[PROBLEMCHYLD]

I got 3.3 down to 53.9 MB after removing IE6 core files and smart card components.

[Fredledingue]

Drugwash said:

In Firefox I see no notice, but in SlimBrowser it says my number of downloads has exceeded 6 in 24 hours. So using FlashGet to make sure the package comes integer (due to this bad modem connection - max 10kB/s download at the time of typing this - and large package size) practically kills any chance for me to get anything from the main site.

This mean that your number of downloads or attempts at downloads has exceeded 6 in 24h on the main site.
This is normal except that PhP seems to forget to update the IP login datas after 24h. So I deleted the IP login datas so that you can try again.

This is not wonderful, this is a necessary security step after I'v been hacked.
Otherwise I'd just put a direct link as before.

Drugwash said:

Took me almost two hours to download through IE's simple download, since any other kind of download manager that'd accept resume would be banned for "too many connections" or whatever that PHP script may be filtering for.

The PhP script is a very difficult one and doesn't react the same way not only on different server, but also on different browser/download managers which theoricaly it shouldn't.
I'v tried dozen versions of this script and this is the only one working on the server.

I'm sorry for the inconvenience. As stated above it was the only way to prevent the bandwidth attack I was victim of few months ago.

I know it sucks not to be able to use a dwonlaod manager, but you don't have to download 98SESP every second day, hopefully.

If I was managing (cuz I'm the website manager) a website where poeple come to regularly download large files I may do it differently. But we are talking about a file that's downloaded only once or twice, for a total of 150 downloads a months.
Not a big deal.
+ There is the second server for which I have no control over, because it's not on my website.
And it has the same inconvenience, probably to avoid the same problem.

buyerninety and Drugwash,

The filesize is not a very good way to check the file version.
The date is more indicative of which file is newer.

But the best way is still to update the file version number (or sub number or sub version letter whatever).
Like 3.2a, 3.2b, 3.2c etc

Prob said:

I got 3.3 down to 53.9 MB after removing IE6 core files and smart card components.

Are you sure it's usefull to trim as much as possible.
What if someone need "smart card components"?

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Fredledingue, on 03 July 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

Are you sure it's usefull to trim as much as possible.
What if someone need "smart card components"?

Well', I removed it because its already on the Win98 CD.
D:\Drivers\Scard There no need to add it as an option if everyone already have access to it.
And its the same exact version, so there is no gain in having it.

[Drugwash]

Fredledingue, on 03 July 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

The filesize is not a very good way to check the file version.
The date is more indicative of which file is newer.

But the best way is still to update the file version number (or sub number or sub version letter whatever).
Like 3.2a, 3.2b, 3.2c etc

There's still the possibility that a certain download manager that were able to download the file could alter the file timestamp; FlashGet does that when a download was paused and resumed so any other such app can do that. Exact file size would be a 99% secure pre-download indication, while an MD5 hash would ensure post-download file integrity and also version confirmation.

If it were to use standard MS versioning convention, it should be major.minor.build.revision, where any of the members may range between 0 and 65535.

[jds]

PROBLEMCHYLD, on 03 July 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

jds, on 03 July 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

I see you still bundle 'MLANG.DLL' version 6.0.2800.1599. Please avoid this or any other version beyond 6.00.2800.1106 (actually, that's the only 6.X version I know of that is designed to work properly on W98). They are all afflicted by the "Outlook 2000 may not display a complete HTML message" bug, which was first reported for version 6.0.2600.0 here : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/318256

Joe.

Because anyone who uses the core files shouldn't be using IE.
We had members in the past report problems with this issue.
You can't install Office with out IE. I though the bug only applied to Outlook 2002 is why I added it back.
I probably will remove IE6 core files because IE5 core files are more stable and solid.
It also will shave off approximately 4mb and some change.
If you don't plan on using IE as browser, then IE5 cores is the best solution IMO.

Why not simply bundle the good version 6.00.2800.1106 DLL instead of the bad version 6.0.2800.1599?

