XPSP3_QFE_UpdatePack for Windows XP Post-SP3 20180109

Windows XP Professional Update Pack discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:24 pm

5eraph wrote:You may want to consider a new release soon. The Flash update deals with two security issues.
you win :wink:

pack updated version 1.2.0 20100212 ....

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Sun Feb 14, 2010 6:27 am

After integrating latest pack (1.2.0 20100212), I can confirn that MU shows ZERO updates.
Also qfecheck show all updates correctly.

Great work. thanks u_h

User avatar
trippinferret
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: Lakewood, N.S.W. Australia

Post by trippinferret » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:03 pm

Hi user_hidden

Just finished integrating your pack and a few others, here's what I did.

Onepiece IE8 1.9.0
Onepiece Windows Media Player 11 v2.0.0
Onepiece Net Framework 1.1.4322.2443
User_Hidden QFE Updatepack 1.2.0
Ricktendo64 XP to MCE05

All integrated successfully in the one go, but let NLite choose the order in which to slipstream and you will have a fully patched XP SP3 Media Center Edition DVD, formatted the hard drive and it installed perfectly.
Thanks to all who made it possible.

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:23 pm

trippinferret wrote:Hi user_hidden

Just finished integrating your pack and a few others, here's what I did.

Onepiece IE8 1.9.0
Onepiece Windows Media Player 11 v2.0.0
Onepiece Net Framework 1.1.4322.2443
User_Hidden QFE Updatepack 1.2.0
Ricktendo64 XP to MCE05

All integrated successfully ........
thanx for the tip of transforming XP 2 MCE ... regarding the issue of the order in which one should integrate pieces... I am afraid that QFE must go first, as the prime integration operation,... I mean before IE8, WMP11...since those two are explicitly oversighted in QFE structure policy... although the former (QFE pack) it represents the very platform for the latter ones... (IE8, WMP11). :rolleyes:

I believe that QFE does have elements of the i.e. browser and multimedia components from M.S., that the IE8 and WMP11 need to update, modify, even replace :) . Fellows here could provide as with more helping information, i am novice, although i consider the reasons of chronological releasing of components and also the design that user_hidden had in mind making QFE ... allowing us to use QFE as is...or update components such as IE and WMP after each one's flavor...

User avatar
ricktendo64
Posts: 3213
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:27 am
Location: Honduras

Post by ricktendo64 » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:48 pm

You can move the addons up or down on the list, updatepacks should always go first

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:55 am

I've made my first silent installers :P consisting of 3 updates I personally use over QFE.
  • CAPICOM-KB931906-v2102.exe
  • WindowsRightsManagementServicesSP2-KB979099-Client-x86-ENU.exe
  • Silverlight.exe (3.0.50106.0 - last one, updated)
could someone tell me if i did it right, pls ? 8) I would like to integrate them using RVMi

mine KBs over QFE.7z

newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Post by newsposter » Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:08 am

v, you should probably make your own thread instead of using this one.

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:07 am

vodacuza wrote:I've made my first silent installers :P consisting of 3 updates I personally use over QFE.
  • CAPICOM-KB931906-v2102.exe
  • WindowsRightsManagementServicesSP2-KB979099-Client-x86-ENU.exe
  • Silverlight.exe (3.0.50106.0 - last one, updated)
could someone tell me if i did it right, pls ? 8) I would like to integrate them using RVMi

mine KBs over QFE.7z
start a new thread about your addons.

addons get tested in a VM.
you should install Virtualbox or VMware and test yourself.
addons should not be released public unless already tested.

User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Post by mr_smartepants » Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:24 am

speedy859 wrote:I've been having this odd issue where if I integrate this pack (using RVMi 1.6) on clean XP Pro SP3 and XP Home SP3 sources and then make a multiboot disc using XP PowerPacker, this one update (KB955759) shows up when I run Microsoft Update. If I tell MU to install it, nothing seems to change; the update remains listed when I run MU again.

Weirder is that this issue does not present itself when I don't make a multiboot disc (i.e. just burn the slipstreamed XP Pro disc by itself). I'm not using any other update packs or anything. Anyone encounter this?
Yes, I'm still chasing this gremlin! When doing a clean integration with 1.20 (I'm testing 1.18 at the moment) and the rest of my addons, the subsequent .iso tests fine in VM. If I modify the source using XPtsp (which doesn't modify any files included in kb955759), that hotfix will continue to show up over and over again regardless how many times I allow MU/WU to install it.
Very odd.
I'm regressing back through the updatepacks to find the point it starts working again.

@U_H, is there a quick way for me to remove kb955759 from this updatepack for testing?
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4618
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:38 am

That update should be easily removed by using the following addon. It should be mentioned that by using this addon, the resulting installation can be exploited through the vulnerabilities described in MS Security Advisory 954157 unless KB955759 is reapplied using some other method.

Details:
  • Intended for user_hidden's Update Pack v1.1.5 or later.
  • Untested.
  • Integrates with RyanVM Integrator v1.6 and nLite 1.4.9.1, or later versions of either.
Downloads:

User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Post by mr_smartepants » Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:02 pm

Thank you 5eraph. Yes, I plan on adding KB955759 either manually or at ROE whichever works for me in my unique circumstances.
I'll test and report back.

*Edit
Confirmed. Using the removal addon, then adding the KB955759 hotfix at ROE works perfectly. I'm not sure why incorporating the hotfix into the updatepack is causing the trouble, but it is.
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:15 pm

user_hidden wrote: ...you should install Virtualbox or VMware and test yourself.
just downloaded virtualbox :)

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:58 pm

Just activated and ms site pointed me to download a new LegitCheckControl.cab containing LegitCheckControl.dll version 1.9.42.0
Not pointed me until today even if dll date is 25.06.2009. Strange microsoft ways ! seem to be one verry delayed update.
inside of latest pack (1.20 20100212) is legitcc.dll version 1.9.40.0 10.03.2009.

Microsoft source files here (direct download )

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:09 pm

vmanda wrote:Just activated and ms site pointed me to download a new LegitCheckControl.cab containing LegitCheckControl.dll version 1.9.42.0
Not pointed me until today even if dll date is 25.06.2009. Strange microsoft ways ! seem to be one verry delayed update.
inside of latest pack (1.20 20100212) is legitcc.dll version 1.9.40.0 10.03.2009.
I will update for the next release.

thank you vmanda :D

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:23 pm

i'm just guessing here, they send the same version .dll repackaged under the declared version of "1942", only when some "sensor" detects to much friction around the senzitive matter of modifying and testing activation behaviors, on some machines...i mean ..when some data does not corelate anymore... they send the refurbished 1940 as 1942, who knows what MS has in mind, anyway...it is the time by now, for them, to release another official upgrade to the protection mechanism :?

Used Install Watch...saw that hidding or revealing an update from the list it addresses to 3 logs (3 different locations on PC) and registry also :wink:

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:48 pm

vmanda wrote:Just activated and ms site pointed me to download a new LegitCheckControl.cab containing LegitCheckControl.dll version 1.9.42.0
i updated the pack locally.

out of curiosity, i removed KB892130 from the test system.
i then went to MU and was prompted for KB892130 download.
after download and install they pushed version 1.7.69.2 !!!

very strange.

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:06 pm

waw, so they abandoned the ethic rules they've used as with and playing dirty now, becoming tricky :rolleyes: , or I am becoming paranoid . maybe the declared version (even digital signing) is one, and the content is new, could someone compare the present one with the old version one it says it is ?

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Tue Feb 23, 2010 7:11 am

vodacuza wrote:waw, so they abandoned the ethic rules they've used as with and playing dirty now, becoming tricky :rolleyes: , or I am becoming paranoid . maybe the declared version (even digital signing) is one, and the content is new, could someone compare the present one with the old version one it says it is ?
dont worry about having the "latest" version.

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Tue Feb 23, 2010 7:20 pm


speedy859
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:16 pm

Post by speedy859 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:22 pm

mr_smartepants wrote:
speedy859 wrote:I've been having this odd issue where if I integrate this pack (using RVMi 1.6) on clean XP Pro SP3 and XP Home SP3 sources and then make a multiboot disc using XP PowerPacker, this one update (KB955759) shows up when I run Microsoft Update. If I tell MU to install it, nothing seems to change; the update remains listed when I run MU again.

Weirder is that this issue does not present itself when I don't make a multiboot disc (i.e. just burn the slipstreamed XP Pro disc by itself). I'm not using any other update packs or anything. Anyone encounter this?
Yes, I'm still chasing this gremlin! When doing a clean integration with 1.20 (I'm testing 1.18 at the moment) and the rest of my addons, the subsequent .iso tests fine in VM. If I modify the source using XPtsp (which doesn't modify any files included in kb955759), that hotfix will continue to show up over and over again regardless how many times I allow MU/WU to install it.
Very odd.
I'm regressing back through the updatepacks to find the point it starts working again.

@U_H, is there a quick way for me to remove kb955759 from this updatepack for testing?
I solved my issue without needing to remove KB955759 from the pack. For some reason or another, it was the method I was using to create the final ISO that affected this. The parameters I used with CDImage (supplied by the multiboot guide on MSFN) resulted in the error with KB955759. Creating the image with mkisofs, however, made it so the image was fine. I used the following parameters:

CDImage (This gave the KB 955759 error): cdimage.exe -lXPMulti -t01/01/2006,12:00:00 -b\DVD\BOOT\loader.bin -h -n -o -m \AIO-DVD C:\MultiBoot.iso

MKISOFS (This gave a working image): mkisofs -joliet-long -iso-level 2 -N -d -relaxed-filenames -duplicates-once -D -boot-load-size 4 -no-emul-boot -volid "XPMulti" -sysid "Win32" -b loader.bin -o "C:\Temp\MultiBoot.iso" "C:\AIO-DVD"

I'm not sure what exact change in the parameters made it work, but everything has been fine since I switched to mkisofs.

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:31 pm

When I finish the tasks ment for RVMi...i quit integrator bypassing any iso image formatting (MKISOFS?) and formation :D , and pass to nlite to make the final adjustments and create ISO with nlite. This way I've never had problems also. I remember that using RVMi to create iso it makes an extra file on the image...which on earlier versions I could manage to transform somehow using Ultraiso and make it vanish although keeping bootinfo ..but lately did not succeed anymore, i forgot the method or not supported anymore... so I quit RVMi after integrating all there can be integrated with it and jump to nlite to integrate drivers, remove a few stuff, adjust settings and make by default invisible boot info on final disk image 8)

User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Post by mr_smartepants » Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:22 am

Ah, that might explain things. XPtsp uses CDImage to build it's .iso. More testing is in order then. Thanks for the tip!
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!

User avatar
Bhishmar
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by Bhishmar » Wed Feb 24, 2010 5:12 am

vodacuza wrote:.......................
I remember that using RVMi to create iso it makes an extra file on the image...which on earlier versions I could manage to transform somehow using Ultraiso and make it vanish although keeping bootinfo ..but lately did not succeed anymore, ....................
Do you intend to say that, the iso created by rvmI (ver-1.6), cannot be customized by UltraISO, to augment some files/folders ?
And if it is attempted, the resulting ISO will become unbootable or corrupted?
Can u elaborate. Also which version of ultraiso where u using?

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:32 am

vodacuza wrote:detected new: KB979306
:P

DST timezone update will be in next patch tuesday release of the pack.

newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Post by newsposter » Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:47 am

whoops, disregard.....

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:32 pm

Bhishmar wrote: Do you intend to say that, the iso created by rvmI (ver-1.6), cannot be customized by UltraISO, to augment some files/folders ?
I wasn't saying that, Ultraiso it's a powerful tool... you may add/remove whatever to the iso with it, I was referring to the specific task of removing that "mskifo" file that appears on the root of the iso image, after using the RVMi to create iso (the final phase of the RVMi). I was saying that with previous releases of RVMi and with previous releases of Ultraiso I somehow could manage to get rid of that mskifo from the root... by saving boot info to desktop, deleting mskinfo file from image, reapplying boot info from the desktop (all 3 operations provided by using Ultraiso) Well, wasn't able anymore , so I just quit RVMi after integrations..and let nlite deal with the matter of creating iso , nlite has too that possibility . I use the final Ultraiso, always :wink:

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:55 pm

There is one issue I would like to discuss with you all. I am afraid that there are some very few windows XP updates, even catalogated as "High Priority" by MU itself, that does not reveal normally except in some particular conditions. Although those updates are fixing system vulnerabilities, compatibilities, stability, performance blah blah... let's say improve windows XP, they appear only after installation of other pieces of software. This does not mean at all that Xp, will not be improved if we apply that update, independently or prior to that software installation, even if we will install it or not, in fact it is ment for XP in the first place. Also by having it already into the system, we just extend windows security and readiness of the platform to eventualy meet with the standards of other software components and alike.

As a practical example (the only I posses) I would like to mention what happened to me a few minutes ago when ... I've installed Office XP (my Offixe10 disk it is up to date, thanks to a tool from Siginet... "Office Integrator" ). After installing OfficeXP to check if there are any new updates available, it said "0 updates for OfficeXP" but booom : Windows XP (High Priority) update available... KB975025 . Excuse my english, i won't check it anymore 8)

boydaigai
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:55 pm

Post by boydaigai » Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:55 am

I tested update pack, Nice work.Thanks user_hidden

new hotfixs : kb97662 and kb979306

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:35 am

boydaigai wrote:I tested update pack, Nice work.Thanks user_hidden

new hotfixs : kb97662 and kb979306
KB976662 = IE8 update not a winXP update

KB979306 = DST update already local will be in next pack.

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:33 pm

boydaigai wrote:I tested update pack, Nice work.Thanks user_hidden
new hotfixs : kb97662 and kb979306
kb97662 was reported and already implemented in this IE8:
http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7778 8)

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:59 pm

clandren wrote:anyone read about this? http://social.answers.microsoft.com/For ... 92b69f2fd1
seems to be a problem related to KB977165
as far as using my updatepack with KB977165 integrated there is no issues when installing or using the pc.

issues with the KB can only happen on a live system when applying the KB.

to see if your system is compatible with KB977165:
How to determine whether a computer is compatible with security update 977165

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Thu Mar 04, 2010 5:35 pm

any news from u_h ?
is he working to update qfe ? :D

newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Post by newsposter » Thu Mar 04, 2010 5:57 pm

Considering the next increment of the update packs are due next week, you might want to wait (quietly) until then.

No sense in releasing an updated pack with LAST MONTHS fixes when THIS MONTHS fixes are 5 days away.

User avatar
vodacuza
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: Fukushima 3rd reactor

Post by vodacuza » Thu Mar 04, 2010 6:55 pm

hopefully microsoft will do what they are threatening us and discontinue support for XP, thus we will be stress free ...

User avatar
vmanda
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: TM.Romania

Post by vmanda » Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:28 am

vodacuza wrote:hopefully microsoft will do what they are threatening us and discontinue support for XP, thus we will be stress free ...
acording to this page ending support for sp3 will be verry soon: 21.04.2010 for regular updates,
after this date sp3 will go into "Extended Support phase", and will release only Security Updates.

Also this page says:
.........
Only Software Assurance customers who still run Windows XP can enroll in the Extended Hotfix Support Agreement if they want to receive non-security related hotfixes. The enrollment offer for consumers ended on July 14, 2009.

On April 8, 2014, all Windows XP support, including security updates and security-related hotfixes, will be terminated.
My personal opinion: SP3 release has not been carefully prepared, since 21.04.2008, almost all windows xp components have been updated/patched.
Windows XP buyers merits an SP4 to be released, to incorporate all updates/patches since sp3 release,before to enter into "Extended Support phase",
but seem that this will not happens ...

