[soporific]

OK, i've been on the receiving end of some USER.EXE, USER32.DLL and EXPLORER.EXE muckups quite a few times and it really is the simplest thing to fix if you know what's going on when this happens. Yes it p***es me off no end when it happens, but, again, it is the easiest thing to fix. For me. But what about others?

I think its high time the "keep Windows 98 alive" crew, which is most of us regular posters in the "Unofficial Win98 SE Service Pack" section of MSFN, create an automatic hotfix solution to fix all those caught up in the maelstrom of our system patching activities. I'm specifically talking about the USER*.* issues. Not everyone who takes a punt by installing these updates knows what to do when it all stops working, especially the problem that stops the OS from even loading. If this is your only connection to the internet, its highly inconvenient to get a fix for the problem by the usual way of asking for help online.

I know the REAL solution would be to create hotfixes that don't muck a system up, but the real world shows us its still possible. And when the solution is so easy i think its high time we provided one for the community.

So who wants the kudos for getting this fix together? I have some ideas if someone wants to help out...

[RetroOS]

I think an easy fix option is a great idea.
Exactly how this would be assembled is something to discuss.
Perhaps a separate thread?

However, I think there may be some issue that is some times appearing with the update installers.
I had a problem some weeks ago with the OLEUP update where it did not replace the files on reboot and left them missing.
See my post here. Also this post.
Maybe a recent update has caused problems with IExpress installers in some cases?
Something to look into.

MDGx: Any comments?

[eidenk]

Fredledingue, on Oct 12 2007, 06:13 PM, said:

Here is the link of the file in question:
- USER32.DLL + USER.EXE Fix [419 KB, English]:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/Q891711.EXE

Well I have installed this patch in a virtual machine and there is nothing wrong with it. According to me it CANNOT do what you claim it does (the computer turned itself the power off).

Here is the inf file of this patch :

; Unofficial Windows 98/98 SE/ME U891711 Fix
[Version]
Signature=$CHICAGO$
AdvancedINF=2.0
[DefaultInstall]
AddReg=2R
CopyFiles=2I,2S
RunPostSetupCommands=2N
Reboot=1
[2N]
"NOTEPAD.EXE %11%\KB891711\U891711.TXT"
[DefaultUninstall]
DelReg=2R
DelFiles=2I,2S
DelDirs=2D
UpdateInis=2X
Reboot=1
[DestinationDirs]
2X=10
2I=17
2S=11,KB891711
[2I]
U891711.INF
[2S]
Q891711.DLL
KB891711.EXE
U891711.TXT
[2R]
HKLM,"Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices","U891711",,%11%\KB891711\KB891711.EXE"
HKLM,"Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\U891711",,,
HKLM,"Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\U891711",DisplayName,,"· Uninstall Unofficial Windows 98/98 SE/ME U891711 Fix"
HKLM,"Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\U891711",UninstallString,,"RUNDLL32.EXE %11%\ADVPACK.DLL,LaunchINFSection %17%\U891711.INF,DefaultUninstall"
[2D]
"%11%\KB891711"
[2X]
WININIT.INI,Rename,,"DIRNUL=%11%\KB891711"
[SourceDisksNames]
1=,,0

It is meant to backup (used for uninstall) and replace user.exe and user32.dll and it works as expected :

First stage of the install copies the patched versions of user.exe (as user.001) and user32.dll (as user32.001) to the system dir :



And creates a wininit.ini file in which we can see that on the next reboot the original files are going to be backed up as user.098 and user32.098 before being replaced by the new versions :



And thist is exactly what it does. System check after reboot :



You can see that the original files have appeared and have been replaced by the patched ones.

No can you please tell me what in this installer, if it would fail for a reason or another, would yeld the symptoms you report ?

According to me it CANNOT yeld all the symptoms you report. It is impossible.

Quote

Here are MDGx's comment on this patch:

Quote

"MDGx" said:

Q891711, Q891711F + Q891711I:
http://www.mdgx.com/web.htm#9SU
English Fix only:
Removed ",,,4" + ",,4" strings from INF CopyFiles + RenFiles sections.
Added warning to *not* install this Fix if already installed RP:
* Unofficial Windows 98 SE Animated Cursor (.ANI) + Icon Handling USER32.DLL + USER.EXE 4.10.2233 Security Vulnerability Fix

OK there is a warning it is incompatible with RP.

A few months ago MDGx wrote about previous versions of this patch:

"MCGx" said:

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT:
You MUST REBOOT at END of INSTALL for this Fix to complete properly!
Do NOT install this Fix MORE THAN ONCE WITHOUT REBOOTING AFTER FIRST INSTALL!
IF you ALREADY installed this Fix ONLY ONCE, BUT have NOT YET REBOOTED [which
would complete the install properly], you MUST REBOOT IMMEDIATELY, otherwise
Windows will LOCK UP!
IF you ALREADY installed this Fix MORE THAN ONCE, BUT have NOT REBOOTED AFTER
FIRST INSTALL OR BETWEEN INSTALLS [which would complete the install properly],
you MUST UNINSTALL it [see the "UNINSTALL" chapter below] BEFORE trying to
REinstall it again, otherwise Windows will LOCK UP!

With all respect due to MDGx, most of those warnings are plain nonsense IMO, especially the first one :

Indeed, the first phase of install consist only into copying two files (+ an inf file to the inf folder) and creating a wininit.ini file so that user.exe and user32.dll can be backed up and replaced on reboot. There is no risk of any lock up whatsoever here.

The second warning makes more sense as reinstalling the patch without having uninstalled it first will lead to have back up files for uninstall that are not the original ones but the patched ones as well. No risks of lockup either here.

Quote

===> But this was not my case: I launched the patch only once.

Frankly, with no pun intended, your apparent lack of grasp of the most basic mechanisms of Windows is sometimes appaling.

Especially when considering the fact that you appear to be an experienced user who even writes complex VB scripts for checking system integrity.

[Fredledingue]

From what I have read above the problem is with the wininit.ini file.

Either wininit.ini is not executed at all
Either wininit.ini execute at a later stage when user.exe is already needed by the system
Either wininit.ini wasn't written correctly by the installer.

Eidenk
It's not because a code is written, as simple as it can be, that it will always be executed as intended. There is only a relatevely high probability that the code will be executed and this probability is never 100%. Not because of the coder but because of computer imprecision, unpredictability and unknowns.
The only reason why you think that it's impossible that it's not executed properly as verified in your test, is that you ignore these concepts.

I didn't mean to offend the anonimous. I imagine that he has tested his patch before and didn't see any possible error.
Now the goal is find out the unkown and the unpredictable in order to fix it.

noguru
Thanks for sharing your experience with us. My version is english.
So I don't think it's language version issue.

RetroOs,
I also had an issue with OLEUP in the past but thanks to MDGx's infos, I could solve the problem.
The effect of the wrong install with OLEUP was not even remotely as scary as with *891711.

[Fredledingue]

It's funny... I don't have user32.dll in my system.

This post has been edited by Fredledingue: 13 October 2007 - 04:27 PM

[dencorso]

RetroOS, on Oct 13 2007, 07:14 AM, said:

I think an easy fix option is a great idea.
Exactly how this would be assembled is something to discuss.
Perhaps a separate thread?

However, I think there may be some issue that is some times appearing with the update installers.
I had a problem some weeks ago with the OLEUP update where it did not replace the files on reboot and left them missing.
See my post here. Also this post.
Maybe a recent update has caused problems with IExpress installers in some cases?
Something to look into.

MDGx: Any comments?

RetroOS:
Happened to me too!
OLEDLG00.DLL is not deleted AND the new OLEDLG.DLL is not added.
I used the same workaround as you did.

[dencorso]

Fredledingue, on Oct 13 2007, 04:01 PM, said:

It's funny... I don't have user32.dll in my system.

But of course you do. Question is where is it. That might be a reason for the problems you reported.
I mean, mixed user.exe/user32.dll versions... Try to find it, by using LOCATE. HTH

[Fredledingue]

Sorry, I found it indeed. I must have mistyped user32.dll when I searched for it.

[the_guy]

Hey guys,

Until MDGx updates his site with unofficial IE/OE updates, the newest version of the IE updater has those updates in them.

Download from Filefront

Also, a new version of the ME SP (I will not update the main topic until MDGx posts a link on his site, consider this a pre-release special).

