Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12) - KiXtart.org - official site

You are not logged in. [Log In] KiXtart.org website » Forums » KiXtart » Basic Scripting » Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)

Page 1 of 2

1

Topic Options

#34863 - 2003-01-07 06:13 PM Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
MSHALOM MSHALOM Lurker Registered: 2003-01-07 Posts: 3 Loc: Israel	Hello all. Running login script by Kix2001(4.12) on Win95 stations have encountered strange problems, like > Microsoft Exchange Server's service was removed from the outlook profile. > The user desktop has been changed as for a new login user. > The WELCOME screen of WINDOWS appears. It seems as the system identified the old logged-on user as a new user in the local station. Did someone come up against above described problems ?
Top

#34864 - 2003-01-07 06:15 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Sealeopard Sealeopard KiX Master Registered: 2001-04-25 Posts: 11165 Loc: Boston, MA, USA	It is unlikely that this is cause by KiXtart itself, UNLESS your script is making those changes. Who wrote the script? It sounds more like profiles were en/dis-abled on the Window s9x computers. _________________________ There are two types of vessels, submarines and targets.
Top

#34865 - 2003-01-07 06:24 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
MSHALOM MSHALOM Lurker Registered: 2003-01-07 Posts: 3 Loc: Israel	1) Thank u for answering me 2) I wrote the script. this is an old script which worked (and working again) well in kixtart 4.37. 3) it doesn't make any changes as described above. 4) Any more ideas ?
Top

#34866 - 2003-01-07 06:28 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Shawn Shawn Administrator Registered: 1999-08-13 Posts: 8611	Is this just a one-shot thing that happened on a single wkstn, or did it happen all over the place ?
Top

#34867 - 2003-01-07 07:52 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Jack Lothian Jack Lothian MM club member Registered: 1999-10-22 Posts: 1169 Loc: Ottawa,Ontario, Canada	I agree with jens, I think something else changed, I can't see how this has anything to do with changing KixTart versions. Maybe you enabled/disabled local profiles or you have introduced mandatory/roaming profiles on the server or maybe someone re-installed windows. More details might help narrow it down. PS: Moving back & forth between kixtart version, especially with Win98 clients is not a good idea. All the DLLs, EXEs and KXRPC services must be the same version. It is very difficult to keep these files in total agreement across the complete network if you keep changing back & forth. MCA has an excellant utility for verifying all components are in agreement. See his site for the utility. I though just came to me. If Kixtart is failing completely because of incompatibilities in its components it might have serious implications but I can't see how it would affect local profiles. [ 07. January 2003, 20:01: Message edited by: Jack Lothian ] _________________________ Jack
Top

#34868 - 2003-01-09 06:37 AM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
MSHALOM MSHALOM Lurker Registered: 2003-01-07 Posts: 3 Loc: Israel	Thank u
Top

#34869 - 2003-01-09 04:24 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Sealeopard Sealeopard KiX Master Registered: 2001-04-25 Posts: 11165 Loc: Boston, MA, USA	Is your problem solved? What was the solution? _________________________ There are two types of vessels, submarines and targets.
Top

#34870 - 2003-01-14 02:27 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
PhazeD PhazeD Fresh Scripter Registered: 2003-01-14 Posts: 7 Loc: Netherlands	Woa! Finally! Found someone with the same problem. =) Hi. I'm PhazeD, new to this board. ;D I've been trying to upgrade kix from 3.63 to 4.12 (I want writevalue etc). The intitial testing gave no problems, my old script was working ok. I added another short script for some registrysettings I want done. But after logging in for about 10 times the whole user profile suddenly vanished. It was still there, but it seems another 'clean' user profile gets created just after, or during, login. When this happend the loggin in took longer then usual and a few windows-installer type screens, like progress screens, flashed by. Scary eh? (Imagine fixing the user profiles for hundreds of users) Luckily I was just in time and rolled back the 4.12 installation. Now, kix itself could not create an clean profile out of the blue. At least, that seems very unlikely. So I looked to the script we use. After a few simple mappings we run newprof.exe for automatic exchange profile settings. Then I came across this article: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q239093 My working theory right now is that somehow, because of the new kix version, newprof.exe gets run twice (as discribed in the article). Is this feasible? Or does this sound stupid / am I misinterpreting something? And if this is true, how to solve this problem...? Any idea's are very welcome. Thanks. Greetings, PhazeD
Top

