[Kiki Burgh]

Mim0 thanks for addressing concern about KB955069 & KB954459 vs KB973687 in the latest update list (though i think last entry date in table 7 should be 2009-12-13 instead of 2009-12-3) ... further there are 2 entries now for this kb, 1 in table 2 as security update & another in table 3 as optional update (could be confusing)
following-up on this too:

Kiki Burgh, on Dec 12 2009, 09:38 AM, said:

... could be worth a look as there are actually 2 KB954459s, namely: Security Update for Microsoft XML Core Services 6.0 (KB954459) with msxml6-KB954459-enu-x86.exe dated 2/23/2009 as the downloadable file (this is the 1 i have in HF) while the other on the list being WindowsXP-KB954459-x86-ENU.exe dated 11/10/2008 from Security Update for Windows XP (KB954459) ... yet would it still matter if indeed KB954459's been replaced by KB973687? kindly verify.

appreciate it!

This post has been edited by Kiki Burgh: 15 December 2009 - 01:52 AM

[bphlpt]

Hi Mimo!

Thanks for keeping this so up to date.

Minor confusion - WindowsXP-KB955069-x86-ENU.exe and WindowsXP-KB954459-x86-ENU.exe are still shown in Table 2 as Critical and Important under an entry dated 2008-11, while in Table 7 it shows that they are included in KB973687.

Also, WindowsXP-KB969898-x86-ENU.exe is shown in Table 2 under an entry dated 2009-06, the HFSLIP File Checker says this is replaced by KB973346, but that is shown in Table 7 as itself being replaced by KB973525.

I don't mean for this to be a double post, here and in the File Checker thread, just wanted anyone not using the File Checker to be aware of the above apparent discrepancy. (And everyone definitely should try the File Checker - it's going to be a really great addition to HFSLIP - maybe it even should be folded in so HFSLIP always runs the checker unless specifically told not to, and if it finds any problems, displays them and then gives the user a "Are you sure you want to continue?" kind of option. Might prevent some wasted runs, speeding things up overall. Just a thought!)

Anyway, again, Thanks for all your hard work!

Cheers and Regards

[Mim0]

bphlpt, on Dec 15 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

Minor confusion - WindowsXP-KB955069-x86-ENU.exe and WindowsXP-KB954459-x86-ENU.exe are still shown in Table 2 as Critical and Important under an entry dated 2008-11, while in Table 7 it shows that they are included in KB973687.

You're right, I've fogotten to remove the obsolete entries.

bphlpt, on Dec 15 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

Also, WindowsXP-KB969898-x86-ENU.exe is shown in Table 2 under an entry dated 2009-06, the HFSLIP File Checker says this is replaced by KB973346, but that is shown in Table 7 as itself being replaced by KB973525.

KB969898 has to be removed from table 2. But I didn't understood what you found in table 7

Thx, Mimo

[bphlpt]

Mim0, on Dec 17 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

You're right, I've fogotten to remove the obsolete entries.

I thought so.

Mim0, on Dec 17 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

KB969898 has to be removed from table 2.

I thought so, again.

Mim0, on Dec 17 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

But I didn't understood what you found in table 7

No real problem. It's just that if I had followed the File Checker's advice and removed WindowsXP-KB969898-x86-ENU.exe and replaced it with KB973346 as suggested, when I ran File Checker again it would have then told me that, no, KB973346 is obsolete and it has been replaced by KB973525, as shown in Table 7 by this line -

Quote

MS09-032: ActiveX Kill Bits (cumulative) (973346) --- Critical --- Replaced by MS09-055: ActiveX Kill Bits (KB973525)

So while the File Checker is "correct", it could have saved me a step. Anyway, again, it's no problem. The Tables are correct now, as far as I know.

Thanks again for your hard work and for this wonderful, time saving tool!

Cheers and Regards

This post has been edited by bphlpt: 20 December 2009 - 10:20 PM

[tommyp]

Here's a monkey wrench for XP. If you use wm9, you can upgrade to the v9.5 codecs using wmfdist95.exe in HF. These codecs don't have as many DRM as WMP11 does. HFSLIP already takes care of necessary hotfix updates if you use wmfdist95.exe.

[Mim0]

bphlpt, on Dec 17 2009, 05:19 PM, said:

Mim0, on Dec 17 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

But I didn't understood what you found in table 7

No real problem. It's just that if I had followed the File Checker's advice and removed WindowsXP-KB969898-x86-ENU.exe and replaced it with KB973346 as suggested, when I ran File Checker again it would have then told me that, no, KB973346 is obsolete and it has been replaced by KB973525, as shown in Table 7 by this line -

Quote

MS09-032: ActiveX Kill Bits (cumulative) (973346) --- Critical --- Replaced by MS09-055: ActiveX Kill Bits (KB973525)

OK, understood! "replaced" is just an information. Not a necessary information but for me sometimes I'm interested for this information. "missing" is the only hint that an updated was expected in the HF-Sub-Folders.

tommyp said:

Here's a monkey wrench for XP. If you use wm9, you can upgrade to the v9.5 codecs using wmfdist95.exe in HF. These codecs don't have as many DRM as WMP11 does. HFSLIP already takes care of necessary hotfix updates if you use wmfdist95.exe.

