[billygoat]

First, thanks for this effort! An amazing amount of work!

I've finally gotten around to having a try installing the 1.8 package with 1.92 updates. (It took me a long time to realize that the 1.8 exe file was really an unpacker, not the real installer!)

I restored my 98SE system back to just after most hardware drivers were installed, so basically clean. I changed very few of the module options, but will be wanting to get more details on some of the modules at some point. (Still amazed at how much is in here!)

Anyway, on my system the Auto-Patcher fails during the Win98-to-ME module. I get a "Windows could not upgrade the file" message, then a prompt to press any key to continue. Briefly, I see "Error loading User.exe" (and a bit more, I think) before the system shuts down. Looks like System\User.exe is renamed to 'User.w98' and the module doesn't proceed past that point. I haven't found any pertinent log files on that module, but I've left the system partition and the 'autopach' directory alone for now, so let me know if there's something to look for.

Additionally, though you may have already addressed this, I'm not sure if it's recommended to go back and install optional modules later, in no particular order. My next step, of course, will be to install without the Win98-to-ME module.

Thanks again for this very interesting project! I had followed the Unofficial SESP after stumbling on it, and found the Auto-Patcher thread while checking for updates after SP2.1a.

[nathanson1947]

submix8c, on Mar 7 2007, 01:05 PM, said:

Soporific: Good news (I think)

The problem to the "You must have a Mac" when going to WU web site APPEARS to be one of MS's making. MAYBE related to "ending support" and MS MAY be transitioning away from the V4 website, or at least away from many supported fixes. I stumbled across a KB article referencing WSUS services that indicates "dropping" many "fixes" from the search engine/.CAB file (an XML document).

SO...

Using clean install SAME THING! Installed MSInstaller, then installed IE6SP1, then did the following (partial quotes from another source, then modified):

-------------------------------------------
For Windows 98 and Windows Millenium Edition.
Manually install the latest controls:
1) Download the controls from:
http://v4.windowsupd.../ansi/iuctl.cab
Save them to your desktop. Extract the .cab file following the steps below:
*) Go to the desktop and right click the iuctl.cab file.
*) Right-click "Extract to"
*) Point to a known location (like the desktop) and click "OK"
*) Go to the location you selected and right click on the iuctl.inf file.
*) Click "Install." (the two DLL's go to "WINDOWS\SYSTEM")
- OR just copy the two DLL's to folder... (faster) -
2) Download:
http://windowsupdate.../v4/iuident.cab
*) Create "Program Files\WindowsUpdate\V4\temp" folder(s)
*) Copy iuident.cab to BOTH "V4" and "V4\temp" folders
*) Go to "V4" folder and right-click "Extract to"
*) Point to the "V4" folder (i.e. "Here") and click "OK".
3) Try Again!!!
-------------------------------------------

Apparently, there is currently a glitch at WU that refuses you UNLESS you already have these files/folders, because I applied the above procedure to the TEST machine (ALL Autopatch applied, kinda) and it WORKED as WELL .
How long this will work? Dunno...

NOW back to cross-checking the 6 updates WU THINKS(?) I need...

(p.s. Remember, LOCATE.COM is DOS-based and CANNOT find anything OTHER than "8.3" filenames...)

l8tr, dude...

I tried both methods mentioned here, but I still get directed to the "You must have a Mac" page. Oh, well,Viva la Revolucion!

[soporific]

Wow, new people and lots of feedback and info. You people are all great !!

* I will try to add the Windows Update IUIDENT package to save the USER having to do it ... it will probably go into the Critical and recommended system updates module.

* I repeat what worked for me with WU - clean install of Win98se, run the IE6 module from Auto-Patcher, run the newest rootsupd.exe file, go to WU.
- can someone confirm that it DOESN'T work for them doing exactly the above, so we can start to get somewhere with this problem.

* For those trying to get the v1.80 / v1.92 package from Softpedia --- i'm sorry you are having problems, I am nearly finished v1.95 which is going to be another preview release and so i'm going to upload it via emule, bittorrent, & ShareBigFile probably within a few days (get your feedback IN!) --- Bittorrent is probably your best bet so if you aren't familiar with bittorrent, get familiar now!

* Submix8c: you will find that WU reckons you need either 6 or 7 updates that you definitely DON'T NEED - here's the bit of code that i'm putting back into the program that explains all this.

