[oscardog]

Petr, on Jan 17 2007, 02:59 PM, said:

oscardog, on Jan 17 2007, 02:14 PM, said:

I am simply saying that the os version number has been changed to reflect the hotfixes applied

And I'm simply saying that it is impossible - none of the released hotfixes change OS version number.

Please give me any example of hotfix that changes the windows version number.

Petr

I have not/am not refering to released hotfixes,I gleamed that bit of information from the post
"No Auto-patching at all, and it reports 4.10.1999"
I am refering to DeadDudes very interesting non standard setup cd and replying to Drugwash "Then, what is 4.xx.1999, repeatedly reported by DeadDude?"
@DeadDude it will be very interesting to see any screenshots you are able to take Friday, and also to see how ntkern.vxd differs from 98se/me

[DeadDude]

plonkeroo, on Jan 17 2007, 09:28 AM, said:

soporific, on Jan 16 2007, 06:00 AM, said:

OK lets try to clear up some confusion!! if you type VER in a DOS box in any Windows operating system, you get the version of the operating system.

VER doesn't work for me but WINVER does. Also, if you've installed 98SE2ME the OS version shown will be Millenium not Win98SE.

98SE2ME changes the OS version reported to ME??? Is this true?

Isn't that in the auto-patcher??

Is it possible that some *specific* hotfixes and magic voodoo that these packages *together* (hell, even so far as to say on *this specific rig*), caused this problem?

Later today I will have 2 of these towers up and running... and a third will be with me for at least a week...

I've almost totally 'worked around' this, (I've got the owner manually writing in totals on invoices, and he seems to be able to deal with that), but I am totally curious now what is going on...

Who knows, maybe going through all this could get me to a point where I can help like y'all...

(is it *just* because 98 is old that you guys know all this?? trial and error? :bows: )

[Eck]

No, MDGx changed that from old versions. The GUI from My Computer's properties used to report the Windows Me version in old 98SE2ME versions but it was and always will be 98SE. The newer 98SE2ME versions, for quite some time now, show 98SE version numbers. It was just the GUI anyway.

And yes, the auto-patcher does include a small subset of 98SE2ME, but only the Explorer.exe and updated registry (user32.dll and user.exe I think) files because bugs were fixed in the Windows Me versions.

If you are not going to seperately install 98SE2ME and 98MP10 then I recommend letting the auto-patcher install what it includes of them.

If you intend to seperately install 98SE2ME and 98MP10 then I recommend toggling those off in auto-patcher so the backup process is not interferred with and the files are updated properly when you do run those seperately (as I do. I'd rather have the full versions).

But that didn't cause your problem. I think you have official Microsoft cd's, but rare ones that mess with the version just like that old Security Updates cd did. Yeech!

So you've got something extremely unusual there. I think retail or OEM 98SE cd's are occasionally available on ebay. Or you probably have a friend or associate who no longer runs 98SE and would give, sell you their cd and license. That would be the safest bet as who knows at this point what folks on ebay are selling.

I wouldn't want to run the cd you have as it obviously causes conflicts with updates and programs just like the Security Updates cd used to. It's up to you but it might not be possible to get everything updated and working with that cd.

[Drugwash]

According to DeadDude's post #191:
• windows 98 ASP0210 X05-39104 (NM.05) 08 IFPI L894 BARCODE
• At the rights side of the hole it says

For distribution
with a new PC
only. For product
support, contact
the manufacturer
of your PC.

SECOND EDITION

According to Eck's post #189:
• Windows 98SE: 0499 Part No. X04-14310
• Windows 98Gold + SE Update: 0499 Part No. X04-12707
• Windows 98SP1: 0499 Part No. X04-64496

According to DeadDude's post #187:
• No Auto-patching at all, and it reports 4.10.1999
• Only installed files were Win98SE (after the Gold fiasco), driver CD from GigaByte, and Auto-Patcher 1.7, then 1.8... and that sequence boosted it to 4.95.2222

According to oscardog's post #195:
• "With few exceptions, Windows 98 hotfixes are stamped with a version number of 4.10.1999 or greater, which indicates that the file is a newer version than the file that had been originally included with Windows 98. Windows 98 Second Edition hotfixes are generally stamped with a version number of 4.10.2223 or greater"

My conclusions:
• The CDs are definitely OEM versions
• They are Windows 98Gold with hotfixes (and possibly SP1) included
• It's possible that they're preliminary versions of 98SE (attempts at) - limited series
• The cause of version boost to 4.95.2222 must be found and dealt with

[soporific]

DeadDude, on Jan 18 2007, 04:35 AM, said:

Isn't that in the auto-patcher??

Just to clear up confusion, the 98 to Me included in auto-patcher is only the core of it --- only 3 files get updated and so i wouldn't expect and/or want the version to say anything other than Windows 98 second edition. Here's a screenshot of my test system after everything in auto-patcher is installed:

[Eck]

Yeah, but see that 4.90.3000A? That's what MDGx has fixed in the full version of 98SE2ME. It stays at 4.10.2222, or whatever it's supposed to be exactly. I forget and can't check at the moment since I'm in XP. I still think that's cosmetic, as the command prompt winver would I assume be the version reported to updates or install programs that check the Windows version.

At any rate, I turn those modules off in auto-patcher and install the full versions as I have a Windows Me cd for that. The version reported after using the auto-patcher is then not changed from before running it.

I think this fellow just needs to get his hands on normal 98SE cd's. Right off the bat his version will throw off updates and programs, same as the Microsoft Security Updates Cd did.

I see this as a Microsoft mess up. I think the computers that came pre-manufatured with this version of Windows installed aren't all that updatable due to that crappy hybrid Windows installed. And installing this included cd of that particular OEM Windows results in the same problems.

Hey! Maybe this fellow is the only one who got these computers that is still trying to run 98 on them. Or, at least, update them. Wow. A special moment.

Calls for a beer.

[soporific]

Eck, on Jan 18 2007, 10:55 AM, said:

Yeah, but see that 4.90.3000A? That's what MDGx has fixed in the full version of 98SE2ME. It stays at 4.10.2222, or whatever it's supposed to be exactly. I forget and can't check at the moment since I'm in XP. I still think that's cosmetic, as the command prompt winver would I assume be the version reported to updates or install programs that check the Windows version.

Hmmmm, i hope its cosmetic but i'm now wondering why I sometimes (very rarely) get this behaviour with Windows Explorer (I think it happens when I install SHELL98) --- all the drop-down menus aren't available and I cannot return it to normal --- has anyone else seen this?

Eck, on Jan 18 2007, 10:55 AM, said:

Calls for a beer.

substitute spliff for beer and i'll join you.

[DeadDude]

DUDE!!!

THAT'S WHAT HPJOBBER DID BEFORE!!!!!!! Except it wasn't a Win balloon, it is just BLACK. And it was inside HPJobber... not explorer.exe... and hpjobber doesn't use the standard GUI model, it has some weird attempt at resembling DOS... right down to no menu at the top at all, it is all keyboard driven with some mouse hacks thrown in...

The very first install I had, using all the crap I listed, had that SAME problem....


but I only noticed it in HPJobber... (when it happened, I just used keyboard to shut down and restart)

So I think that **is** the problem, right there.

Yes, my CDs are some freaking thing ... thanks for the post earlier with colors... made it easier to recap...

Okay... sooo....

My OEM CDs are some really crazy beast.
My version string is fiddled with from the ?beta? 98SE.
The version is further modded by the partial install of the 98SE2ME thingy... (even if unintentional, this plays into it I think, as the version is *still* different after this)

*That* explains the wild version on a fresh install... as well as the entirely impossible version after auto-patcher...


Dang... Does anything know the viability of trying my CD key on another CD? I know with XP that is usually possible, but is it on 98SE?

(Methinks this HPJobber software is absolute garbage... need to convince him to change to QuickBooks or something... looong story on it, but here's a try:
HPJobber *was* a DOS only program, no DOS box even... the guy was crazy smart, and this was a time when programmers often put time bombs and the like to keep people legit and updating/upgrading. Well, this guy, as the story goes, committed suicide. A company bought the rights to the software, but couldn't locate any source code. So, they wrote a Windows program that reads the DOS data files... and that's where it all gets uber-freaky. Don't know what to believe after this point...)

This post has been edited by DeadDude: 17 January 2007 - 11:14 PM

[DeadDude]

Question on the CD thing....

Microsoft gave away over 2,000 copies of 98SE to a small non-profit org "Computers for the Community"
This org rebuilt donated hardware into computers that they gave away...
I was their 'certified computer technician' for 2 years, and routinely took work home...


I really don't think my CD got swapped with one of their's... but it is the only thing I can think of...
unless my "local shoppe" was somehow selling stuff they had no right to.

and now knowing the CD is definately a major fubar, perhaps it *is* from that batch M$ gave away?

It is awfully odd... but perhaps M$ knew about the screw ups and that's why they gave them away instead of selling them?

Just some final thoughts on this issue....

