Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account


Photo

Unofficial SP 5.2 for Microsoft Windows 2000


  • Please log in to reply
735 replies to this topic

#501
GaryMX

GaryMX

    Ex-programmer

  • Member
  • 27 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
@tomasz86 -- I restored the image of Drive C back; there was never a problem with the installation of W2K on this system. The problem was on Drive D, when I copied over an old backup of Drive C there. So, drive C is not unstable; there is no referencing in the Registry to anything on Drive D. This is where I installed the daily. I was thinking last night, that perhaps the daily doesn't have all of the file updates like a weekly? If it was assumed that the installer was using v11 daily to update an existing v11 system, when v11 was never installed, perhaps that would generate the stop x050 error? This error is an "addressing exception," which means that there was a module trying to access an area of memory that wasn't allocated.

You (and others) keep mentioning about using a VM (virtual machine) on your computer. I've only got 2 GB of memory on this old W2K box, and 750 MB is in use. I've only used a VM when I've run Hiren's boot CD, which runs Windows XP SP2 on this PC (with no problem) and creates an "X" drive for its use. I use this product to run DriveImage XML, which won't run on W2K without issues due to no VSS service, and even with drive locking, causes problems. So better to run in virtual XP.

My next project with this PC (when I have time) will be to reformat D: drive and install W2K clean, add all updates (M$ only,) then reinstall the software I need to run here. This will extricate the D: drive (and Registry) from any references to C: drive. It will probably be faster also, as I'm not going to reinstall much of the software that has been added to C: drive over the years ...
Once I'm done with that, I'll image the drive, and try v10d install, then the weekly v11 and see how it goes.


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#502
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
The label daily means only that it's a very experimental version updated on a daily basis. It doesn't mean that it's "incomplete" ;) It's a just a full version which hasn't been tested yet and sometimes contain some additional experimental features which may or may not be later included in weekly / stable releases. You don't need to install any previous / other release of UURollup-v11 before applying a daily one.

If you want to test in a VM then I'd suggest using Innotek VirtualBox 1.5.6. It's an old version, has some bugs but it supports Windows 2000 as a host very well, is suitable for testing Windows 2000 too and it's also VERY light and fast compared to other / newer virtual machines. In my case it consumes only about 160 MB of RAM when running a VM with Windows 2000 installed in it :) In my experience the biggest pain when setting up VMs is not CPU, not RAM but a slow HDD. Having an SSD or at least a faster HDD (>= 10,000 rpm) helps a lot. I actually run my test Windows 2000 VMs from a RAMdisk.

If you decide to reinstall I'd highly recommend using my HFSLIP package. Almost all updates (official and unofficial) are already included in it so you don't need to install anything later manually (maybe except for .NET Framework).

By the way, I think you should avoid talking about this since it violates the forum rule 1.a and may bring you trouble :ph34r: As for the "newbie" label, you should be able to change it under My Settings.

Edited by tomasz86, 29 March 2013 - 08:15 PM.

post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#503
GaryMX

GaryMX

    Ex-programmer

  • Member
  • 27 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
Tomasz -- I will try using Innotek VirtualBox 1.5.6 when I get a chance. Regarding your HFSLIP package, I am assuming this is for "slipstreaming?" I've never done this (never had to) so, what do I need to do to use it? I've got my original licensed W2K install CD and the M$ updates, and of course, your UURollups.

I won't talk about this, but the latest version uses all "shareware" or "freeware" (except of course, for the OS.) And most of these are unused. Honestly, I only need DriveImage XML, and I already use it on my home XP computer (using another version that I downloaded from Runtime software.

One more thing -- "my settings" doesn't have an option to change that title. :no: I may be blind, but I can't see it there.

#504
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Tomasz -- I will try using Innotek VirtualBox 1.5.6 when I get a chance. Regarding your HFSLIP package, I am assuming this is for "slipstreaming?" I've never done this (never had to) so, what do I need to do to use it? I've got my original licensed W2K install CD and the M$ updates, and of course, your UURollups.

You just need to download and unpack it, then copy contents of your Windows 2000 CD into the SOURCE folder (basic info about HFSLIP available here). After that just run the script and wait until it's finished.


but the latest version uses all "shareware" or "freeware" (except of course, for the OS.).

That's the problem :(


One more thing -- "my settings" doesn't have an option to change that title. :no: I may be blind, but I can't see it there.

It's called "Member Title".
post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#505
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
I've uploaded the first and completely untested version of PowerShell 2.0 & WinRM (KB968929). It's available in the Download Archive (Windows2000/UnofficialSP5). UURollup-v11 weekly/daily and .NET Framework 2.0 are required. You'll see an error at the end of the installation but the package seems to be working nevertheless.

I don't even know how it works yet. At least there are no unfixed dependencies. You can start PowerShell by typing "powershell" in the command line. If there's anyone knowledgeable about PowerShell then it would be very nice if they could test some real scripts in it.
post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#506
Tommy

Tommy

    Brooke's Tommy honey <3

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
I've enabled PAE on my Dell Vostro 400 minitower. I now have full use of my 4GBs of RAM (it shows up as 4GBs in the system properties). However, I only have a 640x480x16 display and even though it's set to 800x600x32 bit and it is shown in the display properties. Could this possibly be because I'm using the onboard graphics adapter which is an Intel Chipset?

Also, I'm using your new HF_Slip compilation, did you disable Windows Update again? I'm having problems using the Windows Defender program to automatically check and download updates.

Edited by Tommy, 31 March 2013 - 12:28 PM.

Daily running Windows 2000 Pro SP4 and Windows 98

Posted Image
Posted Image

#507
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
@Tommy

  • It's definitely cased by the Intel driver. Intel graphics drivers don't seem to like PAE, unfortunately :( Actually the only graphics drivers about which I can say for sure that they work with PAE enabled are the NVIDIA ones.
  • I haven't changed anything related to Windows Update recently... Especially in case of a slipstreamed installation the only change done by UURollup is setting

    HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate\AU","NoAutoUpdate",0x10001,1
    in the registry.

Edited by tomasz86, 31 March 2013 - 07:45 PM.

post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#508
Tommy

Tommy

    Brooke's Tommy honey <3

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
That does make sense. It was upgraded with the NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT but I put it in this computer when I switched them. Even though the other was better, I custom built this one pretty much so its kinda special to me so originally it had the NVIDIA in it put now it just has the standard Intel Onboard graphics.

I just made the registry change and I'm waiting to restart it. Hopefully it'll work.

Still having a Chrome issue. This is such a hit and miss issue and it's driving me nuts. Sometimes it works flawlessly on certain installs and other times it works when it wants. You go and open a tab and try to launch a page and you'll have the little circle going backwards like its thinking, but it doesn't do anything else. You have to close the tab and try again in a new one. Even launching something internally such as the downloads tab, sometimes it doesn't want to function right either. Iron did the same thing. It's like the Chrome Engine itself has a problem. It's annoying too and I prefer Chrome to FireFox myself.

EDIT: Windows Defender still won't update. I get a 0x80245001 error code when searching for updates.

Edited by Tommy, 31 March 2013 - 11:32 PM.

Daily running Windows 2000 Pro SP4 and Windows 98

Posted Image
Posted Image

#509
AnX

AnX

    ...

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 162 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

That does make sense. It was upgraded with the NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT but I put it in this computer when I switched them. Even though the other was better, I custom built this one pretty much so its kinda special to me so originally it had the NVIDIA in it put now it just has the standard Intel Onboard graphics.

I just made the registry change and I'm waiting to restart it. Hopefully it'll work.

Still having a Chrome issue. This is such a hit and miss issue and it's driving me nuts. Sometimes it works flawlessly on certain installs and other times it works when it wants. You go and open a tab and try to launch a page and you'll have the little circle going backwards like its thinking, but it doesn't do anything else. You have to close the tab and try again in a new one. Even launching something internally such as the downloads tab, sometimes it doesn't want to function right either. Iron did the same thing. It's like the Chrome Engine itself has a problem. It's annoying too and I prefer Chrome to FireFox myself.

