Then your download was corrupted. Please re-download and try again.
And welcome to DriverPacks.net! 
3,401 2008-07-22 16:09:35
Re: Error: C:\DriverPacks\DPs_BASE_805.exe is not supported archive (3 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
3,402 2008-07-22 08:12:27
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
You owe me $5 Stu! 
3,403 2008-07-22 08:11:18
Re: Error: C:\DriverPacks\DPs_BASE_805.exe is not supported archive (3 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
Yes, it's not an archive.
It's an executable, just double-click it.
3,404 2008-07-22 06:27:54
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
mr_smartepants wrote:
Has ANY HD2x00 owner had a successful test with any of these nightlies?
Anyone?Helmi wrote:Hopefully going to try on the HD 3850 AGP soon (a reinstall is desperately needed...)
Please do that Helmi, and report back.
I'm seriously tempted to remove the HDMI drivers until we can get this sorted out.
I can get a HD3450 for $35 here.
3,405 2008-07-21 07:59:38
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
midiboy wrote:
But the driver was installed fine, no ? At least it seems so.
No.
Not if you have a 'yellow exclamation mark'.
I don't want to sound arrogant, but without a suitable card to test on myself, I can only surmise that somewhere along the line you did something wrong.
At the moment I only have a mobility 9600 to test ATI stuff on. All my DriverPacks test perfect on that (along with my nvidia 8800GTS).
I can get a deal online for a HD2400Pro for around $45. But that will take time.
Has ANY HD2x00 owner had a successful test with any of these nightlies?
Anyone?
Or do they all fail. 
OverFlow wrote:
I can certainly figure it out... but he probably already knows the answer
Don't count on it my friend.
3,406 2008-07-21 05:27:29
Re: Noticed the fast downloads? Thank SimpleCDN! (14 replies, posted in News)
Sounds great!
Now how about some extra storage space for the nightlies?
I had to throw out some older nightlies to make space for the newer uploads. "Disk Quota exceeded" errors all over the place.
Welcome back Boss!
3,407 2008-07-20 17:14:33
Re: DriverPack updates? (1 replies, posted in Other)
The release DriverPacks have undergone extensive testing and have proven to be successful and stable on multiple platforms.
The 'nightly' builds are our way of testing new drivers or new methods of driver integration and are therefore considered 'beta'.
You may find that the nightly builds are far more up-to-date than the release DriverPacks but because they are in testing, they may not be stable.
Welcome to DriverPacks.net!
3,408 2008-07-20 17:04:39
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
My upload connection crapped out at 98%.
Uploading now...
First post updated.
$5 says ATI releases Catalyst 8.7 in the next day or so...just to spite me!
3,409 2008-07-20 07:54:06
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
First post updated.
Oops. I just realized this is July...file should have been 8.07A.
Oh well. Still uploading. Give it 30 min before downloading.
3,410 2008-07-20 06:47:45
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Stand-by...I'm doing the file comparison...
OK, the only files different between 806G\N1 and the 'new' 175.19 are:
nv4_disp.cat
nvapps.xml
That's it!
Sigh...stand-by for 806i...
3,411 2008-07-20 05:11:54
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
twipley wrote:
the 175.19 has been re-released the very day of your post (that is, the 9th of July). It's probable that the performance issues has been fixed, though be warned that this claim is limited by speculation and may not be reflecting actual facts.
Sigh...
And I just uploaded G_A 806H about an hour ago (which fixes the AVIVO codec install problem).
3,412 2008-07-19 17:37:45
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Wow, this is wierd. Looks like the DPFinisher got confused.
PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043&REV_00\4&2E5EAC9&0&0008: ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO
<snip>
2008-07-18 19:29:52 : <FLTR> ! Could not match +infFile"C:\D\G\A1\A_Hotfix.inf" through the HWID "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043" (original HWID: "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043&REV_00").
<snip>
2008-07-18 19:29:53 : <FLTR> ! Could not match +infFile"C:\D\G\A1\CX_59746.inf" through the HWID "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043" (original HWID: "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043&REV_00").
<snip>
2008-07-18 19:29:53 : <FLTR> ! Could not match +infFile"C:\D\G\A1\CX_59749.inf" through the HWID "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043" (original HWID: "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043&REV_00").
<snip>
2008-07-18 19:29:54 : <FLTR> ! Could not match +infFile"C:\D\G\A1\mobility.inf" through the HWID "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043" (original HWID: "PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589&SUBSYS_01BC1043&REV_00").It looks like the finisher was being ultra-exclusive in it's matches because it didn't ignore the &REV_00.
It even ignored the generic HWID present in the Hotfix .inf as well as the factory standard .inf (not to mention in the mobility.inf)
"ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO" = ati2mtag_RV630, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9589
Overflow, any ideas here?
