dpms textmode maybe?
3,126 2009-01-07 07:30:44
Re: [Solved] DP Base 8.05 works / 8.12.x "no files to extract" error (47 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
3,127 2009-01-07 03:41:20
Re: FindHWIDS v3.2s - The INF Searching, Hardware ID Exporter (353 replies, posted in Software)
kickarse wrote:
I'll look into it. Is it in the latest Graphics pack? A, B?
Thanks!
Yes, confirmed with even the latest nightly & release DriverPacks. 
If the .inf is structured with the following layout, the DEV_* generics get skipped:
VEN_XXXX&DEV_YYYY&SUBSYS_ZZZZZZZ
VEN_XXXX&DEV_YYYY
If the .inf is structured with the following layout, everything is fine:
VEN_XXXX&DEV_YYYY
VEN_XXXX&DEV_YYYY&SUBSYS_ZZZZZZZ
3,128 2009-01-07 03:33:32
Re: [IMPL] Intel GMA driver package 6.14.10.5404 (Z7x/B77/H77support) (54 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Downloading now...
3,129 2009-01-05 17:06:50
Re: Conexant High Definition SmartAudio 221 drivers for xp (21 replies, posted in DriverPack Sound)
I've learned a lot in the past few months while reading the MSDN material here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms794526.aspx
It really bugs (pun intended) me that driver makers get so lazy with their .inf files. Your post above just highlights that laziness.
Using the "$CHICAGO$" flag makes this .inf supported by all windows OS (when it shouldn't).
Microsoft wrote:
Note An INF file that has a $Windows 95$ signature will not run on Windows 2000 and later versions of the operating system. Conversely, an INF file that has a $Windows NT$ signature will not run on Windows 95/98/Me.
If the INF file will be used on both Windows 95/98/Me and Windows 2000 and later versions, the INF file must also have the following line in the Version section:
Compatible=1
A network INF file that has a $Chicago$ signature will not run on Windows 2000 and later versions unless the Compatible entry in the Version section is set to 1.
3,130 2009-01-05 09:35:18
Re: Conexant High Definition SmartAudio 221 drivers for xp (21 replies, posted in DriverPack Sound)
This HWID is still missing from both sound DriverPacks.
If anyone can;
1. find a driver
2. CONFIRM IT WORKS
3. provide a link to download
...then I'll add it to the DriverPack Sound B I'm working on currently.
3,131 2009-01-04 19:47:07
Re: [AddOn] DriverPacks BASE v8.12.1 (Updated Jan 01-2009) (13 replies, posted in Feature Requests)
DriverPacks BASE version got bumped to 8.12.2 
Thanks for this Rick!
3,132 2009-01-04 18:43:06
Re: [REL] DP_Monitors_wnt5_x86-32_908130 (59 replies, posted in 3rd Party DriverPacks)
3,133 2009-01-04 18:39:01
Re: [REL] [x86, 32 bit] ALL DriverPack's Repacked (246 replies, posted in 3rd Party DriverPacks)
Us2002 wrote:
What a problem? i dont inderstand... .xls files? Just delete them when u integrate pack in distributive, if u not need them
Here's the problem.
When you posted your monitor dp, people think it's a final because you didn't mention that it's a nightly. Having changelogs & worksheets included in the DriverPacks are normal for nightly builds, but NOT for final builds for just this reason.
If it's a nightly or beta build, then say so.
The new DriverPacks file names must follow the format listed here:
OverFlow wrote:
Format is [Y] Y.MM [. [V] [versiontype] ]
Y.MM and YY.MM are main versions and finals.
main versions will likely be released at the first of the month since any subversion will be newer.
Single digit years must begin with a 7, 8 or 9.
IE 08.12 is identical to 8.12 = _wnt5_x86-32_0812.7z and _wnt5_x86-32_812.7zV is a Subversion.
