You are not logged in. Please login or register.
DriverPacks.net Forum » Posts by OverFlow
Welcome Nikolai,
Yup, Every experienced IT guy lands at DriverPacks sooner or later. Others have tried to fork off of our work but without our packs the other guys are dead in the water. We are the original and the basis of all the other projects, like the one you mentioned. Wim Leers started this idea in 2004, and was told by many members of the MSFN.org forum it was not possible... Yet we are still going strong almost 8 years later 
.
HWID's?
We can't even begin to assist without you specifying the hardware... HWID tool in my signature
given the missing info it is likely that we can tell you why it failed on that machine.
as far as your apprehension about using DriverPacks... we have millions of users installing on hundreds of millions of PC's... we get less than one report a month about failures... (odds of failure are less than a million to one) So you need not worry. Your odds of hitting the lottery are better than having a failed driver install. Additionaly we ususally very quickly address reported issues like yours, so there is even less of a need to be concerned. Apparently you are new on the scene, our project is very well known and widely respected.
instead of adding a new post he updated his OP...
Is the device mac 28e7cfc45a4d set to obtain IP from DHCP (not static)?
If so then "it is just some apple thing on both networks not properly getting DHCP ..."
Sounds like you are heading in the right direction now...
Welcome to DriverPacks.net
PS if you have slipstreamed DriverPacks into your install you already have SAD in your hands. Just run "DP_Install_Tool.cmd" from the OEM folder . SAD is automatically included so you can update any NT5 platforms ( 2k, XP or 2k3) just by inserting the install disc and running the script. You can even put SAD on a thumb drive if you please .
PSS SAD stands for "Stand Alone Drivers" and uses Microsoft's DPINST.exe as its engine.
that method will fail...
detached program runs in PARALLEL with setup and not before it... therefore it is possible that the drivers would be needed before they were extracted and actually in place, In fact it is quite likely that setup would need them before they were extracted.
That is why we use "fake" setup, it halts setup until after the drivers are extracted... Obviously this is critical to making them work.
What you can do is to use Method One (M1) in DriverPacks BASE. M1 does not use "fake setup". HOWEVER if you use M1 there is a limit of 4096 characters in your path length. That is why M1 is seldom used anymore, we hit the 4096 limit in like 2005... It is possable to select just a few main DriverPacks with M1 and then use dpinst for the remainder. (the DriverPacks BASE feature SAD uses dpinst.exe)
So if you can't use M2 because you cant have fake setup then use M1 and only select the basics Mass Storage, Chipset and LAN. Then call SAD from a script (perhaps RunOnce or RunOnceEX or even Startup) for the remaining DriverPacks you require. (Be sure to install AT LEAST Mass Storage AND Chipset, since mass storage is a dependent of Chipset. Can't put a capstone on the pyramid without first building a base . Chipset is the base that all other drivers are built upon)
I hope that helps
Jeff
PS NO dpinst should not be used. It certainly does not work anywhere nearly as well as windows setup does. It should... but we know from experience that it absolutely does not... the best method is the recommended one DriverPacks BASE M2. Anything else is going to cause you issues in one form or another. M2 is recomended because nothing else even comes close to working as well... We have been trying to improve on Wim's project since 2003... We pretty well have it perfected after almost ten years and over a hundred million users. (we often have weeks where we get over two million downloads). So you are not going to find / invent a better system. If you have certain constraints placed on you, we understand, and are here to help. But you are going to get less than optimal results if you deviate from a M2 install. (<--that is a BIG period)
The alternate I suggest above will be about as close as you can get without using fake setup (the recommended Method 2 install). M1 for Chipset, Mass and LAN... SAD (Stand Alone Drivers, using MS's DPINST.exe) for the remainder. That will work fairly well. (95% instead of 99.99%)
Agreed run SAD at time of deployment
the only exception to this might be the monitor pack... HID would be pushing your luck.
If you still have users adding an external modem (say for use as a fax) then perhaps the 3rd party DriverPack for modems.... not many people use modems anymore.... can't imagine you really might need to do this 
Truely there is no good reason to use KTD... SAD is 1000 times better. The only reason KTD still exists is for nostalga, it was an original feature of BASE and over the years we have come to realize it sucks... Some things sound really good in theory, but don't work in the real world. I have left it there purely for sentimental reasons .
It will work for VERY BASIC drivers (like a monitor driver)
It will absolutely fail at advanced drivers like Graphics and Sound (that require coinstallers).
If you need the chipset pack ... then you have installed a new motherboard right? then you absolutely need SAD.
KTD is dead, Long live SAD!
there have been so many times i wanted to pin a medal on you... and here we are again
Native windows drivers are automatically included in a driver search... you don't have to do anything.
The drivers referenced in win51ip.sp3 ( or where ever else they may be, like in a service pack) are what we refer to as native drivers, those are always copied during windows setup to the local system.
the native drivers are all referenced in / from %systemdrive%\INF\ which is the first place searched.
the OEM folder is searched second...
So you're problem is not what you think it is...
