• Announcements

    • xper

      MSFN Sponsorship and AdBlockers!   07/10/2016

      Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Gape

New ideas for the next version

155 posts in this topic

I know there were some discussins about it, but I think that adding Q282949 and Q314941 is absolutely harmless - it can only improve things if unpatched WBEM 1.5 or original XP ICS client is installed, and will does nothing if these are not installed. It could be implemented like this:

...

All necessary files have 88 KB packed, it is 0,5% of the SESP2.0 size.

What do you think?

I agree!

one idea regarding the build environment.

...

What do you think?

I agree again. I explored most DDF, SED and INF details myself. So, they was not as useful as I hope.

I changed my environment. Thanks! :thumbup

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody know what is the problem with preserve mechanism in setupx.dll 4.10.2222? I have found the following:

Всего за 5 минут победил preserve (PreserveFilePath и PreserveCabName) !!!

Оказалось, что родной setupx.dll направильно обрабатывает эти параметры. Все решилось заменой на setupx.dll от милениума. Работает как часики. Кстати, а более cвежий чем 4.10.2222 родной setupx.dll в природе существует?

И еще подгони мне setupx.dll от английской версии Me.

but I don't know the context.

Petr

Edited by Petr
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

context is: setupx.dll from WinMe works much better :yes:

however it shows also all messages from Me :} and should be edited in some way...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
context is: setupx.dll from WinMe works much better :yes:

however it shows also all messages from Me :}  and should be edited in some way...

OK, but what does exactly mean "better"? Are there any flaws in 4.10.2222 version?

I'm now working on FE SP and there is setupx.dll version 4.10.2000 in Service Pack 1, this SP uses preserve mechanism too so I'd like to know if it is necessary to test or to avoid something.

Petr

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, but what does exactly mean "better"? Are there any flaws in 4.10.2222 version?

as i know from the problem described by Maximus - setupx.dll from Win earlier than Me not allows using preserve as Folder - only cab-files. MDCU stores all its extracted files in folder Windows\Options, but not in the cab located there.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, SETUPX.DLL is targeted specifically for each OS build.

98SE 4.10.2222 uses setupx.dll 4.10.2222, which allows to install 98SE OS from CABs the way MS wants, which is to first check [among other things] for previous OS compatibility and compliance. No previous WinOS, no go. :(

Example: if u have 98SE upgrade setup CD and want to install it onto an empty HD [without any previous MS OS], u can't, unless u mod SETUPPP.INF right after starting the install [example]:

[data]

OEMUP=1

and create a new MSBATCH.INF with this line:

[setup]

ProductType=1

This applies also but the other way around to 98FE/98SE OEM setup CDs.

And this "fix" also needs a hexed setupx.dll, which is pretty hard to do, because in each language edition and in each setup CD version [Full, Upgrade, Updates, OEM, MSDN subscriber, custom OEM/VAR, etc] setupx.dll is different.

This works great with 98 FE as far as I know, but might not work in 98 SE, if u don't hex setupx.dll from 98SE CD properly.

More info [OSR2]:

http://www.mdgx.com/osr2.htm#INSTAL

More info [98 FE]:

http://www.mdgx.com/98-1.htm#BLUES

IMHO it's best to keep original setupx.dll [from setup CD] for each OS, unless u want to hex it for extra power. ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
High priority:

- 137 GB HDD limitation fix [with FDISK + FORMAT tools].

* Added free FIND.COM [thanks to MDGx].

* Replaced ATTRIB.EXE with better free ATTRIB.COM [thanks to MDGx].

Just few comments - as I already mentioned, the correct copyright and license should be included for all programs. I think attrib.exe can be removed now, but find has the following license and copyright:

FreeDOS Find, version 2.9

GNU GPL - copyright 1994-2002 Jim Hall <jhall@freedos.org>

copyright 2003 Eric Auer <eric@coli.uni-sb.de>

GNU GPL software has strict requirements regarding adding the license and distributing the source code.

You also propose to add FDISK and FORMAT from FreeDOS, it is the same with them. And I already wrote that it may not be the best idea to owerwrite original Microsoft tools - they have cosmetical bugs, but are rather complex.

Petr

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
High priority:

- 137 GB HDD limitation fix [with FDISK + FORMAT tools].

* Added free FIND.COM [thanks to MDGx].

* Replaced ATTRIB.EXE with better free ATTRIB.COM [thanks to MDGx].

