<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Superfail, the third</title>
	<atom:link href="http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/</link>
	<description>Aw dawg, this is just my whateva-whateva site.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 15:12:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: c</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-4322</link>
		<dc:creator>c</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 04:19:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-4322</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t say I don&#039;t agree, but this is a hand in the toaster moment - dev probably never expected someone to do this (hey, nothing ever breaks, right?  Right? ;)), but you can and yes, probably should not work this way.  But as I said, it was found waaaaay too late.  It&#039;s not a security update, _and_ it&#039;s fixed in XP SP2, so it&#039;s just not gonna get fixed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#039;t say I don&#039;t agree, but this is a hand in the toaster moment &#8211; dev probably never expected someone to do this (hey, nothing ever breaks, right?  Right? ;)), but you can and yes, probably should not work this way.  But as I said, it was found waaaaay too late.  It&#039;s not a security update, _and_ it&#039;s fixed in XP SP2, so it&#039;s just not gonna get fixed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DjLizard</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-4310</link>
		<dc:creator>DjLizard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 15:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-4310</guid>
		<description>C: If /i isn&#039;t supported by that DLL, then (in my humble opinion) it should throw the appropriate error like all other DLLs do, rather than making a huge mess.  It all just reminds me of what happened here: http://djlizard.net/2006/03/14/139/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>C: If /i isn&#039;t supported by that DLL, then (in my humble opinion) it should throw the appropriate error like all other DLLs do, rather than making a huge mess.  It all just reminds me of what happened here: <a href="http://djlizard.net/2006/03/14/139/" >http://djlizard.net/2006/03/14/139/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-4034</link>
		<dc:creator>C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 18:29:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-4034</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve not tried, honestly, but you could try it in a VM to see what happens.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve not tried, honestly, but you could try it in a VM to see what happens.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate Coffey</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-4010</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate Coffey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 14:46:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-4010</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m almost sure on the answer on this, but I&#039;ll ask it anyhow just because I can. :)  Is it possible to use XP&#039;s setupapi.dll on a 2K machine?  I would think that 2K&#039;s feature-set in that DLL would be pretty much a subset of XP&#039;s, and not sure what kind of compatibility issues you&#039;d run into as a result of using it.  And again, I&#039;m sure you&#039;ll run into problems trying.  But I had to ask anyhow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m almost sure on the answer on this, but I&#039;ll ask it anyhow just because I can. :)  Is it possible to use XP&#039;s setupapi.dll on a 2K machine?  I would think that 2K&#039;s feature-set in that DLL would be pretty much a subset of XP&#039;s, and not sure what kind of compatibility issues you&#039;d run into as a result of using it.  And again, I&#039;m sure you&#039;ll run into problems trying.  But I had to ask anyhow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-4006</link>
		<dc:creator>C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-4006</guid>
		<description>Note that this is indeed fixed in XPSP2 and 2K3SP1 (and newer), but it wasn&#039;t fixed in W2K.  The fix isn&#039;t in wuaueng.dll either, it&#039;s in the setup api engine (setupapi.dll).  You&#039;ll also notice that if you don&#039;t run the regsvr32 command against wuaueng.dll with the /i switch, you don&#039;t get an error on W2K either (there&#039;s no &quot;install&quot; code in the .dll, so no need for /i).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Note that this is indeed fixed in XPSP2 and 2K3SP1 (and newer), but it wasn&#039;t fixed in W2K.  The fix isn&#039;t in wuaueng.dll either, it&#039;s in the setup api engine (setupapi.dll).  You&#039;ll also notice that if you don&#039;t run the regsvr32 command against wuaueng.dll with the /i switch, you don&#039;t get an error on W2K either (there&#039;s no &#034;install&#034; code in the .dll, so no need for /i).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DjLizard</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-3933</link>
		<dc:creator>DjLizard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Oct 2007 01:52:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-3933</guid>
		<description>It looks like you&#039;re right about Superfail part 2&#039;s steps.  I&#039;ll go adjust that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It looks like you&#039;re right about Superfail part 2&#039;s steps.  I&#039;ll go adjust that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate Coffey</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-3916</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate Coffey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:30:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-3916</guid>
		<description>I do want to note, though, that ALL of this pertains to Windows 2000 and it appears Windows XP is unaffected.  At least SP2.  Prior to that I am unaware as I do not deal with SP1a or earlier any longer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do want to note, though, that ALL of this pertains to Windows 2000 and it appears Windows XP is unaffected.  At least SP2.  Prior to that I am unaware as I do not deal with SP1a or earlier any longer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate Coffey</title>
		<link>http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/comment-page-1/#comment-3915</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate Coffey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://DjLizard.net/2007/10/20/273/#comment-3915</guid>
		<description>Just wanted to point out you&#039;ll want to revise your steps on Superfail part 2.  On that page you say to run section 5, then merge your reg file, and reboot.  All of this is ok, but then the next step is to run section 3 which will effectively recreate this whole problem once again.  This may be why some people still have a problem after using your reg fix.  They assume all will be well and good by running Dial-a-fix again (to sort of clean up registrations again) and once again create the failure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just wanted to point out you&#039;ll want to revise your steps on Superfail part 2.  On that page you say to run section 5, then merge your reg file, and reboot.  All of this is ok, but then the next step is to run section 3 which will effectively recreate this whole problem once again.  This may be why some people still have a problem after using your reg fix.  They assume all will be well and good by running Dial-a-fix again (to sort of clean up registrations again) and once again create the failure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