EDIT: re: WU --- you do need to have all the files in the WindowsUpdate folder as described in a post above --- i am preparing a fix for you to download that will do this automatically

 
:OpenWU
CLS
echo.
echo. A short note about Auto-Patcher and Windows Update:
echo.
echo. After you fully patch your computer using this program,
echo.  when you visit Windows Update it will report you have
echo. either 6 or 7 missing updates (see the list below).
echo.
echo. These are all false alarms: in all these cases, all that is missing
echo.  is the hotfix information that was deleted because the hotfix is now
echo.  superceeded by other updates released since Microsoft stopping counting.
echo.
echo. There is no harm whatsoever in installing these updates as nothing
echo.  of value is installed. You just waste a little bit of bandwidth!
echo.
echo. The list is:
echo.  1) Security Update for Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (kb916281)
echo.  2) Security Update for Windows 98 (kb891711)
echo.  3) Windows Share Level Password Update
echo.  4) Q323172: Security Update (Windows 98)
echo.  5) Security Update, May 19, 2000
echo.  6) Security Update, March 17, 2000
echo. 
echo. Press any key to open Windows Update
PAUSE >nul
echo.
echo. Opening Windows Update...
echo.
START IEXPLORE.exe [url="http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com"]http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com[/url]
echo.
echo. When you have finished, press any key to return to the main menu...
PAUSE >nul
goto RETMENU
 

This post has been edited by soporific: 07 March 2007 - 09:48 PM

[submix8c]

Soporific, et al:

DID have a problem with WU (using the Start Menu/Windows Update), and went to folder WINDOWS, created a shortcut to WUPDMGR.EXE and placed it on the Desktop. The difference in the two shortcuts is the "generated" one has "Start In C:\WINDOWS". THAT one worked (beats me )!

As for the WU thinks I need updates, NO PROBLEM!; tracked them all down and the SOLUTION is to install certain things (including two you do NOT have) before OTHER certain things JUST SO THE REGISTRY GETS UPDATED! Have not actually tested this yet (getting tired myself...) but will and get back to you. **** MS !
There a a couple more ("Recommended") that are related to others already installed that will never appear again that I also have. Links for all 6 and several extra have been saved (direct downloads). Still testing... (ONE UnOfficial did NOT install due to Offical NOT being installed).

BUT, so far, so good.

BTW, have you thought of placing the package onto a CD and running it from THERE? Would certainly save a LOT of disk space! (check out FINDCD.EXE; on the WIN98 CD Boot Image). Find the CD drive letter, use THAT as the path to the package, then write logs, etc., to the HDD. Hmmmm???

l8tr, dude: keep it up and you'll have one heckuva package!

(oops... **** was NOT that bad, but will refrain from now on...)

This post has been edited by submix8c: 08 March 2007 - 09:07 PM

[soporific]

fruityloops, on Mar 8 2007, 05:12 AM, said:

hey guys,i wanted to download the 234 MB file of Auto-patcher for Windows 98SE 1.92 Update / 1.80 Preview, but the download is not stable .After sometime the SOFTPEDIA server doesn't resume my download and dont even support it.Sincew i have 64 Kbps connection ,my downloading is slow so i want resume supported server link.So please i request u guys that if anyone having the complete file then please upload it on any free file-sharing and hosting site .

Sorry, i missed this post ... um, I have had problems with free hosting ever since I started releasing to the public --- your best bet is to wait for v1.95 which is due out very soon, and there will be lots of download options including emule and bittorrent.

billygoat, on Mar 8 2007, 07:55 AM, said:

Anyway, on my system the Auto-Patcher fails during the Win98-to-ME module. I get a "Windows could not upgrade the file" message, then a prompt to press any key to continue. Briefly, I see "Error loading User.exe" (and a bit more, I think) before the system shuts down. Looks like System\User.exe is renamed to 'User.w98' and the module doesn't proceed past that point. I haven't found any pertinent log files on that module, but I've left the system partition and the 'autopach' directory alone for now, so let me know if there's something to look for.

Just out of interest, what unofficial update packs had you already installed before trying to run the Win98 to Me module as you described above? My guess you had at least one ...

submix8c, on Mar 9 2007, 02:00 PM, said:

Soporific, et al:

BTW, have you thought of placing the package onto a CD and running it from THERE? Would certainly save a LOT of disk space! (check out FINDCD.EXE; on the WIN98 CD Boot Image). Find the CD drive letter, use THAT as the path to the package, then write logs, etc., to the HDD. Hmmmm???

Thanks for all your comments, lots of good info. Re: running from CD: was it you that saw from my code I had already planned to have the option of using from a CD? Well, that was at the very very start before the program started to use so many marker files (check out the markers folder just before the program ends, you'll see what i mean. I know this could easily be got around --- but I was following how the guys who do the AutoPatchers for WinXP et al, and they aren't afraid to whack 350mb on your computer to store all the files, so I suppose neither am i.

If there was a very good reason to make the change, i might do it, but unless there are some who live with less than 500 mb of free space, most should be fine.

By the way, I have made the automatic Windows Update fix like i promised: go here to get: http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=94225

This post has been edited by soporific: 08 March 2007 - 09:34 PM

[soporific]

billygoat, on Mar 8 2007, 07:55 AM, said:

Anyway, on my system the Auto-Patcher fails during the Win98-to-ME module. I get a "Windows could not upgrade the file" message, then a prompt to press any key to continue. Briefly, I see "Error loading User.exe" (and a bit more, I think) before the system shuts down. Looks like System\User.exe is renamed to 'User.w98' and the module doesn't proceed past that point. I haven't found any pertinent log files on that module, but I've left the system partition and the 'autopach' directory alone for now, so let me know if there's something to look for.

