1 (CSP) but the general properties tab shows always 4.10.1998 for FE and 4.10.2222 for SE.

Petr

"With few exceptions, Windows 98 hotfixes are stamped with a version number of 4.10.1999 or greater, which indicates that the file is a newer version than the file that had been originally included with Windows 98. Windows 98 Second Edition hotfixes are generally stamped with a version number of 4.10.2223 or greater"
If i applied the above, in a company enviroment, I would alter certain information i.e version so I could keep tabs on which pc has which update applied. Easy failsafe method

Well, the suggestions point to a 98FE cd... but I think it may be the other way....

it *is* a SE cd, regardless as to what the numbers say. and it is an original...

It was purchased (both copies I have) from the local computer shop when they quit supporting 98...

You see, these copies were supposedly the *last* version of 98SE. That's literally all I know, as I wasn't "into" versions and crap back then... the CDs are about 5 years old now...

I am leaning towards thinking these CDs are probably some 'hotfixed at M$' hacked jobs now... especially when i think of the other M$ offerings of the time...

And the driver CD for the mobo seems to all be WDM drivers...

On a side note, these CDs were purchased waaay back when M$ first released a Security Updates CD for ?all? Windows (I know it included 98SE to XP updates, and pre-SP1 for XP)
I did NOT use this CD on anything related to the issue at hand, so please do *not* tell me I shouldn't. But please tell me more about the issues it causes, as I was previously thinking of using it on these...

This is about file version, not OS version. OS version remains unchanged.

Petr

I am simply saying that the os version number has been changed to reflect the hotfixes applied

VER doesn't work for me but WINVER does. Also, if you've installed 98SE2ME the OS version shown will be Millenium not Win98SE.

And I'm simply saying that it is impossible - none of the released hotfixes change OS version number.

Please give me any example of hotfix that changes the windows version number.

Petr