LoneCrusader

Requesting Windows 95 Updates, Tools, etc.

53 posts in this topic

Windows 95C? Hey, I run that. Let's see what I have...

  • 259728dut5.exe (IP Fragment Reassembly fix, Dutch version)
  • DX80dut.exe (DirectX 8.0a, Dutch version)
  • iosysdut.exe (Less Conventional Memory Available in European OSR2 fix, Dutch version)
  • mpfull.exe (WMP 6.0, one of the last versions with no IE integration)
  • Win95-Y2k-Dutch.zip (Y2K update, Dutch version)
  • wmp6cdcs.exe (additional codecs for WMP6)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows 95C? Hey, I run that. Let's see what I have...

  • 259728dut5.exe (IP Fragment Reassembly fix, Dutch version)
  • DX80dut.exe (DirectX 8.0a, Dutch version)
  • iosysdut.exe (Less Conventional Memory Available in European OSR2 fix, Dutch version)
  • mpfull.exe (WMP 6.0, one of the last versions with no IE integration)
  • Win95-Y2k-Dutch.zip (Y2K update, Dutch version)
  • wmp6cdcs.exe (additional codecs for WMP6)

Hello BenoitRen, welcome to the thread. :hello:

I had been waiting for one of our resident Windows 95 users to get involved. While I use 98SE now, I moved up from 95 unwillingly a few years back so I am still very fond of it, and I enjoy working with it.

Also, as you were the OP of the thread I referenced in my original post, I had hoped that you might have archived some of the updates that Petr listed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The actual docs:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/ja-jp/library/bb417343.aspx

only talk of MSZIP and LZX.

FWIW, "CabPack" utilizes MakeCab and also does not include Quantum as an option. Perhaps Quantum was available in Diamond but not used. Why do I say this? If you look in the Headers of the Cabs they seem to indicate MSZIP (AFAIKR; been a while since I "decoded" them). Or, perhaps it was available (and used) but the "flag" was set to MSZIP?

Note to Self - seems to a subject of a different topic as it appears that a dual(or more)-pass was done to construct the "installation set" (since LAYOUTx.INF is in PRECOPYx.Cab). Never got the hang of reconstructing CAB's (the DDF's must be correctly constructed to replicate, using MakeCab).

Thx for additional info (already have the rest tucked away - somewhere?).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LoneCrusader, got time to test it for the 'CompressionType=Quantum" (ref. specific posts jaclaz presented)?

Success!! :thumbup

Of course I owe all of my success to submix8c for finding the right version of DIAMOND.EXE, jaclaz for finding relevant documentation, and to rloew for his Slipstreaming Tools and taking the time to test and script it for me. :wub:

I now have a set of De-Spanned Windows 95 CABs properly compressed with QUANTUM. Now on to slipstreaming updated files.

Thanks for all your help so far!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Petr listed a lot of updates, but I never asked him to send any of the files, so I never saw them.

So, uh, where do I send the files, assuming you're interested in them?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmm, I have odds-n-ends but they're disorganized and are for any/all Win95 versions. When I get a chance, I'll try to organize and list them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Petr listed a lot of updates, but I never asked him to send any of the files, so I never saw them.

So, uh, where do I send the files, assuming you're interested in them?

I have sent you a PM with my email address. :)

Mmmm, I have odds-n-ends but they're disorganized and are for any/all Win95 versions. When I get a chance, I'll try to organize and list them.

I'm not picky, Ill take updates for all versions. :lol:

And really the only way to sort some of them is to actually extract the files and compare them to the ones in the CABs... :wacko:

I have found some files with later version numbers but earlier timestamps than the ones in the CABs, at least one update (Q247578) that will not install on OSR2, even though the files contained in it are newer and work perfectly when substituted manually, have a situation with GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL where v4.00.1112 files exist to replace the originals at v4.00.950, but v4.01.971 files exist and are newer than the 1112 versions. And the list goes on.

Still unable to find the English Q282901 HotFix anywhere. This one is really driving me nuts.

Also looking for the source of at least two files contained in the 95 USP,

VNETBIOS.VXD with a Q262528 reference (unable to find a KB article for this one, even with the Wayback Machine :unsure: )

CONFIGMG.VXD v4.00.1113 - I have 1112; 1114 exists in the missing Q282901 HotFix, but I can find no references to 1113 at all.

On the bright side I have managed to slipstream 50+ updates with RLoew's slipstreaming tools. Including the addition of an .INF file that makes all of the registry entries for each of the updates. :w00t:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found some files with later version numbers but earlier timestamps than the ones in the CABs, at least one update (Q247578) that will not install on OSR2, even though the files contained in it are newer and work perfectly when substituted manually, have a situation with GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL where v4.00.1112 files exist to replace the originals at v4.00.950, but v4.01.971 files exist and are newer than the 1112 versions. And the list goes on.