I'm a bit concerned that someone is experiencing a problem with Win98 to Me module so its at the top of the priority list for things to do before next release ... just letting you know and if you can provide as much information about the context of the error that would be great. Things like security apps protecting files inside certain folders and not allowing changes, or any customizations you have made to your OS, or what exactly happened when the error occurred (more details) ... thanks for all comments and feedback you're all helping to keep Windows 98 alive.

[soporific]

Drugwash, on Feb 2 2007, 10:40 PM, said:

I'm thinking there may be - rare or not - reasons for someone not to install a certain version of an update, while he already has one installed that would serve the purpose and not interfere with the other updates.

... just saying "older version found" instead of "not installed" would be enough in such cases. Or just the version of the checked file, as in the above DS Client case, so the user would have a clue on what he got and what he should do further.

The reason i dug this post out of the history was that it also refers to the problem of you finding that Directory Services is missing ... i totally agree with you that in an ideal world it would be great for the report function to give more useful information other than listing the title of an update - ie separate the updates into those that are totally missing and those that are newer versions of what you already have. Hence you are getting the report saying you are missing an update when that's not technically true. Its not missing, its just old. You see, at the moment its a binary choice - there or not - and that's very easy to code for. If someone was to suggest the entire method of how we could insert some code into what we have right now, i would be interested but its just not high up enough on the priority list to implement without it.

The one thing i am doing is constantly improving the title names for the updates. eg I've changed the title for Directory Services (ie q323455) to Directory Services Client Update (NEGOTIAT.DLL 5.0.2195.4784) which does two things: it shows the user what they can search and check for to see if they have the latest update, and it shows what the code is checking for to tell if the update is needed. There a few cases where i've added this info to the title - bugger if i know which ones but i did, honest.

Anyway, the code is looking for version of NEGOTIAT.DLL (5.0.2195.4784) for Directory Services and i think we've already confirmed you have an older version but i could be wrong.

Please feel free to criticise the above mercilessly!!

[billygoat]

soporific, on Mar 8 2007, 10:29 PM, said:

Just out of interest, what unofficial update packs had you already installed before trying to run the Win98 to Me module as you described above? My guess you had at least one ...

I had restored C: back to a point where only hardware drivers had been installed, just prior to my first installation of the SESP2. (In case I'm an id***, I have to say that I have a second primary DOS partition which I switch to 'Active' and boot into, in order to 'backup' by copying my 'real' system partition. AFAICS this doesn't cause problems, but it's unusual, so I'd better mention it.)

(Hmmm.. the system seems very sensitive - should I say 'fool' instead? Surprising...)

soporific, on Mar 9 2007, 01:52 AM, said:

I'm a bit concerned that someone is experiencing a problem with Win98 to Me module so its at the top of the priority list for things to do before next release ... just letting you know and if you can provide as much information about the context of the error that would be great. Things like security apps protecting files inside certain folders and not allowing changes, or any customizations you have made to your OS, or what exactly happened when the error occurred (more details) ...

Well, it does remind me of the grief I had trying to install DirectX 9.0c in earlier installations. Protection bits set by default (and re-set on every boot IIRC!) caused the MS installer to fail without any details. I only found the answer from other users.

There is nothing installed other than hardware drivers at this point. I'm planning to restore to that state again and look at User.exe properties, then either install *only* the Win98-to-ME module or else install Auto-Patcher defaults *without* the Win98-to-ME module. Then I could try installing Win98-to-ME on its own and see if that works, then go back and try it again with Auto-Patcher. But if you think my unorthodox backup routine is questionable, it doesn't give you any reliable info.

Also, I'm wondering still about effects of omitting some updates and opting to re-run Auto-Patcher to pick them up later, if the order makes a difference or if that's fairly bullet-proof in the checking routines. There's a lot of stuff I'm not aware of or sure if I want/need - MSDA/JetEngine, .Net Framework, etc. - and I'd be inclined to only install the critical updates first but wanted to pretty much follow the Auto-Patcher defaults the first time. (But I didn't strictly...)

I'm guessing you would have mentioned any logs or markers to look at, so I'll probably not save anything from this first try. Any other ideas on best procedure (no w98-ME, w98-ME first, etc.) would be welcome, but I may have a go before you're on again.

FWIW, the error Windows spits out seems broken, too: "Windows could not upgrade the file [blank, several lines] from [blank, more lines] : "

I was suprised that a missing User.exe causes the system to shut down - I still haven't managed to catch the last bit of the error message! Thank goodness for the alternate Pri DOS partition.

[soporific]

billygoat, on Mar 10 2007, 01:45 AM, said:

I had restored C: back to a point where only hardware drivers had been installed, just prior to my first installation of the SESP2. (In case I'm an id***, I have to say that I have a second primary DOS partition which I switch to 'Active' and boot into, in order to 'backup' by copying my 'real' system partition. AFAICS this doesn't cause problems, but it's unusual, so I'd better mention it.)

