the answer is both quite complex and quite simple...

yes two devices can, to some extent, have the same HWID.

for example on my machine i have a RAID controller

============
RAID Devices
============
PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&SUBSYS_61121095&REV_02\4&1F7DBC9F&0&58F0
    Name: Silicon Image SiI 3112 SATARaid Controller
    Hardware ID's:
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&SUBSYS_61121095&REV_02
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&SUBSYS_61121095
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&CC_010400
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&CC_0104
    Compatible ID's:
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&REV_02
        PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112
        PCI\VEN_1095&CC_010400
        PCI\VEN_1095&CC_0104
        PCI\VEN_1095
        PCI\CC_010400
        PCI\CC_0104

The full HWID PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&SUBSYS_61121095&REV_02\4&1F7DBC9F&0&58F0 is probably unique but this is not always true....

this HWID is matched first if it can be found. then the "compatable HWIDs" are matched in diminished order of magnatude. (IE the way they appear in the above list)

with a "super generic HWID" like  PCI\VEN_1095&CC_0104 almost any silicon image driver from any manufacturer could in theory be matched with it, weather or not it will work is anyones guess, most of the time it won't, even though theoretically it should.

If windows searches for a driver and selects one as the best match it isn't going to change it's mind. It is a program and will continue to select the same choice over and over until you change the drivers you have available.

It is possible that the two drivers both contain the same HWID like PCI\VEN_1095&DEV_3112&CC_0104 and are both therefore a good match. however if one is signed and one is not it will always choose the signed driver even if the unsigned is a better or even newer driver. if both are signed then the newer is selected even if the old one is from the oem manufacturer and the new is not. PnP is better than it ever was but it is still far from perfect. If PnP worked then we would not be the only game in town for DriverPacks... everyone would simply make their own. It is just not that easy you cant just take a bunch of drivers together and put them in a folder and expect them to work together... That is what we have been beating our heads against the wall trying to do for over Eight Years, and why no one else even comes close to accomplishing what we have. In theory if they had ten years and a team of dedicated people and millions of users to provide feedback they could get where we are now... big_smile

We will see what we can do to help you with your situation... Can you test a pack if we mod it for you?

Jeff

BTW excellent first post and welcome to DriverPacks.net - thank you for helping us to help you... and everyone else in your situation.

Yes...

753

(109 replies, posted in Universal Imaging)

Thank you for explaining... most appreciated

Oh. I do see ROE.exe now... missed it yesterday. Sorry

ROE adds the finisher call to the RunOnceEx registry key. 937 is the number assigned to the order it will be called. ROE commands are run in numerical order starting at 1, so 937 should put the finisher close to last if not last. big_smile

If that does not solve the issue be sure to read your finisher INI file some of the environment settings are contained there too.

755

(109 replies, posted in Universal Imaging)

you mean like this http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=3018

I assume you repacked the 7z file and reran BASE, making sure you used the pack you modified, and rebuilt the plugin and rebuilt your BartPE disc?

Hmmm strange...

Try disableing the mass plugin rebuilding your BartPE disc
and supplying the F6 drivers from the manufacturer... and report.

757

(5 replies, posted in 3rd Party DriverPacks)

@Sweetemo,

Welcome to DriverPacks.

Your post is off topic.

FYI... Our users are IT professionals, with that in mind your response is also under whelming / borderline insulting.

DriverPacks is designed to be for UNATTENDED installs... you described a MANUAL installation. Your method is not in line with the scope of our project.

Thanks for trying to help! Take a good look around before you leap.

Jeff

should be supported...

DriverPack_MassStorage_wnt5_x86-32.ini file contains

[I8]
; 10.1.0.1008 
ms_count=1
ms_1_deviceName="Intel ICH9/ICH10 SATA AHCI/RAID"

PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_3B2F&CC_0106

In previous versions this was supported by I4 which is now commented out.

you could try commenting I8 and uncommenting I4 and report the results... TIA


We may have to revert this HWID back to the I4 driver...

Squashyport wrote:

Hi all,

I require some assistance from people a lot smarter than me smile

Rats... we don't have anyone like that here big_smile.

Welcome to DriverPacks.net!

Excellent first post sir! Nope you did not miss anything. Gold star awarded...

BRB ... looking it over now.

BartPE or WinPE?

Never use MakePNF EVER! ... It's posted multiple times in the thread you link to...

I don't see your call to the finisher in that code? you need to tell us how you call DriverPacks Finisher... We can't guess how or where you do it... Runonce? GuiRunonce? script? Is G: SystemRoot?

762

(109 replies, posted in Universal Imaging)

http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=5081

Thanks getting it now!

764

(2 replies, posted in Other)

make that three times cause i did it once already too...

i also changed the website link in his profile big_smile LOL water -> brain LOL

That would be awesome! Please do.

i feel your pain...

Normally no news means success big_smile.

I'll compile it myself so i can vouch for the contents... big_smile!

Thanks a million this has been a nagging issue for months!

So you were able to prove that Devcon was having an 'overflow' issue? Cool... Perhaps we can write it in VB and not have to worry about missing DLL's? Or was VB the issue?

769

(8 replies, posted in Other)

did you really just give us a link to technet... Do you think we are stupid?

And we don't accept drivers from third partys ... we never have, in the 8 years we have been doing this.

770

(10 replies, posted in Software)

I don't think you should be fixing peoples PC's - even geek squad can get this far. except they steal it and put thier name on it.

IF you can't extract files to a folder and burn it to a OD you need to go into another line of work and fast.

no the finisher does not "just" delete the files if that was all it did i would have just made a script with a Del command in it dumb ass. Why write a whole program just to delete a folder. use your freaking head.

Do you think we would go through all the motins of writing that script if it could be done an easier way? that is the easiest way.

Read the FAQ's and documentation or get lost. Not going to tell  you again. Gave you a link to the answer in my last post I am guessing you did not bother to read it.

If you are not going to "listen" to the answer to your question don't bother to ask.

wow Erik 7 MB???

OIC you include a pack for each OS / type for reference...

I like your thinking on the process... however this would be much easier to do in AutoIt. Including the Admin privliges.

773

(10 replies, posted in Software)

the method(s) mr_smartepants describes is far superior to going to device manager and hitting search... However if you are dead set on doing it that way his recomendations will not work.

the only way to make that work (and it is slow and clunky) is to extract all the drivers to a DVD, then select search removable media.

nope... at least not very well
makePNF is definatly not needed
The DriverPacks Finisher is absolutely needed

Sorry i must award you a demerit: tongue
[url]http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic. … =4#p4]Read BEFORE you post[/url]
1. Read the forum rules and guidelines
>Fail
2. Check the FAQ forum
>Fail
3. Use the search function
>Fail

the answer is clearly posted in the FAQ section http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=4844

775

(2 replies, posted in Other)

Read before you post linked in my signature. Read it.

Briefly view the rules and posting guidelines too