[Eck]

Feedback? Well, I just used Autopatcher again! (Yay!)

Unpluged the XP drive (so I can go back to it with no hastle) and installed 98SE.

Not taking my own advice, I didn't install Gape's pack. After all it is old and since Autopatcher contains nearly everything and no obsolete stuff I figured I try it.

Before Autopatcher -

Windows (well, that's needed).
Made the usual 386Enh changes in System.ini, Vcache, fixed VM size, Network Server, 4 digit date, Power always on.
W98 Resource Kit Full and System Policy Editor.
98 Plus! Pack with just the themes, screensavers, and Lose Your Marbles.
Via MB, USB drivers
IE6SP1
DotNet 1.1, 1.1 SP1, DotNet 2.0, 2.0 Security fix.
Direct X 9.0c with Software Rasterizer extracted to it. (Don't think I need the SR but who knows, can't hurt.)
ATI WDM and Catalyst 6.2 for 9x
ForceASPI 1.7
Dialup Networking 1.4, then uninstalled Virtual Private Networking and the VPN linked Network items.
Uninstalled CdPlayer. (Not useful with WMP there.)
WMP7.1 without Adaptec, WMP Bonus Pack without Audio Converter, WMEncoder 7.1, WMP9
Drivers for Via Ethernet, M-Audio Revo 5.1, Best Data External Serial V.92 Modem, Apollo USB Printer, HP Scanjet 3970.
Works Suite 2001 with only Works and Word2000, Works Suite 2005 with all except Word 2002. Office2000 SP2, Works 8.5 update.

Autopatcher, selecting to install the whole thing now.

After Autopatcher -

Web Folders update from your exe in the manual folder.
MDGx Unofficial IE 6 SP 1 Cumulative DLL update (superseeds 918899 which should be obsolete).
MDGxUnofficial 891711, MDGx Unofficial WMF update and his reg file which still didn't set them up so Windows Update thinks they're installed. (They uninstall the ones in the Autopatcher.)

MDGx 98SE2ME, 98SE2XP, and the WMP 10 for 9x.

System now screwed! (Well, it was then. I fixed it.)

What happened was I first noticed that although Display Properties shows the newer My Computer icon, only the old one remains on the desktop. That I have no idea how to fix. The only one to select it the new one but applying it doesn't change it from the original default 98SE My Computer desktop icon. I searched and found 3 Explorer.exe's on the system. The one in the System folder and one of MDGx's backup folders are identical versions, and one in another MDGx folder is a different version. The newer one is the one in the System folder. I didn't want to mess with it. I like the older one if no other icons are changed anyway. I have a Windows Me theme if I want to apply the color and newer icons.

Second, and really messed up, an error message about powerprof.dll appeared at startup. When I opened Control Panel I got another message and noticed only a single Toolbar with Windows XP icons on it. No Title Bar, just the XP icon bar. Weird. 98SE2XP hadn't given me any XP icons in the past, or messed with the toolbars, or caused errors.

Windows Media Player would open with an error message that -

"The file wmplayer.exe had a version number of 9.0.0.3250 where 9.0.0.2980 was expected. Windows Media Player is not installed properly and must be reinstalled. Do you want to install the Player from the Microsoft Web Site?"

Oy Vey!

I uninstalled the WMP 10 to 9x update and rebooted. WMP had same error. 98SE2XP would not uninstall with an error about not finding a file. So I reinstalled 98SE2XP and then I was able to uninstall it. I then uninstalled the Fraunhoffer WMP 10 Codec that Autopatcher had installed. Then I reinstalled WMP 9 on top of itself. Success! I then applied all the updates in the Autopatcher's Windows Media module except the WMP 10 Fraunhoffer codec.

Since I was meek I just installed the Cyberlink mp3 PowerPack Encoder (it does the same thing, and I bought it long ago). When I tried to play an mp3, WMP gave that error about not having the codec. So I quickly installed ZoneAlarm and plugged in the Ethernet cable. On line, WMP downloaded and installed the normal Advanced Fraunhoffer mp3 codec and mp3's played fine.