Well, that is unusual, but it shouldn't be anything different --- unless you AREN'T hiding the backup primary partition from Windows (does it show up as a drive letter?) ... You aren't supposed to be able to have 2 able to be seen by Windows but i think it's actually possible. If you do, well this may stuff up the WININT.INI method that i use to install the Win98 to Me update. But it shouldn't really. But i can't be sure ...

billygoat, on Mar 10 2007, 01:45 AM, said:

Also, I'm wondering still about effects of omitting some updates and opting to re-run Auto-Patcher to pick them up later, if the order makes a difference or if that's fairly bullet-proof in the checking routines. There's a lot of stuff I'm not aware of or sure if I want/need - MSDA/JetEngine, .Net Framework, etc. - and I'd be inclined to only install the critical updates first but wanted to pretty much follow the Auto-Patcher defaults the first time. (But I didn't strictly...)

No, there shouldn't be ANY restriction in the order you install the modules and updates. Of course there are barriers i've put in place that will stop errors - eg any MSI installer packs need "Windows Installer v2" installed first ... until you install it, you get a message saying an update can't be installed because you don't have X -- but you can do them in whatever order you think you need to. In those cases, you may need to keep running Auto-Patcher (ie installing single items) until you've unlocked all the barriers. Another example is DirectX 9.0c (DX) --- if you run the report for missing updates, an update for DX won't appear until you have installed DX first.

But don't forget, this project was made for the sole purpose of allowing a COMPUTER PROGRAM to do all the work for you. Why waste time? Just whack the installer on a CD, when you re-install your OS, after its done installing - whack in the CD, install AP, and set it to auto-patch your system. I also had in mind that your OS could be in ANY state prior to using AP - you might have 2 updates installed, you might have only 2 missing - it shouldn't matter. This project doesn't install anything unless the program THINKS you NEED it. NO OTHER unofficial service pack, or update pack does this. You only have to worry about what you already have installed for OTHER projects, not THIS one! YAY!!

I think its a good idea to try the Win98 to ME update on its own. Tell me how you go ...

[Molecule]

Hi soporific!

I've been lurking for a while, in great anticipation of your wonderful project, and if I might I wanted to throw in a small prayer. Admittedly this might be "on a wing" too far out there -- maybe it should really be in another thread -- but if you could integrate this idea as an option of your autopatcher, that would be great.

I'd like to use a 98se Autopatcher-Kiosk edition for connection to the internet (56k), and use a w2k system for personal work -- under the totally paranoid theory that even if a hacker "has" my w98e system (it is my absolute assumption that any computer with a wire going out the back is controlled by a foreign power), the 98 kernel can't detect or molest files on a nt-partition. I would load the OS and all 98se programs on a 8-12 gig VFAT C-drive, and I keep all important data on other drives.

Since I'm not a programmer, so I can only tell you what would make me "feel safe," which I understand is a kind of haha, but nonetheless, I hope it can't hurt to ask --

I would love to have the option to setup 98se as a Kiosk operating system -- creating a "98seR" R for Restored.

After setting up the system with autopatcher, I'd love to have an easy way to keep it that way -- that is add an autopatcher restore function, as a routine and daily part of 98se-Autopatcher, Kiosk edition.

On shutdown, I'd be given over to a simple batch file which gives me the option on a daily basis to Restore the system to pristine condition (or adopt new changes, such as after a program install).

If the default Restore (or kiosk option) is selected, the system reboots down to DOS, runs a batch which lfn-copies the system directories from a "safe" area onto C-drive, and turns off the computer. Each time I boot up, I'm restored to autopatcher pristine. If the update option is selected, the system directories are lfn-copied over to the operating system "safe-area" and the system shuts down, so that the next time I boot up, I will see the updated system. (After the kiosk has been setup, I don't want to save *any changes to the registry ... later it might be possible to modify that, for certain keys for known programs, but that would have to be done on a personal basis for each user -- so it's setting up the core part of a 98se-Kiosk edition which stumps me.)

Any chances for an Autopatcher-Kiosk edition?

Regards, and thanks for your help!

[billygoat]

soporific, on Mar 9 2007, 10:41 AM, said:

Well, that is unusual, but it shouldn't be anything different --- unless you AREN'T hiding the backup primary partition from Windows (does it show up as a drive letter?)

Hmmm... more on this later, but currently the partition is *not* hidden. I can't remember how I set this up, seemed to be a bit of a trick, IIRC. I have a vague memory of trying to hide the alt PriDOS and messing things up - couldn't get it back. (It shows up as one of the last drive letters, before or after a Secondary Master physical drive I try to hide in BIOS, but which Windows finds after boot anyway.)

soporific, on Mar 9 2007, 10:41 AM, said:

No, there shouldn't be ANY restriction in the order you install the modules and updates. Of course there are barriers i've put in place that will stop errors...

