Page 5 of 6

Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 10:00 am
by Adrian
yes, i integrated your uurolup with hfslip and onepiece's updatepack with nlite

Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 2:59 pm
by tomasz86
UURollup-v9a (ENU) is ready.

You were right. Mfc100.dll and mfc100u.dll had wrong checksum and that was the reason to prevent the installer from working when they were slipstreamed. I used a script to fix dependencies and "modifype.exe" to correct checksum but something went wrong and it the end the checksum wasn't changed. I'm sorry about that.

Everything should be fine now :)

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 1:39 pm
by tomasz86
I've uploaded UURollup-v9b. The only change is that I modified file version of syssetup.dll from 5.0.2195.6611 to 5.0.2195.6612 to distinguish it from the official one.

I've also added KB950305-KB977225. It contains some Universal Printer drivers. It must be slipstreamed through svcpack (HFSVCPACK_SW1 folder in HFSLIP) because it adds a few files which are originally not present in W2K's, therefore they won't be correctly slipstreamed if you use the HF folder. It replaces the previous 950305 which actually also should be slipstreamed from _SW1.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:17 am
You don't need all three versions of

Microsoft Windows Script 5.6
Microsoft Windows Script 5.7
Microsoft Windows Script 5.8 v3

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:51 am
by tomasz86

Only 5.8 is integrated, the rest are replaced by it but I listed all three to make it clear that UURollup replaces all of them. The number of files and registry entries included in all these script versions are exactly the same, i.e. Script 5.7 has newer versions of the same files as 5.6, and 5.8 has just newer files than those included in 5.7. And all of them share the same bug which leaves registry entries untouched when Windows Script is uninstalled. I've fixed it in UURollup.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:42 am
by Adrian
There's a problem with the uurollup alone integrated

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:21 pm
by tomasz86
UURollup mustn't be integrated alone :o

It requires at least SP4 and Update Rollup 1.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 3:19 pm
by Adrian
i had sp4 in the source,doesn't sp4 include ur1? Because the date on ur1 seems 4 years older than sp4

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:41 am
by tomasz86
SP4 - 2003
UR1 - 2005

UR1 was originally supposed to be SP5 but M$ changed their mind later. Even its structure (the update.inf) is exactly the same as the one from SP4.

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 2:53 am
by Adrian
thanks for clearing that up
Seems net framework 4 for xp got some updates today :D

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 3:04 am
by tomasz86
Yep :)

I'm waiting for OnePiece to update his addons so I can prepare a W2K compatible version.

Posted: Sat May 12, 2012 7:32 am
by tomasz86
I''ve been working on UURollup-v10 and I can say for sure that this will be the last version of it. Even if there are some newer files/updates available I won't add them because I want to focus 100% on the USP 5.2 instead.

Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 4:06 am
by Adrian
unofficial service pack 5.2? :D

Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 5:02 am
by tomasz86

Posted: Mon May 14, 2012 5:56 pm
by tomasz86
WildBill has just released a new version of his kernel. Let's wait a few days and if there are no issues I'll include it in UURollup-v10 (ENU). I've also started to update the Global version a little bit.

I've found two issues in Update Rollup 2. One of them is a bug caused by one of the integrated M$ updates (Kodak files are not installed correctly) and the other one is not really a bug but a problem with the "UR1 must be installed" requirement I added. UR2 checked for UR1 in the registry and refused to install if it was not found. The problem is that the required registry info is not present in the Gurgelmeyer's USP 5.1 even though UR1 itself IS included there. The result was that UR2 refused to install in a system with USP 5.1 installed.

Anyway, the two problems are nothing serious so I hope I can manage to prepare a final version of UR2 pretty soon. I only need to gather updates for other languages. The rest is done automatically by a script (with a few final manual adjustments). As you've probably notices already, I added two XP files (2681116 & 2695962) because, well, they're official updates (although originally not for W2K). Why am I writing this? The thing is that there might be more such updates (or updated versions of the two) in the future... but I do NOT plan to update UR2 once it's ready. Shortly speaking, there will be only ONE version of UR2 and it won't be updated even if there are new (official) updates available later on. Two reason is quite trivial - I just can't manage to maintain all these packages. UR2 is going to be available in 24 languages and even compiling a package for each language takes 5+ hours... It would have to be a team of people to maintain all the 24 packages. By the way, there're around 250 updates and HBRs integrated in it.

After UURollup-v10 and Update Rollup 2 are ready I'm going to focus only on the USP 5.2. Actually, I've already started to look at it and managed to integrate .NET Frameworks from 2.0-3.0-3.5-4.0 but it's only the beginning yet.

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2012 3:04 am
by tomasz86
A new version of UURollup is almost ready... but I have bad news. UURollup-v3a will probably be the last version of the Global edition of UURollup. I just haven't got time to work on it :/ as there are too many other things which I consider more important.

If there's another person interested in maintaining the Global version then feel free to update it :) I can provide technical help (modyfing update.inf, repacking). The most time-consuming part is to compare file versions, check if they can be installed in all language versions of W2K, test, etc.

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:27 pm
by tomasz86
Just a quick update:

- Update Rollup 2 (only the English version for now) is ready. I'm testing it right now. Everything seems to be fine.

- UURollup-v10 is almost ready. I've added most of the libraries from the Kel's Runtimes addon. Please tell me if there are any other additional files that are worth adding.

I've also managed to install IE7 but it doesn't want to run :P

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:03 am
by tomasz86
I spent many hours trying to make IE7 work but failed :( I give up. It probably requires some heavy changes done to the system DLLs. I managed to make it install and run but couldn't open any pages ("website cannot be reached").

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 6:07 pm
by tomasz86
UURollup-v10 (ENU) is ready! Update Rollup 2 is ready too (only ENU version at the moment)!

Please see the first post for details.

I have also managed to set up a simple website:

I've tried to gather all information in one place. Please tell me if there is anything missing or if there are any errors on it.

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:26 pm
by Adrian
it says a ttf file cannot be copied

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:09 pm
by tomasz86
Hey Adrian,

Please be more specific. Which package are you trying to install? A logfile would be helpful - it's "uurollup-v10.log" for UURollup and "updaterollup2.log" for UR2. The logfiles are created in the %systemroot% directory.

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:05 pm
by Adrian
works now :D

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:51 am
by tomasz86
I'm still interested what the problem was about ;) How did you manage to fix it?

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 7:36 am
by Adrian
i disabled kaspersky for a moment while slipstreaming with hfslip, nlite has no problems with it on though. When i tested all files copied properly

Aye! it failed :P

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:48 am
by Charlieb000
hello, i am testing your updates and would like to make some recommendations.
Firstly i visited your site and found instructions for the "complete" "easy" method. first it tells me to download. i had preferred to use my own download manager (i do admit that mine is not automated on which folders to put files, but subfolders shouldnt be necessary anyway). And then i had no instructions on what to do next (im surprised). i would like to know what to install (some installers are self extracting archives with no installers inside) and what order and when to reboot. i also half expected an automated setup tool. for example, instruct the user to copy the files to the local hard disk, and then add a batch file to the startup. this batch file points to many other daughter batch files. and when it is done the parent batch file moves, deletes or renames the daughter batch file, so on restart the correct next one is chosen each time. you guys have seen inside these setups so you know what ones need a reboot or whatever. if it were automated then i could leave it over some hours.

here is what i did:
install W2k sp3 (fresh install)
install sp4
install RU1
install drivers for hardware, the ATI driver demands .NET
i decided to do the two bigones, SP51 (first) and RU2. i did get a windows file protection message.
seeing that these did not do all the other installers, i did the rest in some order, first the ones that had UU in them (renaming them to !filename) then i did from the top to the bottom (sortof). and rebooted at about the place for MSP. as it detected i had other files pending. i attempted to run MSCONFIG to stop some things comming up but this failed. then i did some more and the IE ones that did not demand SP1 (because i dont know which update is SP1) and rebooted and now i get a BSOD. Mode exception not handled. 0x0000001E (0xC0000005). right now it sucks, but im sure you can improve it further.

my first thoughts may be considered silly, but what i thought would be a great idea is not to touch the OS itself, but to create a WindowsOnWindows environment. sort of like Wine or something that bigger organisations are working on (even using a couple of the Wine files) so we could perhaps even "emulate" the win7 environment - in a semi-native way. that way we dont have to modify each program to run on win2000 but do it universally.


Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 4:52 am
by tomasz86
Hey Charlieb000,

Thanks for your support and suggestions.

Actually the problem here is that all the three methods are targeted at preparing an updated Win2k source. It means that you can use them to update your Win2k CD before installing it on the computer. What you want is to install them manually in a running system. Am I right? This is actually the problem here because not all packages can be installed manually, ex. the DX9 Full Pack or some other addons cannot. In order to use any of these methods you must use HFSLIP/nLite/RVMi (depending on the chosen method) and slipstream (integrate) the files into your source.

I'm sorry to to say this but for such a fully updated manual installation you'll probably have to wait until the Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 is ready. Everything will be included in it and you will be able either to install it manually or to integrate it into your Win2k source (everything with just one click). At the moment if you really want to install the updates manually then I'd recommend following these instructions.

In one word, there's no easy way to update your system manually except for installing all the packages (the ones that CAN be installed) one by one. The best way is to update your source (=Win2k CD) as there are several ways to do so and all of them are proved to work. If you still want to update your running system then following the link which I mentioned above should do it.

I think what you did wrong was to install the drivers first and then try to update the system. You also installed Update Rollup 1 separately even though it's already included in the USP51! You also didn't need to install SP4 because USP5.1 supersedes all previous service packs. Still, it's very difficult to diagnose the problem after so many packages have been installed. I know it's a pain but in this case I'd recommend starting from the beginning and either:

1) prepare and update your source before installation


2) follow the instrucitons and install the required components manually.

PS The WINE-like environment may be an interesting idea but it's totally out of the scope of my skills.


Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:41 pm
by Charlieb000
tomasz86 wrote:Hey Charlieb000,

Thanks for your support and suggestions....
i saw the site said the 'prereq' for UR2 was SP4 and UR1, i dont think i fully knew what the characters "USP5.1" was referring to in the 'notes', as i was new when i read that, so i installed SP4 and UR1 first, instead of USP5.1 and when i did those two, i chose randomly.
i have more questions. first of all im not sure if i have a propper full list of KB's you have included and only have the posts from this forum topic (your site also driects here). i am wondering about windows installer 4.5, you last wrote about it in October. will not having it prevent some programs from installing? the HFSLIP page offers it as an installation option. you have mentioned here the update of 3.1 (KB968006), the HFSLIP site says it's not necessary if you have 4.5 (KB981669, KB942288).

and finally, what cant you do with the installed OS? are all programs now compatible? 64bit excepted, though if you feel ingeneous you could perhaps move win2000 over and run it using WoW64. google "How Windows 64-bit Supports 32-bit Applications" but im not sure if you also get windows 2000's ability to run 16-bit apps, it should, it would be two layers of emulation but no guarentees!.

as for wine (more properly, WoW, windows on windows), well if someone else wants to pick it up, i thought maybe start programs under different credentials with a different path and additional/overriding registery files (ie it says its win7 :lol: ). eg it can freely access your seperate .NET files which are registered in your additional regs, etc.
perhaps also add some extra security, where the OS pulls up (or ignores, lies to) the program if it wants to modify/mutilate the OS folders or those of other apps unless user gives permission (after being warned).

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:13 pm
by bphlpt

I'm confused, if you are talking about using wine, or WoW, and emulating Win7 and running 64bit apps, then why are you trying to install Win2K? Most people who use Win2K choose to do so to avoid all the extra layers and want to get back to a more "simple" OS, for the reason of either simplicity, security, speed, hardware limitations, don't want to pay for a new OS if Win2K meets their needs, or whatever. If you want to use all the "features" you mentioned, why not just use an OS that is made to deal with them in the first place?

Cheers and Regards

Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 12:27 am
by Charlieb000
bphlpt wrote:@Charlieb000,

I'm confused,

Cheers and Regards
i considered the GUI of newer ones to be bulky. i didnt say the new ones were better...

by the way, am i supposed to have all the files on the site? there are some missing...

kels runtime addon (onepiece downloads instead)
Windows2000-UURollup-v10-x86-ENU.exe (UU-KB968006-x86-Global instead)
are these required?

Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:15 am
by tomasz86

1. Windows Installer 4.5 turned out to be incompatible with Win2k and I don't know how to fix it. I even checked and compared the logs of MSI 4.5 run in XP and 2K to find out the cause but it was beyond my knowledge. At the moment you can use only MSI 3.1. The update KB968006 is still available here.

2. Even with all the unofficial packages installed there will be many applications that won't work properly but still it's MUCH better than a Win2k system with only official updates installed. Frankly speaking, in my opinion Windows 2000 without all these extended functions would be just unusable today.

3. All required updates are listed under the "complete method" but again, it's main goal is slipstreaming, not manual installation. Of course you can still install almost all of them manually. There are a few exceptions which have got no installer built-in though. The complete method consists of packages coming from both and

4. What do you mean by:
kels runtime addon (onepiece downloads instead)
Windows2000-UURollup-v10-x86-ENU.exe (UU-KB968006-x86-Global instead)
? :rolleyes:

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:44 pm
by tomasz86 has been updated. Nothing extremely important but I've added a new version of Kel's Runtimes, two PLK updates and a few programs to the list.

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 12:06 pm
by vioplujjnsjzfg

installation of UUrollup-v10 breaks the execution of the program
starmoney 7, it refuses to start and displays an error message
roughly translated as "security module can not start starmoney,
error 1359"

what dll or update do you guess could be the culprit ?
can the error be related to executable signing/certificates ?

the system: USP5.1, rollup2

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 12:46 pm
by tomasz86
There seems to be a problem with the newest ntdll.dll from WildBill (but it's not 100% confirmed yet). A beta version of UURollup-v11 has already been tested for a few days. Did the program work with UURollup-v9b?

I'll try to check it myself but could you try it out too? You can find beta versions here (always download the newest file).

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:35 pm
by vioplujjnsjzfg
haven't tried the old UUrollups, is there a link to v9b or even older version ?

i tried blackwingcat's Windows2000-KB935839-v15s-x86-ENU.exe and it worked,
starmoney starts without an errormessage.

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 4:44 pm
by tomasz86
Actually it would be much more helpful if you tried the beta version of UURollup-v11 mentioned above ;) In UURollup-v11 is used the same version of ntdll.dll as was used in UURollup-v9b.

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:06 pm
by vioplujjnsjzfg
I tried Windows2000-UURollup-v11-x86-ENU.exe, the problem is not solved yet.
The program StarMoney still does not start, it fails with the same error message.
I googled the code and found some references to linux systems having these issues when
starmoney runs in wine.
After deinstallation of UUrollup-11 starmoney started correctly.

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:27 pm
by tomasz86
UURollup-v10a is ready. All bugs reported in this topic have been fixed. No other changes have been done.

By the way, there's a new security bulletin today and many Win2k compatible updates have been released. I don't plan neither to modify the packages nor to add them to UURollup (as UURollup is final; only bugfixes may be released). If there's anyone willing to repack them for Win2k then feel free to do it :) I'm going to include them in USP5.2 later.


Could you give me an URL where I can download the program?

Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 6:52 am
by hun
Hi All,

I have just joined the forum and was wondering if someone could kindly shed some light on the following:

A virus scan (Avira) of the file "Windows2000-UURollup-v10-x86-ENU.exe" detected 3 viruses packed within:

--> ndproxy.sys
[DETECTION] Is the TR/Patched.Gen Trojan
--> shell32.dll
[DETECTION] Is the TR/Crypt.XPACK.Gen3 Trojan
--> update.sys
[DETECTION] Is the TR/Rootkit.Gen Trojan

For further confirmation I uploaded these 3 files to VirusTotal for additional testing. Apart from AntiVir, "shell32.dll" and "update.sys" were given the all clear by the other virus engines. With "ndproxy.sys" however, 2 other virus engines confirms viral infection (Emsisoft - Trojan.Patched!lK, Ikarus - Trojan.Patched).

My questions:
1. Have I downloaded a dodgy file by mistake?
2. If the detections are accepted as false positives, to put my concerns to rest, what checks have been made to support that conclusion?
3. If these 3 files are indeed infected, can they be simply replaced by the standard versions of the same files found in a win2k installation?

I have gone through all the postings on the "Post-EOL unofficial updates for Windows 2000" thread but could find no mention of this at all.

Many thanks

Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:49 am
by tomasz86
I've just uploaded UURollup-v10b. There was a bug in the installer of v10a.


These are just false positives. They are system files, have been modified by WildBill/BlackWingCat, have got no M$ signature, etc. This is the reason that some AV scanners may mark them as "infected".

Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 1:56 pm
by vioplujjnsjzfg
tomasz86 wrote: Could you give me an URL where I can download the program?
Thanks for your kind offer to help.

The program can be downloaded here ... 567_h_.exe

MD5: 1FE7CE8A16051CCD169FAD57C7108EC5
It's 156 MB !!!.

It needs a license key to run, but installation should work without.
With UUrolllup the program does not even start but shows an error 1359.

Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:37 am
by tomasz86

Could you try with UURollup-v10b? It works here.

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:45 pm
by acus
I repacked two new HF x W2K:


Windows2000-UU-KB2719985-x86-ENU.exe: (removed)

The first one has new files for MDAC 2.81
The second one has new msxml3.dll & msxml6.dll

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:23 pm
by tomasz86
Thanks acus.

Can't the MSXML6 official update be used directly? ... id=1003984

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:22 pm
by acus

"Can't the MSXML6 official update be used directly?"

yes, I've successfully installed it in VM.

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 1:09 am
by tomasz86

This should be added to KB2719985 in order to supersede the official KB955069.

Code: Select all


HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f22-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1b-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1c-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1d-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1e-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f21-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1f-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f20-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f28-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f29-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f26-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221},"Compatibility Flags",0x00010001,0x400


HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f22-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1b-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1c-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1d-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1e-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f21-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f1f-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f20-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f28-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f29-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}
HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{f5078f26-c551-11d3-89b9-0000f81fe221}

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 1:47 am
by tomasz86
As I've already mention in the MSFN topic, I'm going to keep updating UURollup until USP5.2 is ready. There are just too many changes going on to leave it like this, especially concerning the fact that it's still a long way to finish USP5.2.

One thing will be different though. This time I'm going to release test versions of UURollup before releasing the final one. It's necessary to test every change thoroughly to be 100% sure that the final version is stable. I can't test everything myself so I'm asking everyone for help. Together it's possible to eliminate all potential problems and bugs through extensive testing.

Test versions of UURollup will be available here:

I've just uploaded UURollup-v11.20120722.142800. Kernel32.dll has been replaced with the BWC version and some other files have been updated too. The newest XP updates (KB2655992 & KB2719985) have been added.

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 4:21 am
by acus

thanks for the correction for KB2719985.

I modified the HF, adding the reg entries you suggested and the cat file kb955069, I removed also msxml6.dll because there is the official msxml6-KB2721693-enu-x86.exe .

New version (only msxml3.dll): Windows2000-UU-KB2719985-v2a-x86-Global.exe, link:

Reading your post, I thought to repack also KB2655992:
Windows2000-UU-KB2655992-x86-ENU.exe, link:

(post riedited to correct link).

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:28 am
by tomasz86
Thanks acus :)

I've just uploaded a new test version of UURollup-v11. There are too many issues in the current BWC kernel. In the yesterday's version of UURollup there is a bug which breaks Silverlight. I've tried all my best to fix it but couldn't get through it. Until this problem and other issues (see the main topic about BWC kernel) are fixed UURollup will use WB kernel.

In the today's version of UURollup-v11 WB kernel is used and I've added one more update to it - KB2603381. It's no longer required to slipstream it separately.

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:40 am
by tomasz86
New test version of UURollup-v11 is ready. I've added

Code: Select all

dnsapi.dll 5.0.2195.7283
iphlpapi.dll 5.0.2195.7101
from the new version (v7) of WildBill's KB2508429.

Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:03 am
by tomasz86
New test version of UURollup-v11 ready.

The experimental IPv6 support has been (partially) added:

Code: Select all

tcpip6.sys 5.0.2195.1