 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows 98 / General Topics / May 2008Bootup - Shutdown logger
I would like to produce a (text) file that shows when (date & time) bootup is completed and when shutdown is initiated. The file needs to append itself everytime bootup and shutdown occurs, i.e the file grows bigger with time. For example, over a year period the file will probably have many hundreds of entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any suggestions? This was just discussed in *Elapsed time meter* See Franc's second message [04-14-08] for autoexec.bat entries to create a text file.  SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | I would like to produce a (text) file that shows when (date & time) bootup is | completed and when shutdown is initiated. The file needs to append itself | everytime bootup and shutdown occurs, i.e the file grows bigger with time. | For example, over a year period the file will probably have many hundreds of | entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any | suggestions? Perhaps I should add, that there were times when someone would request an actual program that would do this [with password protection] and I would install Sentry or another boot protection program [something they could understand]. SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ Not being a computer whiz, I am a little reluctant to mess with the autoexec.bat file. What happens if I make a typo error when modifying the autoexec.bat file? Will my PC fail to boot? Then what? > This was just discussed in *Elapsed time meter* > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > | entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any > | suggestions? Franc was careful enough: that seemed to be correct and intact when posted. A cut and paste of the lines into a text editor, and saving the file as > test.bat < would allow you to test without any difficulties. Just click on the bat you created in Explorer, and look in the folder at the created text file to see if it contains what you want [or use the RUN box or MSDOS prompt]. If it suits your purposes, then add the lines into the autoexec.bat by cutting and pasting there. NOTE: place them at the end of the Batch. If you mess up the test.bat, then nothing untoward will occur while testing. SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | Not being a computer whiz, I am a little reluctant to mess with the | autoexec.bat file. What happens if I make a typo error when modifying the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] | > | entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any | > | suggestions? Nothing you put in autoexec.bat is going to tell you when boot "finishes." I'm lost. What was the recommended autoexec.bat command? Was it just to put a timestamp in a log? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > Franc was careful enough: that seemed to be correct and intact when > posted. [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > | > | entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any > | > | suggestions? Its Franc's code, let him explain. Like I said, I would install one of the available third party programs [for those not wanting policies and other] to completely monitor access, password protected and required for entry, encrypted, complete logged activity if desired including hack attempts or failed logins, and several other. SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | Nothing you put in autoexec.bat is going to tell you when boot "finishes." | [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] | > | > | entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any | > | > | suggestions? Yeah, so would I. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > Its Franc's code, let him explain. > [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > Any > | > | > | suggestions? It's difficult to pin down when boot up is "finished", but a rough estimate is provided by a script in the Startup folder. For shutdown, you use a script to initiate shutdown. Both scripts write the date/time to a single, mutual file. How's that for an idea? I even have most of the code written. But you've been given a lot of info already, with no seeming result. What's wrong with the solutions already provided in this forum? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >I would like to produce a (text) file that shows when (date & time) bootup >is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any > suggestions? Not being a computer whiz, I am a little reluctant to mess with the autoexec.bat file. What happens if I make a typo error when modifying the autoexec.bat file? Will my PC fail to boot? Then what? > It's difficult to pin down when boot up is "finished", but a rough estimate > is provided by a script in the Startup folder. For shutdown, you use a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any > > suggestions? Take our word for it, nothing that's been recommended will do anything to hurt the system. At worst, the command won't do what you want it to do. But as I'm discussing with MEB, I'm not clear that some command in autoexec.bat can do what you want. As stated, you want to log when bootup finishes and when shutdown commences. Is this a secure system that you have to keep kids from messing with, for instance? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com \ > Not being a computer whiz, I am a little reluctant to mess with the > autoexec.bat file. What happens if I make a typo error when modifying the [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> > entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any >> > suggestions? Anyway, I just finished a whole set of scripts and shortcuts that will do what you want. I can even put them into an installer so you don't have to worry about mistakes. Or are you familiar enough with computers to, say, put a couple of files into the C:\ folder, on into the Startup folder, etc.? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > Not being a computer whiz, I am a little reluctant to mess with the > autoexec.bat file. What happens if I make a typo error when modifying the [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> > entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any >> > suggestions? Okay, let me reply here. If you finished the scripts and other, is there a link for testing these [no installer yet please]? SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | Anyway, I just finished a whole set of scripts and shortcuts that will do | what you want. I can even put them into an installer so you don't have to [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] | >> > entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any | >> > suggestions? No, I'll post the code here, between lines of asterisks. "StartTime.vbs" **************************** Option Explicit Dim fso, f Set fso = CreateObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject") Set f = fso.OpenTextFile("C:\uptime.txt", 8, True) f.WriteLine "Start " & now f.Close WScript.Quit ****************************** "Shutdown.vbs" ***************************** Option Explicit Dim fso, f, wso Set wso = WScript.CreateObject("WScript.Shell") Set fso = CreateObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject") Set f = fso.OpenTextFile("C:\uptime.txt", 8, True) f.WriteLine now f.Close wso.run "C:\WINDOWS\RUNDLL32 SHELL32.DLL,SHExitWindowsEx 9" ******************************** ""Restart.vbs" ******************************* Option Explicit Dim fso, f, wso Set wso = WScript.CreateObject("WScript.Shell") Set fso = CreateObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject") Set f = fso.OpenTextFile("C:\uptime.txt", 8, True) f.WriteLine now f.Close wso.run "C:\WINDOWS\RUNDLL32 SHELL32.DLL,SHExitWindowsEx 2" ******************************** "Logoff.vbs" ******************************* Option Explicit Dim fso, f, wso Set wso = WScript.CreateObject("WScript.Shell") Set fso = CreateObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject") Set f = fso.OpenTextFile("C:\uptime.txt", 8, True) f.WriteLine now f.Close wso.run "C:\WINDOWS\RUNDLL32 SHELL32.DLL,SHExitWindowsEx 0" ********************************* Place StartTime.vbs into the Startup folder. Place the other three into the C:\ root folder. "C:\Uptime.txt" is the log. I'd place shortcuts to the shutdown scripts and the log onto the Desktop. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > Okay, let me reply here. If you finished the scripts and other, is there a > link for testing these [no installer yet please]? [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > | >> > entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any > | >> > suggestions? | No, I'll post the code here, between lines of asterisks. | [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] | C:\ root folder. "C:\Uptime.txt" is the log. I'd place shortcuts to the | shutdown scripts and the log onto the Desktop. Okay, tested shutdown and startup vbs. Not sure if this is accurate, but apparently the desire is to monitor ALL log times [like in a networked server/work station environment or multi-user environment {tracking kids usage}]. How do you intend to ensure that a user MUST use these to logoff or shutdown, hence creating an accurate and complete log for usage tracking purposes, and ensure that the Startup vbs is not removed from Startup? The poster also wished TOTAL runtime output logged [as in other apparent users; apparently for comparison to cumulative logged activity]. The suggestion was to compare SMART values [hard drive runtime hours]. SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | > Okay, let me reply here. If you finished the scripts and other, is there a | > link for testing these [no installer yet please]? [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] | > | >> > entries in it. The program must NOT delete previous entries. Any | > | >> > suggestions? I've proved the concept, just not actually written all the code, that would provide individual and cumulative uptime notations added to the log at shutdown, but I think it might be better to leave the log alone and run a script on it whenever a report is desired. Depends on end use. You mention various scenarios. Perhaps the OP could help us pin down the target environment. Or, perhaps OP has used that code of Franc's and it works just fine and he just hasn't bothered to report back. Locking down Windows 98 using Doug Knox's methods would be the only way I know to prevent meddling with the tracking system. Locking down would be required NO MATTER what tracking method was used if trust of the user(s) is not complete. Perhaps a combination of POLEDIT and Doug's scripts. http://www.dougknox.com/security/index.htm, which would be necessary under those conditions, anyway. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > | No, I'll post the code here, between lines of asterisks. > | [quoted text clipped - 123 lines] > Any > | > | >> > suggestions? Okay, let's see if PSRumbagh can verify exactly what the target for security is or if that is necessary, and whether either presented technique provides what they need.. SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | I've proved the concept, just not actually written all the code, that would | provide individual and cumulative uptime notations added to the log at [quoted text clipped - 138 lines] | > Any | > | > | >> > suggestions? >I've proved the concept, just not actually written all the code, that would >provide individual and cumulative uptime notations added to the log at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >environment. Or, perhaps OP has used that code of Franc's and it works just >fine and he just hasn't bothered to report back. My simplistic shutdown code does not log restarts, so from that point of view your approach is better. I primarily use my method because I have a lot of automatic housekeeping tasks that execute just prior to shutdown, eg check for changes in critical files and sectors, display new Run components in registry, display HD SMART parameters (reallocated sectors), etc. Aside from the fact that I don't know how to achieve the same end within the GUI, the added benefit from doing this at the DOS command line is that malware may not remain memory resident once one exits the GUI. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. >No, I'll post the code here, between lines of asterisks. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Set f = fso.OpenTextFile("C:\uptime.txt", 8, True) >f.WriteLine "Shutdown" & now ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >f.Close >wso.run "C:\WINDOWS\RUNDLL32 SHELL32.DLL,SHExitWindowsEx 9" >******************************** I'm no programmer, but have you forgotten to add explanatory notes (eg Shutdown, Restart, Logoff) to the date/time stamps in the respective scripts? BTW, I get a VBScript runtime error in line 3 of StartTime.vbs: ActiveX component can't create object 'Scripting.FileSystemObject' Code: 800A01AD Does this mean that I am missing some component or that my permissions are set incorrectly? - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |>No, I'll post the code here, between lines of asterisks. |> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] | | BTW, I get a VBScript runtime error in line 3 of StartTime.vbs: It worked for me & produced "Start 4/19/08 11:39:16 PM" in UpTime.txt. | ActiveX component can't create object 'Scripting.FileSystemObject' | Code: 800A01AD | | Does this mean that I am missing some component or that my permissions | are set incorrectly? Can it be you need to update your scripting engine? (But I have failed to remember or discover how to do that. All I have are these three URLs... http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/t0aew7h6.aspx VBScript User Manual http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/9bbdkx3k.aspx More VBScript User Manual http://www.billsway.com/vbspage/ Windows VBScript Tools ) | - Franc Zabkar | -- | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net >| BTW, I get a VBScript runtime error in line 3 of StartTime.vbs: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Can it be you need to update your scripting engine? It was already up to date. >(But I have failed to remember or discover how to do that. All I have >are these three URLs... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >http://www.billsway.com/vbspage/ >Windows VBScript Tools Last week I bought "MS VBscript - Step by Step", Microsoft Press. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |>| BTW, I get a VBScript runtime error in line 3 of StartTime.vbs: |> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] | | It was already up to date. Yet, you are reporting a lower version to your script files...!... You Me WScript.exe 5.6.0.6626 5.6.0.8825 VBScript.dll 5.6.0.7426 5.6.0.8825 MSVCRT.dll 6.10.8924.0 6.00.8797.0 You do have a later MSVCRT.DLL. All the other file versions you posted to MEB seem to be about the same as mine. Here is the last of 3 mentionings in my SFCLog.txt about those files... Microsoft System File Checker Log file generated on 5/8/06 at 04:46 PM Started verify scan using verification data file: "C:\WINDOWS\Default.sfc" Previous Previous New New CRC File Change Version Date Version Date Match ---------------- ----------- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- ------ [C:\WINDOWS] wscript.exe Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No [c:\windows\COMMAND] cscript.exe Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No [C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM] jscript.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No scrobj.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No vbscript.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No wshext.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No scrrun.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No wshom.ocx Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No ...snip Are you sure you are fully updated at Windows Update? I'm pretty sure there was one of two criticals dealing with scripting! |>(But I have failed to remember or discover how to do that. All I have |>are these three URLs... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | -- | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net Another thing: what about your settings at...?... "Control Panel, Internet Options, Security tab, Select Internet (& maybe Local Intranet)" Are you at Default or Custom? If Custom, are the 3 Scripting options enabled? Mine are, (but not all the ActiveX options are enabled). ||>| BTW, I get a VBScript runtime error in line 3 of StartTime.vbs: ||> [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] | PCR | pcrrcp@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net >Another thing: what about your settings at...?... > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Are you at Default or Custom? If Custom, are the 3 Scripting options >enabled? Mine are, (but not all the ActiveX options are enabled). I'll try to answer everyone's questions here. These are my security settings: Local intranet Medium-low Trusted sites Low Internet Medium Restricted sites High I've tried setting Local intranet to Low but the error remained. I've been able to successfully run Gary's .vbs script on my other Win98SE box. Now I'm trying to find what is different about them. According to msinfo32.exe, the two boxes are both using IE6SP1 with the same build version and same updates. The above security settings are also identical. These are the IE data for the good box: http://www.users.on.net/~fzabkar/VBS_problem/xp2500IE.txt These are the IE data for the bad box: http://www.users.on.net/~fzabkar/VBS_problem/xp2500IE.txt This is the difference between the two data sets: http://www.users.on.net/~fzabkar/VBS_problem/diff_ie.txt I can