Great! That's what I thought.

soporific, on Mar 9 2007, 10:41 AM, said:

But don't forget, this project was made for the sole purpose of allowing a COMPUTER PROGRAM to do all the work for you. Why waste time?

Yes, however once into the Auto-Patcher I suddenly realize there are several modules I know nothing about, and want to go ahead with the obvious ones. Which reminds me - I know there's a lot of info about what Auto-Patcher does, and I've skimmed it, but some people (like me) could use a quick summary of some of the modules. I don't own XP, so I have only the vaguest idea of some of the post-98SE features. I'm sure I'll find what I need to know eventually, though, so don't waste any effort - just if it's already in front of me but I can't find it.

soporific, on Mar 9 2007, 10:41 AM, said:

I think its a good idea to try the Win98 to ME update on its own. Tell me how you go ...

Good, thanks. I'll give it a shot.

[soporific]

Molecule, on Mar 10 2007, 03:00 AM, said:

Any chances for an Autopatcher-Kiosk edition?

The easiest way to achieve this is to automate a ghost image restore. There's no 'easy' way for me to do what you ask unless major work is involved, but it wouldn't be the best option anyway. From what I understand, you want to go back to 'pristine' each time if you want, Ghosting is the way to go --- obviously this doesn't give u the option of gradually accepting updates, but even that can be overcome by gradually building up a stable series of images, each one with additions to the program list, etc.

Unfortunately for you, AutoPatcher isn't also mascarading as AutoGhostImager !!

... but it was a nice idea though!

Anyway, v1.95 will make you happy enough i think. I just finished the essential code for the debug function and i'll be switiching it on more often than not, its very useful now (i hated it before and never used it unless it was a drastic need)... actually, why don't i give you guys a little sample ... i'm right in the middle of tweaking the text, so its not the finished product, but you'll get the idea...

 
-----------------
 Debug log for Auto-Patcher v1.95 Preview Release 2
 Saturday, 10 March 2007, 05:04:30
-----------------
 --- variables ---
 COMSPEC=C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND.COM
 LOCATE=C:\AUTOPACH
 windrive=C:
 windodir=WINDOWS
 
 Program modes:
 Force re-installation mode is OFF
 Undo tweaks mode is OFF
 Make report mode is OFF
 
 Now running code inside C:\AUTOPACH\CODE\RUN-MOD.BAT
 
 variables:
 LOCATE is C:\AUTOPACH
 1st switch is Fullup
 2nd switch is C:
 3rd switch is WINDOWS
 4th switch is "C:\AUTOPACH"
 5th switch is 
 6th switch is 
 7th switch is 
 
 Now running code inside "C:\AUTOPACH\code\modules\Fullup.bat"
 -- variables --
 TRACK=Inst07
 NEXT1=Inst08
 FILES=DirectX
 
**** Now starting to run code in the DirectX 9 module
 
 Now running code inside "C:\AUTOPACH\code\MainCode.bat"
--- variables ---
 TRACK="DirectX9"
 TITLE="DirectX 9.0c (December 2006)"
 PARTH="Files\DirectX"
 FILES="DXSETUP.bat"
 FILE2=""
 CHECK="C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\d3dx9_32.dll"
 CHEC2="9.16.843.0"
 CHEC3=""
 CHEC4=""
 USECH="FILC"
 USEDP="none"
 GONUM="1EXE"
 ABOOT="G"
 ARGUS=""C:\AUTOPACH\files\DirectX""
 SKIP!=""
--- label checkpoints ---
 DIALOG1  -- start to process the update
 DIALOG2  -- the update has no confirmation marker set yet
 DIALOG3  -- the update looks like it needs to be installed
 DIALOG4  -- the update has been cleared to be installed
 OKayEnd  -- the update has finished installing
 ExitMe   -- finished processing the update
 REGBOOT  -- the computer is set to reboot and restart the current module
 
 Now running code inside "C:\AUTOPACH\code\Run-Mod.bat"
 
 variables:
 LOCATE is C:\AUTOPACH
 1st switch is fullup
 2nd switch is C:
 3rd switch is WINDOWS
 4th switch is "C:\AUTOPACH"
 5th switch is 
 6th switch is 
 7th switch is 
 
 Now running code inside "C:\AUTOPACH\code\modules\fullup.bat"
 -- variables --
 TRACK=Inst07
 NEXT1=Inst08
 FILES=DirectX
 
**** Now starting to run code in the DirectX 9 module
 
 Now running code inside "C:\AUTOPACH\code\MainCode.bat"
--- variables ---
 TRACK="DirectX9"
 TITLE="DirectX 9.0c (December 2006)"
 PARTH="Files\DirectX"
 FILES="DXSETUP.bat"
 FILE2=""
 CHECK="C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\d3dx9_32.dll"
 CHEC2="9.16.843.0"
 CHEC3=""
 CHEC4=""
 USECH="FILC"
 USEDP="none"
 GONUM="1EXE"
 ABOOT="G"
 ARGUS=""C:\AUTOPACH\files\DirectX""
 SKIP!=""
--- label checkpoints ---
 DIALOG1  -- start to process the update
 DIALOG2  -- the update has no confirmation marker set yet
 GoFouee  -- the Update was found
 ExitMe   -- finished processing the update
 