Download from Filefront

the_guy

[pjmelect]

I have just tried out mesp202en-b9.exe update for Windows ME. I installed it on a clean copy of windows ME with the latest versions of Internet Explorer 6.1, DirectX and Media player installed. The only problem I saw was when the program had finished installing the updates and the computer was restarted the error message "Windows could not upgrade file %1 to %2 %3" flashed up briefly on this version of the updater, Windows update now works correctly and reported the following required updates.

KB916281
KB837009
KB833989
KB917734
KB904706
KB828026 (not required)
KB887797
KB816093
Microsoft Net Framework 1.1
Windows Automatic update
Euro conversion tool

This post has been edited by pjmelect: 27 October 2007 - 06:53 PM

[RetroOS]

Hey MDGx,
There are regular problems being reported with the current OLEUP update not actually installing OLEDLG.DLL and leaving the old one missing...
See a number of previous posts.
Also see here for the latest one.
I think the author of this unofficial update needs to revisit it!
It's really quite useless as an update as it stands if it needs manual intervention to get back an OLEDLG.DLL file that was there before the update...

[bristols]

MDGx is strangely absent. He hasn't logged in for over 2 weeks (according to his profile).

It seems strange to me, since he's a moderator, and is usually so prompt when dealing with enquiries and posting new and revised updates.

[RetroOS]

Even moderators need holidays!
That might explain why the latest unofficial 9x IE6 and OE6 updates haven't shown up?
They've probably already been compiled, but haven't been posted anywhere...
Afterall, MDGx is the updates collector man!

[soporific]

seriously, you can set your watch by MDGx ... just not this month for the first time in ages. It just goes to show ... human beings need holidays! It's about time he took a break

We've got things covered till you get back MDGx!

[bristols]

RetroOS, on Oct 21 2007, 09:59 AM, said:

Even moderators need holidays!
That might explain why the latest unofficial 9x IE6 and OE6 updates haven't shown up?
They've probably already been compiled, but haven't been posted anywhere...
Afterall, MDGx is the updates collector man!

I noticed and decided to post about the fact that MDGx continues to update his own site with new and revised hotfixes:

- check bottom of the home page: "Site UPDATED October 23 2007"
- check the dates next to the first three updates under the heading "Free Updates + Patches" on the home page, which include the latest unofficial IE6 Cumulative Update for 98/98SE.

I'm not sure whether or not he wants the information posted here (otherwise why not post it himself?). I can only guess that he is not against us downloading the updates, because he has taken the trouble of compiling them and making them available on his own site.

This post has been edited by bristols: 23 October 2007 - 04:53 PM

[MDGx]

UPDATED · 10-24-2007

Hopefully all install/rename INF problems should be resolved.
Please test these updated patches, and let me know:

ITOLEUP.EXE - Italian
OLEUP.EXE
KB891711.EXE
Q891711.EXE
Q891711F.EXE - French
Q891711I.EXE - Italian
RICHED9X.EXE
ITSHELME.EXE - Italian
SHELL98.EXE
SHELL98F.EXE - French
SHELL98I.EXE - Italian
SHELL98P.EXE - Polish
SHELLME.EXE
ME918547.EXE
Q918547.EXE
KB918547.EXE

All others are English.

BTW:
I need a volunteer to translate the text files from English to Polish = SHELL98P.EXE.
PM me if you want to do this. Thanks.

Enjoy.

P.S.:
I'll be waiting for more feedback on the new Xeno86 VACHE.VXD patch for 98 SE.
I'll build an installer if it works for most testers.

[RetroOS]

MDGx, nice to see you around again.
It's amazing how everything seems to slow down when you're not posting.
You must be the motivator as well as the moderator!

Good to see those 9x updates rolling on.

The Dream Lives!

[MDGx]

Many thanks for your kind appreciation.

I hope to keep you guys busy for the next few days testing all those updates.

[bristols]

Welcome back MDGx, and thanks as always for the updates.

[RetroOS]

Has anyone tested Sun Java 1.6.0_03 on Windows 9x? (Yes, it does work)
The installer claims that it is best on a newer OS but does not claim it will not work!
I've been running it for about a week.
It appears faster and more stable than 1.5.0_13.
No problems so far with IE6 and Firefox...

Anyone else had experience with Java 6 on 9x?