Search options (Page 60 of 99)

Hi

2k, win2K, or 2k3, win2k3 subfolders and files that are needed for those platforms are kept.
Windows 98/ME files can be referenced in an INF (Windows Driver Model), and just take space.
Removing them, could cause an error and (I, personally) do not think it is worth the time to edit all the INF files so that references to unused files are removed.
One error while manually doing so can ruin the driver.

There are still some driver folders where the process of feedback has not given the current team cause to look at them.
(we inherited some).
One of the more recent efforts is aimed at reducing redundant duplicates, and the way the team works is not really >Barny does mass, Fred does Lan, William does Modem, and Lucy does the noodles.

Feedback about errors is always welcome.
Tell us where, somebody will probably look.
If it caused a serious error, and you tell us, it will get noticed.

There is more than one team member with 'look up recent' or 'look up unanswered' in bookmarks.
(these links are also in the bottom of the forum page)

@ every body. Do NOT forget to subscribe to a topic you posted in.

I WAS thinking about a prize contest about the last bit news I mentioned.

We have made a start on gathering Hardware info from the INF files in the DriverPacks.
We do need better, fast and reliable methods to sort out the duplicate lines in a single driver.

I can upload a few raw gems which Jeff, Ruud and I consider to be worthy of further exploration, and maybe the people here make a motherload of useful data for real datamining out of it.
Get the raw nuggets, make them reliable, make them work for us.

I do not know what Bâshrat the Sneaky was doing for the driver database, but my viewpoint on this is really simple.
It is NOT going to be easy to get all data out of the drivers.

It is apparently not going to be easy to get correct, NON duplicated data about supported hardware out of a SINGLE INF.
We've made a start, and the files that deviate from "standard" INF writing get spotted.
We cannot blindly trust a script.
(commented out HWIDS, for instance, could appear as "supported" device.. dang.)

One of the gems I could upload can probably tell us what is in a non-slipstreamed install, and puts it in a searchable file.. We'd need some methods for real datamining. Easy methods. Not something that takes ten hours of work each time a fly dropped a dump on a TFT in tokyo.

hi

I've written it at the beginning after you told me that was the reason it sometimes failed.

I've personally come across an issue when I used SFC.
SFC apparently wants the i386\WINNTUPG folder to be there.
And, some people apparently use upgrade from within windows to repair windows.

either way, it does not hurt to remove setupold.exe, and this could also be done by the finisher (which I consider part of DPsBase.)

http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=1817

the reason we disable for windows2000 is simple.
win 2000 has a memory limit, and if we do not do this, none work.

windows 2000 Users have to edit the INI, enable the driver(s) they need for 2000, and repack.
If the memory limit is breached, they have to disable a (few) other, and repack.

tee hee.. spoilsport. I never get so many weeks off.

Hi, welcome to DriverPacks
It is fixed.

We are trying to contact the admin.

The files are there, but the scripts in front page cannot get to them.
--------------------------------------

maybe we ought to have a SYSPREP user forum ?

chud?
One question.
which pack and version of it?

just another of those weirdest of updates..

drops some HWIDs, adds some HWIDs, has a cartload of NODRV for XP.

We'll need info on the chip versions this is intended for.
A good link to the description page would be nice.
We may have to do an new/old
(That is, if at all possible.. if this is for a different BIOS and we find that overlappping HWIDS in new do NOT work for older BIOS.. Then we have yet another of those that cannot be in a pack together.)

I have misgivings on this one.