 Now running code inside "C:\AUTOPACH\code\MainCode.bat"
--- variables ---
 TRACK="kb904706"
 TITLE="Hotfix for Vulnerability in DirectShow"
 PARTH="Files\Hotfixes"
 FILES="kb904706.exe"
 FILE2=""
 CHECK="C:\WINDOWS\system\quartz.dll"
 CHEC2="6.5.1.907"
 CHEC3=""
 CHEC4=""
 USECH="FILC"
 USEDP="DX90c"
 GONUM="1EXE"
 ABOOT="G"
 ARGUS="/Q:A /R:N"
 SKIP!=""
--- label checkpoints ---
 DIALOG1  -- start to process the update
 DIALOG2  -- the update has no confirmation marker set yet
 DIALOG3  -- the update looks like it needs to be installed
 DIALOG4  -- the update has been cleared to be installed
 OKayEnd  -- the update has finished installing
 ExitMe   -- finished processing the update
 HF_END   -- the DirectX 9 module has completed
 NoBoot   -- the computer doesn't need to reboot, so start the next module
 
 Now running code inside C:\AUTOPACH\CODE\RUN-MOD.BAT
 
 variables:
 LOCATE is C:\AUTOPACH
 1st switch is fullup
 2nd switch is C:
 3rd switch is WINDOWS
 4th switch is "C:\AUTOPACH"
 5th switch is 
 6th switch is 
 7th switch is 
 
 ++ The modules have all finished ++
 
 now dumping the contents of the marker folder into this debug file
StartTim.TRA
@_Inst01.tra
@_Inst02.tra
@_Inst03.tra
@_Inst04.tra
@_Inst05.tra
@_Inst06.tra
@_NumIns.TRA
@_Inst08.tra
@_Inst09.tra
@_Inst10.tra
@_Inst11.tra
@_Inst12.tra
@_Inst13.tra
@_Inst14.tra
@_Inst15.tra
@_Inst16.tra
@_OP0201.skp
@_OP0202.skp
@_OP0203.skp
@_OP0204.skp
@_OP0205.skp
@_OP0601.skp
@_OP0602.skp
@_OP0603.skp
@_OP0604.skp
@_OP0901.skp
@_OP0902.skp
@_OP0903.skp
@_OP0904.skp
@_OP0905.skp
@_OP1401.skp
@_OP1402.skp
@_OP1403.skp
@_OP1404.skp
@_OP1405.skp
@_OP1406.skp
@_OP1407.skp
@_OP1408.skp
@_OP1409.skp
@_OP1501.skp
@_OP1502.skp
@_OP1503.skp
@_OP1504.skp
@_OP1505.skp
@_OP1506.skp
@_OP1507.skp
@_OP1601.skp
@_NumIns.REP
go_debug.txt
DirectX9.txt
mybat.reg
DirectX9.fou
kb904706.txt
@_GoBoot.tra
@_Inst07.tra
 
 That's it! No more debug info for you, my friend... see ya later!
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

ps yes, the time is right, it is 5:04am and i'm still up from the night before coding away ...

This post has been edited by soporific: 09 March 2007 - 12:10 PM

[Drugwash]

soporific said:

Anyway, the code is looking for version of NEGOTIAT.DLL (5.0.2195.4784) for Directory Services and i think we've already confirmed you have an older version but i could be wrong.

You are right, my version is 5.00.2195.1. If you ever manage to add third state (older/newer) to this binary detection, it would be wonderful - much less (if any) confusion.
Apologies for not being of any help lately; luckily, now there's someone really skilled that is doing a good job.

[billygoat]

I started again, selecting only the W98-to-ME module this time. Same result. The original files Explorer.exe User32.dll and User.exe are all renamed with a '.w98' extension. Not sure if the registry information gets updated - couldn't see anything changed in RegEdit even after doing it by hand. (I also then copied the three files from the Win98-2-ME folder. There was no obvious reason the files could not be copied by the script.)

Somehow, I didn't find the I_Result.Log when I first ran this, but anyway it ends like this after the failure:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
00:58:00 ++ the Win98-to-Me module was started
--------------------------------------------------------------------
00:58:04 -- was installed: Win982Me - The core of Win98-to-Me by MDGx
00:58:08 .. the computer was set to reboot.

So anyway, then I ran Auto-Patcher pretty much with defaults, with Win98-to-ME on 'Install' to check. It seemed happy, and the other updates seemed to install fine. Generated a report afterward which seems as expected.

I think another user may have also noticed this, but I have a long delay after login after booting - about 10 seconds.