find only one real difference and that is that the good box has a later version of vbscript.dll. However using this version on the bad box doesn't make the error go away. The good box also has Opera installed on it, although it is a much earlier version. The same versions of wscript.exe are installed on both boxes. This a Filemon record up until the error box appears: http://www.users.on.net/~fzabkar/VBS_problem/vbs_filemon.txt The Filemon output screen isn't mousable, but holding down the Ctrl-Shift key plus Home/End/PgUp/PgDown and then selecting Edit > Copy enables one to copy and paste the output into Notepad. Thanks to MEB. As for TweakUI's IE settings, all but the following boxes are checked: Clear document, run, typed-URL history on exit Show Favorites on Start Menu If I use Opera to open a .vbs file, it merely displays its contents. Under Tools > Preferences > Advanced > Downloads there is no VBS file type. =============================================================== While writing the above and trying things as I went, I finally got the script to work. Unfortunately I lost track of what I did. :-( However, if I now rename scrrun.dll in the Windows\System directory to scrrun.dl_, then the VB script breaks as before. Renaming other files in the scr56en.exe package either has no effect, or produces other errors. I notice that scrrun.dll appears in MEB's Filemon output screen (thank you MEB) soon after mine errors out. Maybe that was the problem all along. The following URL may offer an explanation for what happened: http://www.auditmypc.com/process/scrrun.asp "The file, scrrun.dll, is used by windows when running scripts such as those written with JScript or VBScript. If scrrun.dll is unavailable, windows will not be able to execute scripts. If you do not use any scripting on your computer you may be able to remove this file." Anyway I suspect that something broke my IE6 or WSH installation. I hate installing updates and patches because this sort of thing seems to happen to me a lot. Thanks to all for your help. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |>Another thing: what about your settings at...?... |> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] | | I've tried setting Local intranet to Low but the error remained. Those settings were good, then. And I see you have solved the problem & possibly could stop now. Probably, some 3rd-party software renamed your Scrrun.dll as a security measure to prevent scripts from running, & you will be fine now that you renamed it back. | I've been able to successfully run Gary's .vbs script on my other | Win98SE box. Now I'm trying to find what is different about them. | | According to msinfo32.exe, the two boxes are both using IE6SP1 with | the same build version and same updates. I'm not seeing that you have taken all the updates, at "IE, Help, About"...!... Yours... ;SP1;q240308;q313829;Q330994;Q828750 Mine.... SP1, Q313829, Q328970, Q328389, Q324929, Q810847, Q813951, Q816506, Q813489, Q330994, Q818529, Q822925, Q828750, Q824145, Q832894, Q837009, Q831167, Q823353, Q867801, Q833989, Q834707, Q889293, Q867282, Q891781, Q890923, Q883939, Q896688, Q905915, Q912812, Q916281 & Q918439. Although mine is misleading (because the registry key the data comes from is not cleared of superceded updates, but the later ones are just added)... you need to go to Windows Update & get at least Q916281 & Q918439... http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS06-021.mspx Microsoft Security Bulletin MS06-021 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (916281) http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS06-022.mspx Microsoft Security Bulletin MS06-022 Vulnerability in ART Image Rendering Could Allow Remote Code Execution (918439) REMEMBER... To see the Win98 updates at Windows Update, you must go there from a Win98 machine. And that MSVCRT.dll you reported earlier looks suspiciously XP/Vista-irradiated to me...!... You Me MSVCRT.dll 6.10.8924.0 6.00.8797.0 Also, your script files... jscript.dll 5.6.0.8513 vbscript.dll 5.6.0.8515 ...are STILL lower than my versions. Jugding from this SFCLog.txt of mine, you need at least one more update... [C:\WINDOWS] wscript.exe Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No [c:\windows\COMMAND] cscript.exe Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No [C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM] jscript.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No scrobj.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No vbscript.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No wshext.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No scrrun.dll Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No wshom.ocx Updated 5.6.0.8515 1/14/03 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 No I'm not sure Windows Update will get that done for you. If not, I'll try harder to recall what it was that I ran (back in '06 says the date in SFCLog.txt) that got me updated to that. Well... wait a minute... I am seeing those files with those dates in my version of that file you mentioned... Scr56en.exe. Its Properties says my version is 5.50.4134.600. (Not sure where I got it from.) | The above security settings | are also identical. [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] | -- | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net >I'm not seeing that you have taken all the updates, at "IE, Help, >About"...!... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Q867282, Q891781, Q890923, Q883939, Q896688, Q905915, Q912812, >Q916281 & Q918439. >Although mine is misleading (because the registry key the data comes >from is not cleared of superceded updates, but the later ones are just >added)... you need to go to Windows Update & get at least Q916281 & >Q918439... >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS06-021.mspx >Microsoft Security Bulletin MS06-021 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Vulnerability in ART Image Rendering Could Allow Remote Code Execution >(918439) OK, after updating I now have ... Update Versions ;SP1;q240308;q313829;Q330994;Q828750;Q918439;Q916281;Q837009;Q833989;Q891781; Java VM Version 5.0.3810.0 >REMEMBER... To see the Win98 updates at Windows Update, you must go >there from a Win98 machine. And that MSVCRT.dll you reported earlier >looks suspiciously XP/Vista-irradiated to me...!... > > You Me >MSVCRT.dll 6.10.8924.0 6.00.8797.0 I have no idea where this version came from. >Also, your script files... > >jscript.dll 5.6.0.8513 >vbscript.dll 5.6.0.8515 After Windows Update I have ... jscript.dll 5.6.0.8831 vbscript.dll 5.6.0.7426 >...are STILL lower than my versions. Jugding from this SFCLog.txt of >mine, you need at least one more update... [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >version of that file you mentioned... Scr56en.exe. Its Properties says >my version is 5.50.4134.600. (Not sure where I got it from.) That's the one Gary is offering. BTW, start.vbs still works, but I wouldn't be surprised if the updates broke something else. Thanks for your interest. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |>I'm not seeing that you have taken all the updates, at "IE, Help, |>About"...!... [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] | | Update Versions ;SP1;q240308;q313829;Q330994;Q828750;Q918439;Q916281;Q837009;Q833989;Q89 1781; | Java VM Version 5.0.3810.0 That looks a lot, lot better! Try Windows Update once more to see whether it is through with you. Sometimes you need to take one in order to be eligible for another. If no more are offered, the rest of what I have shown (of my IE, About) is presumably either superceded or not applicable to your machine. (I should be more definitive like Terhune & Chauvin have been in the past about these updates, but...) here (anyway) is a clue to the superceded ones. At "Control Panel, Add/Remove Programs, Install/Uninstall tab", I do know that... (a) Internet Explorer Q918439 replaced... Q912812, Q905915, Q896688, Q883939, Q890923, Q891781, Q889293, Q834707, Q867801, Q831167, Q832894, Q824145, Q828750, Q822925, Q818529) (b) Outlook Express Q823353 replaced... Q837009, Q330994. (That's right, it replaced a higher number.) (c) All of these also show up in Add/Remove... Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669 Microsoft VGX Q833989 Windows 98 KB891711 Update Windows 98 KB896358 Update Windows 98 KB908519 Update Windows 98 KB918547 Update Windows 98 Q823559 Update Windows 98 Q840315 Update Windows 98 Q888113 Update Windows 98 Q890175 Update |>REMEMBER... To see the Win98 updates at Windows Update, you must go |>there from a Win98 machine. And that MSVCRT.dll you reported earlier [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | | I have no idea where this version came from. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=MSVCRT.dll++6.10.8924.0&btnG=Google+Search Google finds about 402 for "MSVCRT.dll 6.10.8924.0", but I haven't come up with a definitive answer yet. http://support.microsoft.com/dllhelp/Default.aspx?dlltype=file&l=55&alpha=msvcrt .dll&S=1&x=12&y=13&start=50 MS's DLL Database doesn't mention yours, but that too is not quite definitive. |>Also, your script files... |> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] | jscript.dll 5.6.0.8831 | vbscript.dll 5.6.0.7426 OOOPS... that is right about about JScript.dll! I have a later entry in SFCLog.txt showing... jscript.dll Updated 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 5.6.0.8831 5/17/06 No ..., after the last bundle of critical updates! But VBScript.dll definitely was last updated by Scr56en.exe v.5.50.4134.600. It is v.5.6.0.8825. The JScript.dll in that .exe also is that older version; (I've just extracted it). It might have been best to run Scr56en.exe before going to Windows Update. But there's a chance it won't wreck your new JScript.dll if you run it now. It might ask first before over-writing a newer version. (I don't know for sure.) |>...are STILL lower than my versions. Jugding from this SFCLog.txt of |>mine, you need at least one more update... [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] | | That's the one Gary is offering. It will give you a newer VBScript.dll-- but will it revert your JScript.dll? | BTW, start.vbs still works, but I wouldn't be surprised if the updates | broke something else. I can't recall any script crashes. | Thanks for your interest. | | - Franc Zabkar | -- | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net >| OK, after updating I now have ... >| [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >have shown (of my IE, About) is presumably either superceded or not >applicable to your machine. The only useful items that were offered were ... Security Update for Flash Player (KB913433) Windows IDE Hard Drive Cache Package >(I should be more definitive like Terhune & Chauvin have been in the >past about these updates, but...) here (anyway) is a clue to the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >(c) All of these also show up in Add/Remove... This is what I have: N=no, Y=yes N Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669 Y Microsoft VGX Q833989 Y Windows 98 KB891711 Update Y Windows 98 KB896358 Update Y Windows 98 KB908519 Update Y Windows 98 KB918547 Update Y Windows 98 Q823559 Update Y Windows 98 Q840315 Update Y Windows 98 Q888113 Update N Windows 98 Q890175 Update I think I'll just leave it as it is. Thanks for your input. BTW, this is what msinfo32.exe reports: [Software Updates] Windows 98 Second Edition = 4,10,0,2222 Updates = Year 2000 Update for Windows 98 [W98] [Windows 98 KB891711 Update] [Windows 98 KB896358 Update] [Windows 98 KB908519 Update] [Windows 98 KB918547 Update] [Windows 98 Q245729 Update] [Windows 98 Q274548 Update] [Windows 98 Q314147 Update] [Windows 98 Q323172 Update] [Windows 98 Q323255 Update] [Windows 98 Q329115 Update] [Windows 98 Q811630 Update] [Windows 98 Q888113 Update] [W98.SE] [Windows 98 Q273727 Update] [Windows 98 Q823559 Update] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q242975 Update] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q256015 Update] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q259728 Update] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q263044 Update] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q273017 Update] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q273991 Update] [W98.TELNET] [Windows 98 TELNET Update] [Win98.SE] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q238453 Update] [Windows 98 Second Edition Q239887 Update] - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |>| OK, after updating I now have ... |>| [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] | Security Update for Flash Player (KB913433) | Windows IDE Hard Drive Cache Package Interesting! I don't have that one, & Windows Update doesn't offer it... http://support.microsoft.com/kb/913433 MS06-020: Vulnerabilities in Macromedia Flash Player from Adobe could allow remote code execution However, that article speaks of older versions of Flash Player than I have, & I think it was mentioned at this site that an alternative to that fix was to get the the newer version... http://www.adobe.com/go/getflash Adobe Flash Player version 9.0.124.0 That update goes quick & well. After it is done, at... (a) C:\WINDOWS\Downloaded Program Files (b) R-Clk "Shockwave Flash Object", Properties, Version tab, should show v.9.0.124.0. NOTE: I had to click the URL for the update. It did not work to R-Clk, Update, the earlier version I started with! |>(I should be more definitive like Terhune & Chauvin have been in the |>past about these updates, but...) here (anyway) is a clue to the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] | | N Microsoft Data Access Components KB870669 http://support.microsoft.com/?id=870669 How to disable the ADODB.Stream object from Internet Explorer I didn't do it manually (that I reall), but true to the articles word, my Registry does contain this key... REGEDIT4 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ActiveX Compatibility\{00000566-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4}] "Compatibility Flags"=dword:00000400 That's one of the kill-bits so famous here a while ago! | Y Microsoft VGX Q833989 | Y Windows 98 KB891711 Update [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] | Y Windows 98 Q888113 Update | N Windows 98 Q890175 Update http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS05-001.mspx Microsoft Security Bulletin MS05-001 Vulnerability in HTML Help Could Allow Code Execution (890175) That seems to deal with ActiveX & security zones! It hasn't hurt me to take it that I can see! | I think I'll just leave it as it is. | [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] | [Windows 98 Second Edition Q238453 Update] | [Windows 98 Second Edition Q239887 Update] Here is mine from MSInfo32... Windows 98 Second Edition=4,10,0,2222 Updates=Year 2000 Update for Windows 98b SP2: Windows 98 Second Edition USBHUB W98: KB891711, KB896358, KB908519, KB918547, Q245729, Q274113, Q314147, Q323172, Q323255, Q329115, Q811630, Q840315, Q888113, & Q890175. W98SE: Q823559, Q245272, Q256015, Q259728, Q260067, Q263044, Q273017 & Q273991. Win98SE: Q249973, Q238453, Q239887, UHCD Windows 98 Second Edition Digital Video Windows 98 TELNET But this machine was set up by Compaq (a 7470 Presario). So, it may necessarily be different from yours. I see you have some that I don't. But I'm not overly worried, presuming Windows Update would have offered them if applicable. I see the 1st one you've got that I don't is... http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274548 Patch for "HyperTerminal Buffer Overflow" Vulnerability in Windows 98, Windows Me Now, I've taken the download. It's been my policy not to take stuff that wasn't offered at Windows Update. This is more of a "hotfix". But I'm considering it! | - Franc Zabkar | -- | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net > |>Another thing: what about your settings at...?... > |> [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > version of that file you mentioned... Scr56en.exe. Its Properties says > my version is 5.50.4134.600. (Not sure where I got it from.) Hi,PCR. Check again and you will notice that the version you quote is for Wextract.exe which is the package itself and NOT the update files it contains. Your vbs version of 5.6.0.8825 is the latest MS offered from this now dead URL: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/downloads/list/webdev.asp Begining with Gary's Scr56en.exe of 6626 version, MS would silently update the version available from the above website such that one always got the latest version. I have archived versions 6626 8515 8825 The only one I think I might be missing was 8513. You could only have gotten your version 8825 from that source as it was never available from the WinUP site for reasons I can't fathom at all. Update 917344 does update just Jscript.dll to 8831 version, and once again NONE of these updates will retrograde any version of files backwards. Files are only replaced if the incoming files are the same or higher version. So when Franc re-applys his 6626 version update all his script files should be getting refreshed provided they ARE the same version. I'll be emailing Gary (from lee_454 AT Yahoo) the latest version for all to enjoy the latest scripting host package - it is NOT available anywhere else that I know of, so thanks a lot Gary, we need it hosted somewhere. To view the version of files inside, open it with WinZip and double click on the inf file to read, close to the bottom of it, the version number. WinZip extracts just the inf file as a temporary file in your TEMP folder and launches your default text file reader to view it with, in such double click situations. To ensure trust, do check the Digital Signature to see that it is a valid MS file that has not been tampered with. I once had a problem with script errors and found it was Norton's scripting guard causing it because when I removed Norton my vbs spell checker started working again with out the errors. Perhaps Franc has Norton? The "Can't create ActiveX Object" error report is a common one and more of a generic output than something specifically wrong with the script itself although the script CAN be wrong and generate the valid error - when the same script works for several other people it is NOT an ActiveX error after all. Something else is going on with Franc's machine. Getting him the latest Scripting Host package would be number one on my list of things to do. > | The above security settings > | are also identical. [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > PCR > pcr...