[johndoe74]

I've been trying to locate KB934238 ever since it came out for the purpose of integrating it with HFSLIP but I couldn't until now. I just hit a Japanese site which linked me to a patch that appears to be the "XML Paper Specification Shared Components Pack 1.0". I installed KB934238 on my working windows via windowsupdate today and the file hashes match with the ones that I extracted from this patch. there's a couple of minor problems though.

• The downloaded file is called xpsepsc-x86-en-us_f01c40d4ce7a451a51724bb2c44c164d063938e6.exe which, even if I shorten it to xpsepsc-x86-en-us.exe, is not going to conform to HFSLIP standards of WindowsXP-KBxxxxxx-x86-enu.exe (I think). I was instead thinking of renaming it to WindowsXP-KB934238-x86-enu.exe. Any idea how HFSLIP will behave?
  
• The above file (and KB934238 as well) contains three folders inside: i386 and amd64 apart from the regular update folder. Now I haven't come across a patch like this so far so I'm not sure how HFSLIP is going to treat this patch i.e., which folder it will pick the files from (if at all) to integrate with the source. My working hardware right now is AMD64 with 32-bit XPSP2 (if it matters). And no, I'm not even remotely Japanese.

This post has been edited by johndoe74: 27 April 2007 - 11:45 AM

[Tomcat76]

Sorry, but this hotfix is not supported. It's a complete mess and I don't understand how it works. Two main installations should occur but I have no clue as to when the second should be executed. Also, why are seven x86 files included twice (once in the root and once in the i386 folder)? Why is there an amd64 folder containing 3.54MB worth of binaries when this hotfix is for x86? Doesn't make sense...

[johndoe74]

i obviously have no answers to any of those questions except to say it's from MS - what else did you expect

anyways, since it isn't supported by hfslip what i'm gonna do is repack it into an SFX and see if it won't install via either SVCPACK or HFGUIRUNONCE.

Also, i've uploaded the folder on my system that KB934238 was installed from via automatic update on my system just so you can compare the contents with this file. I don't see any major differences. Please see if you can make something of it. Thanks.

This post has been edited by johndoe74: 27 April 2007 - 01:09 PM

[Jazkal]

Anybody have a link to the x64 version of this file?

[johndoe74]

nope

[NtegrA]

FYI:

http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsg...c7e5bad&p=1

[oneless]

johndoe74, on Apr 27 2007, 08:10 PM, said:

... which linked me to a patch that appears to be the "XML Paper Specification Shared Components Pack 1.0"....

i install this file on VMware and i think is the right file.
the printer Microsoft XPS Document Writer was installed too.
for silent i used /q /n /z .

thank you for the link.

[Tomalak]

Jazkal, on May 3 2007, 04:35 PM, said:

Anybody have a link to the x64 version of this file?

Here you go:

http://www.download.windowsupdate.com/msdo...17194a1e384.exe

I'm preparing a post with a full list of links (versions for Windows XP, Windows XP x64, Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2003 x64 plus all available language packs).

Kind regards,
Tomalak

[Tomalak]

As promised here's a full list of all KB934238 related downloads Microsoft currently provides. The English "base pack" always has to be installed, and then if necessary the appropriate language pack on top.

Update for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003

• XPS Shared Components Pack English (United States)
  
• Languagepack Arabic (Saudi Arabia)
  
• Languagepack Czech (Czech Republic)
  
• Languagepack Danish (Denmark)
  
• Languagepack German (Germany)
  
• Languagepack Greek (Greece)
  
• Languagepack Spanish (Spain)
  
• Languagepack Finnish (Finland)
  
• Languagepack French (France)
  
• Languagepack Hebrew (Israel)
  
• Languagepack Hungarian (Hungary)
  
• Languagepack Italian (Italy)
  
• Languagepack Japanese (Japan)
  
• Languagepack Korean (Korea)
  
• Languagepack Norwegian (Norway)
  
• Languagepack Dutch (Netherlands)
  
• Languagepack Polish (Poland)
  
• Languagepack Portuguese (Brazil)
  
• Languagepack Portuguese (Portugal)
  
• Languagepack Russian (Russia)
  
• Languagepack Swedish (Sweden)
  
• Languagepack Turkish (Turkey)
  
• Languagepack Chinese (People's Republic of China)
  
• Languagepack Chinese (Taiwan)

Update for Windows XP x64 Edition and Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition

• XPS Shared Components Pack English (United States)
  
• Languagepack German (Germany)
  
• Languagepack Spanish (Spain)
  
• Languagepack French (France)
  
• Languagepack Italian (Italy)
  
• Languagepack Japanese (Japan)
  
• Languagepack Korean (Korea)
  
• Languagepack Portuguese (Brazil)
  