The rest is not any matter. Just the rest of my stuff!

Okay. I don't know what's wrong but I think I should be seeing the newer My Computer icon, as 98SE2ME installs that and it DOES appear in Display Properties. Just not on my desktop. Previously, when I had been installing Gape's pack first, all his icons remained. When I ran the first Alpha Autopatcher I didn't install Gape's pack first and your small version of 98SE2ME just changed the My Computer icon correctly to the new one. THIS time, 98SE2ME in the Autopatcher didn't install ANYTHING. And, the latest MDGx 98SE2ME left the original icons on the desktop but the new My Computer icon in Display Properties.

Secondly, I haven't had any problem with the 98SE2XP before. And in the last several months there has been no problem with the WMP10 for 98SE either. Could the WMP problem be due to one of the Microsoft updates being applied before installing the WMP 10 thing? And also, that mp3 codec perhaps shouldn't have been installed before installing 98SE2XP or the WMP 10 update as those install the same codec.

I can only suggest there that you don't include the mp3 codec in the Autopatcher. It's easy enough to install from a seperate download and could possibly interfere with the other 2 packages.

The good news so far is I haven't had that Error loading Device IOS Real Mode Memory Allocation Failed message yet. Yet. I'm holding my breath.

[soporific]

Eck, on Dec 11 2006, 05:08 PM, said:

Feedback? Well, I just used Autopatcher again! (Yay!)

very comprehensive feedback, thank you very much

Quote

Autopatcher, selecting to install the whole thing now.
After Autopatcher - [then]Web Folders update from your exe in the manual folder.

but what was your system like at THIS point? Because you say your system was screwed at the end ... then we would be testing your particular system with all the unofficial update packs and we can't really know which one is causing fuss. Can we really make many conclusions with these results? ... but we can still make some. And that is that I can't see the connection between the problems you've reported (esp. the one about powerprof.dll --- that file does not exist within any file in the autopatcher package) and autopatcher functioning ... i'm not saying there isn't, just that it doesn't really help ...

What I did to test autopatcher (AP) was to try it out on a clean vanilla install of Windows 98se, but I also tried it out after installing all the service packs, which helped pin down what was missing from AP. But really, the most AUTHENTIC way would be to install all the official updates from MS you want to, and then try autopatcher. Maybe make a report before and after running AP ...

The other thing to remember is the AP is just that an AUTO patcher ... its just installing the updates listed, in only a few places is there any modifications to the official method of installation. So if there's a bung update included in AP we need to root them out --- I've already fixed the problem with installing the q322656 hotfix, because it was pointed out to me... I've simply packaged the proper file and its installed after the official one.

But all feedback is good so thanks a million, you're the best!!

Quote

I can only suggest there that you don't include the mp3 codec in the Autopatcher.

I'll move it from automatic to optional install and I won't make it default when you choose to fully autopatch. Problem fixed, so its staying in! -- this is the sort of feedback we need, little things like moving the XP codec from automatic to optional will make a big difference for some. Please keep the suggestions coming...

patchworks, on Dec 7 2006, 08:54 PM, said:

I'm excited about AutoPatcher98, but lemme understand:
it's just another unofficial update pack or -more interestingly- a cumulative installer of other (uSP, 98SE2ME, etc) packs ?

Just think autopatcher for Windows XP and you'll get the idea of what it wants to be when it grows up.

This post has been edited by soporific: 11 December 2006 - 02:40 AM

[Drugwash]

Eck:

AFAIK, the official explorer.exe is in %windir% only (usually C:\Windows). I suggest you remove any other copies of it from your system (rename or delete them) and only place the appropriate one (the one with the newer icons, if that's what you want) directly in the Windows folder (%windir%). You'll have to do that in DOS mode.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

@ Eck
you should always install 98SE2XP/98SEMP10 last after 98SE2ME
Also when ever you update one of these packages
you must uninstall in order for things to work good.It worked for me and i just finish a clean install

[soporific]

glocK_94, on Dec 6 2006, 08:42 AM, said:

q308567: Hotfix for Vulnerability in .ASF Processor in WMP

This has been removed from AP

Quote

q238453: Hotfix for Spoofed Route Pointer Vulnerability
q240075: USB Devices May Not Work in Windows 98 Second Edition
q323455: Directory Services Client Update for Windows 98

These should already have been fixed. Please check these are right when v1.7 is released.

Quote

kb917344: Hotfix for Vulnerability in Microsoft JScript

This should be right already:
- checks for %windir%\system\jscript.dll ver 5.6.0.8831 - sometimes I pick the wrong file to check for but I'm very very sure I got the right file this time. Please check the file version of jscript.dll on your system and report back.

Quote

qfechkup: the Update Information Tool
> q243199: Hotfix for bug in Win98se with NDIS Intermediate Drivers

- both have now been fixed

Quote

dun14-se: Dial-Up Networking 1.4 for Windows 98se

This is still outstanding

Quote

Hope that helps !

Of course!

[Eck]

Thanks PROBLEMCHYLD, and that's what was done. Sorry for the long post that could confuse!

Yes 98SE2ME, 98SE2XP, 98SEMP10 in that order. With rebooting after each rebooted just to be sure. But the last 2 there was what screwed things up. As I said I'm now running without them. Just 98SE2ME, which was fine except for the My Computer icon staying with the old one on the desktop but the newer one somehow being the default choice in Display Properties, but not applying for some reason.

Drugwash,

I'll take a closer look at the Explorer.exe that is active and the other 2 in the MDGx backup files. I was too crazy from all the installing and updating to take a good careful look at things at the time.

And, soperific, no experimenting on this system at the moment as it looks like it may be able to stay. In that long post I did state that the problems were fixed after I managed to remove 98SE2XP and 98SEMP10.

Incidently, I fixed the MSINFO update caused error with the Internet Explorer information being blank in System Information by extracting that problem file using System File Checker. After a reboot all the information was back.

So, I do suggest that the unofficial MSINFO fix be taken out of Autopatcher until that file is set not to be replaced with the newer, buggy one in the update. Well, it's a choice. I guess you could leave it for now as the rest of the update is a security patch? And we'll deal with that problem file manually. Up to you!

No critisism's here. System was messed not by Autopatcher, but by some combination of Autopatcher and the 98SE2XP and 98SEMP10 programs. For some reason, when I had been using Gape's pack first then Autopatcher those updates hadn't caused the problems. I'll just live without those 2 until it can be figured out why it happened.

Extremely pleased with the progress of the Autopatcher! Even though I did install a few things first it saved a lot of time and the system's running fine so far. And that's the whole point. Make things GO!

Errr, I added the patch for Shell Icon Cache size increase myself. Did it before the Autopatcher ( I think. Starting to forget!). Was that thing included in the Autopatcher? I didn't notice it in the long list of stuff it installed.

[soporific]

soporific, on Dec 11 2006, 03:26 PM, said:

Drugwash, on Dec 7 2006, 05:20 PM, said:

• Will you include Visual C runtimes v6, v7.0, v7.1 and probably v8 (Visual C 2005) as well?

Its coming in the next version ..

I've started investigating what to install with regard to visual basic runtime files and I want some feedback before going ahead with coding ....
Q1 -- is it worth offering v1-3 ?? I remember a very long time ago needing a vb3 file but that was in the last millenium it was that long ago.
Q2 -- should I offer the rest as an all-in-one package? Or should I split it up into their individual versions.
Q3 -- where can i see more info about v7 and above?

Any help much appreciated!

EDIT: well, I know its only been a few hours, but Ive gone ahead with coding the VBruntime 6 pack into AP --- I've decided to put it into the Critical & Recommended System Updates module. I suppose the alternatives would be: the Optional components module, or the system stability module. Any other suggestions or comments?

