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

98 SE SP 2.0.2

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
117 replies to this topic

#101
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined 29-November 04

But no, it is not possible to do a simple batchup of all of the updates forcing a non-reboot after each install, as it would cause certain updates to not install at all.

How would it cause certain updates to not install at all ? Can you be more specific by actually providing an example instead of theorizising so much.

As far as theory is concerned, KB updates are supposed to do several things. They first check if the IE version is the one intended as target, either 5 or 6. It it's the wrong version they won't install.

After that they eventually write registry entries (killbits for example) and replace files.

If target files are not in use they are replaced immediately if they are of a version inferior to the one that installs. If they are of a version superior to the one that installs, they will be skipped by the installer.

If files to be replaced are in use, wininit is used to replace them automatically at reboot before the OS loads. Data is appended to wininit.ini.

Wininit either does not normally downgrade files unless the file to be replaced is first deleted by using the NULL command which the KB installers do not do as far as I know so that even the install order should be insignificant as far as replacing files is concerned.

For someone intent on me not "theorizing" you seem to engage in a whole lot of it!

As I stated in an earlier post, there are the INTENTIONS of updates, and there are the REALITIES of updates known to this forum to SIMPLY NOT WORK AS INTENDED. Unless you actually installed the 35+ updates to IE 6.0 SP1 and can state some EXPERIENCE, I suggest you practice what you preach! What you have not addressed is whether or not an update simply bails out because it is "unhappy" with the environment it's run in. IE updates seem to have this quirk in some instances. What you suggest is generally the behavior of Windows updates, which need to have the default of rebooting after installation inhibited, if possible. Please note that 98SE doesn't have a "QCHAIN" mechanism, allegedly a working functionality within the NT family. It is well known that specific cases in the 9x world simply don't work as you imagine, and a few have been discussed on this forum. [In a prior post in this thread, I outlined two of them, although I would have to research the KB numbers. Perhaps Gape or erp or MGDX can give the specific references. I may be able to find at least one of them, but frankly, this is old business of this forum and not up for debate, etc.]

MS occasionally screws up the logic within an update's installer disrupting the "rules" such as they are. In my experience, several of the IE updates are subject to this, thus the need to reboot in at least a few cases, etc.

Can anyone actually show an install that succeeds in installing all of these IE updates. [Note: NONE of these are updates to Windows 98 or Windows 98SE or Windows ME].

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#102
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined 29-November 04

My observations are as follows:

- one batch with all updates worked fine for me, I didnt noticed anything wrong (files not copied, registry not updated), this is the example for Windows 98 Gold:

[nice list of udates for Windows 98 FE deleted]

Maybe I have missed something but I believe not.

- IE updates test full version of all updated files, this is part of the SED IExpress definition file for IE6.0sp1-KB883939-Windows-98-ME-x86-ENU update:

[FileSectionList]
1=#S\BROWSEUI.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1622:%Warn2%:Ok
2=#S\CDFVIEW.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1612:%Warn2%:Ok
3=#S\IEPEERS.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1497:%Warn2%:Ok
4=#S\INSENG.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1475:%Warn2%:Ok
5=#S\MSHTML.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1506:%Warn2%:Ok
6=#S\MSRATING.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1623:%Warn2%:Ok
7=#S\PNGFILT.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1506:%Warn2%:Ok
8=#S\SHDOCVW.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1658:%Warn2%:Ok
9=#S\SHLWAPI.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1612:%Warn2%:Ok
10=#S\URLMON.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1487:%Warn2%:Ok
11=#S\WININET.DLL:6.0.2800.1106-6.0.2800.1506:%Warn2%:Ok

and if any of these files has wrong version the update will not install at all.

- Updates for IE6.0SP2 are called e.g. Cumulative Update for Internet Explorer for Windows XP Service Pack 2 (KB896688)

While there are updates claiming to be for Windows XP Service Pack 2 and thus IE 6.0 SP2 specifically, and claim to be cumulative, they are NOT all totally so. There are one-off updates not addressed by these accumulations! In any case, this is not the subject of this forum, nor of this topic.

Your list of updates to 98FE notwithstanding, the subject matter of this topic is updates to IE and OE that need to be applied after installing IE 6.0 SP1, and show verification of installation by observing the help/about in IE. There are at least 36 such updates.

