XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack for Windows XP Post-SP3 20161026

Windows XP Professional Update Pack discussion.
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Sun May 16, 2010 8:24 am

adric wrote:Yes, I see the url in the module and it is valid. vshell32.dll on the other hand doesn't seem to be a part of windows though.
The mrt from code65536 has a different url, but it works - no vshell32.dll in it so it isn't the same file.

Agreed. vshell32.dll appears to be a file included in "Alky for Applications," which is not a part of Windows. (It's not even a Microsoft file. It was created by Cody Brocious for the Alky Project.) code65536's stub should be used, which, as you've stated, does not have a dependency on a non-Microsoft file. :)
Last edited by 5eraph on Sun May 16, 2010 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Re: KB890830 (MRT)

Postby user_hidden » Sun May 16, 2010 8:27 am

adric wrote:I was just comparing the mrt.exe that gets installed with the updatepack and the mrt.exe that gets created via WU and I see
a huge size difference in the two. 8704 vs. 32058312. If I run the smaller .exe, it throws up an error about vShell32.dll not found.

Are there some additional steps needed so mrt.exe will work?

Up to now I've always copied it from another system and forgot to ask about it here.

Al


the MRT.exe in the pack is a stubbed version to save space.
it will launch a website to download the update if you want to.
the link works perfectly as i test it before i stub the version every patch tuesday, and just tested it now.

when i originally made it i think it is a mix of Code65536 and Yumeyao.
here is the thread that has the info.

http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4852
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Sun May 16, 2010 8:29 am

Your stubbed file requires a non-Microsoft file, which is not included in your update pack, user_hidden. code's file should still be used.

Test without the sidebar addon, or anything that installs Alky for Applications. ;)
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Postby user_hidden » Sun May 16, 2010 6:10 pm

5eraph wrote:Your stubbed file requires a non-Microsoft file, which is not included in your update pack, user_hidden. code's file should still be used.

Test without the sidebar addon, or anything that installs Alky for Applications. ;)



now i get it :oops:

already rebuilt a new mrt.exe for next release.
User avatar
vioplujjnsjzfg
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:07 pm

Postby vioplujjnsjzfg » Mon May 17, 2010 11:26 am

Thanks for all the hard work.

Are you planning on making a new release soon with:

Fixed Descriptions & Installed By entries
Fixed Mrt.exe
Added Microsoft Update Catalog Web Control v7.4.7057.223

or waiting a month for the next patch Tuesday?

Thanks again.
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Postby user_hidden » Mon May 17, 2010 12:40 pm

vioplujjnsjzfg wrote:Thanks for all the hard work.

Are you planning on making a new release soon with:

Fixed Descriptions & Installed By entries
Fixed Mrt.exe
Added Microsoft Update Catalog Web Control v7.4.7057.223

or waiting a month for the next patch Tuesday?

Thanks again.


yup will be released this afternoon.
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Postby user_hidden » Mon May 17, 2010 1:56 pm

updated 20100516 ....

1.28:
added Microsoft Update Catalog Web Control 7.4.7057.223
updated Mrt.exe stubbed version
updated code in updatepack inf files
User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Postby Outbreaker » Mon May 17, 2010 1:58 pm

nice thx
User avatar
shiner
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:18 am
Location: SE Asia

Postby shiner » Mon May 17, 2010 7:09 pm

Yes, thanks once again.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."
newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Postby newsposter » Mon May 17, 2010 8:36 pm

tested in a few VMs, seems to work ok, qfecheck verbose comes up clean and as expected.
User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Postby Outbreaker » Mon May 17, 2010 11:49 pm

In "Add/Remove Windows Components" i have a ernty "Windows XP PRO Specific" why is this in there ?

entries.ini has also this entry that points to a version.inf file that is not in the Update Pack:
VersionSpecific=ocgen.dll,OcEntry,version.inf,HIDE,7
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Tue May 18, 2010 2:37 am

This is strictly a cosmetic issue. It's there because the [Optional Components] sections of the files xphome.inf and xppro.inf do not match what's given in entries.ini. The text in white in the code samples below should all match.

entries.ini

Code: Select all

[color=white]VersionSpecific[/color]=ocgen.dll,OcEntry,version.inf,HIDE,7

xphome.inf and xppro.inf

Code: Select all

[Optional Components]
[color=white]ProdVersion[/color]