This post has been edited by soporific: 11 December 2006 - 10:27 PM

[Eck]

I always stick vbrun 1, 2, and 3 into the system folder and usually use MDGx's vbrun6SP6 FULL to get that installed. There used to be a comctrl (?) update that also patched 2 files after SP6 but I think MDGx's latest already includes that.

I thought you had VB6 in the Autopatcher so I didn't install it myself this time. Am I missing out on anything? It's possible that programs that need it will include it in their program setup, but I do think it would be a good idea to include it.

Always getting confused between that and Visual Studio 6. Heh. I'd really rather not deal with those files myself.

Put 'em in. Get 'em patched. Make it all automagic like! I love it.

Soon it'll be as easy to get 98 set up as it is XP! For that I use RyanVM's stuff and make a new XP cd when he comes out with a new update. Don't always wind up using them but it's always nice to have a fresh XP cd with all the latest updates already integrated.

[Drugwash]

I agree with having them all in one pack. After all, the files are not that big (around 1MB each or so) and there still are applications that do not provide them optionally. I'm thinking about gdiplus.dll being added, as it's needed by some newer applications (I know for sure some of Miranda IM's modules need it).

However, you will have to pay attention to VC2005, because that one is a lot different than the previous ones: it creates %windir%\winsxs with a few subfolders and installs its stuff there instead of %windir%\System. While VC6/7 can simply be dropped in the System folder even without registration, the VC2005 files will never work that way.

Also a good idea might be upgrading RichEdit (riched20.dll) to 5.30.23.1226, as it may be needed by recent applications. Personally I tried to use a more recent version of it (5.40.x.x and 5.50.x.x) but I found them to be faulty regarding a few functions while testing in Miranda IM, so I had to downgrade to 5.30.x.x, which is working fine for me.

Speaking for myself, I think the biggest, the supreme achievement for all 98SE users would be to have absolutely all possible updates/upgrades/patches/whatnot in one single pack - be it a modular or integrated one - and best of the best, integrated with the Unattended Boot Disk project, so that everything would be on one single CD, installable when selected in the UBD menu.

But that would require cooperation between certain wise people around here. Could that be achieved? I surely hope so. Because time is running away, and Win9x is dying a bit day by day...

[604joe]

last link is dead.. i can host if you like

[Petr]

Drugwash, on Dec 12 2006, 12:58 PM, said:

Also a good idea might be upgrading RichEdit (riched20.dll) to 5.30.23.1226, as it may be needed by recent applications. Personally I tried to use a more recent version of it (5.40.x.x and 5.50.x.x) but I found them to be faulty regarding a few functions while testing in Miranda IM, so I had to downgrade to 5.30.x.x, which is working fine for me.

Really? That's very bad, Riched20.dll 4.0 (5.40.x.x) is required for Metapad and many other programs to work with non-ASCII codepages, like East/Central European codepage 1250.

This topic was alaredy discussed here: http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=72448 and the conclusion was that it is safe to use riched20.dll version 5.40.11.2218 because it does not break anything.

Here you can see the difference:

Richedit 3.0 (all versions):


Richedit 4.0 (all versions):


This is also noted here: http://www.liquidnin...ad/faq.html#Q18

This problem si common for Windows 98, Windows Me, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 and even Windows Vista.

Therefore I have opened the incident # SRQ060526601424 with Microsoft and asked them to correct this bug but after several months of e-mailing and phone calls the result was:

Quote

After a long time with testing and conferencing with my colleagues from the US and also discussing this with our Unit Manager regarding this issue here I am to give you an update and some more info:

I regret to inform you that Peter Constable, Program Manager for Windows Globalization maintains that this is a “by design” behavior. Here’s some more info from Peter:

Please note some things regarding versions of the RichEdit control:

- When you see “5.30.23.1221”, ignore the initial “5.”; this is version 3.0.