#34871 - 2003-01-14 02:31 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Shawn Shawn Administrator Registered: 1999-08-13 Posts: 8611	This sounds intriguing ... so first a question. In the old version of your script - how do you stop newprof from being run twice ?
Top

#34872 - 2003-01-14 02:47 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
PhazeD PhazeD Fresh Scripter Registered: 2003-01-14 Posts: 7 Loc: Netherlands	Woa. You draw fast Shawn! Well... thats the strange part. It doesn't. And normally running newprof.exe does not seem to cause any problems. Yes, I'm groping at straws here. Totally clueless. I'm testing while we speak: trying to run newprof twice.
Top

#34873 - 2003-01-14 02:57 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
PhazeD PhazeD Fresh Scripter Registered: 2003-01-14 Posts: 7 Loc: Netherlands	The lines in the script were talking about: Copy "p:\scripts\newprof\outlook.prf" "c:\windows\" Shell "p:\scripts\newprof\prfpatch.exe @USERID" Shell "p:\scripts\newprof\newprof.exe -p c:\windows\outlook.prf"
Top

#34874 - 2003-01-14 03:03 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
PhazeD PhazeD Fresh Scripter Registered: 2003-01-14 Posts: 7 Loc: Netherlands	Argl. Test results for running the lines manually from a command prompt: First user: profile is 'damaged', outlook says it isn't installed (and other office apps). Second user: nothing happens. No problems with outlook. Feels like I'm overlooking somehting... Any idea's?
Top

#34875 - 2003-01-14 03:12 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Shawn Shawn Administrator Registered: 1999-08-13 Posts: 8611	Well to be honest, i've never used newprof - have no idea what it does, but I gather from your comments that running it twice for different users produces different results ? One damages the profile and the other doesn't Its just that at the end of the day - I'm really finding it difficult to believe that going from 3.6 to 4.12 causes newprof to run differently. I could see that happening if you had some logic wrapped around the command to stop it from running twice but this doesn't seem to be the case. I don't really have any followup ideas but it sure would be nice to get to the bottom of this. Thanks for testing this as much as you have - hoping you can pursue this more ... [ 14. January 2003, 15:13: Message edited by: Shawn ]
Top

#34876 - 2003-01-14 04:36 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Sealeopard Sealeopard KiX Master Registered: 2001-04-25 Posts: 11165 Loc: Boston, MA, USA	Asd far as I understand it, this has nothing to do with KiXtart at all. KiXtart is not responsible for incorrectly written scripts and external utilities that mess up profiles. It really seems to be an issue with NEWPROF.EXE and PROFGEN.EXE. You might want to check whether those programs are actually compatible with Windows 95. And remember that Windows 95 is no longer supported by Microsoft, which means that e.g. the Office XP NEWPROF/PROFGEN don't need to be compatible with Windows 95, either. _________________________ There are two types of vessels, submarines and targets.
Top

#34877 - 2003-01-14 05:23 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
PhazeD PhazeD Fresh Scripter Registered: 2003-01-14 Posts: 7 Loc: Netherlands	Well, I'll continue testing. I need to get to the bottom of this... Newprof.exe is the tool that Outlook uses to create Outlook profiles. Usually, Outlook uses Newprof.exe only to create a new Outlook profile when no Outlook profile exists. It uses a .prf file to do these settings. Prfpatch is used to change ProfileName=%username% to the proper username. I'm still not certain newprof.exe causes this problem. Its the most plausible explanation I've come up with. What else could it be? A possible workaround would be to run newprof only once. I'll need to write a short script to prevent it from running every time. Any thoughts on how the schript should look? Any thougts at all? Please, don't mind me. Slept 3 hours and got 'one of those days'. Never try to be whitty when new on a forum...
Top