It IS true that some of these updates are theoretically cumulative. In fact there are at least two such accumulations: One for the updates to IE and one for the updates to OE. With regard to this, it might be true that the latest version of a member of an accumulation list might in theory replace any and all of the predecessors within that accumulation. Thus, an argument could be made that no one update is cumulative for all purposes. However, it is ALSO true that the two updates one could nominate are also insufficient to update IE/OE completely simply because some of them are one-off in nature. [Note: Update 870669, while nominally related to IE, is considered an MDAC update and appears in add/remove programs as such. I am NOT referring to updates such as this, but I believe this is a singular case.]

Some of these updates are obscure, but are nonetheless available and should be applied to IE/OE. To my knowledge, all of the updates considered cumulative for IE or OE have at some point in time been available within Windows Update. Also, to my knowledge, NONE of the non-cumulative updates have ever been mentioned within Windows Update. Since Windows Update represents such a small percentage of the source of updates for Windows 98SE in its entire history, this is a meaningless point! Indeed, this forum is devoted to the polar opposite, namely the categorical failure of MS to provide available updates in any meaningful way, etc.

So, I would suggest to anyone who wants to contribute anything to this thread, can you please provide any actual on-topic experience with this multitude of updates, as opposed to optimistic hypotheticals or alternate examples of unrelated topics. My methods are crude by my own admission. However, they also succeed at the intended mission. Anyone that can simplify the method down to something that gets the SAME job accomplished with less overhead I would gladly defer to. Additionally, if someone has information about more than the 36 I am referring to, please post their article numbers here.

cjl [can provide the ones that I am aware of; none were hard to obtain at the time I got them. Can't say about now!]
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#103
eidenk

eidenk

    MSFN Addict

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,527 posts
  • Joined 28-March 05
My dear Clasys, I think you are just a troublemaker.

First you haven't yet come up with your list of 30 updates that are now 36 for IE which should be easy as you claim to have made a special installer for them that automatically reboot after each one. But no after that you say you don't remember which ones they are and call for the help of Gape, ERPdude or MDGx to tell you what are their KB numbers :

In a prior post in this thread, I outlined two of them, although I would have to research the KB numbers. Perhaps Gape or erp or MGDX can give the specific references. I may be able to find at least one of them, but frankly, this is old business of this forum and not up for debate, etc.]

Second you accuse Petr of going off topic when in fact the one that is off-topic since the beginning is you, as this thread is about Gape's service pack which is not concerned by IE6 updates as far as I know :

Your list of updates to 98FE notwithstanding, the subject matter of this topic is updates to IE and OE that need to be applied after installing IE 6.0 SP1, and show verification of installation by observing the help/about in IE. There are at least 36 such updates.


Edited by eidenk, 19 November 2005 - 08:37 AM.

Asus A8V Deluxe - Athlon 64 FX-55 2.6Ghz - 1GB DDRAM 400 - Windows ME (IE 5.5 SP2 Shell) + KernelEx 4.0 and Revolutions Pack 10

#104
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined 29-November 04

My dear Clasys, I think you are just a troublemaker.

First you haven't yet come up with your list of 30 updates that are now 36 for IE which should be easy as you claim to have made a special installer for them that automatically reboot after each one. But no after that you say you don't remember which ones they are and call for the help of Gape, ERPdude or MDGx to tell you what are their KB numbers :

In a prior post in this thread, I outlined two of them, although I would have to research the KB numbers. Perhaps Gape or erp or MGDX can give the specific references. I may be able to find at least one of them, but frankly, this is old business of this forum and not up for debate, etc.]

Second you accuse Petr of going off topic when in fact the one that is off-topic since the beginning is you, as this thread is about Gape's service pack which is not concerned by IE6 updates as far as I know :

Your list of updates to 98FE notwithstanding, the subject matter of this topic is updates to IE and OE that need to be applied after installing IE 6.0 SP1, and show verification of installation by observing the help/about in IE. There are at least 36 such updates.

Actually, my dear eidenk, it is YOU who are the troublemaker. I will elaborate:

What actually came FIRST is all of the following:

MANY people contributed to the service pack 2.x release as it stands now. I am happy to say I am one of them. Specifically, if you would care to look within the installation notice when you install it, you will find specific reference to me as a contributor, and not just someone such as yourself, who appears to think this forum consists merely of what you stumbled upon, not the long list of contributions by many who predate this entire subtopic going back now about 11 pages.

Certain of us "have a life" and as such, sometimes we cannot devote enough time to this forum and would rather ignore it entirely until such a time we can devote proper attention to it. This applies to significant others on this forum who are even larger contributors than I am. [BTW, count of messages posted is NOT an indicator of any measure of contribution to this project; additionally this does NOT include PMs sent between members, some of which applies in my case with some of the other "principals" of this project, etc.]