Joe.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

jds, on 04 July 2012 - 02:56 AM, said:

Why not simply bundle the good version 6.00.2800.1106 DLL instead of the bad version 6.0.2800.1599?

Joe.

IE 5.5 SP2 files has greater stability over IE 6.0 SP1 files. There are faster and uses less resources.
After testing both sets of files for many many months, IE 5.5 takes it by a long shot. I use to think newer was always better,
but in some cases it is and in some its not. This is one of those cases.
You can always test both sets of files and come up with your own conclusion.

I will be removing Power Management Trouble Shooter since the same exact version is on the Win98 cd.
These files don't need to be added since everyone who installs Win98 have access. If files are the exact same
version as on the cd I will either remove if present or not add them at all. I wish I had known this 9 months ago.

This post has been edited by PROBLEMCHYLD: 04 July 2012 - 08:35 AM

[Elvi]

Hi new here, just stumbled on this service pack for old 98SE and i like the idea of keeping it slightly updated still but i can't use it cause it's english only
My own version is swedish so it brakes it.

The only reason i still use 98SE is cause i collect old pc's and right now i'm rearanging a old pc, switching hardware and so forth and it seems the copy i had on the main hd is going bad so i guess i'd need a reinstall but i'd like all the updates too but as winupdate is not 98SE friendly anymore... trouble trouble.
I've seen other sites have the updates but to me seeing a page full of update numbers just makes my head spin, i just don't know what i need.

If anyone has any ideas please share and if this post is somewhere wrong, just move it

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Nice to meet you Elvi

If I knew how to translate, I would have a package in every language.
I'm sorry I can't help you further benefit. Maybe a translator will probably come along and give you some help.

[Elvi]

If i could help you translate i would but i don't know the underworkings of 98SE too well even if i've used for many years, unless we help each other

Funny enough, i tried the english version and it actually worked albeit some stuff changed to english thought the desktop got blanked.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Elvi, on 09 July 2012 - 04:04 PM, said:

If i could help you translate i would but i don't know the underworkings of 98SE too well even if i've used for many years, unless we help each other

Funny enough, i tried the english version and it actually worked albeit some stuff changed to english thought the desktop got blanked.

Lets come up with a plan. I'll try my best to help you as much as possible.

[Elvi]

I'm all ears

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Elvi, on 09 July 2012 - 04:41 PM, said:

I'm all ears

Download the SP3 and check all the files. The ones that are (NOT) Language Neutral, then please post them.
We can go from there.

[Elvi]

okay, just 1 problem, i don't know how to identify the languages in a file

[tomasz86]

@Elvi

You may want to have a look at my conversation with Hackeronte about translating UURollup. It starts from here. I don't know if filever.exe works in Win98 though. It would be much faster to check files with a script instead of analysing them one by one manually.

[Elvi]

looks like it's win2k only tomasz86

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

tomasz86, on 09 July 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:

@Elvi

You may want to have a look at my conversation with Hackeronte about translating UURollup. It starts from here. I don't know if filever.exe works in Win98 though. It would be much faster to check files with a script instead of analysing them one by one manually.

Thankz. Anything to speed up the process.

[Elvi]

Um PROBLEMCHYLD... it's win2000 only and besides that, i don't see how it could help, i already reformated the hd and installed a fresh copy of windows onto that old pc of mine and i mean old, pentium mmx 233, 256mb sdram, 3 hd's 6.5, 7.8 and a 40gb caped at 32gb couse the bios can't see it else, and a nice voodoo 3 2000 pci as the video card oh lets not forget the soundblaster 16 card i have in there heh

[dencorso]

Elvi, on 09 July 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

looks like it's win2k only tomasz86

No, it's not! It works like clockwork on 9x/ME!

[Elvi]

well guess i was wrong about filever.exe but the script doesn't work atleast for me

[tomasz86]

@Elvi

Of course the script wont work! You need to modify it accordingly to the structure of the USP3 which is very different from UURollup.