[schwups]

jds, on 20 February 2013 - 03:04 AM, said:

dencorso, on 19 February 2013 - 03:37 AM, said:

What JRE you do have installed and working?  If it is one of the 1.6 versions, you might as well just use MsiX.EXE, a fantastic command-line tool, able to extract files from .msi, .msm and .msp installation files to extract the .msi contents and then put them in place, over the old ones... it's labor intensive, but it might work.

Hi Den,

I have 6u7 installed. I've also tried uninstalling this first, but it doesn't help.

MsiX isn't doing too well for me, it extracts about 10 files, some only partially renamed to their final names. AFAIK, MsiX uses the API's of the installed MSI stuff on the system. When that's not working properly, neither does MsiX. At least that's what I've concluded just now. BTW, the MSI stuff on my system does work properly for other MSI files that I've previously installed, it's only this Java stuff that it has issues with.

I wonder what version of 'msiexec.exe' others have, and what KernelEx settings it has? Mine is version 2.0.2600.2 (MD5 = 53223ff3012db1ac5a35cae4720bdd46). I get a different error message depending on what KernelEx compatibility settings I use, but it seems to bomb out at around the same point either way.

Speaking of MD5 hashes, these are the hashes of the files I get after attempting to run the 6u39 installer :
Data1.cab = 4ce133f19d40787a5548a6afcf15541e
jre1.6.0_39.msi = 606aac2b60cf3e37baebd8a744cf300c
Perhaps someone can confirm these are OK (else it would mean the installer extraction process is the problem).

schwups, on 19 February 2013 - 06:56 AM, said:

Try: Skip CheckPendingFileRenameOperations action with SuperOrca or Orca. 

Hi schwups,

I tried this just now (deleted 3 or 4 occurrences).  Unfortunately, it didn't help.

It's frustrating, but I don't seem to be the only one having problems with this Java stuff.

Anyway, there's now a new version of this thing - that also won't install for me : 6u41.

Joe.

The version number of my msiexec is the same and MD5 (MD5Checker9x) is different. 


6A20A72677196CC87E75681524E03773  msiexec.exe, Size 83,456; DATE Modified 26.Jan.2002

Java39:

606AAC2B60CF3E37BAEBD8A744CF300C  jre1.6.0_39.msi; Size: 905,728; Date: 4.Feb.2013

Cab: 4CE133F19D40787A5548A6AFCF15541E  Data1.cab; 13,211,806; 

I think you cleaned your registry, especially the JavaSoft Keys. Make sure that the updater and the Quickstarter is disabled. Your current KernelEX setting in the Core.ini is 0 (DCFG1)? What is listed in the Kstub822.log (stubs.log)?  

Version 41 just installed successfully, too.

This post has been edited by schwups: 20 February 2013 - 04:32 AM

[schwups]

"MSICheckPendingFileRenameOperations: RegOpenKeyEx() failed with ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND: 2, Error Code: 0" isn't the real problem.

Now I also see this in my jusched.log:

Wed Feb 20 11:25:47 2013


:: SetDllDirectory() failed.  ErrorCode: 120
Wed Feb 20 11:26:37 2013
:: MSICheckPendingFileRenameOperations:  RegOpenKeyEx() failed with ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND: 2, Error Code: 0

Did you verify "[Kernel32.dll] GetSystemWow64DirectoryA=z2e120" with KTree? The function isn't contained in the Kstub822 (Kext first post). You have to add it.

 "Error 26011. Unpacking rt failed" is a a widespread problem, not only for ME/98 users. Today 300MB free disk space is very little. Maybe Oracle enlarged the required space?
link

This post has been edited by schwups: 20 February 2013 - 05:54 AM

[loblo]

schwups, on 20 February 2013 - 04:40 AM, said:

 "Error 26011. Unpacking rt failed" is a a widespread problem, not only for ME/98 users. Today 300MB free disk space is very little. Maybe Oracle enlarged the required space?
link

I used to have this problem a while back and could never find either the cause or a fix. Now it works again and I don't know why.

There was a workaround however and that was to install the corresponding JDK which installs the JRE as a subset of its installation and whose installer didn't suffer from this issue. Perhaps this still applies today. Worth a try anyway I guess.