@netzero.net Whoa, now. Don't bother to email me anything, and I did no such thing as agree to host anything. I only host files that I write myself or that I downloaded from known legitimate sources and which are left untouched. Lastly, I only do it when I can find no other legitimate source to refer others to. Anyway, anything you email me is automatically disqualified. Unless I get/got it directly from MS, it doesn't go up. You want it hosted, you gotta do it yourself. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com <SNIP> I'll be emailing Gary (from lee_454 AT Yahoo) the latest version for all to enjoy the latest scripting host package - it is NOT available anywhere else that I know of, so thanks a lot Gary, we need it hosted somewhere. To view the version of files inside, open it with WinZip and double click on the inf file to read, close to the bottom of it, the version number. WinZip extracts just the inf file as a temporary file in your TEMP folder and launches your default text file reader to view it with, in such double click situations. To ensure trust, do check the Digital Signature to see that it is a valid MS file that has not been tampered with. I once had a problem with script errors and found it was Norton's scripting guard causing it because when I removed Norton my vbs spell checker started working again with out the errors. Perhaps Franc has Norton? The "Can't create ActiveX Object" error report is a common one and more of a generic output than something specifically wrong with the script itself although the script CAN be wrong and generate the valid error - when the same script works for several other people it is NOT an ActiveX error after all. Something else is going on with Franc's machine. Getting him the latest Scripting Host package would be number one on my list of things to do. > | The above security settings > | are also identical. [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > PCR > pcr...@netzero.net Perhaps you need to contact MSFN and/or MDGx or one of the other non-standard sites for hosting purposes of un-official files. Be aware that they like to first test them for compatibility, though as many are running highly modified versions of 9X those tests may not reflect everyone's systems. SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ On Apr 23, 7:15 pm, "PCR" <pcr...@netzero.net> wrote: > Franc Zabkar wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > version of that file you mentioned... Scr56en.exe. Its Properties says > my version is 5.50.4134.600. (Not sure where I got it from.) Hi,PCR. Check again and you will notice that the version you quote is for Wextract.exe which is the package itself and NOT the update files it contains. Your vbs version of 5.6.0.8825 is the latest MS offered from this now dead URL: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/downloads/list/webdev.asp Begining with Gary's Scr56en.exe of 6626 version, MS would silently update the version available from the above website such that one always got the latest version. I have archived versions 6626 8515 8825 The only one I think I might be missing was 8513. You could only have gotten your version 8825 from that source as it was never available from the WinUP site for reasons I can't fathom at all. Update 917344 does update just Jscript.dll to 8831 version, and once again NONE of these updates will retrograde any version of files backwards. Files are only replaced if the incoming files are the same or higher version. So when Franc re-applys his 6626 version update all his script files should be getting refreshed provided they ARE the same version. I'll be emailing Gary (from lee_454 AT Yahoo) the latest version for all to enjoy the latest scripting host package - it is NOT available anywhere else that I know of, so thanks a lot Gary, we need it hosted somewhere. To view the version of files inside, open it with WinZip and double click on the inf file to read, close to the bottom of it, the version number. WinZip extracts just the inf file as a temporary file in your TEMP folder and launches your default text file reader to view it with, in such double click situations. To ensure trust, do check the Digital Signature to see that it is a valid MS file that has not been tampered with. I once had a problem with script errors and found it was Norton's scripting guard causing it because when I removed Norton my vbs spell checker started working again with out the errors. Perhaps Franc has Norton? The "Can't create ActiveX Object" error report is a common one and more of a generic output than something specifically wrong with the script itself although the script CAN be wrong and generate the valid error - when the same script works for several other people it is NOT an ActiveX error after all. Something else is going on with Franc's machine. Getting him the latest Scripting Host package would be number one on my list of things to do. > | The above security settings > | are also identical. [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > PCR > pcr...@netzero.net ...snip |> Also, your script files... |> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] |> try harder to recall what it was that I ran (back in '06 says the |> date in SFCLog.txt) that got me updated to that. Subsequently (as I posted elsewhere) I did discover a later entry in my SFCLog.txt showing... jscript.dll Updated 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 5.6.0.8831 5/17/06 No ..., & a notation of about 5 critical updates having been run. But VBScript.dll has remained at v.5.6.0.8825. |> Well... wait a minute... I am seeing those files with those dates in |> my version of that file you mentioned... Scr56en.exe. Its Properties [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] | for Wextract.exe which is the package itself and NOT the update files | it contains. I am reporting the version of Scr56en.exe, itself, to be 5.50.4134.600, which shows in Version tab of its Properties. All of the files inside that match the bove SFCLog.txt seem to be v.5.6.0.8825 & have the same date. I did extract the two script .dll's with WinZip to verify it. There is no WExtract.exe inside of Scr56en.exe than I can see. HOWEVER, I do see extra files inside that do not appear in SFC log. I presume they are temporary files, or that I already had exact matches for them. Another possibility is that some files in there are for other OS than Win98SE. WinZip shows a total of 16 files in there of various dates! And only 8 show up in that SFC log & all of one date! Here are the ones that did not show up... Advpack.dll 6/6/00 8/29/02 Dispex.dll 6/26/01 6/26/01 Scr56en.cat 9/16/04 None Scr56en.inf 9/16/04 9/16/04 W95inf16.dll 6/6/00 4/23/95 W95inf32.dll 6/6/00 9/17/96 Wscript.hlp 6/6/00 6/26/01 Wschcon.dll 8/8/04 None The 1st date is the one inside Scr56en.exe. The 2nd is the date of the file in my system. "None" means I don't have the file. SO... looks like a few files may have been for temporary use, but the bulk of the "missing" ones weren't extracted (for SFC to notice) because the system already had higher versions (judging by the dates). | Your vbs version of 5.6.0.8825 is the latest MS offered | from this now dead URL: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/downloads/list/webdev.asp I'm afraid I can't recall where I got mine from. Doubting it came that way from Windows Update, someone once must have posted a link to it (Scr56en.exe) here in this NG. But I see Terhune is denying it! | Begining with Gary's Scr56en.exe of 6626 version, MS would silently | update the version available from the above website such that one [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] | from the WinUP site for reasons I can't fathom at all. Update 917344 | does update just Jscript.dll to 8831 version, OK-- Security Update for Windows 98 (KB917344) is one of 5 in my notes for that SFC run. OK, that must have been the one that got me to Jscript.dll 5.6.0.8831. | and once again NONE of | these updates will retrograde any version of files backwards. Files | are only replaced if the incoming files are the same or higher | version. That seems to be true also from what I report above. I wasn't sure. | So when Franc re-applys his 6626 version update all his | script files should be getting refreshed provided they ARE the same | version. OK. Thanks for the information, which seems to agree with my recent findings. I agree he should run his Scr56en.exe, especially if it, itself, is version 5.50.4134.600. That would give him a better VBScript.dll of v.5.6.0.8825-- & not degrade his VScript.dll of v.5.6.0.8831. | I'll be emailing Gary (from lee_454 AT Yahoo) the latest version for | all to enjoy the latest scripting host package - it is NOT available | anywhere else that I know of, so thanks a lot Gary, we need it hosted | somewhere. To view the version of files inside, open it with WinZip | and double click on the inf file to read, close to the bottom of it, | the version number. Mine contains thess lines... HKLM,%ActiveSetupRegKey%,"Version",0,"5,6,0,8825" ActiveSetupRegKey= "SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Active Setup\Installed Components\{4f645220-306d-11d2-995d-00c04f98bbc9}" And, going to that Registry key, indeed I see that version. I am content to know my VScript.dll is v...8831. | WinZip extracts just the inf file as a temporary | file in your TEMP folder and launches your default text file reader to | view it with, in such double click situations. I was afraid of WinZip's message warning against running an .inf. Therefore, I extracted just that .inf & then clicked it-- which did as usual open it in Notepad. | To ensure trust, do | check the Digital Signature to see that it is a valid MS file that has | not been tampered with. Huh? To do that, is it sufficient to go to its Properties, Digital Signature tab, & see that it says...?... Microsoft Corporation, Thursday, September 16, 2004 06:40:10 PM. | I once had a problem with script errors and found it was Norton's | scripting guard causing it because when I removed Norton my vbs spell [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] | Franc's machine. Getting him the latest Scripting Host package would | be number one on my list of things to do. That's what I thought, that he should update the host. The problem is gone. We think something had renamed his Scrrun.dll as a security measure. Now that he's got it back, he is fine! |> | The above security settings |> | are also identical. [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] |> PCR |> pcr...@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net [....] > Subsequently (as I posted elsewhere) I did discover a later entry in > my SFCLog.txt showing... > > jscript.dll Updated 5.6.0.8825 8/9/04 5.6.0.8831 5/17/06 No [....] All of our jscript.dll's were updated to 5.6.0.8831 via: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS06-023 (917344) Vulnerability in Microsoft JScript Could Allow Remote Code Execution Published: June 13, 2006 ...which the install file for 9x obtained from WU was named: Windows9X-KB917344-x86-enu.exe Looking back in my software tracking install ecl's shows that the only thing that this update (Windows9X-KB917344-x86-enu.exe) install did was replace the previous jscript.dll and added a JS9XEN.INF file, there were actually no registry entries written with this update to show any relevance. Rick ...hope I didn't jump in out of place and time to this thread, but if I did then greetings to you all anyway ---- Original Message ---- > From: "Rick Chauvin" Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion > Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 7:27 PM [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > relevance. > Rick | ---- Original Message ---- | > From: "Rick Chauvin" Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] | > relevance. | > Rick Thanks, Chauvin. That confirms Lee's statement that it was KB917344 that did that update. Yes, looking now at JS9XEN.INF (which somehow I didn't know was involved until now), I can see it does nothing discernibly more than copy those two files into separate folders & possibly to have JScript.dll register itself. I know the .dll is mentioned in 3 Registry keys, but its version is never specified. Here is one... [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{f414c260-6ac0-11cf-b6d1-00aa00bbbb58}\InprocSe rver32] @="C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM\\JSCRIPT.DLL" "ThreadingModel"="Both" ...Therefore, no tracker would notice the difference, if the .dll had been registered before. Here is the .inf... [Version] Signature=$CHICAGO$ AdvancedINF=2.5,%VersionWarning% [DefaultInstall] CatalogName =js9xen.cat CopyFiles =Copy.Engines, Copy.Inf RegisterOCXs=RegOCX [DefaultInstall.NT] CopyFiles =Copy.Engines, Copy.Inf RegisterOCXs=RegOCX.NT [DestinationDirs] Copy.Inf = 17 ; %WinDir%\Inf Copy.Engines = 11 ; %WinDir%\System32 [Copy.Engines] jscript.dll,,,32 [Copy.Inf] js9xen.inf,,,32 [RegOCX] %11%\jscript.dll [RegOCX.NT] %11%\jscript.dll [SourceDisksNames] 1=%DiskName%,,1 [SourceDisksFiles] jscript.dll=1 js9xen.inf=1 [Strings] VersionWarning= "This setup requires a newer version of the Setup API." DiskName= "Windows Script Version 5.6" Product= "Windows Script version 5.6" Lang=EN I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. I'll put that on my site instead of v. 6626. Have you guys decided if there are any problems with 8825? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com On Apr 23, 7:15 pm, "PCR" <pcr...@netzero.net> wrote: > Franc Zabkar wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > version of that file you mentioned... Scr56en.exe. Its Properties says > my version is 5.50.4134.600. (Not sure where I got it from.) Hi,PCR. Check again and you will notice that the version you quote is for Wextract.exe which is the package itself and NOT the update files it contains. Your vbs version of 5.6.0.8825 is the latest MS offered from this now dead URL: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/downloads/list/webdev.asp Begining with Gary's Scr56en.exe of 6626 version, MS would silently update the version available from the above website such that one always got the latest version. I have archived versions 6626 8515 8825 The only one I think I might be missing was 8513. You could only have gotten your version 8825 from that source as it was never available from the WinUP site for reasons I can't fathom at all. Update 917344 does update just Jscript.dll to 8831 version, and once again NONE of these updates will retrograde any version of files backwards. Files are only replaced if the incoming files are the same or higher version. So when Franc re-applys his 6626 version update all his script files should be getting refreshed provided they ARE the same version. I'll be emailing Gary (from lee_454 AT Yahoo) the latest version for all to enjoy the latest scripting host package - it is NOT available anywhere else that I know of, so thanks a lot Gary, we need it hosted somewhere. To view the version of files inside, open it with WinZip and double click on the inf file to read, close to the bottom of it, the version number. WinZip extracts just the inf file as a temporary file in your TEMP folder and launches your default text file reader to view it with, in such double click situations. To ensure trust, do check the Digital Signature to see that it is a valid MS file that has not been tampered with. I once had a problem with script errors and found it was Norton's scripting guard causing it because when I removed Norton my vbs spell checker started working again with out the errors. Perhaps Franc has Norton? The "Can't create ActiveX Object" error report is a common one and more of a generic output than something specifically wrong with the script itself although the script CAN be wrong and generate the valid error - when the same script works for several other people it is NOT an ActiveX error after all. Something else is going on with Franc's machine. Getting him the latest Scripting Host package would be number one on my list of things to do. > | The above security settings > | are also identical. [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > PCR > pcr...@netzero.net | I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. I'll put | that on my site instead of v. 6626. Have you guys decided if there | are any problems with 8825? There's no problem with it on my machine. It provides both a JScript.dll & a VBScript.dll of v.5.6.0.8825. Zabcar's currently has... jscript.dll 5.6.0.8831 vbscript.dll 5.6.0.7426 We think he should run Scr56en.exe v.5.50.4134.600, which contains files of v...8825. It will lift his VBScript.dll & leave the other alone. (However, the actual problem he reported already is solved, i.e., he can run the .vbs files you posted now.) | -- | Gary S. Terhune | MS-MVP Shell/User | www.grystmill.com | | "Lee" <melee5@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:234891b6-c92a-42dc-810e-18295566059a@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... | On Apr 23, 7:15 pm, "PCR" <pcr...