Just few comments - as I already mentioned, the correct copyright and license should be included for all programs. I think attrib.exe can be removed now, but find has the following license and copyright:

FreeDOS Find, version 2.9

GNU GPL - copyright 1994-2002 Jim Hall <jhall@freedos.org>

copyright 2003 Eric Auer <eric@coli.uni-sb.de>

GNU GPL software has strict requirements regarding adding the license and distributing the source code.

You also propose to add FDISK and FORMAT from FreeDOS, it is the same with them. And I already wrote that it may not be the best idea to owerwrite original Microsoft tools - they have cosmetical bugs, but are rather complex.

Petr

Yes, it's necessary to include the GPL 2 license for the find.com file. You need to show it to the user when installing the 98SE SP

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody know what exactly mean "KillBit"? There are several similar patches:

; 231452 (ie4)

HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{16E349E0-702C-11CF-A3A9-00A0C9034920}","Compatibility Flags",0x10001,00,04,00,00

; 240308

HKLM,"Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{06A7EC63-4E21-11D0-A112-00A0C90543AA}","Compatibility Flags",0x10001,00,04,00,00

; Windows Update - [AddRegKillBitWUV3IS] ??

HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{CEBC955E-58AF-11D2-A30A-00A0C903492B}","Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x00000400

;870669

HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{00000566-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4}","Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400

It seems that KB870669 patch is just one key in the registry - therefore it could be easily added to the SESP. Plus appropriate entries to tell Windows Update that the patch was installed.

Could there be any problem with this?

I'm not sure, is "00,04,00,00", "0x00000400" and "0x400" the same value?

Petr

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Petr,

What are {16E349E0-702C-11CF-A3A9-00A0C9034920}, {06A7EC63-4E21-11D0-A112-00A0C90543AA} ? They exist under the ActiveX compatibility key and have all a compatibility value of 1024 but they don't exist anywhere else in my registry.

{CEBC955E-58AF-11D2-A30A-00A0C903492B} is to be found under the ActiveX compatibility key where it has a compatibility value of 1024 and at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Active Setup\Installed Components where it is described as AutoUpdate Detection Engine.

{00000566-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4} does not exist under the ActiveX compatibility key on my system but is a CLSID value corresponding to C:\PROGRAM FILES\COMMON FILES\SYSTEM\ADO\MSADO15.DLL, part of the MDAC runtime.

I have IE5.5 SP2 and MDAC 2.8 installed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Petr,

What are {16E349E0-702C-11CF-A3A9-00A0C9034920}, {06A7EC63-4E21-11D0-A112-00A0C90543AA} ? They exist under the ActiveX compatibility key and have all a compatibility value of 1024 but they don't exist anywhere else in my registry.

{CEBC955E-58AF-11D2-A30A-00A0C903492B} is to be found under the ActiveX compatibility key where it has a compatibility value of 1024 and  at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Active Setup\Installed Components where it is described as AutoUpdate Detection Engine.

{00000566-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4} does not exist under the ActiveX compatibility key on my system but is a CLSID value corresponding to C:\PROGRAM FILES\COMMON FILES\SYSTEM\ADO\MSADO15.DLL, part of the MDAC runtime.

I have IE5.5 SP2 and MDAC 2.8 installed.

{16E349E0-702C-11CF-A3A9-00A0C9034920} is mentioned here: Q231452

{06A7EC63-4E21-11D0-A112-00A0C90543AA} is mentioned here: MS99-032

{00000566-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4} is mentioned here: KB870669

but I don't know exact meaming of these registry entries.

Petr

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Petr, I have done a little bit if searching and put all the patches you quote into one single mergeable registry file. The "Killbit" is apparently nothing more than a flag preventing IE to load the ocxs or dlls corresponding to the flagged GUIDs. I did not find some of those GUIDS under the CLSID key because I either removed those components and cleaned the registry afterwards or those components aren't present on an ME System (iepreld.ocx). I was vulnerable to the ADO vulnerability and that might be the reason why I suffered 3 times in a year from unauthorized disk write and code execution after clicking on external links of some websites.

REGEDIT4

;MSADO15.DLL vulnerability Fix
;http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=870669

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{00000566-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4}]
"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400

;iepreld.ocx vulnerability Fix
;http://support.microsoft.com/kb/231452

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{16E349E0-702C-11CF-A3A9-00A0C9034920}
"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400

;eyedog.ocx vulnerability Fix
;http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/fq99-032.mspx

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{06A7EC63-4E21-11D0-A112-00A0C90543AA}]
"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400

;scriptlet.typelib vulnerability Fix
;http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/fq99-032.mspx

[-HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT \CLSID\{06290BD5-48AA-11D2-8432-006008C3FBFC}\Implemented Categories\{7DD95801-9882-11CF-9FA9-00AA006C42C4}]

;WUV3IS.DLL Prevents IE from using windows update engine ?
;No Doc found

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{CEBC955E-58AF-11D2-A30A-00A0C903492B}]
"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400

PS : I wrote in an earlier post that GUIDS were flagged with a value of 1024. This is because I use RegMagik which displays the values in decimal format. 400 (Hexadecimal) = 1024 (Decimal).