#34878 - 2003-01-14 05:30 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
PhazeD PhazeD Fresh Scripter Registered: 2003-01-14 Posts: 7 Loc: Netherlands	Hi sealeopard, "As far as I understand it, this has nothing to do with KiXtart at all." Well, the change in KiXtart causes newprof to bug out... "KiXtart is not responsible for incorrectly written scripts and external utilities that mess up profiles." Agreed!! Ofcourse not. Just trying to solve another buggy Microsoft adventure. MRSHALOM might find this useful. Might. I'll stop wasting precious forum space. Thanks for the reply's. BTW: We use win98se with office2000, and yes newprof is compatible but ofcourse, its buggy and somehow the update from 3.63 to 4.12 triggers this bug. [ 14. January 2003, 17:33: Message edited by: PhazeD ]
Top

#34879 - 2003-01-14 06:11 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Les Les KiX Master Registered: 2001-06-11 Posts: 12734 Loc: fortfrances.on.ca	Something you should consider is the speed and timing issue. KiX 4 is certainly faster than 3 and if some SHELLed progs run async, the script may finish before the SHELLed prog. The logon process then tears down the temp Z: assignment and grief may ensue. Load order is also a factor. Perhaps moving some portion of the script to 'RunOnce' may offer more stability. _________________________ Give a man a fish and he will be back for more. Slap him with a fish and he will go away forever.
Top

#34880 - 2003-01-14 06:25 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Shawn Shawn Administrator Registered: 1999-08-13 Posts: 8611	HORRAY - I think Les nailed it - the shell commands your using are not synchronous (fe: not using %comspec% /c ) and therefore this both utils will run at the same time !!! And this might produce inconsistent results. -Shawn [ 14. January 2003, 18:26: Message edited by: Shawn ]
Top

#34881 - 2003-01-14 06:43 PM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
Sealeopard Sealeopard KiX Master Registered: 2001-04-25 Posts: 11165 Loc: Boston, MA, USA	Haven't thought of that one as I have it enabled by default. We might want to put that into the Starter's Guide as a recommendation. [ 20. January 2003, 17:25: Message edited by: sealeopard ] _________________________ There are two types of vessels, submarines and targets.
Top

#34882 - 2003-01-20 10:55 AM Re: Win95 compitability of KIX2001 (4.12)
PhazeD PhazeD Fresh Scripter Registered: 2003-01-14 Posts: 7 Loc: Netherlands	quote: HORRAY - I think Les nailed it - the shell commands your using are not synchronous (fe: not using %comspec% /c ) and therefore this both utils will run at the same time !!! And this might produce inconsistent results. Ofcourse!!! You guyz rule. Thanx Les. Thanx sealeopard and Shawn. Me happy! Prfpatch.exe should be run BEFORE newprof.exe! If newprof.exe is run before prfpatch has done its work newprof.exe loads default / empty profile settings. Would a 'sleep 1' suffice? Or use %comspec% /c (I'm not really clear on how this would solve the problem)?
Top

Page 1 of 2

1

Previous Topic

Previous Topic View All Topics

View All Topics

Index Next Topic

Next Topic

Moderator: Jochen, Allen, Radimus, Glenn Barnas, ShaneEP, Ruud van Velsen, Arend_, Mart

Hop to:

Shout Box

Who's Online

1 registered (Allen) and 675 anonymous users online.

Newest Members

batdk82, StuTheCoder, M_Moore, BeeEm, min_seow
17885 Registered Users

Generated in 0.109 seconds in which 0.062 seconds were spent on a total of 13 queries. Zlib compression enabled.

click tracking