In which category belongs wmfdist95.exe?

• Optional Update for Windows XP SP3 in general (independend from the installed WMP which means it makes also sense when someone installs WMP11)?
  
• Or is this just an optional update for WMP9? (than I would add a new table for WMP9 to my list).

Regards, Mimo

[tommyp]

mim0 - the wmfdist95 is only for wmp9. It's not needed if you use wmp11. Actually, to be safe, you probably should not include it if you are using wmp11.

[Tomalak]

Hello Mim0,

Regarding your update list:

• KB958911 (optional GDI+ update) needs to be removed from table 3 (and your update checker), as it is outdated and has been superseded by KB958869 (MS09-062).
  
• KB976098 (cumulative timezone update) is listed as to be put into HFSVCPACK_SW1. Any special reason for this? I have found that it works flawlessly in HF.

Kind regards,
Tomalak

[tommyp]

mim0/Muppet Hunter -
Just a heads up. HFSLIP can slipstream WM11 codecs and not the player for XP. This could wreak havok if one were not using hfcleanup (I got my hfcleanup'd install down to 160 meg with all my codecs and drivers!!!). I'll come up with a list of what's needed codecwise for this.

This post has been edited by tommyp: 27 December 2009 - 06:30 PM

[Mim0]

Tomalak, on Dec 27 2009, 01:39 PM, said:

• KB958911 (optional GDI+ update) needs to be removed from table 3 (and your update checker), as it is outdated and has been superseded by KB958869 (MS09-062).

Oh, thx for that Info!

Tomalak, on Dec 27 2009, 01:39 PM, said:

• KB976098 (cumulative timezone update) is listed as to be put into HFSVCPACK_SW1. Any special reason for this? I have found that it works flawlessly in HF.

Hmm... I found this info on the list which is now maintained by MH. And I think I have something in mind that tommyp has written something about that (but I'm not sure).Regards, Mimo

This post has been edited by Mim0: 28 December 2009 - 05:03 PM

[tommyp]

IIRC, there were some language issues, not all languages would slipstream correctly. You gotta love how msft remains inconsistent with their hotfixes.

[Parseus]

tommyp, on Dec 29 2009, 03:27 AM, said:

IIRC, there were some language issues, not all languages would slipstream correctly. You gotta love how msft remains inconsistent with their hotfixes.

So, can we put it to HF now without any problems??

[Martin H]

@Tommy

I've just changed back to Win2k again, and this of course means using hfslip! (the xp hfcleanup fileset wasen't stable at the time i changed to XP...)

Anyway, i just wanted to ask what the "Don't do it!" note of KB958470 relates to; is it the same as "Junk" or do you reffer to not using remote desktop in general (which i don't) ?

Sorry for being dence

Also, sorry for being off-topic, but while i'm posting to you anyway, then i noticed that i have an entry in 'add/remove programs' which states "Update Rollup 1 for Windows 2000 SP4", and i didn't remember having that, last i used hfslip/win2k ? Hmm, maybe it's fdv adding that, since i'm using his latest fileset ? (i haven't looked at his INFs yet)...

CU, Martin.

Edit: Please ignore my second question:

FDV:
- free-av says "rollup must be installed" but it -is- so I'll have a look into what it thinks it wants at some point

This post has been edited by Martin H: 05 January 2010 - 05:59 PM

[tommyp]

Hi Martin. Hope all is well. Unfortunatly I had to convert to XP and finally say goodbye to 2k. Because I loathed XP so much, I had to rip it a new orifice and generated/fixed the files for hfcleanup. It's mature enough for my box and the zip package posted at hfslip.org is the same files I use in my current real machine. This box seems faster than my 2k boxes and installs slightly faster. The only issue I have is WMP classic, but I think I have a way for that. The only time I can really test it out is the next real install. My iso is 160 meg which includes all drivers and codecs and ie core. Without codecs, the install is about 110-120 meg. The goal was to fit on a mini-cd. The goal was achieved.

Remote desktop = remote access to your computer. Personally I prefer to not have someone peek into my machine. I'd recommend to remove remote desktop. I'm sure there is a way to do it with a winnt.sif. I just hfcleanup and don't let it install at all.

Thanks for answering your own Q on the AV program. I always wondered why it would never install for me.