[[color=white]ProdVersion[/color]]

The easiest way to fix it would be to change VersionSpecific in entries.ini to ProdVersion.
User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Postby Outbreaker » Tue May 18, 2010 3:11 am

THX this works but i have see now also that the xphome.inf and xppro.inf have all ProdVersion in the [Optional Components] section :)
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Tue May 18, 2010 4:02 am

Correct. That's why the fix works.
soporific
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:10 am

Postby soporific » Tue May 18, 2010 11:23 pm

yay, a new release ... i SOOOOOO rely on this pack as the foundation for my unattended DVDs for both Home and work ... please please keep up the fantastic work :)
acus
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 2:41 pm
Location: italy

Postby acus » Thu May 20, 2010 1:14 pm

Hi user_hidden,

first of all, I want to thank for your work.
I made a comparison between your pack and this french pack (http://www.forum-unattend.fr/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=80).

I notice that in section [txtsetup_dirs] of the file entries.ini, there are two missing lines:

726 = system32\mui\041b

728 = system32\mui\0424

I notice, also, in svcpack folder that the french pack contains some hotfixes that are not present in your pack.

KB817688
KB889320-v2
KB897571
KB915800-v4
KB927436-v2
KB934401
KB940159-v2
KB945060-v3
KB945184
KB945436
KB948277
KB948698
KB948877-v2
KB950305-v2
KB950820
KB950982
KB951159
KB951347
KB951822-v2
kb952013
KB952117-v2
KB952595-v3
KB952909-v2
KB953930
KB954434
KB955043-v2
KB957218
KB957495
KB957502
KB958071
KB958259-v2
KB958910
KB959085
KB959160
KB959540
KB959554
KB959682
KB959765
KB959873
KB960519
KB960655
KB960921
KB960970
KB961067
KB961853-v2
KB963038
KB965220
KB967705-v2
KB968764
KB969262
KB969395
KB969632
KB970048
KB970063
KB970326
KB970413
KB970685
KB970922
KB971276
KB971323
KB971455
kb972187
KB973039
KB975167


Best regards
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Postby user_hidden » Thu May 20, 2010 3:32 pm

acus wrote:Hi user_hidden,

first of all, I want to thank for your work.
I made a comparison between your pack and this french pack (http://www.forum-unattend.fr/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=80).

I notice that in section [txtsetup_dirs] of the file entries.ini, there are two missing lines:



looks like a french translation of my pack :shock:

as for the extras i have no reason to even download and check that pack.
mine is 100% up to date!
User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Postby vodacuza » Thu May 20, 2010 4:01 pm

                user_hidden wrote: :shock:
Image nice the reaction...

maybe the french pack maker forgot to operate the replacements between the various releases of the same target update each time

or they rushed in to include all "artistic" updates MS excremented among the high priority ones... :)

usually the updates for the other languages are equal or even less than the english ones...

there are many updates...not all of them essential...some attend specific irrelevant situations
User avatar
Outbreaker
Posts: 703
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am

Postby Outbreaker » Fri May 21, 2010 1:58 am

Should this not be set to 0x10001,1 in the Update Pack ?
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\DeviceInstall\Settings","SuppressNewHWUI",0x10001,0
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Postby user_hidden » Fri May 21, 2010 7:52 am

Outbreaker wrote:Should this not be set to 0x10001,1 in the Update Pack ?
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\DeviceInstall\Settings","SuppressNewHWUI",0x10001,0



according to KB938596 if set to 1 all UI plug & play messages would be suppressed.
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Fri May 21, 2010 8:55 am

In my opinion, where existing functionality is significantly changed, it is best not to enable the change by default. I believe user_hidden has taken the correct course of action concerning KB938596. Should a user wish to enable the change, they are welcome to do so in their own source by simply adding a registry entry. :)

I have done the same in my own pack with this update, and also with KB971029 and KB977377. Additionally, I've made note of these in my changelog so users know what to expect.

