Possibly two file copying issues with W2k SP4 patches

[Inki]

Hi,

I may be mistaken, but it appears that HFSLIP 1.6.5 does not copy all the relevant files from the October cumulative patch for IE6 SP1 on W2K SP4 (MS07-057/KB939653).

Also, I have noticed that MBSA (Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer 2.0.1) seems to frown at the file comctl32.dll (5.81.3900.7109), which HFSLIP copies into W2K SP4 from MS06-057/KB923191. It seems that MBSA would be more pleased with comctl32.dll (5.81.4968.2500), which is located in the xpsp2_binarydrop subfolder within the same patch file. I certainly have no idea which file version would be better or more correct. Anyways, it is easy enough to silence MBSA by placing the latter file (compressed it into comctl32.dl_) in the HFSLIP\FIX folder.

Hope that this information is useful- or at least not too wildly out of core context

[Tomcat76]

HFSLIP takes the files in xpsp2_binarydrop if IE6 is being slipstreamed. Seeing that you also have issues with the IE6 cumulative update, I believe the problem is that HFSLIP doesn't recognize the IE6 cabs in HFCABS. Can you zip HFSLIP.LOG and attach it here?

[Inki]

Certainly, I can attempt it, let's see if it will appear here somewhere...

At least it will demonstrate that I am still in the process of figuring out what works and what does not. Great tool, by the way.

Actually your guess is certainly very accurate in the sense that I don't have any IE6 cabs in my HFSLIP setup, because I am using Gurglemeyer's USP-5.1.2195.24 as a base and as a source for IE6. It sounds then as if this might not be detected as an IE6 installation because of that.

Edited addition: Perhaps I should place some IE6 cab into HFCABS just as an indication for HFSLIP that IE6 is involved, although it is already included in the USP?

Furthermore: I do have some old and obscure patches included (my version of W2k "fully patched" backwards in time as far as possible), with some of them having been renamed to work with HFSLIP, and probably not all very useful. However, they are unlikely to impact this issue, as I get the very same result when using only MS07-057 with the USP.

HFSLIPLOG.ZIP

Edited November 10, 2007 by Inki

[Inki]

Well, I did some experiments and found out the following:

First, I placed all the relevant IE6 cabs into HFCABS.

As a result, HFSLIP apparently recognized IE6 and the issues with MS06-057 and MS07-057 vanished. Instead, MBSA reported 5 new missing updates: 02-050, 03-023, 05-013, 05-044, 06-023, plus the post SP4 Rollup, all of which are included in the USP.

Second, I also placed the post SP4 Rollup into HF.

As a result, at first I was unable to install MBSA, because "installer services are unavailable or improperly installed" or something like that. So I installed Installer 3.1(v2) manually (it is included in the USP). MBSA then reported 7 missing updates: 05-026, 05-040, 05-042, 05-043, 05-044, 05-049, and 06-023, all of which are included in the USP.

My impression is that this route looks a bit messy, and going along it might undo an unknown number of updates included in Gurglemeyer's USP that might not even be revealed by MBSA or WU.

Might there be any way of letting HFSLIP know that the basic IE6 is taken care of by the USP, and that it should not worry about it?

Edited November 10, 2007 by Inki

[Tomcat76]

There is a bug in HFSLIP that prevents the IE level from being set properly with USP5. Actually, HFSLIP sets it to IE6 but it's reset to IE5 just a bit later.

I'm currently working on HFSLIP 1.6.6 RC7 which will also fix this problem. I'll keep you posted.

[Tomcat76]

The ID problems should be fixed in hfslip-1.7.0rc1. I hope that fixes all of them...

[Tomcat76]

I notice a few problems with your log file.

MDAC253-KB927779-x86-ENU.exe

MDAC281-KB927779-x86-ENU.exe

I don't know whether USP 5.1 contains MDAC 2.8 SP1 or not. If it does, you should remove the hotfix for MDAC 2.5 SP3. If it doesn't, you should remove the hotfix for MDAC 2.8 SP1 (or remove the hotfix for MDAC 2.5 SP3 and include the MDAC 2.8 SP1 package).

I also see quite a few hotfixes that do not appear on my hotfix list. Be careful with those.

[Inki]

Thank you very much for your reply. I greatly appreciate your support for this USP by Gurglemeyer, especially since I imagine that it may not be widely used. (A good indication of this is if the IE6 level setting issue has not surfaced previously as I first noticed some symptoms more than half a year ago but dismissed it then as a temporary quirk. Sorry, by the way, for not raising the issue earlier.)

Also, many thanks for your comments on my update list. The mutual interaction of different MDAC versions is something that I have never been too sure about. The USP does not include MDAC 2.8 SP1, which is included in HF as MDAC_TYP.EXE. When working manually I have usually first updated MDAC 2.5 SP3 and then installled and updated MDAC 2.8 SP1, noting that the first update may be redundant. This approach has apparently been carried over into my HFSLIP setup with the idea: "put them all in and let HFSLIP sort it out", which I realize may be incorrect. I will act on your recommendation and remove the update for MDAC 2.5 SP3.

Concerning the contents of the USP (to the benefit of anybody who may be interested): I once made the effort of checking the file versions included in the USP against various updates, and the content of the posted log file represents my best understanding of what is and is not included in this specific version of it. I have duplicated one update from the USP in the HF folder: MS06-015 / 908531, because although its files were included, for some reason the update did not seem to install properly from the USP.

Concerning the updates from "outside the list" (to the benefit of anybody who may be interested): I realise that these updates are not supported and I do have a "let's see if anything bad happens" attitude towards them. They are based on what early updates I have been able to find that have been missed by the USP (or left out deliberately, although I doubt it). Interestingly enough, some of these early updates have updated file versions, which have not been included in later updates. Of course, changes in some other files may have made these updates redundant. I have no idea, but it satisfies my sense of perfection to try to have a "completely updated" installation. Once, maybe roughly a year ago, I posted on this forum a more complete description of these updates just to see if anybody might be interested in making comments on them. However, during the couple of days that I followed the thread, I only saw one reply, which I found a bit discouraging, because it seemed to totally miss my point. I then decided in favor of some completely different interests and am sorry to say, that if there were any relevant comments later on, I unfortunately missed them and failed to reply.

[Tomcat76]

Well... There are a few things you should maybe know...

HFSLIP is a DOS program so it can only go by the creation date of files (using the XCOPY command with the /D switch) without additional tools. If you have a hotfix containing a file named filename.exe which was created on April 1, 2003, and another hotfix with the same file but created on June 1, 2007, then HFSLIP will take the newest, even if it has a lower version number. HFSLIP only makes exceptions for "known issues" such as IE7 for WinXP and the KB899591 update for Win2K Server. Also, this creation date comparison is only done between files coming from hotfixes and updates; files inside the original source and the Service Pack (like USP 5.1) are not taken into account: they are overwritten with whatever turns out to be "the newest" from hotfixes and updates.

Old hotfixes are composed differently and may not be supported as a result. They may also contain AddReg and DelReg sections in their installation INF files which have a name that isn't covered by HFSLIP.

If they contain new files which are not part of the source and need to be placed in a location other than "the defaults" that HFSLIP handles, they are not supported. HFSLIP does have hard coded support for some, but only for files related to current mainstream updates and hotfixes.

If they contain long file names, they are only supported for sure if HFSLIP already has in-built support for those specific files. If HFSLIP does not yet have support for one or more of those long file names, they are only supported with CD-based installs (and if they need to be placed in one of the "default" locations) because floppy installs and network installs use DOSNET.INF, which can't handle long file names.

If files need to be renamed, they are only supported if HFSLIP already covers those files.

[Inki]

Excellent! 1.7.0rc1 seems to have cleared away my IE6-related troubles.

And thank you for the additional information that you have given. I will keep it in mind the next time I gather enough energy to give my HFSLIP setup a thorough examination.