As such, I re-announced myself, as did others who know me. We all felt the project needs more attention, so here we are.

I introduced the topic of what IMHO is an open topic for discussion still unresolved. In this case, it is yet again bringing up the notion of updating IE/OE with its well-known [to members of this forum back when a lot of the grunt work that became SP 2.x was being performed] long list of updates. There was a discussion about this; essentially it was tabled in favor of getting the main event done, which is sort of where we are now. Thus, I felt it was a good time to reintroduce the topic.

Apparently you missed that discussion. As such, you don't have a right to criticize just how others make reference to it. It's all in the back pages of this forum. I already indicated that. It's up to you to find out what YOU missed, not mine to inform you. Towards that end, I indicated that I may be able to recall the KB article of one of the problem cases if I find the time. Having to deal with your intrusion into this forum with no desire to catch up on old topics well known to some of us is taking up some of that time.

I also asked if some relevant others, such as erp or MGDX could recall the relevant articles, since perhaps they are better equipped than I am to recall such things. I admit I am overwhelmed in this area, since I am attempting to keep track of at least all of the following:

Hundreds of updates to WinXP Service Pack 2
Hundreds of updates to Win98SE
Hundreds of updates to WinME
dozens of updates to IE/OE

Sorry if I cannot be the master of my own domain. This is why I come to a forum, to both contribute and learn. Learn by my example, and familiarize yourself with what's already been said so as not to waste the time of people here who have already put a lot of effort into this project.

Oh, and the list of "merely" 36 updates? The reason I use the number 36 is because back when I had more time to follow the list, back about 3-4 months ago, that was the number that applied THEN. I could only venture a guess as to how many more there are. I am hopeful that others, not you, have taken up this particular baton and know how many more to add to that number. I would really like to have definitive answers for any potential "newcomer" updates, which I would assume is a relatively small number, but currently unknown to me because I simply haven't had the time, up until now, to even be a responsive member of this forum. [Note: I have been active in other forums, including other MSFN forums, but my attention just got too stretched to cover all the bases; for that, I apologize for circumstances only partially under my own control, etc.]

As to attempting to use Petr to advance any theories about me, I will address him separately, as he is not you.

There seems to be a confusion about installation of hotfixes generically as opposed to the IE/OE-specific problem. Petr posted a bunch of 98FE hotfixes as an example of what he knows. There is nothing wrong with that; he is basically admiting what he DOES know. However, since the subject of THIS thread is what belongs on the 98SE service pack, clearly his list belongs elsewhere, and specifically there is a nice thread where it DOES belong sticky to this forum.

However, Petr's information doesn't address a long list of hotfixes for IE/OE 6.0 SP1 specifically, so I will assume he has little incremental information regarding this particular sub-topic.

The inclusion of IE 6.0 SP1 and its updates within the SP 2.x is IN FACT an ORIGINAL subject discussed months ago and predates any discussion of 98FE at all! IMHO it needs to AGAIN be addressed now; I did NOT merely raise this as a new issue, but rather as an OLD one that needs to be rethought. If no one wants to talk about it, that's fine, especially when I have come up with a [barely!] acceptable method of dealing with this problem, which I believe others are also interested in.

You have a curiously out-of-context quote of me that references two specific updates that are CURRENTLY part of the SP 2.x. You make it sound like I invented them as well. In point of fact, they were discussed among the "senior" members of this forum. They were, but no longer ARE, sore points that highlight the fact that Microsoft's hotfix installers are sometimes broken. At least one of them also interacts with the installation of, among other things, IE/OE 6.0 or IE/OE 6.0 SP1. The SP 2.x addresses these and installs them correctly AFAIK. I can confirm personally that one of them does install correctly because the problem does NOT lie with the underlying hotfix files, but rather with bugs in Microsoft's installer program within the hotfix; the SP 2.x simply does not use that broken code, thus gets the job done by a functional equivalent method, etc.

Clearly, the discussion of these two updates is directly on-target for this forum, but also are not specific to the subject of IE/OE updates. You insisted on some hypotheticals being discussed; I pointed out cases where reality differs from theory, one of the many subtopics discussed on this forum successfully, and at this point long put to rest and need not be discussed further unless someone, other than you, wants to post additional information. For myself, I do not wish to, since it is available in the forum's back pages, as a resolved issue. It is sufficient I raise existing examples as to why what you posted could be questionable, etc.