I'd be happy to help test the Win98-to-ME issues on this system, but for now it looks like it's solved for me. I still want to try to learn more about some of the updates and options, and I'm curious about some of your reasons for the default install/bypass setup.

[soporific]

billygoat, on Mar 10 2007, 03:11 PM, said:

I think another user may have also noticed this, but I have a long delay after login after booting - about 10 seconds.

Yeah, i guess this is a result of updating ... i have no idea what Microsoft is doing with their latest stuff, they've added some detection routines when starting up Windows to see what you've got before loading the desktop, i dunno. But i would expect a different feel to how the computer boots up. For example, one of the most common tools i use is "Install Watch" which tells me exactly what got installed so i can see how to code for it. When i run it on a newly re-installed Win98se OS, the snapshot hardly takes anytime at all to create --- there's hardly any files on your machine, and not many registry entries to sort through. If i do the same after a full auto-patch, it takes 5 to 10 times longer to create the snapshot, especially if you also have .Netframework installed. If you had to choose between a machine that booted faster, or one that had everything you needed for computing in 2007, which would you choose?

This post has been edited by soporific: 09 March 2007 - 10:53 PM

[billygoat]

soporific, on Mar 9 2007, 11:49 PM, said:

Yeah, i guess this is a result of updating ... i have no idea what Microsoft is doing with their latest stuff, they've added some detection routines when starting up Windows to see what you've got before loading the desktop, i dunno. [...] If you had to choose between a machine that booted faster, or one that had everything you needed for computing in 2007, which would you choose?

Quite right. I still can't get over how many updates are packed into this thing! As you say, it may be cumulative, so no wonder.

I once spent many weeks trying to assimilate the best advice on Win95 updates from places like Walbeehm's System Updates page, and it was only about a tenth of what is involved here. Thanks again for all your efforts.

[soporific]

latest news: i was going thru my final tests of the file i was going to upload as v1.95 ... and discovered a few things ...

* one of them is that to regularly access Windows Update, i have to use the WU_fix i made, and also make use of both options ... i'd prefer to fix it and make it STAY fixed ... we need to do more work it seems, thanks a bunch microsoft...

* the good news is i've finally cracked the false Windows Updates problem ... the answer was inside the hotfixes all along ... i've still yet to tame the cumulative updates but that's 5 red herrings solved, just 2 to go ... so the release will be delayed for a bit ...

[MDGx]

soporific, on Mar 13 2007, 04:17 AM, said:

* the good news is i've finally cracked the false Windows Updates problem ... the answer was inside the hotfixes all along ...

Can you post more details about what's wrong with WU access, and eventually how you fixed it [REG entries, DLLs, roots update problems etc]?

I've also noticed that WU/WUC can't be accessed unless one reinstalls the newest roots update over and over whenever WU/WUC sites don't work???

Thanks.

[billygoat]

A quick note about my earlier report on the Win98-2-ME module: I mumbled something about not seeing changes in the registry - didn't realize those Keys are *deleted* so never mind. Also, I thought my failure to remove my SCSI Zip drive from the system might have caused the trouble, but another try without it produced the same failure. Oh well.

Onward... I'm wondering if there's anything alarming about the message "Locate error - user variable not found" during the installation of q301540 - 'Unofficial fix for bug in Installable File System Manager' - in the Critical System Hotfixes Pack.

I've run Auto-Patcher a number of times and wanted to give some further feedback per your request. In general, I think the level of information during the Auto-Patcher execution is about right, but the log could alternatively be more informative if there's more info to be provided. I still would like to find some citation for some of the unofficial fixes - some of the descriptions are pretty vague. The option 'Tweaks for Fast Computers' leaves me wondering what is considered 'fast', though I particularly doubt my 933 MHz PIII is one. ;-) At least those tweaks can be investigated, but I don't see any place a user can evaluate benefits or advisability. Also I'm curious about the 48BitLBA patch as this has been a thorny problem for 98, and a fix might need some thorough testing to be safe. (With another solution I've tried, the drive still must have partitions smaller than 137GB.)

So, regarding the official patches, I'm just slightly concerned about the advisability of installing everything regardless of symptoms or relevant hardware, but I'm only an obsessive user, no real understanding of this stuff. The update for LS120 drives, for instance. MS says on a lot of these updates not to install unless the system exhibits the particular problem mentioned, but maybe that's just boilerplate language. I don't have an LS120 drive, for this example.

Similarly, I wonder about q323455 - 'Directory Services Client Update for Windows 98' - in the Critical System Hotfixes Pack. *That's* the update which seems to be the reason for the ten-second delay after login, and the information page lists a lot of symptoms cured by various components, but I don't see any pertinent to me.

Anyway, I'm just asking. I know you primarily intend this as a click-and-forget installer, but even for someone who wants to understand everything that's going on, this is a really nice package to have it all in one place. (I finally decided I wanted to defer some of this, like the WMP stuff, and just have the 'critical' stuff nailed down, hence my interest in installing some modules later.) If appropriate (I don't know) it might be nice to have a few more toggle options for some of the modules (though it's not hard to skip certain updates by editing the .bat files.)

