[turdflinger]

Quote

HF\ WindowsXP-KB953155-x86-ENU.exe Oct 2008 Important 953155 Printing Service

I believe this one 'optional' based upon the info from http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/...n/ms08-062.mspx as it only affects users running IIS:
I am running one of the platforms that are listed in the affected software table. Why am I not being offered the update?
The update will only be offered to systems on which the affected component is installed. Microsoft Windows 2000 and Windows XP systems that do not have Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) installed are not affected and will not receive this update. Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2008 systems that do not have both IIS and Internet printing installed are not affected and will not receive this update.
Would it be a good idea to include a note indicating this is optional unless IIS is installed?

On a side note: with SP3 slipstreamed (before using HFSLIP), 951748 is not displayed via MBSA 2.1 or Windows Update. I've searched for a reason why but cannot for the life of me see why this isn't being included via MBSA 2.1 or Windows Update. I show adf.sys being updated later from 956803 but dnsapi.dll(a), mswsock.dll(a), tcpip.sys(B) and tcpip6.sys(B) all show as version 5.1.2600.5512 and dated 4/13/08 for (B) and 4/14/08 for (a) (see http://support.micro....com/kb/951748). Based upon the list by FDV and TommyP, I would expect MBSA 2.1 or Windows Update should be offering 951748 but neither one appears to do so.

This post has been edited by turdflinger: 14 December 2008 - 11:44 PM

[turdflinger]

spamkonto1, on Dec 14 2008, 08:25 PM, said:

Looks like 893803 and 911564 are not needed for XP SP3.

911564 is included in XP SP3 via 946480 (http://support.micro....com/kb/946480/).
946480 is the List of fixes that are included in Windows XP Service Pack 3.

tf

This post has been edited by turdflinger: 14 December 2008 - 11:46 PM

[tommyp]

turdflinger - I'd prefer not to include other info such as you mentioned about IIS. It's not my intent to offer all scenerios of who installs what and what hotfixes are required for their system. It's already a pita with the various flavors of WMP and IE. In the case of the IIS update you mention, if someone has their winnt.sif file set up to install IIS, then the latest IIS will be installed. If the option is turned off, then it won't install, but the latest fileset still resides on the installation CD. The severity rating will remain as what MSFT says. It's not my call to redefine how MSFT rates their OS software.

spamkonto1 - Thanks for the tips. 911564 removed, but it appears that package installer 893803 is not part of the XPSP3, or at least that's what it says at KB946480. The legitcheckontrol.cab is periodically updated. It's good to keep the latest version there. I don't know how to answer your Q if it's an IE7 thing or not. I don't use IE7 or XP. I dislike both.

[spamkonto1]

tommyp, on Dec 16 2008, 12:22 AM, said:

it appears that package installer 893803 is not part of the XPSP3, or at least that's what it says at KB946480.
...
I don't know how to answer your Q if it's an IE7 thing or not.

Thanks, I was only leaving some comments after trying HFSLIP tool - I find it very useful.
I tried to use nlite, but it failed to produce successfull installation cd XPSP3+IE7
(battery problem - looks like unsigned drivers settins were to blame).
Then I found that nLite does more than I wanted (editing sfc.dlls) and since there
is this HFSLIP tool that any reasonable user can use, STUDY and, in case
of problem, FIX himself, I was delighted.

FYI: when trying to install 893803 under XPSP3 message says that
newer package installer version is already included.
That "question" about IE7 was not really a question ;-) but only information
that it was not exactly fresh XPSP3, but IE7 was extra added (so that
might caused mentioned symptoms).
Anyway, I will try to install really clean XPSP3, then 893803 and report
it later.

One question about scripting - I am new to cmd, but it looks like pretty good
shell (bash is my poison), but can you tell me why HFSLIP does not use
parameters when CALL-ing "shell functions" (i.e. CALL :HF %hotfix_filename%)?
Some 2K/XP/2003/Vista incompatibility? cmd limitation?

[tommyp]

It's not a limitation, it's just a if-it's-not-broke-don't-fix-it thing. Sure there could be lots of optimization to the script, but personal life and work get in the way. I don't think I get the error for the package installer but if more folks say that the file isn't needed, I'll remove it.

[turdflinger]

tommyp, on Dec 15 2008, 02:22 PM, said:

turdflinger - I'd prefer not to include other info such as you mentioned about IIS. It's not my intent to offer all scenerios of who installs what and what hotfixes are required for their system. It's already a pita with the various flavors of WMP and IE. In the case of the IIS update you mention, if someone has their winnt.sif file set up to install IIS, then the latest IIS will be installed. If the option is turned off, then it won't install, but the latest fileset still resides on the installation CD. The severity rating will remain as what MSFT says. It's not my call to redefine how MSFT rates their OS software.

spamkonto1 - Thanks for the tips. 911564 removed, but it appears that package installer 893803 is not part of the XPSP3, or at least that's what it says at KB946480. The legitcheckontrol.cab is periodically updated. It's good to keep the latest version there. I don't know how to answer your Q if it's an IE7 thing or not. I don't use IE7 or XP. I dislike both.

thanks tommyp, i agree pita and that makes sense enough to me!

Per, 893803:
Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 3; Windows 2000 Service Pack 4; Windows Server 2003; Windows XP; Windows XP Service Pack 1; Windows XP Service Pack 2
It doesn't list XPsp3 though...

[Lions]

Hi all,

I would give my little contribution to keep updated Windows 2000 list:

1) KB926121 (Remote Installation Services - RIS) is an optional component. If RIS is not installed, the update gives an error message...

2) KB926122 has been replaced by KB934484 (http://www.microsoft...n/MS08-003.mspx),
wich has been replaced by KB949014 (http://www.microsoft...n/ms08-035.mspx).
So, only KB949014 (currently missing) should be included in the list.

3) KB937894 has been replaced by KB951071 (http://www.microsoft...n/MS08-065.mspx)

4) KB941569 is listed twice.

5) Security and optional updates missing from the list:
-KB941644 (http://www.microsoft...n/ms08-001.mspx)
-KB950760 (http://www.microsoft...n/MS08-032.mspx), NOT replaced by KB9353839
-KB953839 (http://www.microsoft...ory/953839.mspx)
-KB957280 (http://www.microsoft...n/MS08-060.mspx)
-WindowsRightsManagementServicesSP2-KB917275-Client-XXX-x86.EXE (http://support.micro...kb/917275/en-us)

Ciao

[tommyp]

Thanks for the contribution Lions. I'll try to knock these issues down one by one.
1. I don't get an error when slipstreaming 926121.
2. This is the infamous active directory hotfix. The overall hotfix is actually 957280.
3. List updated. Thanks!
4. Agreed, 941569 is listed twice. It's needed if you install codecs only. It's also included if you want to slipstream WMP9. A dynamic hotfix list would be better suited, but I'm not an HTML coder.
5. 941644 updates tcpip.sys. There is already a hotfix that updates this file (941644 is superceded).
950760 & 953839 are those infamous activex kill bits hotfixes. These two updates do not appear for me.
957280. See answer #2.
WindowsRights 917275. I'll reluctantly add this one to the list. I haven't seen the need to use this update yet.

[dreaMMar]

Hi All,

Yesterday I installed a SP3 slipstreamed XP (Dutch), and installed IE7.
Then visited windows update, these are sugested updates:

892130
898461
890830
952069
954600
956802
958215
955839
955069
954459
957097
958644
954211
956391
956803
956841
957095
905474
938464
938127
951066
946648
952954
950974
952287
951978
951698
951376
950762
923789

So it looks like you don't need 893803, 950760 & 951748...

Merry Christmas Everyone

[turdflinger]

dreaMMar, on Dec 17 2008, 07:16 AM, said:

So it looks like you don't need 893803, 950760 & 951748...

These are my results as well.
There are no bulletins replaced for WinXPsp3 regarding 950760 & 951748. 893803 doesn't list Windows XP Service Pack 3 (SP3).
I wonder if this has anything to do with it. Or, it might be a bug in the WUA (which would affect MBSA 2.1 as well).

Is your slipstreamed xpsp3 using an RTM or VLK version?

tf

[Martin H]

Yeah, i recently updated my sisters new PC which had WinXP-SP3 on(i tried to convince her to change to 2k, but couldn't ), anyway, when i followed Tommy's list and then came to KB893803v2, then i could see that it didn't installed right from the batchfile i had made and when i then tried to install it manually, then a prompt stated that the SP level on the system(i.e. SP3) wasen't supported for that update...

Note, this wasen't a slipstream, though... Just a FYI...

[turdflinger]

FWIW, I just finished evaluating a Windows XP SP2 machine (not slipstreamed) which hadn't been upgraded in about a year.
Checking Windows Update showed 893803, 950760 and 951748 as being needed (plus a few others).
Instead of getting all the updates, I went ahead and upgraded the machine to SP3.
I checked Windows Update and 893803, 950760 and 951748 weren't offered.

I tried installing 951748 against SP3 too and it installed without issue. It seems to me this one should probably be included in a slipstream process regardless of what WUA and MBSA 2.1 indicate (or don't indicate as the case may be).

tf

This post has been edited by turdflinger: 18 December 2008 - 12:48 AM

[bfc_xxx]

The WindowsXP-KB915865-v11-x86-ENU.exe points to Windows-en-US-KB943729.exe. The correct I think is Windows-en-US-KB943729.exe
regards

[tfoutfou]

bfc_xxx, on Dec 21 2008, 03:23 PM, said:

The WindowsXP-KB915865-v11-x86-ENU.exe points to Windows-en-US-KB943729.exe. The correct I think is Windows-en-US-KB943729.exe
regards

same question here !

the description , the date and the link are all pointing to KB943729 but only the filename is wrong !

some copy/paste error ?

thanks

[tommyp]

yes, it was a copy/paste error. I'll send the new version to FDV for hosting. The hotfix lists are pretty much generated by a spreadsheet. I have all the KB numbers and MS article numbers. From there, I use some concatenate functions to generate the HTML code. So it's just a copy/paste thing at this point. I feel it's 99% there. But with any software, there is always room for improvement.

Merry Christmas.

[willydejoe1234]

special.reg the continued need for ActiveX Killbits(kb956391)in hfsvcpack folder?
thanks

This post has been edited by willydejoe1234: 26 December 2008 - 07:56 PM

[tommyp]

Are you using the latest beta? The beta should add in that "fix." What's the reg file you need to use?

[willydejoe1234]

in the latest beta everything is fixed either ecepcion of adding an activex killbits .....
adding one. reg published here if the update fixes
compile everything again to see if you ask me ActiveX killbits in Windows Update

[willydejoe1234]

I worked the whole process again and still the asking kb956391 update I have not made any modification of the process and I have used the latest beta of hfslip......
but if we put this. reg in hfsvcpack not ask me to update the ActiveX killbits:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{0002E510-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}]
"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400

I am also a doubt ... because it is blocked windows installer 4.5 in the latest versions of hfslip? Is it a problem caused by this update? Solve WindowsXP-KB958655-x86-ENU.exe this problem?

This post has been edited by willydejoe1234: 27 December 2008 - 07:08 PM

[tommyp]

willydejoe1234 - HFSLIP already addresses this activex issue. Perhaps you have another file that is reversing this fix?