I'm glad you admit to "AFAIK" with regard to the IE/OE SP 2 inclusion topic. Clearly you should admit you don't know. The problem is that those of us who were here when a lot of subjects such as this were discussed DO KNOW. Do you think it's fair to impose your not knowing on us who do know merely because you didn't participate in the discussion and we did? I apologize if I cannot have photographic knowledge of the back pages of this forum, especially considering what I am dealing with for myself, etc. However, as crude as it might or might not be, I understand one can research material already discussed on this forum. Perhaps you can enlighten us as to how effective it actually is to do such research?

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#105
eidenk

eidenk

    MSFN Addict

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,527 posts
  • Joined 28-March 05
Clasys you are entirely off topic in this thread with your IE6 updates. More you post, more you are off-topic. You are even becaming insanely off topic with your references to your value and contribution not being reflected in your post count and all the PMs you exchange with Gape and others and lalala. You've got clearly some sort of problem according to me.

Why not simply opening a dedicated thread to discuss the IE6 KB updates installers that do not perform as they should and that are apparently of so much concern to you ?

Frankly, after a while, I had expected you to : 1) post a full list of those IE6 KBs 2) Say which ones do not work.

But there is still none of it.

I'll leave it there.

Bye.
Asus A8V Deluxe - Athlon 64 FX-55 2.6Ghz - 1GB DDRAM 400 - Windows ME (IE 5.5 SP2 Shell) + KernelEx 4.0 and Revolutions Pack 10

#106
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined 29-November 04

Clasys you are entirely off topic in this thread with your IE6 updates. More you post, more you are off-topic. You are even becaming insanely off topic with your references to your value and contribution not being reflected in your post count and all the PMs you exchange with Gape and others and lalala. You've got clearly some sort of problem according to me.

Why not simply opening a dedicated thread to discuss the IE6 KB updates installers that do not perform as they should and that are apparently of so much concern to you ?

Frankly, after a while, I had expected you to : 1) post a full list of those IE6 KBs 2) Say which ones do not work.

But there is still none of it.

I'll leave it there.

Bye.

Your juvenile and egotistical trolling behavior noted, I will leave nothing out that matters.

1) The subject is what belongs in the SP 2.x. The IE updates are an already discussed subtopic of that topic. That you missed it is your problem. Don't waste everyone else's time because you weren't there when the people who put EFFORT into the project was there. In short, talk is cheap and in heavy supply from you!

2) I don't need to repost the information for your benefit. I'll let the people WHO MATTER deal with the topic as it stands. Clearly, you don't fall into that category, because all you do is whimper about why your homilies and generalities aren't being addressed while I bring up an already discussed valid subtopic already introduced into this forum long before you were a member.

3) My reference to post count is directed SPECIFICALLY at you. You have far more posts to this forum than I, Gape, erp, MGDX combined. It is an indicator of nothing but potential bloviation statistics. Rather, it is an indication of just how much work people who actually DO something can get done in a minimal post head count, etc.

4) Your misunderstanding of the topic of this thread in this forum is nothing but disruptive and self-serving. My latest contribution to this thread is that I want to discuss AGAIN the topic of potential inclusion into the SP 2.x for which in the past there HAS ALREADY BEEN some support and some legitimate points for and against raised. It is a FACT that this discussion is part of the thread, the rest is your egotistical delusion about deciding what does and does not belong from the vantage point of a johnny-come-lately who wants the group to kow-tow to you, when in fact the opposite is true, etc. I seek no fame or glory for anything I did in the past or might do in the near future, just not to be insulted by ignorant remarks such as come out of you.

I again call for some USEFUL discussion on the topic of inclusion of the IE 6.0 SP1 and its multitude of updates, for which I am hoping SOMEONE ELSE has a more authoritative list than I do, since I have no updates at all past I believe August, 2005, and undoubtedly there has been some possible recent MS activity to add more to the list, and possibly others have discovered still more updates beyond the ones I indicated so many months ago. If someone will post the article numbers of recent articles WHICH I CLEARLY DO NOT HAVE and have had no time to research having been RATHER BUSY since this summer up to only a few days ago, I would appreciate if we can aggregate a proper list of ALL of the relevant updates. I for my part will contribute any I do NOT see on the list that I refuse to start. If there is no support for this topic, my posting the 36 "old" updates isn't going to change anything, and I will withdraw the topic, etc. I will be disappointed if so, but not left hanging since my crude method is adequate for the few times I need to invoke it.

However, I do wish to point out that there has been support for this topic before, and I wasn't even the person who started it back then. I believe there were people in several camps:

1) Do nothing at all, leaving us with 98SE with IE 5.0 unmodified.

2) Update all that applies to IE 5.0 but no further. I believe this is what the SP 2.x currently does.

3) Update only to 5.01, because apparently there is more than first seems to be inherently in a point release; there are applicatins that require 5.01 or higher, not 5.0 or higher, etc. As a subset of this, update to all SP's that belong to the 5.01 release.

4) Update to IE 5.5 and likely as far as that can be taken with regard to SP's from MS. I can point out that this is the highest "non-problematic" release of IE and there are some compelling arguments to take us to there and no further.

5) Update to IE 6.0; this is NOT to be confused with IE 6.0 SP1.

6) Update to IE 6.0 SP1, presumably with all known official patches to it.

Personally, I am in the last camp, but I wouldn't be opposed to the IE 5.5 camp being what is included in some variation of the SP 2.x

The discussion also addressed the fears of some that to implement any of this might make something already of some size even more unweildy. I think Gape himself was involved with an implementation strategy whereby whatever someone wanted was to be an optional separate package to be downloaded optionally, thus in no way inconveniencing anyone who doesn't want this.

IMHO, it's time to re-open the specifics of this sub-topic. It is SUFFICIENT that since it can be done, a service pack can address any and all of these issues. It is consistent with Microsoft's own policy, and the seeds of the idea are already within the SP 2.x with the inclusion of updates to IE 5.0 that take it beyond the initial release inherently in 98SE. Clearly, there is no ABSOLUTE line in the sand on this issue, etc. I agree that this issue HAD to be tabled last year, because it is clearly more important to have the bulk of the SP done as a much higher priority than this admitted frill. That said, I suspect one could argue that some of what has already been added to the SP 2.x is ALSO a frill!

Anyone with some CONSTRUCTIVE questions about just what this involves is welcome to participate. All others know where they can put what part of their anatomy, etc.

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#107
bristols

bristols

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 451 posts
  • Joined 24-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

If someone will post the article numbers of recent articles WHICH I CLEARLY DO NOT HAVE and have had no time to research having been RATHER BUSY since this summer up to only a few days ago, I would appreciate if we can aggregate a proper list of ALL of the relevant updates.


Someone already has, I believe (not me, I hasten to add):

http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=46581

I don't have time myself at this moment to make an easy-to-read list of all updates that pertain to 98SE, but to the best of my knowledge all updates (including unofficial ones) since August 2005 can be found at the above URL.

#108
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined 29-November 04


If someone will post the article numbers of recent articles WHICH I CLEARLY DO NOT HAVE and have had no time to research having been RATHER BUSY since this summer up to only a few days ago, I would appreciate if we can aggregate a proper list of ALL of the relevant updates.


Someone already has, I believe (not me, I hasten to add):

http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=46581

I don't have time myself at this moment to make an easy-to-read list of all updates that pertain to 98SE, but to the best of my knowledge all updates (including unofficial ones) since August 2005 can be found at the above URL.

Thanks for the tip. I checked the entire thread out, looking for recent updates past this last summer, and did find a recent DirectX 9.0c update and a recent update I have tentatively titled:

37) Q896688 - MS05-052: Cumulative security update for Internet Explorer

Can it be true that this is the only IE 6.0 SP1-related update since:

36) Q896727 - MS05-038: Cumulative security update for Internet Explorer

which is the last one on my last install list. I believe I have seen updates specifically for XP, likely SP2 only, but the question is: Are there any others for 98SE?

To qualify for this list, the update has to be either for IE 6.0 SP1 or the related Outlook Express [OE] 6 that installs with it. Additionally, it will appear as an update when you reference help/about within the running IE 6.0 SP1. Note that curiously, if you install Q313829 for 98SE, which updates SHELL32.DLL, this reporting mechanism also appies! [The reporting mechanism is NOT supported by the SP 2.x, but the underlying file update is performed. Additionally, any new IE installation cancels the mechanism as well.]

As an aside, WinXP SP1 [NOT SP2!] originally had the same mechanism, but after about 24 updates, they switched over to the mechanism used in SP2, thus updates can only be reported by Q272824 QFECHECK or equivalent, since the update is considered an OS update instead, etc. Thus, you cannot get a total handle on what's present there, etc. and need a composite reading of both programs, etc. In SP2, only QFECHECK can indicate updates.

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#109
Petr

Petr

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • Joined 15-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

but the question is: Are there any others for 98SE?


All relevant updates can be downloaded here:

http://v4.windowsupd...oft.com/catalog

All Internet Explorer critical updates are here:

http://www.microsoft...nloads/critical

All Internet Explorer updates are here:

http://www.microsoft...ws/ie/downloads

Security bulletins related to specific product can be searched here:

http://www.microsoft...ty/current.aspx

But with Internet Explorer we are off-topic here, I think new thread should be opened.

Petr

#110
eidenk

eidenk

    MSFN Addict

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,527 posts
  • Joined 28-March 05
Clasys, please stop the madness :

3) My reference to post count is directed SPECIFICALLY at you. You have far more posts to this forum than I, Gape, erp, MGDX combined. It is an indicator of nothing but potential bloviation statistics. Rather, it is an indication of just how much work people who actually DO something can get done in a minimal post head count, etc.


My post count is 440. The combined post count of You (72 posts), Gape (427 posts), MDGx (806 posts) and erpdude8 (412 posts) is 1717.

According to you 440 is a number far superior to 1717.

I suggest you have your head examined by a specialist.

I'll really leave it here now.
Asus A8V Deluxe - Athlon 64 FX-55 2.6Ghz - 1GB DDRAM 400 - Windows ME (IE 5.5 SP2 Shell) + KernelEx 4.0 and Revolutions Pack 10

#111
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined 29-November 04


but the question is: Are there any others for 98SE?


All relevant updates can be downloaded here:

http://v4.windowsupd...oft.com/catalog

Petr: Do you really believe that? The central reason for this forum is the total futility of MS's update methods being relevant. Has Windows Update precluded your need to spearhead a movement for a Windows FE SP analogous to the one here for SE?

I realy don't want to go into a clearly off-topic discussion of MS' shortcomings, but that would be the appropriate response to your post. Perhaps you can summarize with merely a numeric percentage of just how many updates for 98FE you obtained from there. I do know that for 98SE it's a rather small number.

But sticking to the narrow topic you quoted from me AND put back into the context of the question: Perhaps the LATEST updates to IE 6.0 SP1 are contained there, but that's not quite the question asked, which is, other than KB896688, what are ALL of the updates that pertain to either Outlook Express or Internet Explorer that exist since KB896727 was released some months ago. [Read the previous post for a clear explanation of what a qualifying update is.] Sufficient time has passed that there might be others. Can you explain to me how to query Windows Update's catalog to find out if an update is missing? I don't see how it can tell you what it might NOT have! [Seriously, does Windows Update install confidence in ANY member of this forum as to it having a COMPLETE list of updates?]

All Internet Explorer critical updates are here:

http://www.microsoft...nloads/critical

I don't see it. I believe you have mistaken the latest presumed cumulative update as an equivalent to all other updates for this purpose.

In any case, Microsoft's definition of "critical" has changed in recent years as to have been rendered worthless. Every time there is a new security bulletin, the language of it seems expressly designed to justify why 98, 98SE, and ME are NOT going to get the benefit of an update that will be applied elsewhere. One particular security bulletin uses deliberate illogic to justify this. [Sorry, don't remember the bulletin number.]:

The bulletin gathered up something like 4 unrelated security problems and created a fantasy rating essentially the percentage of what's on the list that pertains to each MS operating system that would be a candidate for criticality. All other systems needed 3 or 4 of the updates while 9x only needed one of them. That each item is arguably critical in its own right was deflected with this loopy argument based merely on the notion that if MS insists on rolling up the 4 updates into one package, it wasn't "critical" ENOUGH to warrant making a 9x version.

One of the many things MGDX and others do is to attempt to use files earmarked for other Windows [including XP SP2] redeploying these files by any means possible to be useful to 9x systems. I am certain that some of this is already in the SP2.x as I do recall that the SP2 was documented as updating 98SE with elements of fairly recent updates presented as I describe above. Simply put, there is NO way to apply the fix described in the security bulletin as a critical update for 98, 98SE, or ME. Yet, due to his efforts, Gape successfully added the update anyway, since MGDX provided a way to accomplish this readily from the more powerful vantage point of the SP2 mechanism, as opposed to rigged MS installs designed to only install on an excessively narrowly focused list of OSes. [I believe it was KB828026 which as I recall is an update for Media Player that pertains to 98FE, 98SE, and ME. However, the updates provided only installed in NT 4.0 in one case, and in the other only in ME. But thanks to the work of people on this forum and elsewhere, that update and updates analogous to it CAN be applied to 98SE and 98FE, and more importantly, have now become an integral part of the SP 2.x.]