[egrabrych]

JRE Version 6 Update 41: http://www.java.com/...d/manual_v6.jsp

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Important note from the Oracle-Sun website ...

"This is the last public release of Java 6. No new public updates of Java 6 will be available after February 2013."

Just downloaded these packages ...

jre-6u41-windows-i586.exe ... Webpage ... Direct Download ( for now )
jre-6u41-windows-x64.exe .... Webpage ... Direct Download ( maybe! )

jre-7u15-windows-i586.exe ... Webpage ... Direct Download ( for now )
jre-7u15-windows-x64.exe .... Webpage ... Direct Download ( maybe! )

Note: There does not seem to have been a jre-6u40.
Note: There does not seem to have been a jre-7u14.

[MiKl]

I was also able to install .41 but I am not sure if it is really working !! There are several websites to check Java but I usually go here:
http://www.chemgaped...ments/java.html

There should be anything displayed. Either a Java logo with a rotating effect or, if Java 3D is also installed, a rotating cube.
I see the cube when checking Java on my XP.

Can anything be done to fix this ? Flash and Shockwave are working.

UPDATE: Deleting the next-generation plug-in from the plug-in folder made it work !! I see the cube again

This post has been edited by MiKl: 21 February 2013 - 01:25 PM

[schwups]

MiKl, on 21 February 2013 - 05:53 AM, said:

I was also able to install .41 but I am not sure if it is really working !! There are several websites to check Java but I usually go here:
http://www.chemgaped...ments/java.html

There should be anything displayed. Either a Java logo with a rotating effect or, if Java 3D is also installed, a rotating cube.
I see the cube when checking Java on my XP.

Can anything be done to fix this ? Flash and Shockwave are working.

Some month ago I also had checked on this website. I seem to remember me, that the test had failed, if both JRE Java 6.xx and Java 3D are installed. Maybe old Java 3D of 2003 isn't compatible with new JRE Java 6 anymore. 

This post has been edited by schwups: 21 February 2013 - 07:23 AM

[jds]

schwups, on 20 February 2013 - 03:32 AM, said:

The version number of my msiexec is the same and MD5 (MD5Checker9x) is different. 

6A20A72677196CC87E75681524E03773  msiexec.exe, Size 83,456; DATE Modified 26.Jan.2002

Java39:

606AAC2B60CF3E37BAEBD8A744CF300C  jre1.6.0_39.msi; Size: 905,728; Date: 4.Feb.2013

Cab: 4CE133F19D40787A5548A6AFCF15541E  Data1.cab; 13,211,806; 

I think you cleaned your registry, especially the JavaSoft Keys. Make sure that the updater and the Quickstarter is disabled. Your current KernelEX setting in the Core.ini is 0 (DCFG1)? What is listed in the Kstub822.log (stubs.log)?  

Version 41 just installed successfully, too.

Hi schwups,

Thank you for that information, it's a great help in tracking down this problem.

Our CAB and MSI files are the same, so the extraction is OK and I can rule that out. The 'msiexec.exe' file is a mystery. Mine has the same time stamp, version string and file size, yet clearly they are different. This might be the key. Note that I haven't yet managed to find your version, but I've got a number of archives to look through.

Following your suggestion, I've deleted anything Java related from the registry and the applicable drive directories. But no luck yet.

schwups, on 20 February 2013 - 04:40 AM, said:

Did you verify "[Kernel32.dll] GetSystemWow64DirectoryA=z2e120" with KTree? The function isn't contained in the Kstub822 (Kext first post). You have to add it.

 "Error 26011. Unpacking rt failed" is a a widespread problem, not only for ME/98 users. Today 300MB free disk space is very little. Maybe Oracle enlarged the required space?
link

Yes, I do have the 'GetSystemWow64DirectoryA' setting (I mentioned this at the outset).

I only mentioned the 300MB figure for drive C: for completeness. The relevant figure is 2G for drive E:. Also, I would have received an appropriate pop-up warning if disk space were to run low during the installation process. I have no doubts that the "low disk space" explanation given by Sun/Oracle is not applicable, just as it isn't for many others too, as your link makes clear. BTW, depending on the KernelEx compatibility setting for 'msiexec.exe', the error can be 1723 instead.

loblo, on 20 February 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

schwups, on 20 February 2013 - 04:40 AM, said:

 "Error 26011. Unpacking rt failed" is a a widespread problem, not only for ME/98 users. Today 300MB free disk space is very little. Maybe Oracle enlarged the required space?
link

I used to have this problem a while back and could never find either the cause or a fix. Now it works again and I don't know why.

