(12 replies, posted in News)

what's an open mind to be like?

I am not going to dive in like way back, at least not like I did in XP.
I came to DriverPacks for XP from out of the blue, as it were... and you know..

Way back when, you perhaps asked about how it got done because this was something that was potentially MUCH more worthy than a mere fleeting thought you had that day... few helped.

Nowadays, I still see people around who believe in what they started to believe once a few got to explain how we needed to explain how it got done, and how much help we really needed to help you help us help you.

I really need your help now.
I have a few niggles in setup, and I truly think there is a way to make a DUMB setup smarter.

And yes, in my question, it is all back to chipsets, hard drive controllers, and of course, LAN. (not neccesarily in that order)

I will need to get up to speed about how you guys nowadays filter out (script around)
I have NO idea about the inbuilt (on DVD.. once LAN is established, MSHQL has a massive base)

Back then, it was not so easy to get what was not supported by MSFT, and I still assume that the driver writers make the same goddamn assumption that all old hardware is """supported""" by their newest (even is it isn't)

I know Jeff know what this is about.
I don't know what the situation is right now.

Do you want me to spend six months to do the final XP sp3 pack so as to get back to learning how it is done?

h*ll, I have not even tried DriverPacks in a win7 install yet.
Does it work?

Should DriverPacks base try to do what other open source program groups try to do?
I personally think that there is a way to make myself useful again.
I know I gonna have to le&rn big time.
(hyll, I know more questions than answers.. you guys teach me how to answer them. It's that simple.)

show me what to test, and I'll try.


(8 replies, posted in Software)

makes me think of esata in an x32 box.

they all had purple colour, and needed a driver post install (hence, no boot HDD ever worked from esata in XP)

I think we tried that in our search for sillicon hyll gigabyte sil 3132, and I blew a mobo by attempting a "suggested fix" that I did while the BIOS prevention (a dual bios..) said I shouldnt.
GB replaced it at no cost (I gave Wim Leers back the money some of the donators forked out for that episode)

the third party port was never meant to boot from, but it was esata (a boon to me, for data rescue work)
Today, it's another ball game.

The capability has to be SET.
What if you did not, and you try it? Any known law cases yet?


(8 replies, posted in Software)

techdude, for UEFI ports to work in esata, X64 is a MUST, and XP64 dont have UEFI recognition (so it is 7x64 and up)

I dont think I have this wrong, Sir.
Man, I read what you did for us here at DriverPacks.. I am gonna take lessons from you real soon, god willing.


(8 replies, posted in Software)

just to let you know.

hot swap can be a setting in UEFI BIOS.
iow, in legacy mode the on mobo port ain't even selectable as hot swap, and in UEFI mode it has that capability.

way back, I had to make damn sure the purple ports were connected to a true hot swap bay, now it's a new ball game.

TIP for people building your own.
internal sata to external wit Esata capabilities, make use of unique color cables, because you will much sooner than you think make an error in that spaghetti.
(many of my test mobos had more than 4 HDD ports. The craziest I went was 10HDD and two DVD.)

This does not mean I never put together a machine with just one HDD, but I Always wanted ports to spare.

Note to Jeff,
remember when we had to create HWID finder from scratch? The early SED filter I originally used, the russinicof and de microsoft scripting guy tool found less..
Very early on we found HWID that early windows filter (win orig setup) missed, and that got us help from warmsnow (a DriverPacks guru back then)
And so on, and so on.

Our work had kinda eliminated all error driver writers left in by scripting around it, or by culling (pruning) out known conflicting duplicates.

a month later, a new driver for realtek came out, and it had all but two new HWIDS, and a known 7526 conflicts with its OWN legacy drivers.
The problem with driver writers was that they did NOT delete the HWID it was no longer suitable for.

The great job we did was that we had finally figured this out and once we knew what what worked in old and not in new, people like Jeff and Mr Smartepants could script around it.
Finding the culprit duplicates and generics way back when was one step. (I think I can honestly  say I was a great help in that)
Developing software to help filter out them conflicts was not  something I could do.

You know, I came on board by asking a question.
years ater, late 2009 I saw that ideas we'd discussed really got going, and I had a tough time in real life (steelplant issues, health issues)

in 2010 I got in a seriuos accident, and was immobile left side for months. it took 10 month revalidation, and I am still partially invalid.

But my brain started to work again.