Perhaps you should tell us in detail what you tried to do and how you tried to do it...
Please start your own thread and Please read "Read BEFORE you post" linked to in my signature. By including most or hopefully all that info in your first post will speed up getting you to the correct solution or answer.
Welcome to DriverPacks.net
Is there any particular reason you used them all?
For example you would have to have a VERY exceptional reason to include DriverPack LAN-RIS 1011
Why have you chosen to do KTD? I can't think of a single good reason to select KTD...
I think that driver is for loopback plugs, we used to use "CheckIt" back in the day we had loopbacks for the serial and parallel ports. Checkit would test the output connectors of the serial port to it's input through the loopbacks. We could be certain that the hardware was operating properly. I imagine it's a similar tool used to verify USB ports.
the passmark loopbacks prolly verify the ports works and gives a speed test.
I have got it in my head that these hacks post a certain URL (for example, the first post in this thread) to a site somewhere, Then they have a BOT that attempts to create a login and post to that URL (the bot is programed to attempt to post to a specific thread). I might just be crazy, and it is just a bad theory. It does seem like that is what happens, that certain threads draw most of the spam.
this thread is turning out to be a real spam magnet... shall we trash it?
and UBCD4Win ver too please
Short answer: No, Thanks for playing.
Similar answer here as to the one in your other post...
If you are able to demonstrate an issue that you personally encountered. That you are willing try a test pack for us on.
IE A specific problem that occurs in your presence, and that you can provide us DOCUMENTATION (DPs_BASE.log and HWIDs), and that will allow us to make changes to a DriverPack, and that you can and will then test on live hardware.
THEN post here... you poking around the packs and then just posting wild guess's, simply wastes our time that could be put to use updating the DriverPacks and DriverPacks BASE.
Feel free to post when you have something other than bad guess's to offer,
have a nice day.
PS if you are just curious then please note>
our search feature works just dandy 
our change-logs are posted for all to see .
For example the excerpt of the change-log that mr_smartepants posted for you above
simply placing the drivers in the INF folder is not sufficient to install them, especially sound and graphics. Many simple drivers will work fine this way, chipset for example... If simply driping them in the INF folder worked we would not be here .
Try Mr_Smartepants SAD2 to deploy your graphics drivers (uses ms tool dpinst.exe)
Can you post your DPs_BASE.log from your last build please?
you may not make changes to your source after DriverPacks... (don't add anything after you run BASE)
@Rick gotcha... explains a lot, LOL
I am sure they are not duplicated... the different drivers support unique hardware that require the different drivers (they are not interchangeable) sometimes the newer driver will not work with an older version of the controllers firmware. so old driver old firmware, new driver new firmware. Same HWID for both firmware versions, yet the drivers are neither duplicated nor interchageable.
if you doubt this then open the mass storage INI file and find a duplicate HWID in there... as long as no HWID is duplicated in text-mode setup there is no conflict or dupllication.(the driver database is generated by BASE from DriverPack_MassStorage_wnt5_x86-32.ini) The "duplicates" are intentional because they are not actually duplicates... they are different, don't believe me then do an md5 check sum on them . Then check their signing. Then check their Date stamps. Then read all the posts in this forum over the last couple years about conflicts and certain hardware that does not work with certain drivers.
Just becuase a driver contains a particular generic HWID does not mean it will work with any controller that matches with that generic HWID.
I wish it were that simple...
If a driver is in there it is in there for a VERY good reason... we have been working on that pack for almost 8 years... I think we have it down pat by now... but thanks for showing up on your first day and thinking you know more than us .
if you are having a specific issue feel free to report it.. Include your DPs_BASE.log and your HWIDs from the machine. Include your OS type and version (IE: XP SP3 Pro), Since you have not posted any specific issues i assume it is working correctly for you?
Or were you concerned about space and you were hoping to carve a massive 50k or so out of the mass storage pack?
Have a nice day
Just because something does not work the way you think it should, does NOT necessarily mean it is incorrect.
the mass storage pack is Extremely complicated... if you have several months to a year i can get you started understanding it.
945g?.... slightly older hardware, should be no problem. How much RAM is in these machines you are putting windows 7 on?
have you tried Clearing CMOS / BIOS settings? (reset to factory defaults) sounds like RAM / virtual memory or an Interrupt
conflict
R U using DriverPacks?
the finisher is not absolutely necessary... it's just a nice upgrade to an already working solution.
We usually don't ban them on the first post... maybe we should.
deleting them is a good idea too
What do you think mr_smartepants?
that sounds like an Excellent IDEA... reminder to self... sticky
The testing team version of BASE does something like that... it opens IE to display the page.
embeding the page in BASE is also a good idea.
Great minds think alike
Newer versions of BASE don't add PNF's (version 10.x) if you used an older version then there may be PNF's ... however this will not create much of an issue unless you are adding hardware to the machine in queston. If so it will simply ask you where to find the driver files, since they will be missing...
DriverPacks.net Forum » Posts by OverFlow
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
[ Generated in 0.128 seconds, 6 queries executed ]