EDIT: Windows Defender still won't update. I get a 0x80245001 error code when searching for updates.


Chrome works great on my Win2k system. It works better than Firefox did. And yes, it seems that Intel Graphics are conflicting on PAE systems.

Instead of Windows Defender, you can use Malwarebytes Anti-Malware.

PC Specs: AMD FX-8320 (3.5-4Ghz, 8-core, Vishera, 16MB of Cache) -H212 Evo, 8GB of DDR3-1600MHz HyperX, 500GB WD Caviar Blue, Seasonic S12II 620 Watt PSU, Cooler master HAF 912 Combat Mid-Tower Case, AMD Radeon R7 260X 2GB, ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 Motherboard, DVD+-RW Writer, Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit

 

50308.png

49128.gif

 


#510
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Chromium has that very annoying Javascript related error (more info) which for me makes it unusable in Windows 2000 as the main browser :ph34r:


@Tommy I've got no idea why Windows Defender's autoupdate doesn't work but I'll try to check it :sneaky: By the way, I've finally managed to install NFS: High Stakes and play it... but there are no errors in my system :huh: The game seems to run well. I've installed it in Windows 98 compatibility mode using "apcompat.exe".

Edited by tomasz86, 01 April 2013 - 05:51 AM.

post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#511
Tommy

Tommy

    Brooke's Tommy honey <3

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Instead of Windows Defender, you can use Malwarebytes Anti-Malware.


Well, I'll tell you. I love that program but I'm a little worried about using it now because I did it a few times on a Windows 2000 machine and after rebooting, I'd get a blue screen saying Invalid License Key or something to that effect. It basically ruined my install. That was probably about a year and a half ago but I haven't tried it since. Can you verify that this works flawlessly and won't ruin my install?
Daily running Windows 2000 Pro SP4 and Windows 98

Posted Image
Posted Image

#512
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
In Post #474 I wrote that I had “Already tried installing BWC’s driver; didn’t work here.”

tomasz86: “I think that I know why the driver may not work. It seems to caused be a bug in UURollup's installer.” (Post #475)

tomasz86: “There's a very serious issue in all versions of UURollup (including v10 and older). The problem is that %windir%\system32\hal.dll isn't updated at all. The installer doesn't replace it and I don't know why (yet).”

“This issue does not affect slipstreaming, only manual installation.”
(Post #478)

After I reinstalled the OS using your HFSLIP package (i.e. a slipstream, rather than a manual, installation), I decided to give the BWC HD graphics driver another try, because AnX wrote in Post #473 that it supports HD 3000 (first I checked my hal.dll file, and it looked right).

I just want to let you know that the BWC graphic driver installed fine this time, so I think you had this figured pretty well, tomasz86.

This is nice, because it allows me to pull the graphics card, which I never really wanted in there in the first place, especially since it messes with my airflow setup inside the case, and I am overclocking. Mission accomplished.

Thanks for the help, tomasz86. And thank you for the advice, AnX.

#513
AnX

AnX

    ...

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 162 posts
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

In Post #474 I wrote that I had “Already tried installing BWC’s driver; didn’t work here.”

tomasz86: “I think that I know why the driver may not work. It seems to caused be a bug in UURollup's installer.” (Post #475)

tomasz86: “There's a very serious issue in all versions of UURollup (including v10 and older). The problem is that %windir%\system32\hal.dll isn't updated at all. The installer doesn't replace it and I don't know why (yet).”

“This issue does not affect slipstreaming, only manual installation.”
(Post #478)

After I reinstalled the OS using your HFSLIP package (i.e. a slipstream, rather than a manual, installation), I decided to give the BWC HD graphics driver another try, because AnX wrote in Post #473 that it supports HD 3000 (first I checked my hal.dll file, and it looked right).

I just want to let you know that the BWC graphic driver installed fine this time, so I think you had this figured pretty well, tomasz86.