I sound like a noob

Nibus, any driver uses machine language, and help files use what's there.

the crux to SIZE is, the HWID really only needs one set..  of all these languages

There were (in the past) WDM files. them are not needed (all in wdm can be safely deleted)

language for help, is not needed (and that alone will save big space)

default language in windooz in amerikaneez ingleez, and you will most likely NOT see EN folder
(you do know that even British English have to get american ingleez out of our language choices?)

the point is, I figure 3.8Gb from your driver collection are not needed at all.

That was the help I can offer you.

Now I need your help

Can you upload for me to download your collection, so I can filter this for drivers you dont even need at all

say where to, i will DL them next thursday
fellow geek

Can a PE environment launched from a NON UEFI drive, determine if the mobo HAS uefi capabilities, and if so, can it make you make the choice to boot in different mode (that is only going to work IF the BIOS has the option set to OS determined is default as "on".. and you know, that ain't Always the case.)

so, Jeff, not even I know what to ask for just yet.
I want to have us at least SEE.

The point being.
Anyone using msfn so far, are helping those that have found out too late.

OK, EI.CFG gives you a next shot.
How about, try make the dude at least look into his bios settings.

Far fetched, but I think it is possible on a BIOS that had OS set to allow OS setting to BIOS (for some reason I think this is a LOT different than way back... when it was only IRQ.
(Q101. do any of you really know what I mean here?)

Can anyone find out if.

proof of concept could be, IF BIOS is set UEFI boot from DVD, setup HWID detection mode is perhaps not different.
I am in the great unknown with this thought, but it should be investigated.

last thought for tonight. I don't think you should try UEFI and do an X32 install
UEFI is all about X64 and (possibly) beyond

Hi Jeff, indeed, and perhaps too long.

the public saw me vanish somewhere in 2008 after a few great filtering jobs.
I should have tried to help more in your later TEAM work in filtering out super generics for XP after 2009, but hey, you were one of the team I explained to what I had done, and why, and how it made sense.
And, SOON after, I helped test the filter you wrote in dpBase (so that the repetitive driver writer caused release error findings I had discosed could be filtered out ""more easily"" (but could not be released untested.. somewhere 2009.)

And yes, somewhat later you saw me drop off the earth.
I still regret having done that, but I really had to.
You, above all people,  MUST know DriverPacks was not let go willy nilly.
At the moment I am retired, and after five years of different health issues (an accident that caused 10 months immobillty in between), I am what... not what I was.

Hi guys,
it's nostalgia, I know, but...
Late in november 2007, I wrote someting that had to get us to 2008.
(hmm. I had to look it up. it was in NEWS.)

It had my views on where sysprep and SAD and M1 XP were sorta not going to get along.
(in XP method one.. because M1 could do repair, and M2 could not/cannot do repair install)
(also because server drivers were not properly distinguished in XP (2003 drivers got loaded if scripted later if the driver writer made some error in its driver).
We had silicone hyll and some other HWID battles back then.

Today, it's UEFI.
The wrong choice made because you did not know you had one.

Hey, that sounds kinda haughty? (like in a from a hyll, if you get the pun.)
I dare you to use fave search engine.. be it duckduckgo, or google, or bing, or Norton...
My 3TB boot drive not showing more than 2TB, well, that gets you hits.

Driverpacks has members already familiar with the problem.
Erik, you are ubiquitous.
Since UEFI is mostly win7 and later, I got to tell you simple facts.

Testers in win 8 or 8.1 should be aware there is a workaround to having to enter the win 8 key (and that gives you 30 days to test)
I assume most testers know how to extract ISO, and rebuild, and a simple EI.CFG file in 'sources' will allow you to test instead of wasting a key from your precious technet/msdn ..whatever..  download.

The information is described in how to install windows 8 without key, and I am sure that THAT is easy to find.
The hard part will be for you guys.
How do we get best performance out of UEFI machines that are most likely set to use non UEFI...

How do we get full capacity from a 4TB drive WITHOUT having to use dummy driver that mimicks a second hard drive and leaves us with a 2TB boot.

Are you up to that?

the question here, posed as "BOTTOM LINE"
How can we query if chipset has UEFI in a machine that booted up in its default state (not using uefi at all while it could, or possibly legacy first when it could have UEFI first or only, but was not set that way...)


(9 replies, posted in News)

At first, when torrent distribution became fact (and that a good while ago), I thought we would have some reports from people working in IT that had a rule to work from behind some intra-zone access server not being able to use a torrent client.
But then, well, company I.T. admins can work the permissions so they get what they damn well know saves them LOTS of time.

Individuals, well, nowadays, even if they do not know what DriverPacks can do for them they are are probably wise to what a torrent can do, and if they weren't wise to what a torrent cleient is, they don't run setup.

One of these days I (or we) should update the old tute (2007), to show all what the later Base app can do.
I have been somewhat out of the picture while still using DriverPacks, but, you know, at this time ((June 2011) windows 7 has proved to me that in several machines, it could not install itself without  the extra drivers properly made available to it.

Let's say that way back (until 2010, actually, off screen) I tried make some companies aware of what caused conflict in apparently un-related drivers, and let's say that super-generics are still not gone, but, let's also say that a LOT OF YOU helped figure out how to effeciently deal with that.

You've all helped this project to be of greater use than many would have ever believed possible.
Kind regards, Jaak


(6 replies, posted in Hardware)

windows's own general "legacy" soundblaster driver should accomodate this?


(10 replies, posted in Software)

hmmm, the $OEM folder still had 347 subs.. 
Your idea about scripting the unzip process could become a fruitless effort.
You see, those INI have exceptions written in them for good reason, and how are you going to handle that?


(10 replies, posted in Software)

the INI in the DriverPacks have to match the folder structure, so... IF you move content and merge it in a greatly reduced number of folders (which is what I did for that experimental discc.), the INI has to be edited so the scripts know where the drivers are so as to be able to do the things (the exceptions) these lines were written for.

For the method ONE, the $OEM$ folder then had a small number of subfolders, and the path was shorter than 4096.
I used winmerge or araxis to merge folders (to spot file duplicates and determine wether or not I could allow an overwrite..), and editing the foldername in an INI is actually quite simple. But, it took work and concentration, and what looks easy to me may very well be a daunting task for somebody less familiar with how the DriverPacks and DriverPacks BASE work.

Since then, DriverPacks BASE has been overhauled, many DriverPacks were updated, and I should make myself another super short experimental.

Jeff knows I put a lot of work in making foldernames as short as possible, and the newer team members also try keep them short.
One thing though, you do not always need all the DriverPacks, so you might stay under the 4096 limit.
DriverPacks BASE tells you when you get over that number.
By the way, the folder limit only affected method 1, but since M1 had one great merit (it could do repair/upgrade) we did not drop it.

I had few machines to play with for a long time, and I have to catch up with the latest developments. sad


(10 replies, posted in Software)

Hi, welcome to DriverPacks.

I once made a set with all DriverPacks on it and worked on the content of the DriverPacks to get a super short path. One can indeed move files into folders that have no file in there with same name.. .
I must tell you that a dp's INI has to point to the folder you merged files into, so that is some extra work.
It took me some hours to get it right, but I had all packs and a path way under 4096.
The result worked.

Why did we not use it at DriverPacks site? Maintaining the packs would have become hyll for the teams.
Because drivers were thrown in several big folders, it made it hard for the guy who has to update a driver. Where is it? Which files had it? (a driver update may have different named files, and then you'd have remnants of the old in the folder.)

So I had a very useful disc, M1 uses windows setup, so it can be used to repair a broken windows..
I think I still have that DVD and CDR with the supershort M1 path, but I did not see how the team could do the maintenance of the DriverPacks on such a layout.

what I am saying is that it can be done.
There are a few caveats. You have to carefully study what is done in The INI in some driverpacks, since split packs sometimes relied on files in another pack.

if you search the fora here,you may find over a year old posts about what I did.
Best of luck.

Observance; troll always will make a good point.
Observance; Pirate editions of copyright have trends.
Peter's principle, or Shumacher's, they saw trends too.

when I wrote the "tripe"  after thinking about a few things I had speedread.. I thought I had not thought of trends and trolls.
Observance; there is a lot I can think of and we all have learned from a past. One of the people I still respect was a gifted troll.
The guy could help, and more often than not gave correct technical advice, and the site banned him for his political posts.

I know we are here to help you help us, and if I had a site political agenda, it would be aimed to have more techie detail explained by old timer core and, MOST of all, by the new timer whom can/will become core.
Gollum, you can take a sentence and twist it, but you cannot forsake/erase the past.
Granalarity is like a talk with Old Nick. (Jeesh, that guy was good.)

Let's consider 'past' support by MSFT for XP x64 (which, incidentally, ran like Jolly jumper when powered by a 'quite old CPU' like the Q6600 Erik has in his desktop)
MSFT does not write drivers, and far too many people got bit by legacy programs having to run in either compatibility mode or in a virtual machine..
(I can tell you, and should, that the speed/stability benefit of the X64 OS of the past have shown much greater promise in the newer server 2008 OS and Vista X64, and, YES, also in Win7.)

We are, like mentioned more than once, a small group of people doing this.
The regular old timer with core knowledge may have other interests, or may have a limitation (like too few suited hardware long-term test motherboards).

There was a time people not only spent time, they also availed hardware for longer term tests, and I (speaking for myself) I cannot afford the losses caused by fast depreciation of hardware.
Time... or history.
When you look it over you find A good many core member old timers dropped off long before, and some other will, and still other members will come aboard and become core.
The smart old timer might find he has too little of something. (time, resources, expertise, help, programming skills...)
When I think about this, I know I ain't smart.

now think as a sailor, on other tack.
If I tell you I have too few machines, and limited expertise, that is true.
DriverPacks has grown, and its members helped think of new ways to do things.
There was a time I got carried away, while things were easier.. My personal time and thought was on problems caused bu driver writers.. my free time was dwindling.
Others like I have suffered same. And all of us do it for free.
We help you help.
I still want to.

One of the major handicaps I once complained about was that we no longer had access to a post where the great majority of hardware download sites were referenced.
(we also had/have an understanding that we did not use a site where beta drivers got catalogued.)

so, at DriverPacks, for my personal need (as a wannabee helper...) I have needs.
I (and DriverPacks) need to have as many as possible NOT EDITED drivers, and that possibly means all those we have not yet pruned out.
I need to understand all the differences between the X32 OS in its various Service pack (as in, what is supported in this version of win2000 server gold that is not supported in win 2000 client sp4.. and by extensis, XP32 gold and SP3, Vista gold, and vista SP2.. in 32bit/64bit.)

More to the point, we really need the guru to tell us where, in which files, you find the differences about support.
Do you know why we need YOUR expertise about this?
Because driver writers will not always adhere to the standard for that OS, and our old sore (dupes in variants) is not only about the many OS, but also about the ways drivers get distributed (SAD, RIS, DISC, WWW-windows-update or WUP+RIS)

about WUP.
I have this gutfeeling that MSFT were listening.
Their database.. I wish we had access, and then show them how to do the filter. (or, show where the problem are.)
it has X64.
it has X32,
and it has a problem, because driver writers of the past (and the now) still do not always adhere to standard.

abdou, you will sometimes have better success by adding a edited (and properly pruned) OEM INF to its reference source, because that is generic and reference to many OEM.

when you try this, it is not done lightheartedly.
you will have to compare files (winmerge or araxis) and pay particular attention to registry entries for the "missing" HWID, as well as pay attention to differences in entries for ALL the Operating systems for that HWID.
(a windows 2000 driver line in INF could have reference to a different filename.)

An INF will have checks to version.
DO NOT BE FOOLED by the version and date you see at the TOP in INF.
A GOOD MANY INF have additional version data (last edit date/sub-sub-version), at BOTTOM of the INF.

sonbd2, welcome to DriverPacks.

A CD image on hard disk is not the same as an copy you made to a folder.
A virtual CD created by a program acts like the CD. (it cannot be written to. It is not seen as an ISO either.)
The CD in the optical drive, cannot be written to, even if it were a CDRW disk in a burner.

a (or our) slipstream utility can write to a copy on hard disk where you have the content of the CD or DVD, and another utility like Nlite or RVM or Nero can burn to a bootable DVD from slipstreamed content.

let's hope "if newer" is real smart and weighs from the sub-sub-sys down because version and date were (in oem drivers) not always trustworthy and they oft had common generic.

the driver update site at MSFT is getting much better too.
NON-critical drivers and those made obsolete or never in your "vanilla" are most likely picked up by an online msft driver search.
This takes one user setting for driver install. 'always allow online driver search" (I have to translate what I see.. it is one tick in a gui.)

I should have asked what DriverPacks BASE and DriverPacks you ran. and the logs.
I did not. I assumed you picked up on what you used, and what you read, and I dare bet there is a year's difference between what you read and searched for.
Get by, and welcome to US. We help you.
We CAN talk layman. We always assume you are a PRO.

It should be, not still, but, again.