What one person may see as a new feature another may see as a bug, depending on point of view.
User avatar
compstuff
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:25 pm
Location: Florida

Postby compstuff » Sun May 23, 2010 11:00 am

Just wanted to say THANKS!!! Wouldn't know what to do without you and you're awesome work!!!
User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Postby mr_smartepants » Sun May 23, 2010 12:59 pm

Indeed. Thank you very much for all the personal time & effort you spend to make our lives easier.
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Re: XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack for Windows XP Post-SP3 1.2.9 20100525

Postby user_hidden » Tue May 25, 2010 9:31 pm

updated 1.2.9 20100525 ....


1.29:
updated KB931125 Root Certificates Update May 2010
added KB981793 replaced KB982615
fuksen
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:18 am

Re: XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack for Windows XP Post-SP3 1.2.9 20100525

Postby fuksen » Wed May 26, 2010 1:30 am

user_hidden wrote:updated 1.2.9 20100525 ....


1.29:
updated KB931125 Root Certificates Update May 2010
added KB981793 replaced KB982615


got this error
---------------------------
Error!
---------------------------
H-The process cannot access the file 'D:\Portable\nLite-1.4.9.1\xxx\SVCPACK.INF' because it is being used by another process.

Please report this error if it's unexpected.

Write your message in English and attach your 'Last Session.ini' if possible.
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------
thx bro nice job with update
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Wed May 26, 2010 12:07 pm

I have received a report of the same error with my update pack in nLite 1.4.9.1. It happens intermittently to me with mine as well. I have not found the cause yet.

When it occurs with my update pack, nLite seems to quit in the middle of adding the CATs to SvcPack.inf. The break point is random. This appears to be a problem with nLite, not the update pack.

For now, I'd recommend starting with a clean source and integrating the latest service pack and update pack with the RyanVM Integrator. Then run nLite on the updated source for everything else.
newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Postby newsposter » Wed May 26, 2010 4:19 pm

You can tell nlite itself to run at above-normal priority or adjust it on the fly in Task Manager.

For me, this seems to have solved the occasional problems of quitting while adding cats and building the actual ISO.
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Wed May 26, 2010 6:02 pm

I'll give that a try, newsposter. I hadn't thought of that. :)
User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Postby vodacuza » Thu May 27, 2010 7:29 am

me had an error issue right after changing nlite processing priority to "above normal" ... in fact I remember that to be the only error issue with nlite that I ever encountered. i cannot say for certain it was for that ... but now i leave it as is and wait a few seconds more to finish
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Thu May 27, 2010 12:59 pm

Unfortunately, newsposter, this does not work for me with my update pack. But thanks for the suggestion.

I haven't had the time to test user_hidden's update pack; so I can't say if it experiences the same nLite error here, or whether your suggestion would work or not.
AndyMutz
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 8:10 am
Location: Earth

Re: XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack for Windows XP Post-SP3 1.2.9 20100525

Postby AndyMutz » Fri May 28, 2010 6:40 pm

fuksen wrote:H-The process cannot access the file 'D:\Portable\nLite-1.4.9.1\xxx\SVCPACK.INF' because it is being used by another process.


maybe a virus scanner running in the background? try to disable any on access antivirus protection and see if that helps.

-andy-
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Fri May 28, 2010 7:27 pm

That's exactly the solution, AndyMutz. Kurt_Aust has just confirmed that disabling AV allows nLite to finish integrating my pack without errors. I can imagine it should work for this pack as well.

In our case, avast! AV was the culprit.
AndyMutz
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 8:10 am
Location: Earth

Postby AndyMutz » Sat May 29, 2010 4:03 am

yeah, i had the same problem once with kaspersky antivirus.. sometimes got the "access denied, file in use" message while creating audio files with foobar2000 and the file being worked on was small and was accessed quickly several times.

-andy-
User avatar
keloo05
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 10:04 pm
Location: Romania

Postby keloo05 » Sat May 29, 2010 7:56 am

5eraph wrote:This is strictly a cosmetic issue. It's there because the [Optional Components] sections of the files xphome.inf and xppro.inf do not match what's given in entries.ini. The text in white in the code samples below should all match.

entries.ini

Code: Select all

[color=white]VersionSpecific[/color]=ocgen.dll,OcEntry,version.inf,HIDE,7

xphome.inf and xppro.inf

Code: Select all

[Optional Components]
[color=white]ProdVersion[/color]

[[color=white]ProdVersion[/color]]

The easiest way to fix it would be to change VersionSpecific in entries.ini to ProdVersion.