[Martin H]

Thanks for your reply, mate!

Cool to hear that you've "stabilized/fixed" the xp fileset!

Myself, i had just spend a good month on making a nLite'd and BartPE'd(for formatting my C: drive unattendedly and loading the XP unattended setup) XP source just the way i wanted it, with tweaks and app-installs etc., but typically, then i've now begun to miss good ol' Win2k, and thought to myself to what purposse i was actually changing over to XP for, so i've wen't back to a nice FDV'd and hfslip'ed win2k yesterday...

Anyway, i'm glad to see that you're still going strong on the hfslip development!

CU, Martin.

[Kiki Burgh]

hello! just a little clarification needed with: Update for Windows XP (KB973687) - WindowsXP-KB973687-x86-ENU.exe has MSXML6.dll
6.20.1103.0 while Update for MSXML Core Services 6.0 Service Pack 2 (KB973686) - msxml6-KB973686-enu-x86.exe has MSXML6.dll 6.20.2003.0 ... doesn't KB973687 revert what is in KB973686?
also, i think it is worth adding something about KB973686 being included in SP3 to this:

Quote

2009-11-26
New but not to integrate:
· MSXML 6.0 Service Pack 2 (KB973686)

in Mimo's Windows XP Service Pack 3 update-list ... your thoughts Mim0? thanks!

This post has been edited by Kiki Burgh: 09 January 2010 - 11:34 PM

[Mim0]

Kiki Burgh, on Jan 10 2010, 06:24 AM, said:

hello! just a little clarification needed with: Update for Windows XP (KB973687) - WindowsXP-KB973687-x86-ENU.exe has MSXML6.dll
6.20.1103.0 while Update for MSXML Core Services 6.0 Service Pack 2 (KB973686) - msxml6-KB973686-enu-x86.exe has MSXML6.dll 6.20.2003.0 ... doesn't KB973687 revert what is in KB973686?
also, i think it is worth adding something about KB973686 being included in SP3 to this:

Quote

2009-11-26
New but not to integrate:
· MSXML 6.0 Service Pack 2 (KB973686)

in Mimo's Windows XP Service Pack 3 update-list ... your thoughts Mim0? thanks!

Hi Kiki,
I didn't remember why I thought KB973686 was not to integrate. But I think, you're right, KB973686 is worth to be listed.

Thx, Mimo

[Kiki Burgh]

Mim0, on Jan 10 2010, 04:10 PM, said:

Kiki Burgh, on Jan 10 2010, 06:24 AM, said:

hello! just a little clarification needed with: Update for Windows XP (KB973687) - WindowsXP-KB973687-x86-ENU.exe has MSXML6.dll
6.20.1103.0 while Update for MSXML Core Services 6.0 Service Pack 2 (KB973686) - msxml6-KB973686-enu-x86.exe has MSXML6.dll 6.20.2003.0 ... doesn't KB973687 revert what is in KB973686?
also, i think it is worth adding something about KB973686 being included in SP3 to this:

Quote

2009-11-26
New but not to integrate:
· MSXML 6.0 Service Pack 2 (KB973686)

in Mimo's Windows XP Service Pack 3 update-list ... your thoughts Mim0? thanks!

Hi Kiki,
I didn't remember why I thought KB973686 was not to integrate. But I think, you're right, KB973686 is worth to be listed.

Thx, Mimo

hi Mim0! my apologies if i confused you. there was nothing wrong with what you noted in the table as indeed there's no need to include it. i'm only suggesting to add maybe a little note about it being shipped with xp sp3 ... sp3 includes MSXML 6.0 SP2. a little more info from here could help such as:

Quote

Version 6, 4, and 3 may all be installed and running concurrently.

if i may direct you to this, info could be vital too.
cheers!

btw, what can be done to prevent KB973687 from overwriting the newer msmxl6.dll in KB973686?

This post has been edited by Kiki Burgh: 10 January 2010 - 10:17 AM

[Parseus]

Kiki Burgh, on Jan 10 2010, 11:17 AM, said:

btw, what can be done to prevent KB973687 from overwriting the newer msmxl6.dll in KB973686?

I have these two updates in HF directory and KB973687 doesn't overwrite the newer msxml6.dll - KB973686 is slipstreamed after KB973687 because of the name of the first one (msxml6-KB973686-enu-x86.exe). I have msxml6.dll 6.20.2003.0.

This post has been edited by Parseus: 10 January 2010 - 11:58 AM

[Mim0]

Kiki Burgh, on Jan 10 2010, 11:17 AM, said:

hi Mim0! my apologies if i confused you. there was nothing wrong with what you noted in the table as indeed there's no need to include it.

I think when KB973686 contains a newer MSXML6 than KB973687, than it's worth to be listed!!! :-) THX again!