hotpants Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 can anybody access the url for the download? it's access is denied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
war59312 Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 can anybody access the url for the download? it's access is denied <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Dont use a download manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted July 28, 2005 Author Share Posted July 28, 2005 Bug: "Publisher: Microsoft Corporation" show up in ARP when doing a "regular" install rather than a slipstream. Totally forgot about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdv Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 Hi Gurgelmeyer the IE6 binary does not have all of the patched files for IE or OE and the scripting is not the updated ver I will PM you with updated filesets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted July 28, 2005 Author Share Posted July 28, 2005 Hi,Well, IE6 / JS56 etc are not in SP5 at all - some people prefer the older IE, and some prefer third party browser/mail etc. So I "played safe" and updated the built in IE 501SP4, OE55SP2, and JS51 instead.But thanks again for the links you sent me - it definately saves me a lot of time When SP5 is done (not too much left to do it seems), I'll probably do an SP5.1 or SP5a (or SP6?) with BITS2, MSI31, IE6SP1 - just the important updates from WU Cheers-G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
At0mic Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 wow that's great news I'll try it out tomorrow. keep up the good work Gurgelmeyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted July 29, 2005 Author Share Posted July 29, 2005 Hi @At0mic - cool Awfully quiet in here... no bugs to report...?? Not even a single one? Did anybody try it at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotpants Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 i can't access it, plse see the attached image. i tried by disabling downlaod accelerator. foo.zip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted July 29, 2005 Author Share Posted July 29, 2005 (edited) Will - please check the foo.bmp - something must be wrong somewhere, but I haven't got a clue myself. Anyone who wants SP5 badly but cannot dl it for technical reasons may send me a PM.Gurgelmeyer B) Edited July 29, 2005 by Gurgelmeyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendipjohn Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 This looks a great idea, but I would want to ask a couple of Post update points.- Would Windows/Microsoft Update work properly after using the unofficial SP?- you mention a SP5a/5.1 with latest product improvements. One of the listed ones is BITS2. The last time I used Windows 2000 w/SP4 fresh install, BITS2/HTTP 5.1 was the first update is downloaded (to allow access to Windows Update). Can you really get away with not including this in the first release?- Legality. It sounds like this is just a big hotfix pack and doesnt actually alter the Operating system or files themselves. All the same, is your planned pack legal to use and deploy in any given environment.Anyhow, those are just the points which sprung to mind. I like 2000 as a backup system after XP, and I do use it. I wish you and the project success and will be ready to try out whatever you produce as soon as it is released Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted July 29, 2005 Author Share Posted July 29, 2005 (edited) This looks a great idea, but I would want to ask a couple of Post update points.- Would Windows/Microsoft Update work properly after using the unofficial SP?Yes. Even WGA don't complain. Actually, the reason that it still says "SP4" in the system properties is, that WU coughs up blood if I cange it to SP5. I even tried to change it to 4a, but WU didn't like that either.Also you might occasionally be prompted to insert your SP4 CD (not by WU though). That's because I didn't want to break any digital signatures, and I'd have to modify syssetup.inf to change the CD prompt and the name of the .tst file in the cd root. Changing txtsetup.sif only affects the text mode part of Setup.- you mention a SP5a/5.1 with latest product improvements. One of the listed ones is BITS2. The last time I used Windows 2000 w/SP4 fresh install, BITS2/HTTP 5.1 was the first update is downloaded (to allow access to Windows Update). Can you really get away with not including this in the first release?You may download and integrate them manually - they do support /integrate I believe....? The real reason that I've chosen not to include them is, that I don't trust them - or more precisely: I don't trust WUv6. Please don't ask me why (not yet anyway).Nevetheless, I fully intend to include everyting (even the FS Filter driver from URP1) in the next version.- Legality. It sounds like this is just a big hotfix pack and doesnt actually alter the Operating system or files themselves. All the same, is your planned pack legal to use and deploy in any given environment.Anyhow, those are just the points which sprung to mind. I like 2000 as a backup system after XP, and I do use it. I wish you and the project success and will be ready to try out whatever you produce as soon as it is released <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Thanks - Yes, this version is a big cumulative hotfix pack which includes SP4, and no hacked files or non-w2k files are installed, and no security catalogs are broken. All installed files have a valid and properly signed .CAT file to vouch for them, which guarantees that they are authentic Microsoft files.The legal aspect is tough though. I honestly can't make any sense of the Microsoft EULA's, but if Microsoft calls me up because this package may - for some reason - be considered illegal, I'll pull it off the net. Also there's an Unofficial SP201 for 98SE, and there's RyanVM's XP Post-SP2 update pack. Both have existed for some time now.For all I care, you may use my packages for anything you like - as long as you don't modify them.Best regards,Gurgelmeyer Edited July 29, 2005 by Gurgelmeyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendipjohn Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 (edited) That sounds fantastic I can imagine all the effort and work this pack requires and the last thing you want are people demanding things from you, but I just wanted to check incase using the SP when it becomes available would lead me to manage my 2000 systems differently to the regular update fashion people are used to. Oh, one final thing, which is even more challenging, could this pack be deployed through WSUS which I have recently deployed on my network Edited July 29, 2005 by mendipjohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted July 29, 2005 Author Share Posted July 29, 2005 Mmmm - that's a very good question. I'll have to take a look at WSUS to answer that I'll get back to you with an answer in a few days.Best regardsGurgelmeyer B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijuro Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 I'm getting an error for access denied, when i get to a certain DLL.I am signed on an administrator account.Just running W2KSP5_EN.EXE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtwarrior Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 has anyone slipstreamed sp and option pack using nlite? if so how? any error messages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts