I recently found that I had two versions of OLEAUT32.DLL in my Win 98SE installation:
version 2.40.4522 in c:\windows\system, and
version 2.40.4518 in c:\windows\options\cabs
I really just want to know whether this is OK or not, but more, whether it is desirable or not. Should I really have two different versions there? I read on MDGX's site that 2.40.4518 is installed by IE6 SP1 (only if a much older version exists in the OS prior to it). Should I now replace this older version in the cabs folder with 2.40.4522?
As a side note, after playing with TweakBIOS, having the OS lock up, and having to power down, Windows no longer boots. Explorer fails to start, and instead reports an error with OLEAUT32.DLL. In DOS, Scandisk reports a long filename, which of course it cannot repair. Because Explorer won't start, I can't do anything about it (it seems).
A bit of background info about this installation (behind which lies several hours of head-scratching over the best installation order to use):
this installation was a recent one, which included IE6 SP1, Gape's SE SP 2.02, MDGX's 98SE2ME (without the ME options), Maximus Decim's native USB & Cumulative Update projects, as well as all the applicable updates I could find with the help of MDGX's site and his 98/SE/ME patches & updates thread, ERPMan's Win 98/ME updates page, and other sources too.
I had looked at all the different installation guides on these forums to try to get an idea about the order in which all these components should be installed. None of these guides follow the exact same order, as many of you will have seen (mainly because not all of the various service packs here are included in every installation guide here). Through educated guesswork and some beginner's ignorance (or luck), I had seemed to have been able to make an ordered list from all these various guides, and had breathed new life into old Intel 430TX board with MMX CPU. Not that much life, but wow! - it was very satisfying to see the old beast doing so well. Probably all this head-scratching about the installation order was unnecessary, even though, after being a lurker on these boards for a couple of months, it still does seem an uncertain point. Maybe the OLE discrepancy is the result of the installation order I used. If anyone knows something I don't, please let me know!
I'm wandering off the point of this post, but one last thing. This is an excellent community, and I have it (and the generous work of several members of it in particular) to thank for making life with Windows 9x so much better.
This post has been edited by bristols: 05 October 2005 - 06:46 AM



Help

Back to top