Thanks again for all your work. Maybe the documentation I'm hoping for is asking too much, but perhaps other users can chime in with comments for a FAQ.

[soporific]

MDGx, on Mar 14 2007, 05:22 AM, said:

Can you post more details about what's wrong with WU access, and eventually how you fixed it [REG entries, DLLs, roots update problems etc]?

I've also noticed that WU/WUC can't be accessed unless one reinstalls the newest roots update over and over whenever WU/WUC sites don't work???

the bit about solving the false alarms refers to the 7 updates that WU reckons you haven't got installed after fully auto-patching. The list is now only 2: the kb891711 update (which i tell people that the unoffical update is better), and also the last official cumulative update for IE6 (kb916281), which is just not going to play well, ever it seems.
Regarding the Windows Update problem, that discussion is better had in the proper thread (there's a few, i'm referring to the one i started). I'll post more info there.

billygoat, on Mar 14 2007, 05:59 AM, said:

A quick note about my earlier report on the Win98-2-ME module: I mumbled something about not seeing changes in the registry - didn't realize those Keys are *deleted* so never mind. Also, I thought my failure to remove my SCSI Zip drive from the system might have caused the trouble, but another try without it produced the same failure. Oh well.

type this at the command line for me can you:

ECHO Y> "%windir%\wininit.ini"

and tell me if you get any error messages ...

Quote

Onward... I'm wondering if there's anything alarming about the message "Locate error - user variable not found" during the installation of q301540 - 'Unofficial fix for bug in Installable File System Manager' - in the Critical System Hotfixes Pack.

That's a known bug related to the fact that one of my variables is %LOCATE% which clashes with the LOCATE.COM utility which clears a variable called LOCATE at some stage. This was recently discovered by Submix8c and is now fixed in the next version.

Quote

I've run Auto-Patcher a number of times and wanted to give some further feedback per your request. In general, I think the level of information during the Auto-Patcher execution is about right, but the log could alternatively be more informative if there's more info to be provided.

This is where the debug mode comes in. Maybe I should change the name from Debug mode, to Verbose mode. Actually, i will. i've posted a version of the log that is produced. Please comment about whether that has enough info!

Quote

I still would like to find some citation for some of the unofficial fixes - some of the descriptions are pretty vague. The option 'Tweaks for Fast Computers' leaves me wondering what is considered 'fast', though I particularly doubt my 933 MHz PIII is one.

This is good, you are picking me up on everything that i've improved for the next version. There is no more "Tweaks for Fast Computers" - i have included a version of AutoSYSTEMini instead that tells you EVERYTHING about the settings you can configure. Talk about overkill. Have you checked out AutoSYSTEMini? its up to v0.54!!

Quote

Also I'm curious about the 48BitLBA patch as this has been a thorny problem for 98, and a fix might need some thorough testing to be safe. (With another solution I've tried, the drive still must have partitions smaller than 137GB.)

Most of these unofficial updates have threads that contain all the discussion about testing, bugs, etc. 48BitLBA has been around for a while and is considered pretty stable these days. The thread can be found here: http://www.msfn.org/...showtopic=78592

Quote

... The update for LS120 drives, for instance. MS says on a lot of these updates not to install unless the system exhibits the particular problem mentioned, but maybe that's just boilerplate language. I don't have an LS120 drive, for this example.

MS says that for EVERY update! We live in a world where a company like MS provides information so they don't get sued, as opposed to providing information that is precise and correct. Makes me rather angry and uptight is what it does ... anyway, my philosophy is that an update becomes OPTIONAL if it is possible that installing it could cause problems.

Quote

Similarly, I wonder about q323455 - 'Directory Services Client Update for Windows 98' - in the Critical System Hotfixes Pack. *That's* the update which seems to be the reason for the ten-second delay after login, and the information page lists a lot of symptoms cured by various components, but I don't see any pertinent to me.

Yeah, this one has been known to cause funny things to happen. I hadn't noticed that this is the cause of the 10 second delay --- maybe its a good reason to turn it into an optional install so you can by-pass it. Don't forget, this program is SO easy to edit for your own purposes. If you don't want anything in any modules, you can just cut it out ... (i can provide more info about how to do this if you need) -- the installs aren't linked together so you won't break anything by taking the odd hotfix out. You can definitely take out q323455.

Quote

Thanks again for all your work. Maybe the documentation I'm hoping for is asking too much, but perhaps other users can chime in with comments for a FAQ.

I'm always adding to the information, but i've been staring at this project for so long now that its hard for me to get a fresh perspective -- i will eventually get around to updating the list of Auto-Patcher contents, but apart from that, what more could we do? Maybe point people to the complete updates list that i maintain --- that one page has all the download links and info links for all the updates currently available. I should add a link to the main page ... good idea 99.

This post has been edited by soporific: 13 March 2007 - 01:45 PM