@netzero.net> wrote: |> Franc Zabkar wrote: [quoted text clipped - 97 lines] | it contains. Your vbs version of 5.6.0.8825 is the latest MS offered | from this now dead URL: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/downloads/list/webdev.asp | Begining with Gary's Scr56en.exe of 6626 version, MS would silently | update the version available from the above website such that one [quoted text clipped - 112 lines] |> PCR |> pcr...@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net Thanks Gary, I can report not a single problem with version 8825 Scripting Host on my machine. MEB - MDGx.com already has an unofficial 5.6 and 5.7 9x scripting host packages, I was holding out for the official version for the very reasons you mention. PCR - Wextract is the engine of the update executable package itself, it's version numbers vary a lot so it's not much use by itself. But the digital signature of it both shows you the Signatory of the package and that it has not been tampered with since by the word and standing of the Signatory which in this case is MS - which is good enough for me to trust it. > I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. I'll put that on > my site instead of v. 6626. Have you guys decided if there are any problems [quoted text clipped - 224 lines] > > - Show quoted text - | Thanks Gary, I can report not a single problem with version 8825 | Scripting Host on my machine. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] | standing of the Signatory which in this case is MS - which is good | enough for me to trust it. OK. There certainly are a lot version numbers associated with the various Scr56en.exe. But why not just R-Clk it, Properties, Version tab? Mine says v.5.50.4134.600 there. And inside are files of v...8825. Won't that always be true? |> I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. I'll put |> that on [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] |> Gary S. Terhune |> MS-MVP Shell/Userwww.grystmill.com ...snip SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net > | Thanks Gary, I can report not a single problem with version 8825 > | Scripting Host on my machine. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Mine says v.5.50.4134.600 there. And inside are files of v...8825. Won't > that always be true? While it will always be true just as you say, the version number 5.50.4134.600 is forever linked to IE 5.50 as per http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=164539. So what happens when someone overthinks this part and wrongly assumes the package can't/shouldn't be applied to IE 6.00 SP1? I'd rather avoid the issue of the version of Wextract file and just tell them how to view the insides to get the real version numbers. BTW the default action for inf files is to OPEN them in the default text editor, never to install them - unlike .reg files which merge with prompt as the default action . So it's OK to double click inf files in the WinZip window to read them. As part of every IE version release, MS would also release an Administrator's Kit to go with it, it was called IEAK and inside the package there was the iexpress.exe file which would make these update packages just so an admininistrator could roll his own installation packages for delivery to the Network he was in charge of. Since Win2000, the iexpress files have been a default install option such that the general public is slowly being exposed to the Wextract engine but some of us 98 users missed that boat entirely. The above simply a means to explain away the many different version numbers of the MS updates themselves. > |> I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. I'll put > |> that on [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > PCR > pcr...@netzero.net |> | Thanks Gary, I can report not a single problem with version 8825 |> | Scripting Host on my machine. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] | 5.50.4134.600 is forever linked to IE 5.50 as per | http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=164539. Yikes! According to that list... 6.00.2800.1106 Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 (Windows XP SP1) ...my own version is XP-irradiated! But I am Win98SE & never did defect to XP!!! | So what happens when someone overthinks this part and wrongly assumes | the package can't/shouldn't be applied to IE 6.00 SP1? I'd rather | avoid the issue of the version of Wextract file and just tell them how | to view the insides to get the real version numbers. I wouldn't, myself, suspect the version of Scr56en.exe (or WExtract, as you call it) necessarily must match the version of IE. But I guess I see what you are saying, especially if folk can create their own Scr56en.exe using IExpress.exe. | BTW the default | action for inf files is to OPEN them in the default text editor, never | to install them - unlike .reg files which merge with prompt as the | default action . So it's OK to double click inf files in the WinZip | window to read them. It may be the default to open .inf files as you say in Notepad, instead of running them-- and indeed mine do default to that. To get mine to run, I must R-Clk, & select "Run". HOWEVER, WinZip puts up the scary caution... This file has a potentially unsafe file type of .INF: SCR56EN.INF You should not open this file if you received it from an untrusted source, or in an attachment to an unexpected or suspicious e-mail message. Do you still want to open this file? I'm just uncertain what WinZip intends to do, despite Windows's default. You have only sworn twice that WinZip will have the same default. If you swear it once more-- I will try it! Also, you must swear thrice that WinZip v.9.0 SR-1 gives you the same scary warning! | As part of every IE version release, MS would also release an | Administrator's Kit to go with it, it was called IEAK and inside the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] | means to explain away the many different version numbers of the MS | updates themselves. I have no IExpress.exe that I can find, not even in my Win98SE .cabs. |> |> I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. I'll |> |> put that on [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] |> PCR |> pcr...@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net Windows XP doesn't run IE6SP1. It runs IE6SP2. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > |> | Thanks Gary, I can report not a single problem with version 8825 > |> | Scripting Host on my machine. [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > |> PCR > |> pcr...@netzero.net | Windows XP doesn't run IE6SP1. It runs IE6SP2. Thanks, Gary-- that is a relief! I guess, in putting out that article Lee posted, MS just got sloppy to hint it was (at least at one time) otherwise! | -- | Gary S. Terhune [quoted text clipped - 104 lines] |> PCR |> pcrrcp@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net I overstepped there. I should limit myself to say that any fully updated Windows XP SP2 has IE6 SP2. Sloppy, old, decrepit XP systems might actually be running IE6 SP1, I don't know. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > | Windows XP doesn't run IE6SP1. It runs IE6SP2. > [quoted text clipped - 110 lines] > |> PCR > |> pcrrcp@netzero.net | I overstepped there. I should limit myself to say that any fully | updated Windows XP SP2 has IE6 SP2. Sloppy, old, decrepit XP systems | might actually be running IE6 SP1, I don't know. OK, thanks for the correction, Gary. Lucky I didn't remove my tinfoil hat too soon! I always had my suspicions MS upgraded my IE to a low-level XP-irradiated version-- it says so in certain Properties screens! | -- | Gary S. Terhune [quoted text clipped - 127 lines] |> PCR |> pcrrcp@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net > |> | Thanks Gary, I can report not a single problem with version 8825 > |> | Scripting Host on my machine. [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > swear it once more-- I will try it! Also, you must swear thrice that > WinZip v.9.0 SR-1 gives you the same scary warning! But I can't since I run version 8 of WinZip which has no such warning. I would be uncertain too with that dialog coming at me, but find it hard to believe that WinZip would alter an inf file's default action which is still set up with this registry entry: [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\inffile\shell\open\command] @="C:\\WINDOWS\\NOTEPAD.EXE %1" It clearly says Notepad. You are excused from the exercise, PCR. > | As part of every IE version release, MS would also release an > | Administrator's Kit to go with it, it was called IEAK and inside the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I have no IExpress.exe that I can find, not even in my Win98SE .cabs. Home page for the IEAK package used to be: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ieak/ which now goes to msdn but still has ieak7 info and a download link. or get YOUR version here: http://download.microsoft.com/download/ie6sp1/finrel/6_sp1/W98NT42KMeXP/EN-US/ie ak6.exe There is also this earlier version of iexpress package which you could install and then update with the newer files available from above. http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=237803 Or read about and install here. http://www.mdgx.com/INF_web/ http://www.mdgx.com/INF_web/ieinstal.htm > |> |> I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. I'll > |> |> put that on [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > PCR > pcr...@netzero.net |> |> | Thanks Gary, I can report not a single problem with version 8825 |> |> | Scripting Host on my machine. [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] | | It clearly says Notepad. Mine says the same. Also, there is... [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\inffile\shell\install] @="&Install" [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\inffile\shell\install\command] @="c:\\windows\\rundll.exe setupx.dll,InstallHinfSection DefaultInstall 132 %1" | You are excused from the exercise, PCR. Yea. I just don't know whether WinZip will honor Windows's default, or actually install the .inf. It isn't so hard to simply extract the .inf & then click it, after all. So far, I've found nothing terribly specific about .inf in WinZip's voluminous .docs-- nothing to distinguish it from .exe, for instance. |> | As part of every IE version release, MS would also release an |> | Administrator's Kit to go with it, it was called IEAK and inside [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] | which now goes to msdn but still has ieak7 info and a download link. | or get YOUR version here: http://download.microsoft.com/download/ie6sp1/finrel/6_sp1/W98NT42KMeXP/EN-US/ie ak6.exe | There is also this earlier version of iexpress package which you could | install and then update with the newer files available from above. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] | http://www.mdgx.com/INF_web/ | http://www.mdgx.com/INF_web/ieinstal.htm Alright. Thanks, Lee. That will take some study. |> |> |> I have discovered that I also have version 8825 of SCR56EN. |> |> |> I'll put that on [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] |> PCR |> pcr...@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net ...snip ||> | BTW the default ||> | action for inf files is to OPEN them in the default text editor, [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] | specific about .inf in WinZip's voluminous .docs-- nothing to | distinguish it from .exe, for instance. UPDATE... OK, fine!, I clicked it. It was as you originally said, that WinZip too opens it in Notepad, despite the dread warning. OK, thanks. ...snip SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net WinZip (I'm testing versions 8 and 11) does NOT change file associations. Double-clicking a file inside a WinZip file does the same thing as double-clicking it outside the WinZip file. Nor does WinZip put up that warning you quote, I am 99.9999% sure that that warning comes from elsewhere, though I can't recall where. I've seen it often, that exact same warning, and not in conjunction with WinZip. Try an INF file that isn't in a WinZip file. Do you get the warning? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com <SNIP> > | BTW the default > | action for inf files is to OPEN them in the default text editor, never [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > |> PCR > |> pcr...@netzero.net | WinZip (I'm testing versions 8 and 11) does NOT change file | associations. Double-clicking a file inside a WinZip file does the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | WinZip. Try an INF file that isn't in a WinZip file. Do you get the | warning? Any .inf I click outside WinZip opens in Notepad-- no warning. If I R-Clk, Install-- I get no warning either. It just does its work, (but I tested with a do-nothing .inf). I guess v.9.0 SR-1 shouldn't be an exception. But I definitely see that warning in it. Did you open Scr56en.exe in WinZip, & click SCR56EN.INF in its window? What happens when you click an .exe file in a WinZip window? You should definitely get the warning for that! Does your version of WinZip have the this in its Help screens... .......Quote a WinZip help screen............. WinZip's Handling of Potentially Unsafe File Types This version of WinZip has been enhanced to warn you about some of the most common situations in which you could become infected by a virus compressed inside a Zip file. This enhancement involves several small changes to WinZip that we believe will, in these specific situations, make it less likely for you to be affected by a virus that has been placed inside a Zip file. If you are using the WinZip Classic interface and you double-click a file with a potentially unsafe file type, such as .EXE, WinZip will display a dialog warning you about the potentially unsafe file type. You can then decide whether you really want to open it. Note that this warning is only displayed when you double-click a file within a Zip file to open that file from within WinZip. You can still extract files from a Zip file to a folder on your disk without a warning, regardless of the file types involved. If you are using the WinZip Wizard interface, the Wizard will display a dialog to notify you when you begin to work with a Zip file that contains any files on WinZip's list of potentially unsafe file types. You can then decide whether you want to continue working with that Zip file. WinZip also displays warning text when you try to install software contained within a Zip file. For example, when you use the Install button in the WinZip Classic interface to install software from a Zip file that contains a Setup program, WinZip will display a dialog reminding you not to install untrusted software. Some WinZip users, especially "power users" who frequently work with some of the file types that WinZip considers potentially unsafe, will prefer not to see these warnings repeatedly. Therefore, all of the new warning dialogs have check boxes that you can use to stop them from displaying again. ..........EOQ................................. | -- | Gary S. Terhune [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] |> instead of running them-- and indeed mine do default to that. To get |> mine to run, I must R-Clk, & select "Run". I meant-- R-Clk, & select "Install". |> HOWEVER, WinZip puts up |> the scary caution... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] |> default. If you swear it once more-- I will try it! Also, you must |> swear thrice that WinZip v.9.0 SR-1 gives you the same scary warning! ...snip SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net My mistake. Not sure what happened. Yes, I get that same message with v. 11, no I don't get it with v. 8. Note that the message has one of those "Don't ask me again" check boxes, so... SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > | WinZip (I'm testing versions 8 and 11) does NOT change file > | associations. Double-clicking a file inside a WinZip file does the [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > > ...snip | My mistake. Not sure what happened. Yes, I get that same message with v. 11, | no I don't get it with v. 8. Note that the message has one of those "Don't | ask me again" check boxes, so... Yep. It may be you unchecked it in a "power user" fit of impatience, as the WinZip help screen suggests. After that, XP-irradiation may have poked the memory of having done so out of you. Some day shortly I may well go ahead & ignore WinZip's warning about it & click an innocuous-looking .inf just to see what happens! Will it honor Windows's default to just open it in Notepad despite the warning-- or will it attempt to install? | > | WinZip (I'm testing versions 8 and 11) does NOT change file | > | associations. Double-clicking a file inside a WinZip file does the [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] | > | > ...snip It's just as if you'd d-clicked it in a normal folder. Just think of WinZip as a folder. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > | My mistake. Not sure what happened. Yes, I get that same message with > v. 11, [quoted text clipped - 127 lines] > | > > | > ...snip | It's just as if you'd d-clicked it in a normal folder. Just think of | WinZip as a folder. Alright. Despite the horrible warning, in a requestor titled "WinZip Caution"... This file has a potentially unsafe file type of .INF: SCR56EN.INF You should not open this file if you received it from an untrusted source, or in an attachment to an unexpected or suspicious e-mail message. Do you still want to open this file? ...WinZip v.9.0 SR-1 just opened the clicked .inf file in Notepad. And thanks to Lee, too. I took your assurance on top his two to be the three swearings I needed! | -- | Gary S. Terhune [quoted text clipped - 124 lines] |> | > PCR |> | > pcrrcp@netzero.net SignatureThanks or Good Luck, |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message