This is nice, because it allows me to pull the graphics card, which I never really wanted in there in the first place, especially since it messes with my airflow setup inside the case, and I am overclocking. Mission accomplished.

Thanks for the help, tomasz86. And thank you for the advice, AnX.


Always Welcome. :thumbup

Oh and tomasz86, Chrome 25 fixes most of these bugs.

PC Specs: AMD FX-8320 (3.5-4Ghz, 8-core, Vishera, 16MB of Cache) -H212 Evo, 8GB of DDR3-1600MHz HyperX, 500GB WD Caviar Blue, Seasonic S12II 620 Watt PSU, Cooler master HAF 912 Combat Mid-Tower Case, AMD Radeon R7 260X 2GB, ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 Motherboard, DVD+-RW Writer, Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit

 

50308.png

49128.gif

 


#514
chinamicah

chinamicah
  • Member
  • 2 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Sorry to bother you all with something so trivial, but am I correct in understanding that because SP5.2 is not in a testable form yet, we are supposed to test this instead?
Windows2000-UURollup-v11-d20130323-x86-ENU.7z

I just want to make sure I'm testing the right thing here.
Thanks for all your work!
Micah

#515
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Not necessarily ;)

There are three different lines - daily, weekly and stable (details in #1). The one which you linked to is the newest daily release of UURollup-v11.

The current releases are:

stable - Windows2000-UURollup-v10d-x86-ENU.exe
weekly - Windows2000-UURollup-v11-w20130323-x86-ENU.exe
daily - Windows2000-UURollup-v11-d20130323-x86-ENU.7z

You can test any of these.
post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#516
marcdw

marcdw

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 11 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
SQL Server 2005 Express doesn't work with Rollup 2.

If this topic has been covered somewhere please let me know. Been pulling out my hair on this one.

Okay, I had Win2K Pro (non-server) on an old OptiPlex GX115 (PIII, 1GHz, 512MB, PCI graphics) I rescued from work a couple of years or so back and all was well.
After rescuing another one (GX240, P4, 1.5GHz, 1GB, AGP) I decided I'd do a fresh install there but this time try out the unofficial updates.
Tested two clean installs (USP5.1/Rollup2/UURollup v10d & SP4/Rollup1/Rollup2/UURollup). Went about installing the things I wanted and got around
to Visual Studio C++ 2005 Express with SQL Server 2005 Express, it also installs .NET 2.0. Went fine sort of (msql would use a lot of cpu but otherwise...).
After that I couldn't install any of the sql service packs. Each time the service would fail to start due to not being able to create a certificate. The install would fail and rollback.
Not thinking it was related to the updates I was all over the web for days and weeks trying to figure out how to fix it.
Trying all kinds of workarounds with certs, file/folder permissions, reg hacks, anything.

I've had XP running on a GX260 (sort of sweet spot as everything ran so well). Before XP reaches EOL it was time to migrate that to something better and use the GX260 for
win2k and end it there (P4, 2GHz, 2GB RAM, AGP).

This time I installed SP4, Rollup 1, IE6 manually, and went through all the official updates from MS. Installed Visual Studio again followed by the sql server SP (jumped straight
to SP3 but MS Update still kept showing it so I let it). No problems with installation or running. Followed it with SP4. Still good.
Then I went and added Rollup2. Not sure if I followed up with UURollup right after or later but I lost SQL server again. The service wouldn't start due to not being able to
create a certificate.

Long-winded I know. :-)

So my question is what part of Rollup 2 or UURollup is breaking the ssl/certs/security/etc and is there any way I can fix it? Is sql server a lost cause?

Thanks,
Marc

Edited by marcdw, 11 April 2013 - 11:23 PM.

Windows 2000 Pro, Xubuntu 12.10, Dell OptiPlex GX260 SFF, Pentium 4 @ 2GHz, 2GB RAM, 160GB WD Drive, Nvidia GeForce FX5200, Dual Monitors
DOS Internet & Tandy 1000
Windows 3.x Makeover

#517
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Then I went and added Rollup2. Not sure if I followed up with UURollup right after or later but I lost SQL server again. The service wouldn't start due to not being able to
create a certificate.