I think that may be because Microsoft intended 4.00.971 to replace 4.00.950 and 4.00.1112 to replace 4.00.1111 not 4.00.950 even if it works. I have seen the same pattern between Windows 98, 98SE and ME where updates of

the older Windows have lower Version numbers than updates that came out earlier for the newer Windows. I have seen the exact same file released with two different Version numbers for different Windows.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that may be because Microsoft intended 4.00.971 to replace 4.00.950 and 4.00.1112 to replace 4.00.1111 not 4.00.950 even if it works. I have seen the same pattern between Windows 98, 98SE and ME where updates of

the older Windows have lower Version numbers than updates that came out earlier for the newer Windows. I have seen the exact same file released with two different Version numbers for different Windows.

That would be the logical assumption of course. ;)

But I think Microsoft didn't exactly follow logic with several of these Windows 95 updates. The main problem seems to be that a good many of the files in OSR2+ still carry 4.00.950 version numbers instead of being bumped to 4.00.1111. This GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL issue is the worst that I have found so far, and honestly, I don't know how to sort it out.

My Windows 95C CABs contain GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL version 4.00.950. Note there are no 4.00.1111 versions.

MDGx lists the Q247578 HotFix (containing GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL version 4.00.955) as being for 95 Original and OSR2, and the files work in OSR2 if manually installed, but the installer says that it is "not for this version of Windows" when I try to run it. A link to an older KB article under it at MDGx's links to Q229670.

Q229670 contains two versions of GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL, 4.00.1112 for OSR2, and 4.00.954 for 95 Original.

The KB article claims that it should include 4.01.971 for 95 Original, but it does not. I just acquired this HotFix with the HotFix request form, so I know I'm using their "current" version of it.

Following these links, there is a link to Microsoft Active Accessibility with a note saying it installs a newer GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL version 4.01.971.

However, the GDI.EXE and GDI32.DLL contained in MSAA are version 4.01.970, not 971.

MSAA automatically overwrites 1112 versions I had installed with its own 4.01.970 versions.

And, to top it off, the W95EURO update installs GDI.EXE 4.01.971, but no GDI32.DLL. This 971 version has an earlier timestamp than any of the previously mentioned files, but has the "latest" version number.

It's a mad house.. a mad house!! :wacko:

Edited by LoneCrusader
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it actually *IS* a mad house! :P

But, when push comes to shove, you can use the PE Timestamp (see this, this, this and this) to sort things out, in many occasions (provided the files in question *are* PE executables (EXE, SYS, OCX, DLL, TLB usually)... although, in some cases it just adds to the confusion. There's nothing equivalent for NE, LE and plain DOS executables, I'm sorry to say.

Also of interest may be this old post, by Petr, on versioning.

HTH

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...when push comes to shove, you can use the PE Timestamp (see this, this, this and this) to sort things out,...

I tried examining GDI.EXE with MiTeC EXE Explorer, and there didn't seem to be anything like a timestamp or compilation date anywhere inside. Also tried PEDUMP with the syntax you posted in the other threads, it generated no output whatsoever, even tried redirecting output to a .TXT file, and it was blank. eXeScope didn't find anything either.

GDI32.DLL did yield some results however. Each version seems to have two instances of "TimeDateStamp," but they are usually within a few seconds of each other.

GDI32.GLL version 4.00.1112 for OSR2 from Q229670:

TimeDateStamp: 398F4DE4 -> Mon Aug 07 20:01:40 2000

TimeDateStamp: 398F4DDD -> Mon Aug 07 20:01:33 2000

GDI32.DLL version 4.00.954 for 95 Original from Q229670:

TimeDateStamp: 39C2632F -> Fri Sep 15 13:58:07 2000

TimeDateStamp: 39C2632C -> Fri Sep 15 13:58:04 2000

GDI32.DLL version 4.00.955 from Q247578:

TimeDateStamp: 39D4D9EF -> Fri Sep 29 14:05:35 2000

TimeDateStamp: 39D4D9EC -> Fri Sep 29 14:05:32 2000

GDI32.DLL version 4.00.970 from MSAA:

TimeDateStamp: 32346E9C -> Mon Sep 09 15:23:08 1996

TimeDateStamp: 32091696 -> Wed Aug 07 18:20:06 1996

Going by these results it would seem that the MSAA versions are actually the oldest. :blink:

Q247578 is the newest, but it supposedly not for OSR2.

The Q229670 KB article claims it should have versions 4.01.971 for 95 Original (but doesn't?), so does that mean that Q229670 version 4.00.1112 for OSR2 is the OSR2 equivalent of Original 4.01.971? If so, then the Q229670 HotFix must contain the last version for OSR2.

