Search options (Page 7 of 213)

Of course, it's almost ten YO, but since it's GigaByte it's still running everyday 24/7.
It will not prove or disprove a driver though. I updated the firmware my first week here (thanks Jaak and Ruud).
Since it is on the MB this required me to Hack a BIOS update Binary file manually to include the firmware update and flash my BIOS. Since GB motherboards have a second backup BIOS ROM, I was not to scared to try it

This made my device compatible with all newer versions of the driver.

I would like to point out this was a huge PITA, and I had to take the considerable risk of bricking my board.
it's bad enough to update with a factory binary, I made my own... YIKES!

Again SamLab was an actively contributing member here for years. He likes to release his packs without testing and roll with the punches. That worked great for us for a long time. He would often release our nightlies (test packs) on his site. This helped us a GREAT deal. We could use his users feedback as well as ours to release the most stable packs possible.

I do trust SamLab, just be aware minimal or no testing is done pre-release on his packs.
his packs are forks / derivatives of our packs. Everyone who has released a DriverPacks used our packs as the starting point of their work. Wim Leers AKA BashratTheSneaky our leader was almost laughed off of the MSFN.org forum for suggesting it was even possible. He created the first packs and DriverPacks BASE to add them. Everyone else has simply stood on his shoulders and all packs are based on our work and were originally our work, and all of them still have remnants of our work. Of all of the people outside of DriverPacks who release DriverPacks i trust Sam the most....

Jeff

NEVER use nLite to add drivers...

we don't accept files from third party sources...

We need a link to the original source (Intel.com, HP.com, Dell.com). We only use verifiable OEM sources for our packs. Even then we prefer our members to test and vouch for the driver, that it works without any issues. (PS StationDrivers is also not a valid source for our packs, though they are trustworthy and often give us a sneak preview of what is next)

Thanks

I stickied this topic. perhaps you can post the link to the final in your first post (edit)

Nice to hear!...

Exactly... sysoc.inf is not being called, is that an issue with svcpack or ROE???

http://unattended.msfn.org/unattended.xp/

agreed... add service packs and patches. Test
Copy, add misc updates and necessities IE Dot NET. Test
Copy, add driverpacks. Test. done...

all of the patches we added to images prior to SP3 (IE a SP2 source) are included with SP3. If you have the most recent version (SP3) no patches are required (since they are included in SP3) and none are added. this is expected behavior. IT IS WORKING PERFECT.

you just answered your own question, changes were made after you added DriverPacks. This almost always results in errors. DriverPacks is the LAST step in creating your image. Or else.

I agree with my team, you need to start clean and you need to not add garbage as part of the install. If you want to add it post install that is up to you. I wouldn't. Adding extraneous garbage to your install is just asking for failure. The main reason people reinstall is to get RID of that kind of useless crap.

the link mr_smartepants included clearly demonstrates that this app is garbage.
AVG... Really? Aaaagh http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic. … 005#p51005

you should be able to slipstream update into 2k with no problem

never hurts to test it out on a bench machine .

Please let us know what YOU think.

"Help us to help you." is what jaak always said and I can't say it any better .
The next guy here, and all those that follow, benefit.

BadPointer uses all techniques at his disposal to integrate drivers, It's a positive and a negative. The end result is the true test. Perhaps you can test and tell us. IDK why BadPointer uses other methods to force drivers. My belief is that feedback from his users results in options to install drivers in more forceful ways. IF that driver is really really needed then it's a good thing. If we are forcing a driver just so we have bragging rights on a version number then it is a very bad thing.

We have limited feedback on the app. the two or three OP's we have had visit here were happy.

Our project (SAD, Stand Alone Driverpacks) uses MS's dpinst.exe and is the recommended way to install drivers. It's not perfect, as with many things Microsoft releases. But the whole install process is run with the recommended MS tool. Only the log file is left behind

depending on what is changed and how also can it be undone / restored, is there a negative effect?
I like to think "do no harm"... if you think like me and you believe harm was done then you have answered your own question.

I don't know enough about it to be sure what is best for you. I hope to test it myself.
I'll be sure to rebrand my rig when done .