It would be extremely important to know whether it was caused just by Update Rollup 2 or by UURollup :(

First of all, could you tell me exactly which unofficial packages you've installed? You can just list their filenames.
post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#518
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
I am running Windows2000/UnofficialSP5/HFSLIP and .NETFramework 1302150148. I am looking into BWC’s KB979683-v2 core delimiter. I have also read the Microsoft article HOW TO: Add Support for Multiple Processors in Windows 2000.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/234558

Do you think either of these methods would work to improve performance when using a Quad-Core desktop processor?

#519
marcdw

marcdw

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 11 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

It would be extremely important to know whether it was caused just by Update Rollup 2 or by UURollup

First of all, could you tell me exactly which unofficial packages you've installed? You can just list their filenames.


The only ones I used at that point were...

Windows2000-UpdateRollup2-x86-ENU.exe
Windows2000-UURollup-v10d-x86-ENU.exe

...in that order. Everything before that was official updates.
You're right, I should've checked SQL Server after Rollup2.

I'll either do a start over or try it out in VirtualBox first - something I should've been doing in the first place.

Since I'm gonna start over anyway I might try to uninstall in reverse order just to see what happens though I'm pretty sure that won't work.

BTW, would it be advantageous to use one of those uninstall/rollback-type utils to generate a before/after report?
Granted it would be quite a list but I'm thinking this has something do with the crypt* files.

Edited by marcdw, 12 April 2013 - 07:52 PM.

Windows 2000 Pro, Xubuntu 12.10, Dell OptiPlex GX260 SFF, Pentium 4 @ 2GHz, 2GB RAM, 160GB WD Drive, Nvidia GeForce FX5200, Dual Monitors
DOS Internet & Tandy 1000
Windows 3.x Makeover

#520
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

I am looking into BWC’s KB979683-v2 core delimiter.

It's included in UURollup-v11 ;)

I have also read the Microsoft article HOW TO: Add Support for Multiple Processors in Windows 2000.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/234558

Do you think either of these methods would work to improve performance when using a Quad-Core desktop processor?

What do you mean? As long as your system detects all CPUs / cores then everything should be all right.


@marcdw I'm suspecting that the problem may be caused by the broken user32.dll which is included in UURollup-v10d. Could you try to install the newest daily release of UURollup-v11 and see if it's fixed?
post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#521
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
These pictures prompted my question. Sorry if I’ve missed the obvious; it wouldn’t be the first time. I do have hyper-threading enabled in the BIOS.

Attached Files



#522
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
At the moment the system is using only 2 cores. You need to increase the number in the registry. I've attached a script which will set the maximum number to 32. Thanks for reporting the problem. I'll add this setting to the new version of UURollup.

Windows 2000 may not like HT. I'd suggest downloading CrystalMark 2004R3, doing a full benchmark with HT enabled and disabled, and then comparing the results.

Attached Files


Edited by tomasz86, 13 April 2013 - 11:11 AM.

post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#523
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
Would it work as well if I just ran the KB979683-v2 executable? And just for future reference, could I add this exe to one of the UnofficialSP5 HFSLIP folders?

Thank you for the advice on CrystalMark, I’ve been trying to figure out which version of that to use, as I continue to tune this setup. I will definitely test that with and without HT.

#524
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,510 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Installing KB979683-v2 won't change anything. You also need to manually add the registry entry after installing it. As I said, it's already included in UURollup-v11 so no need to add / install it separately :whistle:

Edited by tomasz86, 13 April 2013 - 12:07 PM.

post-47483-1123010975.png
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#525
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
Okay, tomasz86, I will do that. I only asked because I couldn’t locate KB979683-v2 in either UURollup-v11 or within any of the UnofficialSP5 HFSLIP folders; it’s probably just in a form I don’t recognize. I will use your 32CPU.cmd.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



How to remove advertisement from MSFN