SP3 and IE7

Questions about Update Pack making? Ask here.
jamesdean
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 2:40 am

SP3 and IE7

Post by jamesdean » Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:08 pm

Just to be clear: I have to integrate IE7 first then SP3 correct?

Also should I just integrate the plain IE7 installer without hotfixes?

User avatar
MrNxDmX
Moderator
Posts: 3112
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 7:33 am

Post by MrNxDmX » Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:10 pm

No. First sp3 then ie7. You'll need the hotfixes too.

User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Post by Outbreaker » Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:44 pm

MMM But SP3 has IE7 Hotfixes included ore not ?

jamesdean
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 2:40 am

Post by jamesdean » Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:01 pm

Ive read some people can't install IE7 after SP3. Is that false?

And in this thread, some people say IE7 first then SP3.

User avatar
crashfly
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:39 pm
Location: Arkansas, USA

Post by crashfly » Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:06 pm

Outbreaker wrote:MMM But SP3 has IE7 Hotfixes included ore not ?
Hotfixes are not included for IE7 because IE7 is not included with SP3.

Those hotfixes not "directly" tied to IE7 will probably be included, but otherwise IE7 still has to be updated.
A mind is like a parachute, it only functions when it is open.
--Anonymous

How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Post by Outbreaker » Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:03 pm

Strange i have now installed my SP3 CD white out Addons. And after the Windows Installation i have installed IE7 & WMP11 white out Updates and if i go to Windows Update Center and check for updates then i see only one Security Update for WMP (KB941569). o_O

User avatar
MrNxDmX
Moderator
Posts: 3112
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 7:33 am

Post by MrNxDmX » Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:59 pm

Let me grab my copy of sp3. Then i'll be checking my ie7 addons with sp3. :)
BTW, i agree with crashfly.

User avatar
crashfly
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:39 pm
Location: Arkansas, USA

Post by crashfly » Wed Apr 23, 2008 12:03 am

I have a similar situation Outbreaker. I have used one of the IE7 addons and then integrate fixes at RunOnceEx. When checking the update site, only the KB941569 fix is listed.

Therefore I have downloaded that fix and will integrate it in and see if that shows up again. Seems to be smaller and stable. I like that. :)
A mind is like a parachute, it only functions when it is open.
--Anonymous

How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

ChiefZeke
Posts: 767
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:33 pm
Location: Victorville, California

Post by ChiefZeke » Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:06 am

My memory says there was a mention in the SP3 tech net forum that SP3, while not including IE7 or WMP11, would include hotfixes/updates/etc for those two if, repeat, IF they were already installed on the system to which SP3 was itself being installed.

If that's really true then that explains the anomalies being experienced by others, as mentioned here. :twisted:

User avatar
Cipherfx2
Posts: 182
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:16 am
Location: Philippines

Post by Cipherfx2 » Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:08 am

Is there a link for SP3? :rolleyes:

User avatar
Kelsenellenelvian
Moderator
Posts: 4383
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:32 pm
Location: Pocatello, ID
Contact:

Post by Kelsenellenelvian » Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:21 am

Not yet (at least not a legal one)

User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Post by Outbreaker » Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:53 am

ChiefZeke wrote:My memory says there was a mention in the SP3 tech net forum that SP3, while not including IE7 or WMP11, would include hotfixes/updates/etc for those two if, repeat, IF they were already installed on the system to which SP3 was itself being installed.

If that's really true then that explains the anomalies being experienced by others, as mentioned here. :twisted:
I have read this also. But thats is realy stupid if i now install IE7 & WMP11 on a WinXP SP3. Then the Windows Update Center says then that i have the IE7 & WMP11 Updates but the files are overwrited by the IE7 & WMP11 installer. :rolleyes:

Us2002
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 5:53 am

Post by Us2002 » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:24 am

Links are present (sp3 and VL ISO whith int sp3), but not in this forum :)
WindowsXP-KB936929-SP3-x86-ENU.exe
331,805,736 bytes in 1 file
C411A9DA
BB25707C919DD835A9D9706B5725AF58
C81472F7EEEA2ECA421E116CD4C03E2300EBFDE4

MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.XP.WITH.SP3.x86.RTM.VOLUME.ENGLISH-WZTiSO
FILE: en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl.iso - no WPA
SIZE: 617,754,624 bytes in 1 file
SFV: FFFFFFFF
MD5: 5BF476E2FC445B8D06B3C2A6091FE3AA
SHA1: 66AC289AE27724C5AE17139227CBE78C01EEFE40

User avatar
Kelsenellenelvian
Moderator
Posts: 4383
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:32 pm
Location: Pocatello, ID
Contact:

Post by Kelsenellenelvian » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:33 am

MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.XP.WITH.SP3.x86.RTM.VOLUME.ENGLISH-WZTiSO
FILE: en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl.iso - no WPA
SIZE: 617,754,624 bytes in 1 file
SFV: FFFFFFFF
MD5: 5BF476E2FC445B8D06B3C2A6091FE3AA
SHA1: 66AC289AE27724C5AE17139227CBE78C01EEFE40

This one is totally a rebuilt warez release!

User avatar
project51
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:38 pm

Post by project51 » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:50 am

Kelsenellenelvian wrote:MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.XP.WITH.SP3.x86.RTM.VOLUME.ENGLISH-WZTiSO
FILE: en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl.iso - no WPA
SIZE: 617,754,624 bytes in 1 file
SFV: FFFFFFFF
MD5: 5BF476E2FC445B8D06B3C2A6091FE3AA
SHA1: 66AC289AE27724C5AE17139227CBE78C01EEFE40

This one is totally a rebuilt warez release!
Thank you for the warning. I was about to download it. I would prefer the one made by MS.

Us2002
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 5:53 am

Post by Us2002 » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:34 am

MS not build now XP whith integrated sp3, just only sp3. Anybody can integrate it manually

User avatar
project51
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:38 pm

Post by project51 » Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:51 am

Us2002 wrote:MS not build now XP whith integrated sp3, just only sp3. Anybody can integrate it manually
I actually asked them and one MS moderator replied that they're not going to make an XP MCE SP3 CD, however, they're still releasing a WinXP SP3.iso and CD for retail. (just not MCE nor Tablet edition)

User avatar
crashfly
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:39 pm
Location: Arkansas, USA

Post by crashfly » Wed Apr 23, 2008 12:56 pm

Us2002 wrote:MS not build now XP whith integrated sp3, just only sp3. Anybody can integrate it manually
This is actually a simple step Us2002. Most if not all MS updates and service packs have the /? (also known as /help) option. If you run the SP with /?, you should get a windows pop up (when it completely extracts) on what the command line options are for the service pack.

Specifically, the one you are looking for will be "/integrate:(full source)". Which essentially means, you need to take and copy the entire XP CD (preferably SP2) to its own directory and then have SP3 integrate into "that" directory. (Note: have it point to the directory that the directory "i386" is in.)

I have already done this, and it works just fine. Actually, I have also tested SP3 with addons and it works wonderfully.

Best of luck to ya.
A mind is like a parachute, it only functions when it is open.
--Anonymous

How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

posttoast
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:54 am
Location: The Hague. The Netherlands

Post by posttoast » Wed Apr 23, 2008 3:30 pm

crashfly wrote:Specifically, the one you are looking for will be "/integrate:(full source)". Which essentially means, you need to take and copy the entire XP CD (preferably SP2) to its own directory and then have SP3 integrate into "that" directory. (Note: have it point to the directory that the directory "i386" is in.)
Can you explain to me why the source is preferably a SP2 one? SP's are cummulative right? So shouldn't vanilla XP (SP0) be more than enough? Or am I missing something here?

User avatar
Kelsenellenelvian
Moderator
Posts: 4383
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:32 pm
Location: Pocatello, ID
Contact:

Post by Kelsenellenelvian » Wed Apr 23, 2008 3:46 pm

XP gold is the best way to go with slipstreaming.

Everyone keeps reading the papers wrong and thinking installing means slipstreaming.

You have to use a pre SP installed system to INSTALL sp3 on.

User avatar
project51
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:38 pm

Post by project51 » Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:02 pm

Kelsenellenelvian wrote:XP gold [SP0] is the best way to go with slipstreaming.
But if you already have an XP SP2 Original CD, use it [to slipstream] since it has some tools that's already updated and would never be updated by the SP3 pack. (eg: Support Tools).

Also, someone said that some files from the SP0 are not being updated:
i did a small test

1) XP Retail CD "Gold" German -> slipstream to SP3 RTM

2) XP Retail CD "Gold" German-> slipstream to SP2 -> next to slipstream to SP3 RTM

if found that there are several files that are different.

E.g

Gold->SP3
MSRDP.CA_ is from 18.08.01
MSTSC.EX_ is from 18.08.01 -> 5.1.2600.0

Gold->SP2->SP3
MSRDP.CA_ is from 04.08.04
MSTSC.EX_ is from 08.08.04 -> v5.1.2600.2180

So Gold to SP3 will have some file older than, like slipstream SP2 before SP3

Why ?
source

RickSteele
Posts: 288
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:32 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Post by RickSteele » Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:11 pm

ChiefZeke wrote:My memory says there was a mention in the SP3 tech net forum that SP3, while not including IE7 or WMP11, would include hotfixes/updates/etc for those two if, repeat, IF they were already installed on the system to which SP3 was itself being installed.

If that's really true then that explains the anomalies being experienced by others, as mentioned here. :twisted:
No to all the above in my fresh realtime install. I used, among some other addons for functionality, n7Epsilon's CppRuntimes2008_Addon_n7Epsilon_1.2-20080413, code's MicrosoftRuntimeLibraries-1.3.1-Addon, Kel's Kels_Unicode2008_v1.626.6001.18000_addon, jd976's dotnetfxAIO2.1 (in the switchless installer thread) from runonce, Boooggy's wmp11slips0.99i for WMP11 and the hotfixes/updates listed on his website; and OnePiece's OnePiece_IE7AddOn_2.1.0_INTL_Only_for_RVMi as instructed in that thread, including the three IE7 hotfixes listed there.
MS update reports no updates whatsoever required. The install is error free and my system runs fast and beautiful. :D

RickSteele
Posts: 288
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:32 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Post by RickSteele » Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:14 pm

Kelsenellenelvian wrote:XP gold is the best way to go with slipstreaming.

Everyone keeps reading the papers wrong and thinking installing means slipstreaming.

You have to use a pre SP installed system to INSTALL sp3 on.
Not in my experience, I slipsteamed 5508 and 5512 to a SP2 source; all is perfect! :)

Us2002
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 5:53 am

Post by Us2002 » Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:52 am

Binary Comparison of <C:\vx2pvol_ru> to <D:\ru_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl>
7077 files in 164 folders

113 files don't match

Diffs in I386:

I386\ASMS\1\DEFAULT\DEFAULT.CA_
I386\ASMS\10\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\GDIPLUS.CA_
I386\ASMS\10\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\GDIPLUS.DL_
I386\ASMS\10\POLICY\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\GDIPLUS.CA_
I386\ASMS\1000\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\GDIPLUS.CAT
I386\ASMS\1000\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\GDIPLUS.DLL
I386\ASMS\1000\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\GDIPLUS.MAN
I386\ASMS\2\DEFAULT\DEFAULT.CA_
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\DXMRTP\DXMRTP.CA_
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\DXMRTP\DXMRTP.DL_
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCDLL\RTCDLL.CA_
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCDLL\RTCDLL.DL_
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCRES\RTCRES.CA_
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCRES\RTCRES.DL_
I386\ASMS\52\POLICY\MSFT\WINDOWS\NETWORKING\DXMRTP\DXMRTP.CA_
I386\ASMS\52\POLICY\MSFT\WINDOWS\NETWORKING\RTCDLL\RTCDLL.CA_
I386\ASMS\60\MSFT\WINDOWS\COMMON\CONTROLS\COMCTL32.DL_
I386\ASMS\60\MSFT\WINDOWS\COMMON\CONTROLS\CONTROLS.CA_
I386\ASMS\60\POLICY\60\COMCTL\COMCTL.CA_
I386\ASMS\70\MSFT\WINDOWS\MSWINCRT\MSVCIRT.DL_
I386\ASMS\70\MSFT\WINDOWS\MSWINCRT\MSVCRT.DL_
I386\ASMS\70\MSFT\WINDOWS\MSWINCRT\MSWINCRT.CA_
I386\ASMS\70\POLICY\MSFT\MSWINCRT\MSWINCRT.CA_
I386\DRIVER.CAB
I386\EULA.TXT
I386\GUITRN_A.DL_
I386\MDMSSYS.IN_
I386\MIGISM_A.DL_
I386\MIGWIZ_A.EX_
I386\MMC.CH_
I386\MSRDP.CA_
I386\MSTSC.CH_
I386\MSTSC.EX_
I386\MSTSCAX.DL_
I386\OEMBIOS.BI_
I386\OEMBIOS.CA_
I386\OEMBIOS.DA_
I386\OEMBIOS.SI_
I386\RDSKTPW.CH_
I386\SCRIPT_A.DL_
I386\SUPP_ED.CH_
I386\SYSMOD_A.DL_
I386\TSCUPGRD.EX_
I386\XPTHT41W.HT_
122 folders and files only on vx2pvol_ru
in I386:
I386\ASMS\1\DEFAULT\default.cat
I386\ASMS\10\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\gdiplus.cat
I386\ASMS\10\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\gdiplus.dll
I386\ASMS\10\POLICY\MSFT\WINDOWS\GDIPLUS\gdiplus.cat
I386\ASMS\2\DEFAULT\default.cat
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\DXMRTP\dxmrtp.cat
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\DXMRTP\dxmrtp.dll
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCDLL\rtcdll.cat
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCDLL\rtcdll.dll
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCRES\rtcres.cat
I386\ASMS\52\MSFT\WINDOWS\NET\RTCRES\rtcres.dll
I386\ASMS\52\POLICY\MSFT\WINDOWS\NETWORKING\DXMRTP\dxmrtp.cat
I386\ASMS\52\POLICY\MSFT\WINDOWS\NETWORKING\RTCDLL\rtcdll.cat
I386\ASMS\60\MSFT\WINDOWS\COMMON\CONTROLS\comctl32.dll
I386\ASMS\60\MSFT\WINDOWS\COMMON\CONTROLS\controls.cat
I386\ASMS\60\POLICY\60\COMCTL\comctl.cat
I386\ASMS\70\MSFT\WINDOWS\MSWINCRT\msvcirt.dll
I386\ASMS\70\MSFT\WINDOWS\MSWINCRT\msvcrt.dll
I386\ASMS\70\MSFT\WINDOWS\MSWINCRT\mswincrt.cat
I386\ASMS\70\POLICY\MSFT\MSWINCRT\mswincrt.cat
I386\SVCPACK\
I386\SVCPACK\BRANCHES.INF
I386\SVCPACK\HFINT.DAT
I386\SVCPACK\KB911164.CAT
I386\SVCPACK\KB911164.EXE
I386\SP2.CAB
I386\SP2.CAT
I386\SVCPACK.INF

2 folders and files only on ru_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl

I386\PLUGIN.OC_
I386\SVCPACK.IN_
6845 files match exactly

If anybody wish to compare en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl whith manually integrated sp3(or sp2) on distrb en_winxp, can see same picture. Manual integration is not the same than system+sp ISO from MS.

User avatar
krieger546
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:42 pm
Location: Estonia

Post by krieger546 » Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:30 am

Us2002 wrote: If anybody wish to compare en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl whith manually integrated sp3(or sp2) on distrb en_winxp, can see same picture. Manual integration is not the same than system+sp ISO from MS.
So they're different... But is official MS image better than manual integration?

Is en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl.iso (which one can find from ie Pirate Bay) the image from MS?
The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do.

User avatar
project51
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:38 pm

Post by project51 » Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:40 am

Us2002 wrote:Is en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl.iso (which one can find from ie Pirate Bay) the image from MS?
Right now, I think it's the leaked CD image from MS. Because some file from the Support Tools are updated. Which is not normally updated by any service packs.

Also, making all the filenames in CAPITALIZE is rather dangerous to play with by any integrations. But they pulled it off.

What struck me the most is the Label GRTMPVOL_EN. What the hell is that?

User avatar
krieger546
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:42 pm
Location: Estonia

Post by krieger546 » Thu Apr 24, 2008 11:11 am

Now that I've downloaded it... ALL the files have 14.04.2008 date stamp. When slipstreaming a SP there are always files with xx.xx.2001 date stamp left.

So it did come straight from MS or someone had some hard time tampering with it. :P

GRTMPVOL_EN - RTM & VOL seem obvious. P might stand for Professional. G beats me. :?
The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do.

Us2002
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 5:53 am

Post by Us2002 » Thu Apr 24, 2008 11:38 am

project51
Yes, most of all files in that folders are different, I show files in I386, cause they needed for install
Anybody can compare MS original en_winxp_pro_with_sp2_vl.iso and manually integrated sp2 to XPsp0(sp1), results you will see :)
G - alpf letter, RTM, P - prof, VOL - activate on SN pid -270-

krieger546
Yes, it not from MS, but when MS officially release it, you can compare each file for diffs :)
IMO there will be all the same.

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:19 pm

Actually, it's quite easy to change the datestamp on a whole folder full of files/folders en mass with freely available tools. Kind of like mass file rename tools that are also available.

And the already integrated ISOs are officially available via subscription, despite what Microsoft said about the schedule for that.

User avatar
krieger546
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:42 pm
Location: Estonia

Post by krieger546 » Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:13 pm

[quote="roirraW "edor""]Actually, it's quite easy to change the datestamp on a whole folder full of files/folders en mass with freely available tools. Kind of like mass file rename tools that are also available.[/quote]

This seems to be the case. So far on every Windows disk I've seen the time stamps are slightly different, but on this one all the files have exactly the same time stamp. :!:
The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do.

Chrysalis
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:37 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Chrysalis » Fri Apr 25, 2008 1:13 pm

From what I have read so far it seems this is the way to go for people like me who are not lucky enough to have a native sp2 cd.

SP0 > SP2 > IE7 > SP3

although I dont tend to integrate IE7 so I will wait for windows update to be fixed and then do.

SP0 > SP2 > SP3

These newer support tools they offer anything decent?

User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Post by Outbreaker » Fri Apr 25, 2008 2:20 pm

SP0 > SP2 > IE7 > SP3

SP3 overrides IE7 and you have then IE6 agan. Always SP first.

posttoast
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:54 am
Location: The Hague. The Netherlands

Post by posttoast » Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:19 pm

Just go SP0 > SP3. Less work, same result.

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:38 pm

posttoast wrote:Just go SP0 > SP3. Less work, same result.
There's information in this post http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 8&start=50 by myself and krieger546 that shows that it's not quite the same result. There are files which when slipstreaming SP3 aren't updated which were updated by SP2. It's debateable as to the importance of this, but it's a valid point.

techtype
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:46 pm

Post by techtype » Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:09 pm

[quote="roirraW "edor""]
posttoast wrote:Just go SP0 > SP3. Less work, same result.
There's information in this post http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 8&start=50 by myself and krieger546 that shows that it's not quite the same result. There are files which when slipstreaming SP3 aren't updated which were updated by SP2. It's debateable as to the importance of this, but it's a valid point.[/quote]

Yeah, but this debate was already settled many times ---- see this thread http://www.msfn.org/board/MD5-for-XP-SP ... 08473.html

or the statements on technet.

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:23 pm

I don't see anything in that short thread that settles the matter. No final, authoritive answer on the subject. ZombieDeath apparently still had concerns as well since he said
I agree that changes outside of i386 don't matter but discrepancies in i386 should be scrutinized.
Even Kels last statement was
Then they are updated someother way I checked the mstsc.exe post installation on a gold\sp3 source and it is showing a file version of 6.0.6001.16659 (Which clearly shows it is updated)

The only way to really settle this is by using a post install comparison.
So I just may have to do that sometime.

techtype
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:46 pm

Post by techtype » Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:28 am

[quote="roirraW "edor""]I don't see anything in that short thread that settles the matter. No final, authoritive answer on the subject. ZombieDeath apparently still had concerns as well since he said
I agree that changes outside of i386 don't matter but discrepancies in i386 should be scrutinized.
Even Kels last statement was
Then they are updated someother way I checked the mstsc.exe post installation on a gold\sp3 source and it is showing a file version of 6.0.6001.16659 (Which clearly shows it is updated)

The only way to really settle this is by using a post install comparison.
So I just may have to do that sometime.[/quote]

Seems to me that you were in or near the thread on technet where Microsoft said that there is effectively no difference. Those files trace back to terminal services, I believe. http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/Sho ... &SiteID=17

Anyway, suit yourself, you are the only one who can say when you are satisfied.

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:24 am

I have run a comparison and found that there are definitely no DLLs, EXEs or INFs which are different. I like 1s and 0s, either yes or no, no ambiguity. "Practically no difference" wasn't close enough to "no difference at all". Not all those files are part of Terminal Services.

Edit: Corrected spelling of "Practically". :D
Last edited by roirraW "edor" on Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Chrysalis
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:37 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Chrysalis » Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:17 pm

I agree with roirraW "edor" as far as I see there is some old files left so I will be doing SP0 > SP2 > SP3. It also seems the IE7 > SP3 advice is correct.

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Sat May 03, 2008 3:07 am

krieger546 wrote:Is en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl.iso (which one can find from ie Pirate Bay) the image from MS?
Just thought I would confirm that the download from Pirate Bay has the exact same MD5/SHA1/CRC hashes as the official download Microsoft has available at MSDN Subscriber Downloads and TechNet Plus Subscriber Downloads.
Microsoft wrote:Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 3 (x86) - CD (English)en_windows_xp_professional_with_service_pack_3_x86_cd_x14-80428.iso 589.14 2008-05-02
Date Posted (UTC):5/1/2008 11:01:59 PM
SHA1:1c735b38931bf57fb14ebd9a9ba253ceb443d459
ISO/CRC:FFFFFFFF
Somehow it was leaked before it was available on TechNet/MSDN.

Also for those in denial that SP3 is done http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/Sho ... &SiteID=17:
Chris Keroack [MSFT] wrote:Yesterday, 9:04 PM UTC
Chris Keroack [MSFT]
Moderator
Posts 195
Full retail and volume license installs of Windows XP SP3 now available in select languages, to MSDN / TechNet Plus subscribers

Microsoft is pleased to make available integrated retail and volume license installs of Windows XP SP3, to MSDN and TechNet Plus subscribers. Integrated retail and volume license installs are available in the following languages: Chinese Simplified, English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese (Brazil), and Spanish. Additional languages will be made available soon.

Please see the MSDN Subscriber Downloads or TechNet Plus Subscriber Downloads to obtain these releases. The main TechNet resource page for Windows XP SP3 is updated with this information.

We have recently identified a compatibility issue between Windows XP SP3 and Microsoft Dynamics Retail Management System (RMS). Microsoft Dynamics RMS customers should not install Windows XP SP3 until a fix has been fully tested and made available. In addition, Windows XP SP3 will be available on Windows Update and the Microsoft Download Center soon.

posttoast
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:54 am
Location: The Hague. The Netherlands

Post by posttoast » Sat May 03, 2008 5:39 am

[quote="roirraW "edor""]
krieger546 wrote:Is en_winxp_pro_with_sp3_vl.iso (which one can find from ie Pirate Bay) the image from MS?
Just thought I would confirm that the download from Pirate Bay has the exact same MD5/SHA1/CRC hashes as the official download Microsoft has available at MSDN Subscriber Downloads and TechNet Plus Subscriber Downloads.
Microsoft wrote:Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 3 (x86) - CD (English)en_windows_xp_professional_with_service_pack_3_x86_cd_x14-80428.iso 589.14 2008-05-02
Date Posted (UTC):5/1/2008 11:01:59 PM
SHA1:1c735b38931bf57fb14ebd9a9ba253ceb443d459
ISO/CRC:FFFFFFFF
Somehow it was leaked before it was available on TechNet/MSDN.

Also for those in denial that SP3 is done http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/Sho ... &SiteID=17:
Chris Keroack [MSFT] wrote:Yesterday, 9:04 PM UTC
Chris Keroack [MSFT]
Moderator
Posts 195
Full retail and volume license installs of Windows XP SP3 now available in select languages, to MSDN / TechNet Plus subscribers

Microsoft is pleased to make available integrated retail and volume license installs of Windows XP SP3, to MSDN and TechNet Plus subscribers. Integrated retail and volume license installs are available in the following languages: Chinese Simplified, English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese (Brazil), and Spanish. Additional languages will be made available soon.

Please see the MSDN Subscriber Downloads or TechNet Plus Subscriber Downloads to obtain these releases. The main TechNet resource page for Windows XP SP3 is updated with this information.

We have recently identified a compatibility issue between Windows XP SP3 and Microsoft Dynamics Retail Management System (RMS). Microsoft Dynamics RMS customers should not install Windows XP SP3 until a fix has been fully tested and made available. In addition, Windows XP SP3 will be available on Windows Update and the Microsoft Download Center soon.
[/quote]
Are you sure about that? All the images on the Pirate Bay that I find have different hashes than the one on MSDN. Can you tell me on what date it was put on TPB? If that would be illegal, then please don't answer that question. I'm just curious, can get it from MSDN anyway.

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Sat May 03, 2008 10:31 am

posttoast wrote:Are you sure about that? All the images on the Pirate Bay that I find have different hashes than the one on MSDN. Can you tell me on what date it was put on TPB? If that would be illegal, then please don't answer that question. I'm just curious, can get it from MSDN anyway.
I checked the hashes; the hashes match.

User avatar
project51
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:38 pm

Post by project51 » Sat May 03, 2008 10:44 am

Yeah. The ISO released by WTZiSO is the same ISO of MSDN >> That is XP with SP3 ISO.

This will be my new source then: WXP SP3 MSDN. (aka: Native XP SP3 CD).

posttoast
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:54 am
Location: The Hague. The Netherlands

Post by posttoast » Sat May 03, 2008 1:07 pm

Weird, the WTZiSO-images I found, have this SHA1-hash:

Code: Select all

66AC289AE27724C5AE17139227CBE78C01EEFE40
According to Kelsenellenelvian this is not the real deal.

So, which version are you talking about then?

[edit]
Ah: I see what happened here. The hash you posted is from the retail version. 66AC289AE27724C5AE17139227CBE78C01EEFE40 is the VL-version. So for those who need it, 66AC289AE27724C5AE17139227CBE78C01EEFE40 is clean.

A screenshot from MSDN:
http://uploads.neowin.net/download.php? ... =XPSP3.jpg

Sorry for the confusion!
Last edited by posttoast on Sat May 03, 2008 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
project51
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:38 pm

Post by project51 » Sat May 03, 2008 1:16 pm

Kelsenellenelvian may have been mistaken. But it's the real deal 8)

posttoast
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:54 am
Location: The Hague. The Netherlands

Post by posttoast » Sat May 03, 2008 1:17 pm

Yeah, I know now, I just posted a rectification, but you beat me to it :)

Haha, to add to the confusion: did anyone read SETUPXP.HTM on the CD? This is what it says:
This release of Windows XP includes Service Pack 2 (SP2) for Windows XP. If you uninstall this release of Windows XP, SP2 is automatically uninstalled too. Your computer will be running the operating system that it was running before you installed Windows XP, or it will not be running an operating system. You cannot uninstall SP2 only.
SP2? :P
I am convinced this is the real thing (the hash is the same as on MSDN, I can confirm that too, for what it is worth). But why do you guys reckon this is on there? A little cosmetic mistake by Microsoft perhaps?

At least README.HTM talks about SP3 instead of SP2.

User avatar
krieger546
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:42 pm
Location: Estonia

Post by krieger546 » Sat May 03, 2008 2:06 pm

thanks for clearing that up.
The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do.

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Sat May 03, 2008 2:36 pm

posttoast wrote:This release of Windows XP includes Service Pack 2 (SP2) for Windows XP.
Microsoft probably just didn't really care enough to change that. Just a guess though. SP3 includes SP2 though. :lol:

User avatar
roirraW "edor"
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraW "edor" » Sun May 04, 2008 7:25 pm

As of right now, under XP Pro VLK with SP3 RTM slipstreamed, Microsoft and Automatic Updates shows:
Microsoft/Automatic Update wrote:Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 7 for Windows XP (KB947864)
Date last published: 4/29/2008
Security issues have been identified that could allow an attacker to compromise a system running Internet Explorer and gain control over it. You can help protect your system by installing this update from Microsoft. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.

http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=110557
Edit: However, Automatic Updates downloaded it but said that it couldn't be installed. :(

User avatar
jbob
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:58 pm

Post by jbob » Sun May 04, 2008 8:59 pm

[quote="roirraW "edor""]As of right now, under XP Pro VLK with SP3 RTM slipstreamed, Microsoft and Automatic Updates shows:
Microsoft/Automatic Update wrote:Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 7 for Windows XP (KB947864)
Date last published: 4/29/2008
Security issues have been identified that could allow an attacker to compromise a system running Internet Explorer and gain control over it. You can help protect your system by installing this update from Microsoft. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.

http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=110557
Edit: However, Automatic Updates downloaded it but said that it couldn't be installed. :([/quote]

Could you clarify please? Did you slipstream or install IE7 during/after install? You didn't mention installing IE7 so it's doubtful an update to IE7 would show up if it's not even installed. Just curious!

Post Reply