Thanks for the help in nailing the problem down, and it looks like we still found some sort of a bug in Auto-patcher... yay, I *didn't* spam!

@Soporific
Sorry to be happy about a bug, but I'm sure you can understand how crazy I was getting over this...
Would you recommend not installing the 98SE2ME from Auto-patcher, and installing the full package to see if it still happens?
Would using VMWare produce similar results? I would think so, and if it does... I can pop out whatever tests you want real quick... cloned machine, anyone? Is it illegal to send a copy of the virtual machine to someone for comparison? I got cable internet, so tell me where to upload it if it is OK to do so... I can make it as small as about 200megs (maybe smaller, I never tried it)

My latest VM 98 installs are jackhammer, so it doesn't reflect this issue... but tomorrow... err today... later today I will try...

@anyone else
I will not send anything to anyone else. Actually, there are perhaps 3 people I would send to, but they should already be able to figure out who they are from their posts. I do NOT condone stealing software, even if it is a 10 year old OS from the biggest and richest monopoly on Earth. (they'll track you down and tag you for life... I've *seen* it)

This post has been edited by DeadDude: 18 January 2007 - 12:40 AM

[Eck]

soperific,

That's the look I was getting a while back when using auto-patcher and letting it install 98SE2ME and 98MP10 modules. Not right after the auto-patcher but rather following the installs of 98SE2ME and 98MP10 done afterwards. The weird mix of XP icons on that full screen type Internet Explorer look on all Explorer windows. That, and the WMP not opening and that error message of the conflicting versions. The WMP stuff was fixed by MDGx by a newer version of the updates but I never did figure out (or seemingly get anyone to understand what I meant) why the explorer windows looked like your picture!

Last time I ran it I untoggled your 98SE2ME and 98MP10 modules and did not experience that weirdness. Now you say it was caused by SHELL98? Hmm, was that taken out of 1.7? Or, toggled off by default?

So SHELL98 is the culprit? Funny but I kind of remember that I toggled that on when I last ran auto-patcher 1.7 and I didn't get the weird explorer windows. Maybe it wasn't SHELL98 that I toggled though. I think it was some patch for large file movement, deleting though.

I hope that now that you got the same error that I did and understand what I was talking about we can permanently figure out how to stop it from happening (what to NOT install)!

DeadDude,

I don't think Soperific would need your image, but perhaps he would (can't speak for him) enjoy examining that weird Microsoft hybrid 98 cd you have there just for fun. As far as fixing a bug, it's not an auto-patcher bug as all auto-patcher is doing is installing all these updates. Aside from still having Environment size errors without a bit of tinkering it appears to do its job of installing anything it is set to install perfectly.

Your errors seem to be specific to that program you're using and that strange 98 cd.

Soperific,

Yeah, what about those Environment space warnings? I need to right click and change the memory tab Initial Environment to the (4096?, I forget) largest in the drop down in the batch files I see there. But then I still get the warning in the first screen about it but when I choose to run it anyway it works with no environment errors any of the further screens. That IS something that is a bit buggy about auto-patcher and it will not run without my right click fixing.

This post has been edited by Eck: 18 January 2007 - 01:39 PM

[soporific]

Eck, on Jan 19 2007, 06:36 AM, said:

Last time I ran it I untoggled your 98SE2ME and 98MP10 modules and did not experience that weirdness. Now you say it was caused by SHELL98? Hmm, was that taken out of 1.7? Or, toggled off by default?

I was guessing from what I was doing at the time. I thought SHELL98 was a good candidate for being the culprit as it looks like something to do with shell32.dll being incompatible somehow. So don't quote me on that (even though you can cause that's what I wrote).

Quote

I hope that now that you got the same error that I did and understand what I was talking about we can permanently figure out how to stop it from happening (what to NOT install)!

The problem is I can't reproduce the bug on demand.

Quote

Yeah, what about those Environment space warnings? I need to right click and change the memory tab Initial Environment to the (4096?, I forget) largest in the drop down in the batch files I see there. But then I still get the warning in the first screen about it but when I choose to run it anyway it works with no environment errors any of the further screens. That IS something that is a bit buggy about auto-patcher and it will not run without my right click fixing.

Yeah sorry about that environment warning at the start --- the values I set to trip the warning are completely arbitrary and the problem is that if I add more options and modules to auto-patcher, then more environment space gets used. So the problem stems from the 1.7 update -- i didn't increase the value the triggers the environment space warning. I would guess that its saying you are only a few bytes over the limit anyhow and as you've seen, the program works fine. The REAL value for problems with environment space should be 2048 which is a long way away from what you should be experiencing. I'll make this change in 1.8 --- just so you know, my thinking was that if I gave a very narrow environment space range as the values of what the user should be experiencing, then anything different would have alerted them to a problem before trying to run auto-patcher. I didn't want auto-patcher to spit the dummy in the MIDDLE of doing its thing.

