• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Nomen

Profile Information

  • OS
  • Country
  1. Starting early this month, I installed the Personal Web Server that comes with win-98 on one of my home systems and forwarded port-80 from my router to the PC. As expected, there were a lot of requests from bots for files that don't exist. After a few days I created those missing files by taking a 60 mb porn video and replicating it as many times as necessary, creating various directory trees and placing these replicated files in the correct places so they'd be served up when requested. Examples of the most commonly-requested files are: config.php setup.php sitemap.xml testproxy.php (this is very common) stssys.htm robots.txt wp-login.php xmlrpc.php The default.asp page gets requested a lot, but I think it can't be a binary file because only a fraction of it ever gets uploaded and I think that corresponds with an EOF character being hit. Some of the more strange file-requests are: /muieblackcat /ncsi.txt / I've served up that 60 mb file about 85 times so far, totalling just over 5.15 gb. My upload speed is only about 70 k/sec so I figure I'm tying up those bots for at least 15 minutes each time they request these files. My internet plan is unlimited and this is the upload direction we're talking about so I'm probably going to substitute a 1 or 2 gb file at some point. Over at $dayjob my web server is seeing the same sort of hits for these files, but for a twist I'm performing an http re-direction on them to a 4 gb file being hosted by a remote server. I've tested the redirection to see if the bots follow it by pointing to the PWS on my home server and in most cases the redirection is followed. There doesn't seem to be a way to setup re-directions on win-98 PWS like there is on IIS4 running on NT4.
  2. Arrrgh. The hosts file that I created for this system, taken from a few different sources, included "" but not "". Hence the ability for dns to resolve one and not the other.
  3. I'm fooling around with my custom install of Win-7 with all kb's and drivers rolled in using RT7, and so far so good. I've installed FF 38.something ESR, and updated IE to version 10 with security rollup. Web-browsing is working, but for some reason both FF and IE can't bring up Typing into the location bar directs to https, but FF says "unable to connect" and IE says "this page can't be displayed". Funny how I can bring up on my win-98 system using either opera 12 or FF2. I've checked nslookup and the IP matches (win-98 and the win-7 machine) so this isin't a name-resolution problem. And now the FF on the win-7 system has updated itself (even though I didn't want it to) to v45.3 and still it can't bring up What's going on here?
  4. For those that have absolutely zero interest in playing games, I still want to know: Does going beyond the typical GeForce 6200 / 256 mb AGP card give you better video playback for hi-res movies? How much of divx or MPG decoding is done on the card vs done by the cpu?
  5. Today I took my base install image (which is a virgin Win-7 SP1 technet image with drivers for an old Dell Latitude rolled in) and added 958559 with RT7. That's it. Burned the resulting image on a thumb drive, took it over to the Dell and went through yet another install cycle (always format the drive first). Bingo - right off the bat, no Libraries, can't create any libraries, can't create or rename any folders without getting "Item not found" message. Connected the machine to the internet, did a windoze-update check. It wanted to download something first (which I expected) before it could _really_ check for updates. So it does the download, but then is just wasting my time after that trying to check again. I reboot. It does some re-configuration before shutdown and again after booting back up. I tell it to check again. It's checking. I'm waiting. I go and open explorer - and the Libraries are back! I can create new libraries too. But still get "Item not found" when trying to create new folders. Update list finally comes up. I think about 150+ important and over 100 optional updates. I'm going to go through that list and see how many of these are rolled into 3125574. Bottom line- there is something wrong with 958559. Don't think I'll ever need it though, not for the systems that are going to end up getting the Win-7 install image I'm perfecting. (or maybe 958559 can't be integrated properly into an install image using RT7 ?)
  6. I've created about 20 install sources using RT7, starting with a vanilla MSDN ISO of Win-7 SP1 32-bit and incrementally adding sets of KB's downloaded by whdownloader. I got to the point where an image, with 525 installed updates, works fine with regard to the issues I mentioned above (Libraries issues and "Item not found" when creating new folders). Taking that image as the next starting point for RT7, and integrating kb958559, immediately gives a system that has the issues when the new install is performed. Now whether this issue is caused by 958559 in conjunction with one (or more) of the other 525 KB's, I don't know. On a slight tangent, I notice that one source has the number of KB's rolled into the 3125574 Convenience Rollup Package as 123. When I scan that list against my list of "bad" KB's to avoid, there are 15 matches: 2660075 2726535 2882822 2923545 2970228 2994023 2999226 3068708 3075249 3078667 3080149 3081954 3092627 3102429 3118401 My "good/working" Win-7 install image with 525 integrated kb's does not have any of the above 15 updates rolled into it. Conversely, of the 108 KB's rolled into 3125574 that are "good", I only have 39 of them integrated into my good/working install image. Now I don't know if the list of 123 KB's in 3125574 is the count for the 64-bit version, so maybe the number is different for the 32-bit version.
  7. RT7 is working for me again today. Maybe it helped when I added 2 gb of ram to the system I'm using RT7 on to bring it from 2 gb to 4 gb of ram... In any case, I have determined which KB, when integrated into a Win-7 Ultimate 32-bit installation package created by RT7, will result in the system (a) not showing (not having) any Libraries, (b) not being able to create new libraries, and (c) giving an "Item not found" message when creating new folders or renaming existing ones. The KB responsible for that behavior is 958559.
  8. Yes I know about ei.cfg but I don't "mess" with it when I work with RT7. I assume that RT7 knows about ei.cfg too and can easily choose to disregard it or follow it (or modify it or re-create it) as it builds the image that you want it to build. When you go through an RT7 use-cycle, where you start it, point it to a set of source files, answer the basic first-question "which version?" and then perform what-ever integration (drivers and/or KB's), and then get to the create-ISO/Boot point (where I "burn" the resulting image to a bootable thumb drive), I then exit RT7 because it really doesn't allow you to do anything else at that point except maybe burn another ISO. So when you exit RT7, your source files are now modified. Permanently. So I make a copy of the entire source directory and I point RT7 to the copy, perform integration, perform USB burn, take thumb drive to target machine and perform installation by booting thumb drive (always formatting target drive first). If I like the install, but want to do more to it, I copy the install files to a new directory, point RT7 to the new directory and continue. I did this about a dozen times over the past week. Each time I documented which KB's I was adding to each image, and which KB's were being reported as installed by wmic after installation (the numbers don't always jive). I was close to finding out which KB, when integrated by RT7, gave me an installation of Win-7 that, when trying to create a new folder in explorer, gave me the "Item not found" error. But yesterday, RT7 wasn't loading any of my previous images. I was being stonewalled by the "Please select a valid Windows 7 operating system" message.
  9. > rt7 offers 2 things > > 1. changes to WHOLE source (all images) or > 2. change to single edition > > so beware what you choose After you point RT7 to your source files, the first question it always seems to ask is what version you are interested in (it throws up a menu window). Sometimes I get the whole list (home, home premium, ultimate, etc) and sometimes I just get a single choice (Ultimate). So I don't understand what governs that, or its implications. And yes, there is the radio-button choice to "Build current image" or "build all images". I've always chosen "Build current image" because, after all, since it asked you to choose an image at the very start, wouldn't that make the "build all images" option redundant or stupid? But at this point, as I mentioned in the other thread, I'm now getting the "Please choose a valid Windows 7 Installation" message after I point RT7 to my installation files and select my choice of Ultimate when the choice box pops up (a box that gives Ultimate as the single choice). Even a virgin set of unaltered win-7 sp1 ultimate from technet is giving the same message.
  10. RT7 is now giving me the "Please select a valid Windows 7 operating system" error after I point it to several of my various install images. Even a "virgin" set of technet installation files. There is pretty much nothing on the net I can find about why RT7 puts up that message or how to fix it.
  11. The sysinfo command says "Hotfix(s): 540 Hotfix(s) Installed" which matches the number I get with wmic. However, sysinfo starts to list the hotfixes by kb number, and gets to [242] which it partially prints out the kb number, and then ends the KB list output and then gives the network card info. Does the sysinfo command have a limit when printing the kb list? One other strange thing between the 2 install images: Image-1 has 525 KB's, Image-2 has 540. That's a difference of 15. But in reality, there are 3 KB's in Image-1 that are not present in Image-2. So of the 28 KB's that I added to Image-1 to create Image-2, 18 of them are showing up when Image-2 is installed. 525 + 18 - 3 = 540.
  12. I'm comparing 2 installation images of Win-7 Ultimate SP1 x86 prepared by RT7. The difference between them should be 28 KB's (I integrated 28 KB's into the first image to create the second image). After performing trial installs using both images, I ran the wmic command to get a list of installed kb's for both images. None of the 28 kb's that were integrated into the second image were listed as being present in the first image according to wmic. But the second image, once it was installed and running, was showing only 15 additional kb's, not 28. So either: Win-7 has some ability to "de-install" or cancel some KB's at run-time that it determines it shouldn't have or has been superceeded by another KB that it has, or RT7 has some ability to know during kb integration which KB's should or shouldn't be integrated, or wmic does not show all installed KB's. The wmic command that I ran was wmic qfe list brief /format:texttablewsys > c:\updates.txt And I'm not dealing with the conveinence roll-up during these tests.
  13. At the time I started this thread, I did not realize that RT7 made permanent changes to the 2 wim files that are, basically, the entirety of a win-7 distribution / install package. I thought that when you pointed RT7 to your source files (either the source directory or an ISO of your win-7 original CD) that it performed an integration of various items and allowed you to save your work in a config file but that it did not alter your source image. Hence my confusion as to why I was seeing wim's of different sizes. When I thought I was "going back" to my original win-7 CD image it turns out it was far from it. So I've made successive copies of various trials using RT7 to integrate various kb's in stages, starting with what I know to be an original MS distribution of Win-7 ultimate SP1 32-bit. What I have now is an image with 525 kb updates rolled in, and I am not seeing the "item not found" error when creating new folders, and the "Library" thing is fully populated with the 4 items (music, video, etc). (I would like to create a win-7 install image where libraries and control panel are totally removed from file explorer. God I hate Windoze 7.) I was using whdownloader and the pre-made lists available for it to download the kb files, and it turns out that there are at least 60 kb's that the current lists include that are *not* present or flagged by MS-update as available. So for anyone trying to use RT7 and Whdownloader to create an up-to-date win-7 install image (and bypass the "Conveinence" update which includes some "bad" kb's) then I believe there is a problem with the inventory of kb's that the whdownloader people would have you obtain and integrate into your image. My image contains all the dot-net 3.x and lower patches, plus the 4.61 distribution and all available patches for it. It also contains IE-10 offline install (I'm holding off integrating IE-11 into this image for the moment). So at this point my image, when installed and when it performs the first Update-check, comes back with this as being available: Important Updates: 3120388 security update 3075226 security update 3086255 security update (this is on the "bad" list) 3167679 security update 3138612 just "Update" for win-7 (this is on the "bad" list) optional updates: 2506928 (bad) 2545698 (bad) 2592687 (bad) 2660075 (bad) 2830477 (don't know) 2923545 (bad) 2952664 (bad) 2970228 (bad) 3021917 (bad) 3068708 (bad) 3075249 (bad) 3078667 (bad) 3080149 (bad) 3092627 (bad) 3102429 (bad) 3118401 (bad) 3140245 (too new / don't know) 3161102 (too new / don't know) 3172605 (too new / don't know)
  14. So I've been comparing various win-7 SP1 ISO's and CD's that I have, and it does seem to be the case that they are identical except for ei.cfg. Except for a couple of files - install.wim and setup.wim. They're always different. So that puts the lie to the often-told story that Win-7 distribution media is essentially identical except for ei.cfg. I've been looking into this because I've been struggling with RT7 Lite and it's generating installation images that always leaves me with a system that (a) has no "Libraries" and (b) gives me an "item not found" message when creating new folders or renaming folders. I've now used a different source for the base win-7 SP1 image and have managed to use RT7 to generate an install image that *works* and does not have those issues. The only difference in the source images is these .wim files. I'm going to use reg shot and see if I can find a difference in the registry between the installs. Otherwise I'd like to know more about the reasons why these .wim files are different.
  15. The reader is one of those multi-card readers that slides into a 3.5" drive-bay. It connects to the motherboard USB port via 10-pin header. It uses 2 motherboard USB ports - 1 for the card reader and 1 is a usb pass-through to a front panel USB port. In file explorer the reader shows up as 3 or 4 extra drives even if there are no cards plugged in. When clicking on the correct drive-icon associated with the SD-card slot, I get the "drive not formatted" message. There's nothing wrong with the card because (as I said) the files on it appear correctly on a win-7 laptop with integrated SD port. And let me say that this is *still* a real pain in the butt that I can find no way to render pretty much on any browswer that I can run under win-98. Not even Opera 2.12 can render this page: Complete blank. But that is a description of this problem with SD card.