The missing "Additional Information" files for the following QFEs are still
not published on the download sites.

810577 (MS03-005)
814078 (MS03-008)
331953 (MS03-010)
330994 (MS03-014)
823980 (MS03-026)
823559 (MS03-023)
811493 (MS03-013)
825119 (MS03-044)

Eberhard,

I know you may hate this suggestion but would that be easier just to install
all the QFEs at runtime and watch for the registry and file changes with a
tool like Intrcl5 or RegSnap? There shouldn't be many registry entries from
QFEs, though.

Another trick you may do to save some time analyzing QFEs is extracting a
QFE into a folder (use /x switch with the QFE exe package). You get all the
necessary QFE files (watch for SP1 versions, not SP2). Then you open
update.inf file that goes with any QFE and copy all the registry entries
under [Product.Add.Reg] (or similar) section (expand strings used in the reg
paths or value names by using [Strings] section). In the inf you will also
see where the files go (directories).

Sometime waiting for MS may cause serious project delays.

Don't know if it helps you,
KM

> The missing "Additional Information" files for the following QFEs are
still
> not published on the download sites.
>
> 810577 (MS03-005)
> 814078 (MS03-008)
> 331953 (MS03-010)
> 330994 (MS03-014)
> 823980 (MS03-026)
> 823559 (MS03-023)
> 811493 (MS03-013)
> 825119 (MS03-044)
>

KM schrieb/wrote:

> I know you may hate this suggestion but would that be easier just to
> install all the QFEs at runtime and watch for the registry and file
> changes with a tool like Intrcl5 or RegSnap? There shouldn't be many
> registry entries from QFEs, though.

Thank you for your suggestions! We considered something like that, but
ultimately decided not to rely on these observations. For example, there is
one QFE (were the documentation is available) that not only requires some
registry keys to be set or deleted, but also an EXE to be run with certain
parameters. If something like that applies to one of the QFEs in question
as well, we won't be able to find out.

> Sometime waiting for MS may cause serious project delays.

I'll say. In this case, it's way too late, actually, so we had to deliver
our "monster patch" without those QFEs. Our customers are enthralled. :-(

Right now I'm just trying to make a humble effort that the issue is not
entirely forgotten.

> Don't know if it helps you,

I certainly appreciate your input.

Eberhard,

I fill your pain.
It would definitely be better if MS provided you with the exact registry/files for the QFEs.

Anyway... keep RegSnap/Inctrl5/Filemon/Regmon tools in mind if MS response takes forever.

--
Regards,
KM, BSquare Corp.


> KM schrieb/wrote:
>
> > I know you may hate this suggestion but would that be easier just to
> > install all the QFEs at runtime and watch for the registry and file
> > changes with a tool like Intrcl5 or RegSnap? There shouldn't be many
> > registry entries from QFEs, though.
>
> Thank you for your suggestions! We considered something like that, but
> ultimately decided not to rely on these observations. For example, there is
> one QFE (were the documentation is available) that not only requires some
> registry keys to be set or deleted, but also an EXE to be run with certain
> parameters. If something like that applies to one of the QFEs in question
> as well, we won't be able to find out.
>
> > Sometime waiting for MS may cause serious project delays.
>
> I'll say. In this case, it's way too late, actually, so we had to deliver
> our "monster patch" without those QFEs. Our customers are enthralled. :-(
>
> Right now I'm just trying to make a humble effort that the issue is not
> entirely forgotten.
>
> > Don't know if it helps you,
>
> I certainly appreciate your input.

Jon Fincher wrote:

> I responded to this earlier, but I'll respond for the more recent
> thread.

Jon,

thank you for your posting! I just happen to see this now from home -- I
didn't see your earlier posting because at work, our news server blocks
any posting with an attachment ("security"). :-(

Your ZIP file would have been very valuable for us on June 26. Thank you
for posting it. This is really unfortunate.