A subversion is always newer than its main version
IE 08.12.x is newer than 08.12 = _wnt5_x86-32_8121.7z is newer than _wnt5_x86-32_812.7z
a subversion is the 'V' in YY.MM.V
- The Version value is only one place / character long.
- The only valid values are numbers 1 through 9.
- sub versions are compared if the main versions match for two files.
- a main version with only a subversion is a final yy.mm.v or yy.mm = finalVersiontype
there are four types
1 Nightly
2 Beta
3 Release candidate
4 Final1 A nightly is any Number that follows the sub version number
IE 8.12.11 or 8.12.1 = _wnt5_x86-32_81211.7z a nightly is older than _wnt5_x86-32_8121.7z a final
8.12.11 or 8.12.130 = _wnt5_x86-32_81211.7z a nightly is older than _wnt5_x86-32_812130.7z a nightly also2 A beta has a b in the first location past the version and may or may not be followed by a number (zero assumed).
IE 8.12.11 or 8.12.1b1 = _wnt5_x86-32_81211.7z a nightly is older than _wnt5_x86-32_8121b1.7z a beta
8.12.1b1 or 8.12.1b30 = _wnt5_x86-32_8121b1.7z a beta is older than _wnt5_x86-32_8121b30.7z a beta also3 A release candidate has an rc in the first location past the version and may or may not be followed by a number (zero assumed).
IE 8.12.1b or 8.12.1rc1 = _wnt5_x86-32_8121b.7z a beta is older than _wnt5_x86-32_8121rc1.7z a release candidate
8.12.1rc1 or 8.12.1rc30 = _wnt5_x86-32_8121rc1.7z an RC is older than _wnt5_x86-32_8121rc30.7z a release candidate also4 A final will never have any versiontype values included
8.12.1rc30 or 8.12.1 = _wnt5_x86-32_8121rc30.7z a Release Candidate is older than _wnt5_x86-32_8121.7z a final
3,134 2009-01-04 09:37:19
Re: OFFICIAL 3rd Party DriverPacks addons for Graphics DriverPacks (languages & PhysX) (15 replies, posted in 3rd Party DriverPacks)
Wow, very nice.
Thank you.
3,135 2009-01-03 19:48:40
Re: [REQ]Wrong Driver detected on ECS-D25 Laptop - is an Update Available? (17 replies, posted in DriverPack Sound)
Are there any compatible drivers on the CD that came with it? Just a thought.
3,136 2009-01-03 18:37:41
Re: [REQ]Wrong Driver detected on ECS-D25 Laptop - is an Update Available? (17 replies, posted in DriverPack Sound)
That's disappointing, but not unexpected.
If you can find a working driver from ECS (or anywhere else), post the link here and I'll fix it.
3,137 2009-01-03 07:44:22
Re: [IMPL] Intel Matrix Storage v8.6.0.1007 10/12/2008 (117 replies, posted in DriverPack Mass Storage)
We don't email DriverPacks to anybody.
When dpms is ready, it will get posted as final...not one minute sooner.
At least you asked "Please". 
3,138 2009-01-02 19:15:45
Re: New: Graphics, Lan, and BASE! (46 replies, posted in News)
I tried that. The problem is the DriverPacks Finisher builds the arrays and finds the files BEFORE anything is executed.
Here's the line I tried:
exc_1_command2 = "cmd.exe /c DEL /F /S /Q %SystemDrive%\nvidia.ins"
I also did similar for ATICCC and PhysX but the .exe is getting called before the command is able to delete the file.
Does DriverPacks Finisher support the "start /wait" command? Or would that even help?
This is what we get for allowing multiple HWID overlap.
3,139 2009-01-02 18:51:12
Re: OFFICIAL 3rd Party DriverPacks addons for Graphics DriverPacks (languages & PhysX) (15 replies, posted in 3rd Party DriverPacks)
First post updated to reflect final 8.12.1 DriverPacks
3,140 2009-01-02 18:43:48
Re: [REL] [x86, 32 bit] ALL DriverPack's Repacked (246 replies, posted in 3rd Party DriverPacks)
Us2002 wrote:
DriverPack Monitor 8.1227
--------------------------
Bug report for this dp.
http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?pid=27474
3,141 2009-01-02 03:53:55
Re: [SOLVD] GUI - DPs_BASE_8121 - minor (5 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
Confirmed.