Edited by eidenk
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi eidenk,

thanks for your observation.

I just tried to find out how it is with updated html help, IE versions and updates, and html troubleshooter.

1. New HTML Help (1.41) from KB896358 causes disappearing links if IE4.01, IE5.0 and IE5.5 is installed. For example in C:\WINDOWS\HELP\ACCESS.CHM

2. Latest patch for IE 5.5 KB883939 corrects the behavior and links are visible now.

(this patch is for ME only but works well if you change the TargetWin9xVersion minimum value, from 04,00,00,00,5A,00,00,00 (4.90) to 04,00,00,00,0A,00,00,00 (4.10) by any hex editor, it is near the end of the file)

3. This patch breaks the Microsoft Local Troubleshooter. The easy solution is here: http://forums.techarena.in/archive/index.php/t-10394.html - post by PCR on 10-10-2004, 01:09 AM.

Just installing TSHOOT.INF and removing the KillBit by, for example:

REGEDIT4

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
Compatibility\{4B106874-DD36-11D0-8B44-00A024DD9EFF}]
"Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000000

The same it is for IE 6.0SP1.

It would be interesting to find out what in the KB883939 exactly cause the functionality of links in chm files - maybe it would work wit lower IE versions too?

Added: These are responsible lines in Q883939_d.inf file:

[User.AddReg]
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX
Compatibility\{4B106874-DD36-11D0-8B44-00A024DD9EFF}","Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400

[User.delreg]
HKCR,"CLSID\{4B106874-DD36-11D0-8B44-00A024DD9EFF}"

Petr

Edited by Petr
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Petr, it just came to my mind that Killbit may just be a phonetic equivalent (a mnemonic) for the Hex value of 400 (which is one Kilobyte in Decimal if I am correct).

Edited by eidenk
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the result of my HTML Help 1.41 compatibility test:

Links in .CHM files does not appear if the mshtml.dll file is too old:

IE 5.01 NOT OK: <= 5.0.3513.900, OK: >= 5.0.3516.2800 (Q813489 and newer)

IE 5.5 NOT OK: <= 5.50.4922.900, OK: >= 5.50.4923.2500 (Q810487 and newer)

IE 6.0 NOT OK: <= 6.0.2722.900, OK: >= 6.0.2723.2500 (Q810487 and newer)

IE 6.0 SP1: all versions OK

So neither 4.01SP1 (in FE) nor 5.0 (in SE) can work with new HTML Help.

Should we install HTML Help 1.41 if incompatible IE version is present?

How to test the version of mshtml.dll file for conditional installing?

Does anybody know any other incompatibility?

Petr

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to include the 256-color fix for the Sleek Windows98 explorer.exe shell?

That would be great. You can do the same hex-stuff as for Windows 98 :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One question regarding GDI+ detection tool.

In WUINFO.INF, there is a line:

; gditool
HKLM,"Software\Microsoft\GdiDetectionTool","GDITool",0x00010001,0x1

This prevents displaying the 873374 in the list of critical updates.

But how we can be sure that it is not needed to run the GDI+ detection tool?

I think this is not correctand we should let the GDI+ detection tool to run, either inside or outside the sesp. In sesp., it would mean to add files 4 small files and run

msiutil2.exe /cif gdidet.cif /extended gdidet.xml /log

command.

It would be also possible to update to the new GDI+ DLL 5.1.3102.1360 but Microsoft does not recommend to install it into the system folder - and really, it may be on various places, like

C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322\gdiplus.dll

Petr

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about to add newer OLE automation files - KB886765 ?
I could try it on 98SE and 98FE if you could send me a copy of this patch [if you have it].
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about to add newer OLE automation files - KB886765 ?
Petr,

Please see this post with my conclusions + recommendations after I tried these 4 files on 98FE + 98SE:

http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=44732...ndpost&p=356494

Gape,

I have tried these files [+ a few more] on 98SE, and they all work properly so far.

Please see this post with my conclusions + recommendations:

http://www.msfn.org/board/?showtopic=46399...ndpost&p=356491

Edited by MDGx
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.