I have a question for user_hidden before downloading the new updatepack (my bandwidth is limited now). Was this corrected in the new version, or you leave it on purpose?
User avatar
5eraph
Moderator
Posts: 4441
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Postby 5eraph » Sat May 29, 2010 10:18 am

It is fixed in 1.2.9, keloo05.
User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Postby vodacuza » Sun May 30, 2010 11:43 am

the nowaday's civilization, the global crisis affecting human relations... :P let's be less demanding and acusitory especially when u_h is doing us a favor and it is not hired by any, nor bound to react a certain way, to a demanding attitude, it is the least we can do to respect his passionate but free work :wink: supposedly, those who might be really interested in this kind of forum, might also have an opened mind and a way of getting at the roots of the things in general, which means avoiding as much as possible to bring here the day by day anxiety. choosing the right manner of expressing ourselves makes us human, we can prove it more than others :P
User avatar
c400
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:15 am

Postby c400 » Sun May 30, 2010 8:16 pm

great work! works as a charm
WiNmaKlIn
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 2:08 am

Postby WiNmaKlIn » Sun May 30, 2010 9:08 pm

Hi guys. This is my first post and I hope this question hasn't been asked elsewhere. I have downloaded the 'XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack_1.2.8' version and then a few days later I saw that an update to this 'version 1.2.9' was posted. I am on dial-up so it takes a while to download a 40Mb file. My question is 'Is it possible to integrate the 1.2.9 change(s) into the 1.2.8 40Mb file so that I don't have to download the whole thing again?' Thanks.
newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Postby newsposter » Sun May 30, 2010 9:30 pm

pack makers haven't made delta/changes-only packs.......
User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Postby vodacuza » Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:48 pm

why after installing office xp...even if i remove it ...the MU keeps saying there is a critical update available for windows ? ( KB975025 )
ChiefZeke
Posts: 766
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:33 pm
Location: Victorville, California

Postby ChiefZeke » Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:57 pm

WiNmaKlIn wrote:Hi guys. This is my first post and I hope this question hasn't been asked elsewhere. I have downloaded the 'XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack_1.2.8' version and then a few days later I saw that an update to this 'version 1.2.9' was posted. I am on dial-up so it takes a while to download a 40Mb file. My question is 'Is it possible to integrate the 1.2.9 change(s) into the 1.2.8 40Mb file so that I don't have to download the whole thing again?' Thanks.

As tomorrow is patch Tuesday just wait till late tomorrow or early Wednesday and you'll be offered a new Update Pack.
User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Postby vodacuza » Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:13 am

till this split second :) the only update is DirectX_June2010 , which strange enough cannot be detected by direct x online update tool, which makes me think that it is more a matter of comercial issue, a question of "cadence" releasing habit, rather than a critical update... but NOTHING for XP-OS or IE8 till now.
newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Postby newsposter » Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:31 pm

There is a fine line between polite discussion and harassment......
User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Postby vodacuza » Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:41 pm

which of them replaces the other...cause the corresponding security bulletin fails the appropriate description :wink:
User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Postby vodacuza » Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:32 pm

they did it !
I have almost 10 updates Image...some about IE and WMP also
MS never stops... :(
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1888
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Postby user_hidden » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:51 pm

updated 20100608 .....

1.30
updated Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool Key to v3.8
added KB975562 replaced KB975560
added KB978695 replaced KB968816
added KB979482
added KB979559 replaced KB969947
added KB980195 replaced KB978262
added KB980218
added KB982381 replaced KB980182
added KB983458 replaced KB980232
pdl808
Posts: 58
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:13 pm
Location: Milpitas, CA USA

Postby pdl808 » Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:00 pm

v 1.30 fails the checksums
adric
Posts: 561
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 5:51 am

Postby adric » Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:27 pm

Same here. Downloaded from Mediafire link.

MD5
a89f7d61d9ee4be5f889772030dca3d0 *XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack_1.3.0_20100608.7z

Al
User avatar
RogueSpear
Posts: 1155
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:50 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY

Postby RogueSpear » Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:39 pm

It does however pass 7-Zip test.
User avatar
shiner
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:18 am
Location: SE Asia

Postby shiner » Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:52 pm

Same here. I apparently got the same file as adric.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."

Return to “Windows XP Professional”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest