MalwareBytes AntiMalware Free:

Avira Antivirus Free (adware-as-of-late):

Spybot Search & Destroy:

These detections may xor may not include false-positives (ie: NirSoft.7z? - they're always picking on Mr. Sofer).

I do note that this version does contain two driver files:  XpDrvLAN.7z & XpDrvWLAN.7z (bcmwl6.inf is included in error, bcmwl5.inf is DriverVer=07/17/2003, 3.30.15.0; terribly ancient)  MassStorage drivers are included in 'Hiren's.BootCD.15.0.iso\HBCD\XP\XP.wim\I386\System32\drivers\', yet i'm not sure if they're recent.  I don't see .Inf's for them, though.  USB3 doesn't appear to be supported.  I wonder how they solved nV MassStorage issues.

I have been using SARDU since, which lets you build your own XP PE, much like UBCD4win, using your own source

This must sound like me promoting that soft by now, eh?

Which SARDU do you use?

http://www.sarducd.it http://reboot.pro/14768/ dosn't build a PE, it's use a existing PE.
Main purpose is to build a multi boot environment. A PE is one possibility.

Another PE distribution example:
neosmart did distribute a PE for free in the past. And got contacted by the legal department of OS manufacturer.
A licensing fee is required today.
http://neosmart.net/blog/2011/windows-r … einstated/

This emphasises OS manufacturer opinion: PE distribution is possible within certain limitations.

Some commercial software manufacturer distribute a PE too.
Testing version dosn't include a PE. The PE is distributed within full version.
Example: Backup & Recovery 11 Home 30 Days Trial
No WinPE-Recovery CD included in the installation package. 
http://www.paragon-software.com/uk/downloads/demo.html

Overall PE redistribution is a difficult, unclear part.
OS manufacturer opinion may match or fail local laws. There is confusion without court rulings.
I trust a commercial software manufacturer to redistribute a PE legally.
And I distrust other sources, especial H...
Of course this general approach may be true or false at a special case.

I just re-checked the contents and apparently it still contains some "Mini-XP" alongside with a $ symbol which implies commercial (and most likely copyrighted) software.
I was under the impression (as I told you, I have been using SARDU since, which lets you build your own XP PE, much like UBCD4win, using your own source, so I wasn't aware of Hiren's current contents) it was now shareware-only, as that had been announced by the author and was widely commented on on several fora...

Glad to have that sorted out, though.
Will keep me from suggesting it at least (plus, SARDU seems like a valuable alternative, even containing bootable virus scanners etc - plus it's fully costomizable. This must sound like me promoting that soft by now, eh? )

i did mention what version i used in my first post but i removed that part after i got warned, and it was Hirens BootCD 14.1.

Windows files are free to distribute?

No.  For the same reason that no one (legally) distributes UBCD4win discs.
@Helmi,  you're partially right.  His mention of Hiren's  was just to say "hey, I tried Hiren's and I didn't have this problem using that disc."  It was a comparison.

To his defense, latest official versions (since v. 11 or so) of ... are free of warez

Rhetoric question: Windows files are free to distribute?

Most likely it's warez still.

Personally, before there was SARDU, I was heavily relying on Hiren myself, as were many other Sys Admins I know.

That is not to say to abandon our strict no-warez policy, quite the contrary, but we shouldn't witch-hunt someone before we are sure they broke our law

and although he did use search... (wow ) and give a good description of the issue, and how to reproduce it, and what DriverPacks pack, and it's version... he did not tell us what version of Hirens...

As the original posts have been edited, I am of course unable to judge about what he really posted (some hackers released versions of Hiren's again containing all the commercial tools, so it's possible he was using one of those...).

When we say Warez are not supported we mean it...

It does not mean you come back and answer your own question for others to use. NO SUPPORT for warez... Not by you or us nor anyone else. Not now, not later, not ever... Not even a little.

Banned for one week for violation of forum rules... after being warned.

the administration....

Last edited by OverFlow (Today 00:31:58)

This temporary ban may be extended or made permanent by a Moderator as they see fit.

It does not mean you come back and answer your own question for others to use. NO SUPPORT for warez... Not by you or us nor anyone else. Not now, not later, not ever... Not even a little.

Banned for one week for violation of forum rules... after being warned.

the administration....

I read this topic http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=5443
I excluded I5 but I get same error even tried only I9 no luck same error.

I did some search about mass storage related problems the answer is to do offlinesysprep.
I read Galapo's sticky topic about offlinesysprep, prepared all the requirements.

I tried few times.

1st try:
-HAL update option: AUTO configuration
-Install standard IDE Mass Storage Devices
-Install all DriverPack non-IDE Mass Storage Devices
-Generate new SID

After clicking apply then sysprep.exe started I chose use Mini-Setup, Detect non-plug and play hardware and shut down mode: Quit, generate new SID: OK and then just freeze there.
Is this because the needed server service? At first when running offlinesysprep I get a message bout starting required service.

2nd try:
-HAL update option: AUTO configuration
-Install standard IDE Mass Storage Devices
-Install all DriverPack non-IDE Mass Storage Devices
-Generate new SID
-Complete offlinesysprep operations without running sysprep.exe

Operation finish when reboot to test get error before loading windows: "system32\drivers\ntf.sys missing or corrupt". I did some search about that, found ntldr should be replaced with one from XP 64bit, this is due to memory limitation on 32bit ntldr.

I'm confused I want to know, is sysprep.exe should behave at offline same as online?
is this will work if I do first sysprep as normally only include windows standard mass storage then reseal, after that use offlinesysprep to only inject DriverPacks mass storage?

Thanks to all driverpacks.net members.
I really learned a lot.