Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Eric666

  • Birthday 03/24/1969

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    The Netherlands
  • OS
    Windows 7

Eric666's Achievements

  1. Well, for me it worked using the FAT32 approach :grin: I read somewhere in a thread (MSDN) that the size of the first SWM is important in this matter. It should be large enough to contain the license agreement, or the installation fails. So splitting it to 3900 MB chunks worked at least for me. Note that I only used one Windows version (8.1 Core) by first exporting it to a new WIM (so only an index of 1), and afterwards integrating updates using KUC. Note that a working \sources\ei.cfg is needed, as stated in the thread. I just saw that Akeo released a new version of Rufus, which seems to implement the very thing I requested before: UEFI NTFS support and automatic WIM splitting. Definitely something I'm going to try out. Quote from Rufus 2.0.639 release notes: Add seamless UEFI boot of NTFS partitions, for Windows ISOs with large files (>4GB)Add support for Windows multipart 'install.swm' Regards, Eric666
  2. Hi Liam, Well since you ask.... something that really annoys me is that when creating a bootable UEFI USB, the file system should be FAT32, or it won't work. The consequence is that any install.wim larger than 4 GB needs to be split in SWM files or it won't fit on the USB drive. This was for my Windows 8.1 installation, I used Rufus (from Akeo) to create a UEFI/GPT only bootable and WTK's WIM splitter. Funny thing is that I also made a MBR/UEFI installation for my old Win 7 laptop. This was actually working using NTFS and an install.wim larger than 4 GB. I tried to do the same for the Win 8.1 install, but that did not work. Any way to work around that using USB prep? Maybe I'm missing something.... Regards, Eric666
  3. I used Unattended Creator in the past for my Win7 Home Premium installation. After generation of the XML I added some extra locale info, so I did not have to make selections for that during install. For my Win 8.1 installation I took the existing Win7 XML, updated the serial and the image name to be used, and presto, everything worked. Note that this was done with an older version of WTK Or did you mean using the current version of Unattended Creator? Regards, Eric666
  4. I don't think the compiler itself is the actual problem, but the dependencies in the resulting exe. Mentioned MS exe files are also built by VS201x as an installation/deployment isn't it (quite a noob on that subject, correct me if I'm wrong). In VS one can adjust a multitude of settings, and maybe one of those causes the problem, maybe it is even the version of the MSI installer of the target OS. Seems that your settings for making a build are not offensive to XP ;-) Just my 2c, as I saw the same error happening a completely different context. Regards, Eric666 Edit: Maybe Clarkg888 can check the IE 11 exe dependencies using a tool like dependency walker?
  5. I had the same problem when running a new version of some custom company product on Win XP Pro. It appears that a compile with VS2010 works fine, while VS2012 (or later?) will result in this type of error message. So the exe is probably looking for a dependency, which is not present in Win XP. Regards, Eric666
  6. Hi, Try http://www.rmprepusb.com/ Maybe this free tool can help you with your drive. Note that the author's website is also full of tutorials etc for making bootable flash drives and much more. I just don't like his use of colors, but that is merely personal preference... Regards, Eric666
  7. Hi akf, As for rendering the USB drive normal, just wiping all files or a reformat will do. Making it bootable is just adding a special bootsector and a few startup files. If I recall correctly, WTK can do this. Main -> Intermediate -> USB Boot Preparation. Regards, Eric666
  8. Hi, I was kind of having the same problem with my Windows 7 x64. It was not even trimmed, but by tweaking and tooling somehow I had indeed all features including WMP and DotNet 3.5 unavailable. I tried every normal repair method using Windows Update, standalone versions of DotNet and indeed the N-versions of WMP but to no avail. When running KUC it appeared I had so much bad packages, that windows seemed FUBAR. Komm, the author of the KUC tool suggested that in my case a bad SP1 install might be the culprit, so I even ended up trying to uninstall SP1 but also there things went pear-shaped. Finally I ended up doing a new clean install on the machine and only then all problems were solved. Assuming you have been using W7 SP1 as a source with Winkit, SP1 uninstall would not be an option in your case. Still you might use KUC for inspecting your friends' system. Maybe it is a case of a few bad packages that can be removed and re-installed using DISM. KUC produces a series of batch files to do exactly that. HTH and regards, Eric666
  9. Repticilus, I've removed most of the components you mention on my own installation except for these 4: - Remote assistance - Remote desktop services (3 components) - Remote differential compression - Remote FX (2 components) . Wireless networking works fine with me. Your problem is probably not the absence of those components, but as Dotfusion already said something in your router's configuration. It may even be broken.... Note that to configure a router properly you need to make a wired connection first. And your NIC needs to be set to obtain an IP address automatically. If you also have a wireless NIC in your computer, use inSSIDer to check if the router is doing anything wireless at all. Regards, Eric666
  10. Is it possible to publish a deep link to an executable/msu/cab on a website e.g. by using an .url file? This way a redirect to the MS server would be established. The source website would not suffer from heavy traffic (only small text files with extension .url would be downloaded) and the target MS server should be adequate enough to cope with the traffic. Unless this kind of linking is prohibited? Why this thought? I suspect the KUC program does direct downloads of KB fixes (probably using CURL library) and even did this while Komm's website was offline, so it was probably directly addressing the MS site. WTK would probably not have much problems downloading such reference link files and interpreting the contents so it can download from the MS target server. Is this a feasible approach? Regards, Eric666
  11. OK, I finally understand. Still, also all exe/msu/cab have been removed from his site, which were previously there, and could be downloaded with WTK. I think your guess on KUC directly downloading from MS servers is probably right. Regards, Eric666
  12. Yes, I read that thread, but I did not understand that Komm meant that he removed all updates, since he talked about zips. And KUC (Komm's Update Checker) was still able to download some updates for my system. But possibly those were obtained from some other location. Regards, Eric666
  13. I just checked KUC's site manually and indeed no MSU/EXE/CAB are present, only the additional TXT and HTM files. Did M$ tell him to remove all those? Or are those not listed/hidden in order to reduce traffic? Because when running KUC I can still download needed updates. Regards, Eric666 Edit: the effect is now that all material in the update repository is moved to the Old subfolder, leaving a blank x86/x64 Update folder...
  • Create New...