There was a workaround however and that was to install the corresponding JDK which installs the JRE as a subset of its installation and whose installer didn't suffer from this issue. Perhaps this still applies today. Worth a try anyway I guess.

Good idea, loblo. Unfortunately however, I get the same error with the JDK.

Joe.

[schwups]

I also found in the installer an information that you must have more than 32MB RAM. I'm sure you have more.

"PhysicalMemory>=32  This machine does not have the recommended amount of memory to install this product."

[jds]

schwups, on 20 February 2013 - 03:32 AM, said:

The version number of my msiexec is the same and MD5 (MD5Checker9x) is different. 

6A20A72677196CC87E75681524E03773  msiexec.exe, Size 83,456; DATE Modified 26.Jan.2002

schwups, on 21 February 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

I also found in the installer an information that you must have more than 32MB RAM. I'm sure you have more.

"PhysicalMemory>=32  This machine does not have the recommended amount of memory to install this product."

Hi schwups, et. al.

Well, I still haven't found a version of 'msiexec.exe' with the same MD5 hash as you, although I have found two more files with the same timestamp and version number, yet a different MD5 hash. However, this too isn't the problem, as you'll see below.

I have 512M of RAM, so that's much more than the 32M minimum figure you quote (so little RAM would be a rarity these days).

Anyway, the only real progress I've made is that I've been able to install 6u39 without difficulty on a P4 machine. I also upgraded this to 6u41 successfully, albeit with some difficulties (6u39 didn't like being uninstalled). I've transplanted 'msiexec.exe' and associated DLL's from the P4 machine to the P3 machine, transplanted the whole KernelEx directory, compared the KernelEx compatibility settings for every file that seemed relevant, all to no avail. I still can't figure why 6u39 and 6u41 fail to install on the P3 machine. This thing is driving me crazy.

Joe.

[schwups]

Hello Joe,

I don't possess a P3 machine anymore. Currently I still have one with a 478 socket (P4) and all others have a 775 socket.

[jds]

schwups, on 02 March 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

Hello Joe,

I don't possess a P3 machine anymore. Currently I still have one with a 478 socket (P4) and all others have a 775 socket.

Hi schwups,

I don't know if the CPU is a factor. Earlier, I speculated that the installation package may use SSE2 instructions that the P3 doesn't have, however, Den reported that his AMD machine which also lacks SSE2 instructions was able to install 6u39, albeit under XP. So this probably means it's not the CPU that's the problem, although I don't know if there are more subtle CPU differences (unfortunately, a search of the web only reveals a lot of misinformation and ignorance about this).

Joe.

[egrabrych]

JRE Version 6 Update 43: http://java.com/en/d...d/manual_v6.jsp

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Well that didn't last long ...

CharlotteTheHarlot, on 20 February 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

Important note from the Oracle-Sun website ...

"This is the last public release of Java 6. No new public updates of Java 6 will be available after February 2013."

So much for that announcement. That was supposedly the final version ever released for Java 6 ( JRE 6 release 41 ), but as noted by egrabrych, it was quickly superceded.

Just downloaded these files ...

jre-6u43-windows-i586.exe ... Webpage ... Direct Download ( for now )
jre-6u43-windows-x64.exe .... Webpage

jre-7u17-windows-i586.exe ... Webpage ... Direct Download ( for now )
jre-7u17-windows-x64.exe .... Webpage

Note: Correct me If I'm wrong but there does not seem to have been a jre-6u42.
Note: Correct me If I'm wrong but there does not seem to have been a jre-7u16.