For what it is worth, KTD is OUT. It never worked to satisfaction, and team found a much better alternative.
Less waste of time.
Updatable (KTD never was)
to your need. done proper, SAD will run a MINIsetup (with filtered by DriverPacks ) exceptions

Jeff answerd to this, but he put you on the wrong leg.

What do you mean by root folder tally?
Let's do a live test.
I scan OLD DriverPacks (2007) LAN, with the tool I used  (part of utilityscan05.exe / SED too )
I do a tally for root (zero HWID in scan gets filtered out)
I do a tally by DIR pipe.. and find out scan tool has blind spots.
(I double checked by other means, scanner skipped INF, I had more folder in DriverPacks than I got in excel.)

This was what makes your effort needed.
we need a standard, and no blind spots.

I also said;
Q; why are we not standardised.
A; because we have no standard

When I reread this entire topic, I know I sometimes allude to things mentioned in other topics.
(e.g. FAQ "can you edit DriverPack MassStorage" )

I will have a new testplank (that's good)
Right now, I can perhaps spare 18 hours/month for DriverPacks. (That's bad)

I know you did not do it for the prize I once offered, but the comments our peers make indicate you are eligble to it.
(I am still honour bound to it, and think I still have an English version to ship.)

this BB is daft, no merge post. (I also still hate that edits can be done in a post of five weeks/days/years ago)

I hope that's true.. date being part of version weighing.
BUT, I doubt it is true.
I remember there were several drivers (ermm.. soundmaxx came to mind), that had newer date for older versions.

The good part about those is that, when I worked through the lot I wound up with about ten very questionable HWIDs across several drivers, and still later on, a driver was found which left me with only ONE questionable, so I quite literally dumped that single HWID and the other were supported by a better so got dumped as well.
Old changelogs tell you when folders got dumped.

In those days, we had poor scanner tool.
I am very pleased that people still want to improve the tools we can use, and my comments about the date 'thing' are to be taken at face value.
(well, you would not have those drivers to scan, because they are no longer there.. somebody with old DriverPacks from 2005, 2006, 2007, could provide a scannable driver repertoire for scanner-testing.)

(edit; proof of concept, newer date/old version. Consider this, realtek will add a single HWID to ONE INF, and internally updates ALL systemfile to datematch, ALL 100 or so INF to same date (while the majority have no machine code rewritten.. They were altered to match. Some Driver vendors did NOT alter systemfile version to match INF date. They tagged an edit date, or they tagged a minor version change in INF only, and the machine code was unadjusted, the sysfile not-edited to match INF. Those are hard calls. One can use araxis and -in extremis- hexcompare for proof of concept). At DriverPacks we do not use The Driver developement Kit, but

erm, in this topic kickarse said he'd take a hint at face value, and leave the 'System class OUT!'

In one of my ramblings I hinted there are dupe HWIDs across different GUI class.
For a datamining tool, I think we have to fully understand the way weighing works.
(I am sure a few of our members know how it works, so I would like to see their imput so I can catch up.)

a super generic in modem sound and sound and videograb cards and graphics (HDMI/sound/TV connector on many) comes to mind.
Where will the GUI class weigh more?
(modem and sound often caused conflict.. Then came along HDMI and this has caused some issues for DriverPack Graphics A/b and sound)

Server drivers for SAS seem to have systemfiles with built in checks. (main sys checks validity of other files.)
Server driver main SYS can apparently also check the legitimacy of a call it gets from a DLL by checking the status of the service key and a wrong status results in error (Lsi_Fc.sys wants "on demand")
I'll use some stuff from another forum.

quote 1
S3 Cd04nwlhsllf;Cd04nwlhsllf; C:\Windows\system32\drivers\lsi_fc.sys [2006-11-02 65640]
Vista Ultimate, which includes that driver, but this one is in use with that odd service name. I can see it is for LSI's Fibre Channel Scsi MiniPort storage of some sort, but why that name? ...

quote 2
Set to Manual start, and when it was disabled the guy had a failed bootup, so something relies on it to be on demand.

Where do we want to go?
a fully automated filter and prune?
A helpful tool to assist us in that job?
The raw downloads do force us to compare each time we get a new file (updates aren't, they are sometimes fixes. Fixes drop older. Older and newer drivers may have built-in security checks. They CAN conflict with OEM's proprietary nightmares, and the OEM-nighmare can be newer than the more generic.)

Automated weighing by tool or by human, I think neither can be perfect.
What do you think we do? What is the best thing to do?