All Internet Explorer updates are here:

http://www.microsoft...ws/ie/downloads

No, that is just plain wrong. Show me at least 37 updates for IE 6.0 SP1 documented here. Such a list is not available on an MS websitel never has, never will. Our purpose is NOT to document all of the AVAILABLE TODAY FROM MS updates, rather it is to document and deal with ALL of the updates, which is dramatically different.

Btw, some of the IE updates NEVER were considered "critical" since MS never rates PROGRAM BUGS as "critical". And clearly updates OTHER than "critical" aren't even candidates for cumulative security updates; you need each one separately, other than the off chance that one of them perhaps replaces another. But even in the miminum form of this issue, there would ALWAYS be the need for an update outside of the latest-and-greatest cumulative security bulletin-related update. If we used what would be suggested by this incorrect notion of ONLY security-driven updates as our standard for implementation, there NEVER would have been an SP2.x for 98SE at all!


Security bulletins related to specific product can be searched here:

http://www.microsoft...ty/current.aspx

Hopefully, this will shed SOME light on the topic. Unfortunately, not all updates are security-driven. In the latest incarnation of Windows Update for XP, there are listings of Outlook Express updates [can't vouch for today, let's just say that several have appeared within the last 2-3 months. This is one of the areas I have been "distracted" into, etc.] that aren't even deemed "critical" but fall instead into the category of "recommended" updates. All this means is that there is no security bulletin to reference them, and that these are the latest of perhaps even more which possibly replace previous versions, expressly for XP.

Since each update, regardless of MS's purposes for XP, becomes a potential target of opportunity, we mustn't ignore them merely because there is a still-newer one for XP. Unless we can account for the update with an available 9x-ready version, each and every one must be known so that potentially we can exploit relevant files for 9x systems' purposes. MGDX seems to be the leader here; I know he has had to be selective about what can and what cannot be added, not merely blindly taking MS's latest XP offerings, etc.

Thus, unless there is an alternate list of all UPDATES released for some version of IE or OE, we cannot rely on a security bulletin-driven model, since clearly MS themselves doesn't. To summarize just this point:

1) Are there MS updates for either IE or OE that cannot be derived from security bulletins that aren't presented in a form geared to 9x systems' installation? [perhaps; actually likely.]

2) If so, can someone name them for potential inclusion using a method analogous to what MGDX and other have used, and ultimately for inclusion in some variant of the SP 2.x for 98SE? [I have been distracted from Windows Update in general and specifically for 9x for months. All I can notice is what's offered NOW. Perhaps someone has had the time to be dilligent; I simply haven't had the time to provide anything like that recently, although in the past I certainly did, as did others since that's how parts of the SP 2.x got formed at all!]


But with Internet Explorer we are off-topic here, I think new thread should be opened.

I don't see how an already introduced topic [not quite a year ago, and also not by me] can be off-topic. Perhaps you can enlighten me on just what you conclude would be ON-topic.

Petr

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#112
eidenk

eidenk

    MSFN Addict

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,527 posts
  • Joined 28-March 05
139 pages of KB articles for Win98 (2082 items and many long gone from MS websites) : http://www.kbalertz....nology_232.aspx.

(Posted with a fresh Win98SE install without any update in QEMU running on WinME. See my last post in the WMvare thread in the other subforum for a little bit more details about that if you are interested)
Asus A8V Deluxe - Athlon 64 FX-55 2.6Ghz - 1GB DDRAM 400 - Windows ME (IE 5.5 SP2 Shell) + KernelEx 4.0 and Revolutions Pack 10

#113
CLASYS

CLASYS

    Windows installer, chief cook and bottlewasher

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined 29-November 04

139 pages of KB articles for Win98 (2082 items and many long gone from MS websites) : http://www.kbalertz....nology_232.aspx.

(Posted with a fresh Win98SE install without any update in QEMU running on WinME. See my last post in the WMvare thread in the other subforum for a little bit more details about that if you are interested)

A fine tip to a good resource. I didn't look through all those 139 pages for IE-specific updates, but I do have a few questions that could be troubling:

1) IE updates do not track OS releases. Sometimes one binary can install anywhere the product goes; In other instances, multiple different binaries are needed to handle all of the situations. IE 6.0 SP1 can apply to XP, XP SP1, Win2K, 98, 98SE, ME. I don't see any connection between IE updates and 98 in their lists.