Quote

soperific

Do ya mind if I nip something in the bud? The first few times I didn't bother thinking it was a typo...

[i typed "dict soporific" into firefox]

sop·o·rif·ic (sŏp'ə-rĭf'ĭk, sō'pə-) pronunciation
adj.
   1. Inducing or tending to induce sleep.
   2. Drowsy.
n.
   A drug or other substance that induces sleep; a hypnotic.

if you met me in person, you would very quickly find out how appropriate my online name is.

[i typed "dict soperific" into firefox]

Spell Check
Did You Mean:
soporific
	hypnotic
sapor
	specific
saporific
	sleep (condition – in medicine)

This probably hasn't happened to you too often, there's not much you can get wrong with only 3 letters to your name

This post has been edited by soporific: 18 January 2007 - 05:06 PM

[Eck]

Funny thing is that if I do not right click and increase the Initial Environment in the Memory tab's dropdown box, the next window DOES error out and auto-patcher will not proceed.

So it's not just a problem with the first window. Once I've changed all the batch files and shortcuts in the auto-patcher folder's root, there are no more errors. I don't get it.

Sorry about the misspelling. I was worried that sometimes I capitalize it! I had no idea about messing up the spelling as well.

By the way, I'm currently exploring the world of OpenSUSE Linux 10.2. I happened to be kvetching on another forum about how expensive the new Windows Vista was. One guy replied, "You need Linux." The next guy said, "Here we go!"

Heh, heh.

Well everything I can think of has been downloaded and burned. Been reading like crazy. Thank the maker it's mostly GUI these days. Saw those early FAQ's that are still on the main Linux.org site. Sheesh, that command line stuff seems a bit much. I grew up with Windows 98 so even my MS-DOS command knowledge is meek at best. Got no idea how exactly I'm going to set it up as far as partitions, etc. but I'm gonna do something with it. I'll let you know if my computer (or my brain) blows up.

I think I'll stick 98SE on here first just so I can have some normal access to all the old stuff I have. Gosh I hope I don't get that "Error loading device IOS, real mode memory allocation failed" that seems to haunt me whenever I install a real 98SE system instead of VMWare.

Guess I won't say much though. Completely off topic.

[Eck]

soporific,

What's a spliff?

And, maybe we'll get lucky and never see that weird explorer window bug again? Look at the Revolution Pack thread. Tihiy seems to have located a file replaced by 98SE2ME that messes up unless the Revo Pack is installed first. Is that file possibly related?

Did you get error messages about powrprof.dll (or pwrprof.dll, I forget) when you got the weird windows? I did. Seems to have disappeared with the newer 98SE2ME, 98MP10 versions. Hope it stays gone.

Would be nice to know what caused that exactly, though.

[Randy_Rivers]

heres the problem you got 4 guys trying to fix 98se and when u patch modify a user dll etc with a newer one etc u will use functionally with a older program looking for the orginal 410.2222 dll .one program helps then the next conflicts with another and i read how it use to work before i installed such and such etc etc is there not a better way instead of installing one over another perhaps one exe with proven success.similar to gapes sp2.1 but including all usefull stuff. because it gets frustating if i install 98setome and rp7 etc one always affects the other in some bad way and u either gotta reinstall remove or replaced with orginal dll .

This post has been edited by Randy_Rivers: 21 January 2007 - 12:43 PM

[soporific]

Eck, on Jan 22 2007, 04:53 AM, said:

What's a spliff?

serious? .... well if I went with stereotypes, a spliff would be something a hippie passes you to smoke at a party...

Quote

And, maybe we'll get lucky and never see that weird explorer window bug again? Look at the Revolution Pack thread. Tihiy seems to have located a file replaced by 98SE2ME that messes up unless the Revo Pack is installed first. Is that file possibly related?

i'll have a look and no i didn't get any errors to do with powrprof.dll

The good news is that v1.8 is just about ready to go. This is basically my preview release as it now comes with an installer and uninstaller, and the final release I hope to spread far and wide. The final will probably be the last version for a long while, barring any big bugs that I should fix, so get your feedback in now !!! The change log will eventually record all the changes from v1.7 ... stay tuned ...

oh and I gave up on my project for this project to be in perfect harmony with Microsoft's Windows Update, i mean, what was I thinking? If i didn't have 1,543,788 other things ahead of it in priority, i'd be working on it right now, honest!

This post has been edited by soporific: 22 January 2007 - 07:53 AM

[myelin]

soporific, on Jan 22 2007, 06:32 PM, said:

oh and I gave up on my project for this project to be in perfect harmony with Microsoft's Windows Update, i mean, what was I thinking? If i didn't have 1,543,788 other things ahead of it in priority, i'd be working on it right now, honest!

Thanks sporofic for this great project. Its great.

[DeadDude]

yeah, WU is a tricksy beast...

couldn't you just add a text file on the desktop detailing which updates aren't needed after this is installed?

that's the only confusion I have about this, buddy.

pass that this way, my tumors hurt...
::cough cough::

[Eck]

Well, what Windows Update says might differ depending upon what other software is installed. A lot of software, especially from Microsoft, installs system updates and some of those are duplicated on Windows Update. Even if already installed, or a corrected unofficial version is installed, these updates go ahead and do their thing regardless.

I don't think re-running auto-patcher would fix an older update being installed over a better update installed by auto-patcher previously. But we would want some way to correct the problem as whatever older, buggy dll's or other dependant files installed by the older version of an update could mess things up.

What's nice is that although auto-patcher would not be itself reinstall an update detected as already being on the system, it DOES have all the updates in the auto-patcher folders. So as long as we are aware of which update we need to reinstall, we can simply go to the folder and run the update again ourselves.

If we don't know which one? Well, we don't live in a perfect world, unfortunately!

Anyway, basically after running auto-patcher there is nothing we need from Windows Update. The only thing we need to keep watch on is the sticky thread which is regularly updated with new releases by our guru's that contain security, updated fixes, etc. Whatever is on Windows Update is not going to change for 9x as Microsoft no longer is making fixes for these operating systems. So that thread here becomes our personal Windows Update!

Just be careful as there's no automatic system to determine the proper operating system to install which versions of the newer 3rd party guru releases to install. We must read the information provided and decide for ourselves accordingly.

I think that between the auto-patcher's final release, 98SE2ME, and 98MP10, we have a great start for a fresh 98SE installation. Then we just need to keep watch on that sticky thread for future updates.

Gosh I'm really excited about the sort of final we'll be getting of this with most things finished such as the improved installer/uninstaller stuff. The computer's about to be wiped for fresh installs of 98SE, XP, and OpenSUSE Linux. I'm still downloading stuff and reading like crazy.

I bought BootIT NG so I won't have to be a prisoner to all these operating systems choices of how to partition and boot. They'll all think they're the only game in town as each partition will contain all the boot files that particular operating system needs instead of them being all dumped on the first partition and dependant upon the last operating system installed to handle things. I just hope I will understand BootIT NG enough to do it correctly. I've watched every video and printed out all the documentation but my brain still needs to process all this new stuff. It's always the guy/gal at the keyboard that actually has to use stuff properly. And it's not all easy stuff either. Just trying to get through the Novell startup stuff is making my brain hurt! But I insist that I at least understand the commands, even if I don't remember them all, before jumping in headfirst.

Nice that SUSE by default now automatically installs GRUB to the Linux partition instead of overwriting the boot sector like it used to. One less hurdle.

Oh! So that's what spliff's are. I'm from an older generation and/or geographic location. I never heard that description before.

This post has been edited by Eck: 22 January 2007 - 01:57 PM

[soporific]

DeadDude, on Jan 23 2007, 04:50 AM, said:

couldn't you just add a text file on the desktop detailing which updates aren't needed after this is installed?

I've added some information to the readme.txt file but what I should also do is name the updates so the USER can relax in that the 7 updates that WU reckons are needed are named and shamed beforehand.

Quote

pass that this way, my tumors hurt... ::cough cough::

you don't need a medical reason ... as you well know!! I thought the comments by singer George Michael were good ... he said that if his drug of choice was alcohol he wouldn't be nearly as healthy as he is from being a pot head instead, in terms of how much he's taken over the years. He said if he had, he'd look and sound like Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones ... anyway, don't get me started, especially not about this question of who parents want their kids to have relationships with, ie the government in the form of taxed regulation, or drug dealers and organised crime.... we gotta legalise it obviously ...

[soporific]

More info on that Windows Explorer bug I reported recently --- it seems it was the test system I was using - there was already an earlier version of MDGx's killer WMP replacements and so I uninstalled it, the bug went away, I re-installed the latest WMP pack and no bug. Yay.