- The system has never shipped version 5.0 of RichEdit. RichEdit is developed by Office, and they are currently developing version 6.x for Office 12. Version 5.0 would only have shipped with Office.

- Version 4.0 of riched20.dll has never been shipped by the system; it has only been shipped by Office. The system ships version 4.x of RichEdit using the file name msftedit.dll.

Furthermore we have discussed the possibility of msftedit.dll being used instead of riched20.dll when building a new application.

For this issue to be further pursued I will need you to send me a business impact plan so that Microsoft can decide whether this should be pursued or not.

I’ve already arranged to have a conference call with my manager to discuss this issue if you’d like and I’m also fully available and happy to help you with building the business impact plan if needed.

So Microsoft will not correct any bug without "business impact plan", even if you have paid for the support.

Quote

As agreed your existing support case SRQ060526601424 will now be closed. Customer Satisfaction is very important to us and we would like to be sure that you are very satisfied with the management of this case.

Therefore, if we can be of any further assistance on this case or if you have any suggestions for improving our service please do not hesitate to contact either myself or my manager Bruno Ribeiro on brunor@microsoft.com so we can ensure you receive our immediate attention.

As discussed with Bruno, I have forwarded the info and documentation regarding riched20.dll you provided, plus your workaround suggestion, to the program group in order for them to further study the issue and come up with a KB article. This, unfortunately, might take a couple of weeks.

As this case was related to a design issue, I have closed this case as non decrement for you.

It was a pleasure working with you. I only wished all our customers documented their cases as well as you did. Thank you!

Should you need any further assistance with this matter, please feel free to contact me directly and I will be happy to assist.

Very polite response - but nothing was done yet, even the bug was not documented in MSKB yet.



Back to RICHED20.DLL. Are you able to document your problems with Richedit 4.0 and Miranda? I don't use Miranda so I'd like to test them. The serious problem with Richedit 3.0 and 3.1 and Windows with default codepage 1250 (defualt in Czech, Hungarian, Polish, Slovak, Slovenian versions of Windows 98) has to be solved some way. Maybe there is some other workaround? Or someone will be able to patch riched20.dll 3.0?

My understanding is so that Richedit does a test if the character is supported in the currently selected font. If it is missing, then it switches to different font that contains it - just to be able to display the character and not empty rectangle only. Unfortunately there is a bug in Richedit 3.0, 3.1 and even 5.0 that causes font switching even when the character is supported by the currently selected font.

Regards,

Petr

[Petr]

note: RichEdit 6.0 (12.0.4017.1003) does not work on Win9x - there is unresolved dependency to GetGlyphIndicesW in GDI32.DLL

This post has been edited by Petr: 16 December 2006 - 06:03 AM

[Drugwash]

Not being a programmer but merely a tester/user, I couldn't offer specific technical details, but during testing one of the plug-ins created for Miranda IM - namely spellchecker - I noticed that the wrong words that should have been marked with red wave, dotted, thick or other kind of underscore were only marked with thin line having the same color as the font. Replacing RichEdit v5.50 with v5.40 exhibited the same behavior. Downgrading to v5.30, the underscore immediately started to behave normally as selected in the plug-in's options. So this is not a problem of wrong characters being displayed, but rather one of missing/wrong features.

One other issue that I noticed was in the official eMule client: on the Servers page, at the bottom, there's a tab called "Server info". In there it's a link called "Click HERE to check for a new version" (or similar). With RichEdit v5.40 or 5.50 installed, the link was not clickable, there was only a line of simple text. Downgrading to RichEdit v5.30 fixed that issue too - the line became a link again, that would open the project's main page in the default browser.

Bottom line is that it may be possible to be a bad implementation of some features in certain applications, where programmers have used only RichEdit v5.30 (at most) to test them. But it may also be that RichEdit versions above v5.30 have different implementations of some functions (or even bugs, why not?) that make them slightly incompatible with previous ones. After all, if those versions would have been 100% safe and compatible, I suppose MS would have shipped them as system upgrades. Instead, they preferred to ship them only with the Office suite, which may offer a clue regarding their limited compatibility.