But do not despair, we still having user_hidden ...

User avatar
mr_smartepants
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:56 am
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK

Post by mr_smartepants » Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:59 am

There has been much debate over the possibility of an XP SP4. I for one hope M$ builds SP4 with all the security updates/patches AND includes IE8/WMP11 BEFORE it enters the extended support phase. This would make much more sense for M$ from a support standpoint where it would have a single point of support (ie, we can't help you if you don't install SP4...). It would certainly ensure that whatever WAT/WGA process they want to enforce would be embedded within SP4 (that's what I would do!).
But this is off-topic from User_Hidden's thread. Back on topic please.
As always, these are my opinions only.
Image
Some heroes don't wear capes, they wear Kevlar and dog-tags!

jaynbe
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:37 pm

Post by jaynbe » Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:04 am

MS wants to end the lifecycle of Win XP and will never make a SP4.
It is MS policy to support any Service Pack for at least 2years.
Like in the past they may rather make a Rollup Pack to end the support.
And honestly don't expect much efforts from MS keeping XP attractive.

paulyboi
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:49 am
Location: Newcastle NSW Australia

Post by paulyboi » Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:23 am

@ user_hidden....

The list of inclusions for this pack says Adobe Flash Player.
This does not appear to be included in Ver 1.2.0
Is this a glitch or otherwise.?

No biggie either way as its easy to include an 'vmanda' Addon to the project.

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4618
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:14 am

Adobe Flash 10.0.45.2 for Internet Explorer is included, paulyboi. An addon is required if you want Flash for other web browsers.

jaynbe
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:37 pm

Post by jaynbe » Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:22 am

paulyboi wrote:@ user_hidden....

The list of inclusions for this pack says Adobe Flash Player.
This does not appear to be included in Ver 1.2.0
Is this a glitch or otherwise.?

No biggie either way as its easy to include an 'vmanda' Addon to the project.
I noticed the same issue with Adobe Flash 10.0.45.2 for Internet Explorer.
It seems not correctly installing with this updatepack: to fix in the next pack.

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:04 am

jaynbe wrote:
paulyboi wrote:@ user_hidden....

The list of inclusions for this pack says Adobe Flash Player.
This does not appear to be included in Ver 1.2.0
Is this a glitch or otherwise.?

No biggie either way as its easy to include an 'vmanda' Addon to the project.
I noticed the same issue with Adobe Flash 10.0.45.2 for Internet Explorer.
It seems not correctly installing with this updatepack: to fix in the next pack.
Flash activex control for IE is installed correctly.
This is NOT the flash player nor addon for any other browser.

paulyboi
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:49 am
Location: Newcastle NSW Australia

Post by paulyboi » Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:19 am

ahhh....

Many thanks for the clarification User_Hidden.

maddog
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:07 pm

Post by maddog » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:42 am

eagerly waiting the new security update releasing......

seniorquico
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:40 pm
Location: San Luis Obispo

Post by seniorquico » Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:57 pm

The links in the first post appear to be dead. Does anybody have a mirror of these files?
Kyle Dodson // SeniorQuico

User avatar
user_hidden
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: Canada eh!

Post by user_hidden » Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:32 pm

updated version 1.2.1 20100309 .....

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

Post by ChiefZeke » Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:43 pm

Got it. Nice and quick for patch Tuesday :D

seniorquico
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:40 pm
Location: San Luis Obispo

Post by seniorquico » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:15 pm

It worked perfectly! Thanks so much for the update!
Kyle Dodson // SeniorQuico

User avatar
=[FEAR]=JIGSAW
Posts: 384
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:54 am
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Post by =[FEAR]=JIGSAW » Wed Mar 10, 2010 6:37 am

Thanks ;)

User avatar
compstuff
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:25 pm
Location: Florida

Post by compstuff » Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:22 am

THANKS!!!!!!

adric
Posts: 581
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 5:51 am

Post by adric » Wed Mar 10, 2010 6:10 pm

Nothing to pick on :x

Al

Post Reply