Kurt_Aust

HOWTO create a fully up to date XP x64 DVD (EoL Feb 2016)

751 posts in this topic

By the way, KB982666 replaces KB973917, and KB973917 replaces KB970430. So would you also remove KB970430 from the list?

Good point, it will be done with this month's updates.

I'll be off at a Sci-Fi con for the next few days, toasting the passing of "The greatest Sci-Fi writer in history". << NSFW

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a reminder: KB982666 can no longer be optional if KB970430 is removed. It is necessary to have one or the other after installing KB968389.

Edited by 5eraph
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a reminder: KB982666 can no longer be optional if KB970430 is removed. It is necessary to have one or the other after installing KB968389.

Are you sure about this? I find no information on Microsoft website saying that KB968389 depends on any other updates.

Another reminder: Neither KB982666, KB970430, or KB968389 is offered by Windows Update. I checked this less than a month ago.

Edited by Explorer09
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check again after installing KB968389, Explorer09. That's what I did. The update site will list KB970430.

KB970430 requires KB968389, not the other way around.

Edited by 5eraph
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check again after installing KB968389, Explorer09. That's what I did. The update site will list KB970430.

KB970430 requires KB968389, not the other way around.

I got the claim about what you said in Microsoft's article. Thanks.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/970430

To use the features that this update includes, you must have the update 968389 installed on the computer. For more information, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:

968389 Extended Protection for Authentication

By the way, I found some more items on the list that need to be corrected.

KB936357 (Intel CPU update) - This is a high-priority update.

KB971029 (Autorun patch) - This is a high-priority update, too.

KB2492386 - This is offered as optional updates in Windows Update.

KB982316 - Not offered in my Windows Update. (I think this should be optional.)

KB2345886 - Not offered in my Windows Update. (I think this should be optional.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KB936357 - This update is high priority on hardware with Intel CPUs, but not for AMD or other processors. I no longer have an AMD machine to verify this, but it was true as of 2008/06/06 when I had AMD hardware.

KB971029 - Was initially offered as an optional update on Windows Update on 2011/02/08. I don't know when it got bumped up to high priority status.

KB2345886 - Install KB968389 first, then you will see this update on the Windows Update site (just like KB970430 ;)).

I could do this all day, but Microsoft is releasing more updates in a few hours.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KB2345886 - Install KB968389 first, then you will see this update on the Windows Update site (just like KB970430 ;)).

Finally I get it. It was my mistake all the time. When I said I checked Windows Update, I did so only once.

I didn't realize that KB2345886 and KB970430 two updates are offered at the second check.

OK, both KB2345886 and KB970430 are high-priority updates, and require KB968389 (also high-priority) to be installed first.

Edited by Explorer09
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

June updates

Deletions:

Hotfix\344-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB970430-x64-ENU.exe

Hotfix\744-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2641690-v2-x64-ENU.exe

Hotfix\764-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2633952-v2-x64-ENU.exe

Hotfix\804-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2621440-x64-ENU.exe

Hotfix\904-IE8-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2675157-x64-ENU.exe

RunOnce\install_flash_player_11_active_x_32bit.exe

RunOnce\install_flash_player_11_active_x_64bit.exe

RunOnce\NDP20SP2-KB2656369-x64.exe

RunOnce\NDP40-KB2656368-x64.exe

Additions:

@ . . . Hotfix\828-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2698707-x64-ENU.exe .. . . 709,376 . Time Zone - Cumulative

@ . . . Hotfix\832-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2718704-x64-ENU.exe . . 1,717,216 . Fraudulent Digital Certificates Cumulative

@ Hotfix\836-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2709162-x64-ENU.exe . . 4,365,056 . MS12-041 - Kernel-Mode Drivers

@ . . . Hotfix\840-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2685939-x64-ENU.exe .. . . 781,568 . MS12-036 - Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP)

# . Hotfix\904-IE8-WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB2699988-x64-ENU.exe 43,846,912 . MS12-037 - Cumulative Security Update

# . RunOnce\install_flash_player_11_active_x.exe 9,225,928 . Updated 11 June

@ . . . RunOnce\NDP20SP2-KB2656369-v2-x64.exe 1,556,416 MS12-025 - XAML Browser Applications (XBAPs)

# . RunOnce\NDP20SP2-KB2686828-x64.exe 11,962,488 . MS12-038 - XAML Browser Applications (XBAPs)

@ . . . RunOnce\NDP40-KB2656368-v2-x64.exe . 1,748,400 . MS12-025 - XAML Browser Applications (XBAPs)

@ . RunOnce\NDP40-KB2686827-x64.exe . . . 4,348,008 . MS12-038 - XAML Browser Applications (XBAPs)

and .Net keeps BAP, BAP, BAPing along ...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for this impressive and well thought out guide.

I have a few questions. None of this is criticism, I'm asking honest questions because I want to learn the best way to make my CD/DVD.

1) Is the directory structure contained in your Config_XP-64_date.7z file supposed to overlay the contents copied from one's XP x64 CD or is it just something to keep the files organized before slipstreaming?

2) When I was integrating SP2 using nlite, I got a warning dialog about existing hotfixes that needed to be removed before applying the service pack. Is this normal? My XP x64 source was copied directly from a factory pressed CD. Any hotfixes present must have been put there by Microsoft.

3) Your "Internet Explorer 8 subgroup" has an old version of 5eraph's Internet Explorer 8 AddOn from 2009_03 along with several updates. I assume that the latest version of 5eraph's Internet Explorer 8 AddOn already has those updates included. Can I just use that instead, or is there some specific reason you're using the older version?