2) When they say "98" are they lumping together 98 and 98SE updates? Clearly some apply to both while there may be alternate binaries or singular support as necessary. ME represents an additional complication in some cases.

3) I looked up one of the more obscure bug-fix updates for IE 6.0 SP1 [not a security bulletin, not a rollup AFAIK] and found it at KBAlertz. However, there was no OS association of any kind given.

Thus, the main event is not served: How to know you have all of the updates, when all you can do is find an update you already know about? For example, if I didn't already know this update:

17) Q826940 - Internet Explorer Unexpectedly Quits When You Use It to View a Web Page That Contains VML

How would I know I didn't have it?

So, how does this resource give me any confidence that all of the IE updates are accounted for? My fallback answer is merely that I was pretty dilligent about this, but only up to last summer. Newer updates are likely, and some additional older ones may surface as well. Can KBAlertz be manipulated into dumping out only IE updates?

A separate implementation question regarding the CURRENT release of SP 2.x: In prior releases [back before I "disappeared"] there was an IE hotfix called Q240308 [eeyedog and bubble-boy] that applies only to IE versions prior to IE 6.0. However, due to a bug in the SP, the hotfix was erroneously applied to IE 6.0 and IE 6.0 SP1 as well. Was this ever fixed? Clearly it needs to rectified so that if the current version of IE is installed as 6.0 or higher, this fix must be avoided.

Thus, if this bug has been repaired, it can be argued that there already is the seeds of support for IE 6.0 and IE 6.0 SP1 [and for the more fanatic, I guess this also includes IE 6.0 beta!].

cjl
"In ten years, OS/2 will be on everyone's desktop"
Bill Gates, 1992

#114
Petr

Petr

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • Joined 15-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

A separate implementation question regarding the CURRENT release of SP 2.x: In prior releases [back before I "disappeared"] there was an IE hotfix called Q240308 [eeyedog and bubble-boy] that applies only to IE versions prior to IE 6.0. However, due to a bug in the SP, the hotfix was erroneously applied to IE 6.0 and IE 6.0 SP1 as well. Was this ever fixed? Clearly it needs to rectified so that if the current version of IE is installed as 6.0 or higher, this fix must be avoided.

Thus, if this bug has been repaired, it can be argued that there already is the seeds of support for IE 6.0 and IE 6.0 SP1 [and for the more fanatic, I guess this also includes IE 6.0 beta!].


Q240308 is not hotfix.

This update is included with Internet Explorer 5.01 and later.

Why "this fix must be avoided"? What do you mean by this? What's wrong?

Petr

#115
Petr

Petr

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • Joined 15-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

17) Q826940 - Internet Explorer Unexpectedly Quits When You Use It to View a Web Page That Contains VML


This hotfix (vgx.dll 6.0.2800.1265) was replaced by Q833989 update (MS04-028) with vgx.dll version 6.0.2800.1411.

Petr

#116
Petr

Petr

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • Joined 15-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
BTW, there is also Q897255 - How to install hotfixes that are included in cumulative security updates for Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1.

Therefore I have included in my fesp201 also the registry modification to install hotfix versions:

REGEDIT4

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer]
"QFEInstalled"=dword:00000001

I suggested to include it in SESP too.

Petr

#117
friendly_jacek

friendly_jacek
  • Member
  • 1 posts
  • Joined 25-November 05
A question from newbie:
Is Win98SE shutdown patch (Shutdown Supplement Article ID 239887) included in SP2.0.2?
The reason i ask is because I used SP2.0.2 to update my daughter's Win98SE PC and the PC was able to shut down correctly afterwards (she had the shutdown freeze problem for some time). Unfortunately, the shutdown problem reappeared after I did some updates to her MS Office 97. I wish I did the updates in the correct order, I learned the instructions aftewards.

BTW, thanks for the unofficial SP!!!

#118
bristols

bristols

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 451 posts
  • Joined 24-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Can KBAlertz be manipulated into dumping out only IE updates?


I tried the Advanced Search (link in the left-hand column beneath the Log In area on the KBAlertz page that eidenk provided), chose Internet Explorer 6.0 from the options in the pull-down list, and searched for explorer. This search returned 135 results over 9 pages (somewhat more managable than the full 139 pages). It's a start. :P

Edit: this page allows you to query the database by article category. Here is the results page for Internet Explorer 6.0 articles. 1276 articles over 86 pages. Wow.

BTW, great resource, eidenk.

Edited by bristols, 01 December 2005 - 11:24 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users