• Languagepack Russian (Russia)
  
• Languagepack Chinese (People's Republic of China)
  
• Languagepack Chinese (Taiwan)

Kind regards,
Tomalak

[Edit 2007/06/19: duplicate links consolidated]

This post has been edited by Tomalak: 19 June 2007 - 03:01 PM

[Tomalak]

Tomcat76, on Apr 27 2007, 08:47 PM, said:

Sorry, but this hotfix is not supported. It's a complete mess and I don't understand how it works. Two main installations should occur but I have no clue as to when the second should be executed. Also, why are seven x86 files included twice (once in the root and once in the i386 folder)? Why is there an amd64 folder containing 3.54MB worth of binaries when this hotfix is for x86? Doesn't make sense...

Hello Tomcat76,

can we do something to help you analyze this strange update? Just in case you have not enough work and want to provide new test versions...
My findings (for the English update, Windows XP version): I removed the "amd64" directory as I have an i386 processor. All 7 files in the "i386" directory are binary identical to those one directory level up. So I removed this directory too and changed the references in 'msxpsdrv.inf' to use the files in the root directory (two lines, replacing "= 2" by "= 1"). After that running 'update.exe' in the "update" directory worked flawlessly, and the KB934238 was installed without problems (i.e. WU and MU didn't report the optional update as still missing).

This way the installation directory looks like all other updates: some files in the root directory, and some elements in the "update" directory. Sorry if this view sounds plain stupid or naive, but I don't have a clue how these MS installers work and what you do within hfslip to process them. I don't even understand your sentence with the "two installations" taking place. Any chance to add support for this update with further help from the community here?

Tackling the language packs later on should not be too difficult (I hope). The German version for example just contains a few replacement files (and an additional .mui file) in the root directory, and an appropriate installer in the "update" directory. No confusing and needless "i386" or "amd64" directories here...

Thanks and keep up your great work!
Tomalak

[johndoe74]

i put the windows xp hotfix in hfsvcpack_sw1 and even though it doesn't get slipstreamed, it gets installed just fine at, i guess, T13

This post has been edited by johndoe74: 17 June 2007 - 09:45 AM

[Tomalak]

johndoe74, on Jun 17 2007, 05:44 PM, said:

i put the windows xp hotfix in hfsvcpack_sw1 and even though it doesn't get slipstreamed, it gets installed just fine at, i guess, T13

Okay, I'll try that for my next install. Any idea on how to force XP to install the updates in a certain order (English 'base' package first, then a language pack)? Thanks!

Tomalak

[Chester]

Can KB934238 be integrated into .NET Framework by using Silent .NET Maker?

[Tomcat76]

Alright. These are clearly updates for .NET 3.0. I will update the SNM script for this when I have the time. It shouldn't be too hard to add support for them.

[Super-Magician]

Tomcat76, on Jun 18 2007, 08:34 PM, said:

Alright. These are clearly updates for .NET 3.0. I will update the SNM script for this when I have the time. It shouldn't be too hard to add support for them.

Speaking of .NET, didn't RyanVM figure out a way to combine all of the versions into a single installer? Tried emailing you about it several months ago but never got a reply.

[Tomalak]

Tomcat76, on Jun 19 2007, 02:34 AM, said:

Alright. These are clearly updates for .NET 3.0. I will update the SNM script for this when I have the time. It shouldn't be too hard to add support for them.

Gentle bump... Do you have a rough estimate on when this update for the SNM script will be available for test?

In the meantime: how to ensure that updates from HFSVCPACK_SW1 are run in a certain order? Does Windows setup execute them in alphabetical order?

Thanks a lot!
Tomalak

[Tomcat76]

SNM has been updated.


@Super-Magician
I got the PM but didn't have the time yet to check it out.

[Chester]

I confirmed KB934238 and language file were able to be integrated.
Thanks!!

[Tomalak]

Tomcat76, on Jun 24 2007, 05:48 PM, said:

SNM has been updated.

Wow, thanks a lot, that was really fast! Just created new installers, testing them really soon.
But there's a little glitch during the execution of the script:

   Processing .NET 1.1 installer...
 Processing NDP1.1sp1-KB867460-x86.exe...
 Processing NDP1.1sp1-KB886903-x86.exe...
 Der Befehl "_" ist entweder falsch geschrieben oder konnte nicht gefunden werden.
 Processing langpack.exe...
 [...]

(it means that the command "_" was either not written correctly or could not been found). The rest however seemed to work smoothly, and all three installers were created.

Thanks again,
Tomalak

[Tomcat76]

Don't worry about that; it's harmless and happens because an empty file is created. I think I worked around the error message in another script but I apparantly forgot to do the same in SNM.