The version discrepancy between the Q229670 KB article and the actual files it contains is puzzling. It should contain 4.01.971 files for 95 Original, but does not. In fact, there does not seem to be any GDI32.DLL version 4.01.971, and the only GDI.EXE with that version is in the W95EURO package and has an earlier timestamp than all of these other files.

Edited by LoneCrusader
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GDI.EXE is a NE executable, hence it has no PE Timestamp.

But since it always comes together with GDI32.DLL, which is a PE executable, the latter's PE Timestamp may be used to date both.

The PE Timestamp you should consider is the first that PEDUMP shows, the one in the File Header, which is written last during the linking process.

The fact that there are two such dates separated by a few seconds reflects the fact that compilation and linking aren't and instantaneous process, the "exports table" being created just a little time before the creation of the "File Header", which is the last step, and, for all purposes, the best estimate of when the file was actually written to disk in final form, for the first time, so that is its true "birthday" of sorts. Sometimes, relinking already created parts can result in a wider timespan between the "exports table" and the "File Header".

MS often revises the hotfixes, but rarely does so with their corresponding articles. Of late, they indicate the revisons by adding -v2-, -v3-, etc., to the filename, but that's a more recent practice, so that the hotfix' contents not corresponding to what is stated in the article is not totally unexpected.

The Q229670 KB article claims it should have versions 4.01.971 for 95 Original (but doesn't?), so does that mean that Q229670 version 4.00.1112 for OSR2 is the OSR2 equivalent of Original 4.01.971? If so, then the Q229670 HotFix must contain the last version for OSR2.

Yes. That's the correct conclusion. And they may have decided not to release 4.01.971 for some reason (maybe because they decided to stop supporting Original at that point). I'd think it's a fair bet that GDI.EXE/GDI32.DLL 4.00.970 are the latest extant files for Original.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GDI.EXE madness continues.

In order to have support for the Euro € symbol in Character Map, one has to use the GDI.EXE from W95EURO.EXE.

It makes sense to a point because it does have the latest version number... but on the other hand has the earliest timestamp.

The GDI.EXE's from Q229670 and MSAA do not display the Euro € symbol in Character Map.

It would seem that the last GDI.EXE (4.01.971) for 95 is inside W95EURO.EXE, and the last GDI32.DLL (4.01.970) is probably the one from MSAA.

Leave it to Microsoft to make things overcomplicated, I wonder why they started a "4.00.1111" style versioning for OSR2 in Q229670 and then reverted back to the Original 95 style versioning?

EDIT:

It appears Q229670 has been the victim of some "editing" by Microsoft. The Hotfix file for Windows 95 does not contain the proper versions for 95 Original as I mentioned before, and also the files inside for OSR2 do not match the size attributes listed in the article. The Hotfix versions for 98 and 98SE seem to match the attributes in the article. I believe Microsoft may have purposely crippled this particular update for 95... :unsure:

Also, bristols sent me a copy of this Hotfix earlier, and it is totally different from the one available now, and apparently somewhat older than the one described in the article. Anyone else have a copy of this?

Edited by LoneCrusader
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears Q229670 has been the victim of some "editing" by Microsoft. The Hotfix file for Windows 95 does not contain the proper versions for 95 Original as I mentioned before, and also the files inside for OSR2 do not match the size attributes listed in the article. The Hotfix versions for 98 and 98SE seem to match the attributes in the article. I believe Microsoft may have purposely crippled this particular update for 95... :unsure:

Also, bristols sent me a copy of this Hotfix earlier, and it is totally different from the one available now, and apparently somewhat older than the one described in the article. Anyone else have a copy of this?

A while ago, Erpman (erpdude8 here) announced that he would remove his NT4 and 9x updates pages from his website (he has since restored the latter page, with several updates removed). Before he did, I took the opportunity to download everything there that I didn't already have for Windows 95. The updates that were listed there, as well as those listed by MDGx (and one or two listed at Lightspeed's now defunct Win95 page), account for everything I downloaded for the OS. A few of the updates were produced by Erpman - at least, a few of the NT4 ones were, but possibly also some of the 95 ones.

Anyway, I suspect I got Q229670 from Erpman's site, if not that of MDGx. It would be good to get the Erp's input here. Unfortunately WayBack Machine doesn't seem to have indexed his 9x page when it was at its fullest.

Edited by bristols
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to resurrect this thread. :lol:

I'm searching for a specific HotFix file for Windows 95 RTM, ESDI_506.PDR version 4.00.956.

It was part of the original REMIDEUP.EXE (and possibly other packages) before it was later edited to include ESDI_506.PDR version 4.00.1116 instead.

Anyone out there happen to have this? :angel

Edited by LoneCrusader
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.