Anyway, this is just a supposition of mine, so if anyone knows better, please disregard my posts on the matter.

Petr: Miranda IM is open-source and so are it's plug-ins (with very few exceptions). You're welcome to test it in any combination you wish, to confirm or deny my allegations. Please note that some of the alpha-staged plug-ins can only be found in their dedicated forum threads. Personally I've used a nightly v0.7 build for testing, available from the Development page.

[Petr]

I'd like to move the riched20 discussion to the proper topic: RICHED20.DLL compatibility

Petr

This post has been edited by Petr: 17 December 2006 - 03:27 AM

[bayou75]

Soporfic:

I downloaded and installed autopatcher 1.6 at least three 3 times all with the same result. When the dos window appeared it gives the message "bad command and or file". What am I doing wrong? Is it my machine? I followed the same procedure with autopatcher 1.0 and had no difficulty when installing your patch.

[soporific]

bayou75, on Dec 20 2006, 07:43 AM, said:

I downloaded and installed autopatcher 1.6 at least three 3 times all with the same result. When the dos window appeared it gives the message "bad command and or file". What am I doing wrong? Is it my machine? I followed the same procedure with autopatcher 1.0 and had no difficulty when installing your patch.

You need to run 1.5 and then run 1.6 over it. Getting a 'bad command and or file' message tells me you are most likely trying to run 1.0 and then 1.6 over it. This won't work, sorry. If you have tried the above then i'm not sure why this is happening. If you ran 1.0 successfully then its certainly not your machine.

I am nearly finished with 1.7 and someone has kindly offered to host it for me so if you have no luck then I would wait until 1.7 is available.

[bayou75]

Soporific:

Thank your response - Let me say that I think that your autopatch system is a great idea. Not long ago I crashed my system and having a clean install I was working with autopatch 1.5 and 1.6. When I opened the 1.5 it apeared to install correctly but when the dos window appeared I received the bad command message. I think I will take your advise and wait until 1.7 is released. Again, this is a great idea it has all of the components and hotfixes needed for the 98 system. I await for autopatch 1.7. thank you

[soporific]

bayou75, on Dec 20 2006, 09:08 AM, said:

Soporific:

Thank your response - Let me say that I think that your autopatch system is a great idea. Not long ago I crashed my system and having a clean install I was working with autopatch 1.5 and 1.6. When I opened the 1.5 it apeared to install correctly but when the dos window appeared I received the bad command message. I think I will take your advise and wait until 1.7 is released. Again, this is a great idea it has all of the components and hotfixes needed for the 98 system. I await for autopatch 1.7. thank you

Thanks for your reply and feedback about autopatcher, its been rather scarce...

Please confirm that you have tried the following:

1) run the autopatcher 1.5 file

2) exit out of an error messages you get and exit out of all DOS boxes

3) run the autopatcher 1.6 file

- the program should now open and run correctly.

version 1.7 will be out very soon and so you can always try that one -- I will release a 1.7 update and also the full file now that I have a hoster so there should be a solution soon!


regarding MS Agent 2.0:

Should I include this in autopatcher?

This post has been edited by soporific: 19 December 2006 - 07:07 PM

[bayou75]

Soporific:

Thank you for your interest and response. Since my system last crashed I haven't downloaded autopatcher 1.5 and 1.6. I will download and follow your instructions. Will let you know how things work out.

bayou 75

[Max_04]

@ Soporific: it's possible to localize autopatcher personalizing, or better, remove some updates in this pack?

Naturally AutoPatcher for windows 98 SE, if you give me permission, will contain all updates localized by me in italian and ufficial patches/components from microsoft.

Unfortunately, some updates aren't in my language and I've necessity to reduce the pack, also for my requirement.

For all testing I've a real machine with 98SE.

Let me know.

Max

This post has been edited by Max_04: 20 December 2006 - 03:15 PM