Solution...don't click so damn quick!
3,142 2009-01-02 03:38:21
Re: New: Graphics, Lan, and BASE! (46 replies, posted in News)
Nomadturk wrote:
I was getting Ati CCC for my Radeon X3850 card, my pc.
I was getting nVidea control panel for my 860GT card, my second pc.
What i was getting at virtualbox was just that little blue icon and the ability of resizing the screen causing resolution changing.
This is exactly what you SHOULD be seeing. Have you tried the latest final DriverPacks? 8.12.1
3,143 2009-01-01 18:35:36
Re: New: Graphics, Lan, and BASE! (46 replies, posted in News)
Thanks Jeff.
I'm still getting duplicate DriverPacks Finisher exceptions on my nvidia 8800GTS installing PhysX and the reg entries twice. Working on a solution now where the DriverPacks Finisher will delete the installer after install to prevent itself from installing again. Just an annoyance really, no harm done.
3,144 2009-01-01 05:51:12
Re: A Merry Christmas to all (36 replies, posted in News)
OverFlow wrote:
Which one of us celebrates New Years first???
I think our friends in Fiji & New Zealand are first. They celebrated 6 hours ago
3,145 2009-01-01 05:42:32
Re: New: Graphics, Lan, and BASE! (46 replies, posted in News)
Outbreaker wrote:
With the MassStorage v8.05 i have no Blue Screen on the first Windows XP load Screen.
OK, I can verify this bug exists in VirtualBox with dpms 8111r1.
@Outbreaker, I suggest you post your findings in the appropriate thread in the Testing Team area (I'll post there too.)
3,146 2009-01-01 03:47:03
Re: New: Graphics, Lan, and BASE! (46 replies, posted in News)
OverFlow wrote:
Graphics packs LAN and DriverPacks BASE have all been officially released and the changelogs have been updated!
PS part of the tutorial just became obsolite
The DriverPack Graphics A B & C info pages still list PhysX and Lang files as 8.10, not 8.12.1
I'll get to work on version 2 of the Tutorial.
3,147 2009-01-01 03:37:52
Re: [CLSD] Graphics BETA DriverPacks are here...for TESTING purposes only! (5 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
@eethball, I'll look into this more in the new year. For now though, you'll have to build your dp yourself. My next DriverPacks will be in 2009.
3,148 2009-01-01 03:36:26
Re: A Merry Christmas to all (36 replies, posted in News)
Happy New Year, Godt nytår (Danish), Bonne année (French), and for our Dutch brothers Gelukkig nieuwjaar!
I just updated the two Sound DriverPacks nightlies. No more 2008 nightlies from me!
Roll-on 2009!
3,149 2009-01-01 03:27:54
Re: New: Graphics, Lan, and BASE! (46 replies, posted in News)
Nomadturk wrote:
For the previous graphics pack RC releases, let me post my HWIDS.
First of all, with the graphics pack for my VirtualBox installations i wasn't getting an virtualbox icon at my taskbar as i did with 8.10
Neither did i get Ati or nVidia panels as i did before.
If you were getting ATI or Nvidia control panels in VirtualBox, then THAT was a bug! You should NEVER get the ATI or Nvidia Graphics control panels in any VM because of how I wrote the DriverPacks Finisher exceptions. If you DO get the control panels installed in VM, then post your DPsFnshr.log so I can fix that bug.
3,150 2008-12-31 02:32:59
Re: It's time: Vista DriverPacks x86 & x64!! (34 replies, posted in News)
The 'News' forum is not the appropriate place for this direction of conversation.
Take it to PM.