Re: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1 (KB837009)

"Home User" <Home_User@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:114ohmpq32mpp99@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Here is what I have found:
>
> WABMIG.EXE REGRESSED
> WABIMP.DLL *NEWER VERSION
> WABFIND.DLL REGRESSED
> WAB32.DLL *NEWER VERSION
> WAB.EXE REGRESSED
> Msoert2.dll regressed
> Msoeacct.dll regressed
> MSOE.exe *NEWER VERSION
> inetcomm.dll *NEWER VERSION
>
> *Newer version than what was listed in the manifest, whereas REGRESSED was
> an older version. The rest of the file versions matched.

That's interesting... ;)
I take it that your msinfo32 doesn't have the feature which
would allow you to capture the version information easily
as I suggested? <eg>

The four modules with newer versions correspond to the only ones
that I have in KB887797\SP2QFE Although there is no manifest
for that update and (the last time I checked) the DLL Help Database
was not up-to-date and although I have a different OS let's assume
that those four are from your 887797 update. (As I mentioned
you could probably get more people with common experience
to collaborate with in a newsgroup which specializes in your OS.)

Since you are comparing with 887797's pre-requisite 823353,
"regressed" may only mean that somehow you managed to apply
887797 without first applying 823353. E.g. you might find that
those modules' versions match the manifest for the previous
cumulative OE update 837009 (listed by MS04-013)

Oh, I see, you have listed only some of the modules in the manifest
and the ones which you didn't list have the correct version?
Then that implies that the ones you list as regressed are true limited
regressions of individual modules. E.g. it is not a case of regressing
a complete update.

In fact, the correct version of all those modules is 6.00.2800.1123
which would have come initially from another incompletely documented
patch: 331923 (again, because it wasn't a security update).

So, where would modules which regress those have come from?
Probably from OE6, the pre-requisite for 331923.
And why would they be regressing? One possibility (for WinME)
is (ironically) if those modules all somehow had been (incorrectly)
added to its SFP directory at that level SFP could continually undo
any update made to them which did not also update the SFP copy.

Please check on that possibility. E.g. see if those modules are
referenced in your SFPLOG. Also search your harddrive
for all instances of them. (Make sure that you are able to see
all modules, including System and Hidden modules.)
Tell us the latest version of each that you can find and where
you found it.


Good luck

Robert
---


.

Relevant Pages