4) Regarding DirectX... I see that you're using the directx_Jun2010_redist.exe in RunOnce. code65536 built addon packs for DirectX (later maintained by Yumeyao) that purport to be equivalent, yet quite smaller. Is there some advantage to or benefit from using the redist version that I'm not considering? http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8136

5) Regarding WMP11... There's a comment near the end of this thread by user ricktendo64 about KB970159 and the boooggy's WMP11 slipstreaming tool. What is he talking about?... http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4109&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=wmp++slipstreamer&start=1050

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) Is the directory structure contained in your Config_XP-64_date.7z file supposed to overlay the contents copied from one's XP x64 CD or is it just something to keep the files organized before slipstreaming?

Both, after slipsteaming one should copy the Run*_XP-64.bat files and the AddOns & RunOnce folders to the nLite working directory as indicated in step 9 of the guide.

2) When I was integrating SP2 using nlite, I got a warning dialog about existing hotfixes that needed to be removed before applying the service pack. Is this normal? My XP x64 source was copied directly from a factory pressed CD. Any hotfixes present must have been put there by Microsoft.

No it is not normal, are you sure that your CD isn't SP2 already? Check the root directory of the CD, if it has WIN51AP.SP2 then the disk is Service Pack 2.

3) Your "Internet Explorer 8 subgroup" has an old version of 5eraph's Internet Explorer 8 AddOn from 2009_03 along with several updates. I assume that the latest version of 5eraph's Internet Explorer 8 AddOn already has those updates included. Can I just use that instead, or is there some specific reason you're using the older version?

Yes you can use the updated version if you like, in fact you can use 5eraph's pack and skip the vast majority of the Hotfixes, needing only DirectX, WMP11 and .Net related ones.

4) Regarding DirectX... I see that you're using the directx_Jun2010_redist.exe in RunOnce. code65536 built addon packs for DirectX (later maintained by Yumeyao) that purport to be equivalent, yet quite smaller. Is there some advantage to or benefit from using the redist version that I'm not considering? http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8136

You can try it, but I haven't tested it. Considering I've never heard of an x64 capable computer that only has a CD rather than a DVD drive I've never been worried about the size of the various installers.

5) Regarding WMP11... There's a comment near the end of this thread by user ricktendo64 about KB970159 and the boooggy's WMP11 slipstreaming tool. What is he talking about?... http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4109&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=wmp++slipstreamer&start=1050

Googling it, it seems to be similar to the old and tempermental Media Transfer Protocol, as it's not a high priority download it's not included in the update list.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick response.

2) When I was integrating SP2 using nlite, I got a warning dialog about existing hotfixes that needed to be removed before applying the service pack. Is this normal? My XP x64 source was copied directly from a factory pressed CD. Any hotfixes present must have been put there by Microsoft.

No it is not normal, are you sure that your CD isn't SP2 already? Check the root directory of the CD, if it has WIN51AP.SP2 then the disk is Service Pack 2.

The volume label on the CD is "AX2PXFPP_EN"

The root of the CD only has "WIN51" and "WIN51AP"

The \AMD64\SVCPACK directory contains 4 files...

BRANCHES.INF

HFINT.DAT

KB911164.CAT

KB911164.EXE

In this thread...

...A user says this about KB911164...

"That's a non-public hotfix for IE6 which updates the way plug-ins are loaded ("Click here to activate this control") and maybe other things. Just remove it and slipstream the latest cumulative update, which supersedes it."

Edited by krick
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange, my SP1 disk (which is really RtM, XP x64 and Server 2003 x64 were released when Server 2003 32-bit had already received SP1) has a volume label of ARMPXOEM_EN

Also there is no SVCpack directory on a default SP1 (or SP2) disk, did you buy an OEM disk yourself (in a plastic DVD style case) or was it supplied with your computer?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This page lists the known Windows XP CD labels:

http://www.tacktech.com/display.cfm?ttid=342

According to the page "AX2PXFPP_EN" is the Retail version of Windows XP Professional x64, without SP2.

"ARMPXOEM_EN" is the OEM version.

@krick:

It seems that your disc is slipstreamed by someone else. The original disc shouldn't have the \AMD64\SVCPACK directory.

Edited by Explorer09
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also there is no SVCpack directory on a default SP1 (or SP2) disk, did you buy an OEM disk yourself (in a plastic DVD style case) or was it supplied with your computer?

One of my co-workers picked it up in his college bookstore many years ago, but never got around to installing it. He gave it to me after I mentioned in passing that I was looking for a copy of XP x64 but couldn't find one.

The part number on the CD is E85-03210.

The printing on the disc says...

June 2006

Systems

Student Media / Work At Home Media

I found more information posted in 2007 about KB911164 in a thread about HFSLIP...

The newer SP2 disks install a non-public IE6 update from SVCPACK. The existence of the SVCPACK folder causes HFSLIP to trigger the warning.

The reason I haven't come up with a solution for that yet is because, if that update is not installed (which happens after running HFSLIP) and you don't include the latest cumulative update for IE6, you get tons of errors reported in setuperr.log. So I don't want to simply ignore the existence of the SVCPACK folder as a whole. Instead, the warning message needs to be different.

Edited by krick
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess you may as well give it a try as is, if Microsoft has done their job right the Service Pack should be able to correctly remove those hotfixes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.