EDIT: added x64 links

This post has been edited by CharlotteTheHarlot: 07 March 2013 - 08:15 AM

[jaclaz]

I am not sure to understand the issue about locating the files.
Go here:
http://www.oracle.co...ds-1902815.html
tick the "accept agreement" radio button, and you have all static links, namely:
Windows x86 Kernel 0.87 MB jre-6u43-windows-i586-iftw-k.exe http://download.orac...i586-iftw-k.exe
Windows x86 Online 0.87 MB jre-6u43-windows-i586-iftw.exe http://download.orac...s-i586-iftw.exe
Windows x86 Offline 16.24 MB jre-6u43-windows-i586.exe http://download.orac...indows-i586.exe
Windows x64 16.48 MB jre-6u43-windows-x64.exe http://download.orac...windows-x64.exe

Same goes here:
http://www.oracle.co...ds-1880261.html
Windows x86 Online 0.86 MB jre-7u17-windows-i586-iftw.exe http://download.orac...s-i586-iftw.exe
Windows x86 Offline 30.06 MB jre-7u17-windows-i586.exe http://download.orac...indows-i586.exe
Windows x86 39.77 MB jre-7u17-windows-i586.tar.gz http://download.orac...ows-i586.tar.gz
Windows x64 31.47 MB jre-7u17-windows-x64.exe http://download.orac...windows-x64.exe
Windows x64 41.49 MB jre-7u17-windows-x64.tar.gz http://download.orac...dows-x64.tar.gz

jaclaz

[submix8c]

@jaclaz - I guess their point is that it can't be directly downloaded WITHOUT accepting the license agreement as you'll notice (when I use Flashget) you need a Referrer to be filled out or it just doesn't work. Using you link and the link within after accepting will fill the field in Flashget and allow the download otherwise the direct link is rejected due to "agreement not yet accepted". Just an oddity - not sure what effect that would have on (e.g.) WGET...

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

jaclaz, on 05 March 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

I am not sure to understand the issue about locating the files.
Go here:
Windows x64 16.48 MB jre-6u43-windows-x64.exe http://download.orac...windows-x64.exe

Same goes here:
Windows x64 31.47 MB jre-7u17-windows-x64.exe http://download.orac...windows-x64.exe

Do either of those URLs work for you? I had no luck with Opera, FF and MSIE as of this writing.

As I have written above ( in this thread ) they use browser/system sniffing, specifically rejecting 64-bit packages for 32-bit systems.

[submix8c]

I get THIS in FF with the DIRECT link -
http://download.orac...il-1505220.html

IF I use the Download PAGE link given and ACCEPT the Agreement (after enabling Java) I get THIS as the URL (mistaken - NOT the Referrer field) the FlashGet (FlashGot Plugin) gives THIS and it DOES work (see the AuthParam at the end?) -
http://download.orac...01637dfb9285b94

IOW, you MUST accept the Agreement to be Authorized. It has nothing to do with "browser sniffing".

edit - ARG!!! I take that back! FG is getting "403 Forbidden". Has to do it within the Browser (see the first link about Cookies). Just downloaded both Java6. Going for the Java7 now. Done! (sigh...) NOTE: in FF11 and an x86 OS (as I had previously said)...

This post has been edited by submix8c: 05 March 2013 - 10:33 AM

[jaclaz]

I see.
No, the License Agrrement *needs* to be "ticked", but there is no restrictions (at least here in Opera) for 32 vs. 64 bit.

BUT there is a whole bunch of "mirror" sites allowing direct download, examples:
http://freewareupdat...ime-environment
http://files2.freewa...indows-i586.exe
http://files2.freewa...windows-x64.exe
http://files2.freewa...indows-i586.exe
http://files2.freewa...windows-x64.exe

jaclaz

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

submix8c, on 05 March 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

IOW, you MUST accept the Agreement to be Authorized. It has nothing to do with "browser sniffing".

What I believe they are doing is blocking 64-bit downloads on 32-bit systems. So it is some kind of sniffing resulting in ...



... which is a classic phony page. I tried in all three: MSIE, Opera and FF with cookies and Javascript and they are simply displaying a generic useless page full of lies like they all do. My guess is that they see 32-bit, but do not have an appropriate error message to display.

But I think you and I are talking about two different pages. The sniffing I refer to is done from the main Java page for current releases: Java 6 or Java 7. From there try clicking through the links ( "Information about the 64-bit Java plug-in" ) and follow the rabbit holes and you will most likely keep going in circles.

The Solution. If you want to download the 64-bit installers using a 32-bit browser just go here as Jaclaz posted ( and as I posted for the previous release ) ...

Java 6 u43 Webpage
Java 7 u17 Webpage