3,413 2008-07-19 06:11:59
Re: Graphics A 8.09rc4 for testing purposes (REPORTS wanted) (280 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Well, now that is bad news.
Yours is the first I've heard of a desktop ATI HD2x00 series card not installing properly. And not getting the ATICCC installed is worrying as well.
Did you integrate .NET? Does it work?
I do need to see the DPsFnshr.log. You can email it to me: mr_smartepants 'at' driverpacks 'dot' net.
I may have to change what is included in the G_A DriverPacks.
3,414 2008-07-18 00:50:37
Re: Need help using mode 1 (4 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
ilyushin wrote:
Any comment...?
I have no idea...not without your logs.
3,415 2008-07-17 17:36:40
Re: Need help using mode 1 (4 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
Welcome to DriverPacks.
2008-07-17 12:00:14 : <CRIT> Could not extract DriverPack Chipset.Your Chipset DP is corrupted. Please download the file again and verify the MD5 checksum.
3,416 2008-07-17 02:58:52
Re: Ati radeon 2400HD -"Windows Help There is not enough memory available" (24 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Thanks for the update. I'm aware of the AVIVO codec problem and I'm building a new DP that fixes it.
I wasn't aware of any problems with the control panel though.
It's possible the botched AVIVO install borked the control panel installer since both use the built-in windows installer. I'll look into it.
Can you decompress the G_A dp and double click the d\g\a1\aticcp.exe file to verify it works on it's own?
3,417 2008-07-16 07:22:05
Re: Ati radeon 2400HD -"Windows Help There is not enough memory available" (24 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Hmmm.
Can you try this test pack?
http://dev.driverpacks.thesneaky.com/dr … 32_806G.7z
You might get an error with the AVIVO codecs (I'm working on a fix already), but everything else should be good to go.
3,418 2008-07-16 07:16:30
Re: [TESTPACK] Dell D630 Video Driver (nVidia Quadro NVS 135M) (7 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
muiz wrote:
dead link
It's here.
3,419 2008-07-16 04:37:39
Re: driverpack (10 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
yeah016 wrote:
where is DPs_BASE.log
3,420 2008-07-16 04:35:34
Re: Ati radeon 2400HD -"Windows Help There is not enough memory available" (24 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)
Can you explain exactly how you know it's being caused by atiptaxx.exe (Task Manager mem usage?)
Dell-branded graphics cards have been causing us headaches. Can you check the graphics card itself for a "Dell" logo?
Thanks for reporting, and welcome to DriverPacks!
3,421 2008-07-16 04:31:45
Re: Status of DP Base 8.06? (10 replies, posted in Software)
Well technically the next revision of DPBase would be 8.07 since July is the 7th month. If we don't release until Aug, then the version number would be 8.08 (2008/08)
3,422 2008-07-14 18:08:33
Re: Virtual PC 2007 (29 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
I've used both VPC2k7 and VirtualBox and I prefer VirtualBox. It's about 500% faster than VPC in my testing. XP installs in about 15 min on VirtualBox as opposed to an hour on VPC.
Time is precious!
3,423 2008-07-14 18:04:53
Re: Help| WPI & DriversPack Conflict (5 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
nirh216 wrote:
You know, by-the-way, that your saying in one hand that both GUIrunoce & RunOceEx, conflicts with the WPI.. and the other hand, your saying that I should leave it to default.. zero problems...
Actually what I said was that GUIRunOnce and RunOnceEx execute at the same time.
Read...
http://unattended.msfn.org/unattended.xp/print/web/13/
» First Logon
1. Windows logs you in and loads personal settings
2. Both GUIRunOnce from winnt.sif and RunOnceEX executes at the same time
3. Desktop and Taskbar loads
So if you have abc.exe run during GUIRunOnce, and xyz.exe run during RunOnceEx; then both abc.exe and xyz.exe will execute SIMULTANEOUSLY!!
This will cause problems!
3,424 2008-07-14 17:59:23
Re: Bad Archive Detection for DriverPacks - Help! (20 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
OverFlow wrote:
I just wrote a script for you guys so you can check them at any time...
Very clever script...I like it!
3,425 2008-07-14 17:51:55
Re: [Solved] Help with some BUGS (I think..) with slipstream Packs (4 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)
Just as an FYI, when DriverPacks are integrated, the DPbase backs up key files in your windows source (winnt.sif, dosnet.inf, txtsetup.sif, etc.)
These files are renamed with a *.org before modifying them (.org is for 'original').
When these *.org files are NOT found, this is logged as the DriverPacks being installed into source where none were before.
Don't worry, this is by design.