Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Belarc Advisor says to Reinstall Q823559

Last response: in Windows 95/98/ME
Share
Anonymous
July 15, 2005 2:10:01 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Hello:

I ran the Belarc Advisor 7.0 , and I'm told that Q823559 needs to be
reinstalled.

This is a windows ME Update from July 2003.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x

There is an entry for this in my Control Panel.

Should I uninstall it from the Control Panel before reinstalling it, or
could I simply install it OVER what is already there?

Furthermore, I see the two files of this patch on my system with the version
numbers as given by :
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x..

One of those files: "Html32.cnv"
has three locations on the PC . Two of these have the correct version
number
as indicated by that patch. The third instance of that file is in the Common
Files \Microsoft Shared subfolder and still a version number lower and
earlier than what that patch should have.

The second file of that patch "Msconv97.dll" also has three locations, two
of them at the indicated version and one at a higher version number

The Installation history at windows Update shows this Q823559 update to
have been
successfully installed.

What is the optimal way to reinstall this update given that Belarc Advisor
report?

Thanks in advance

-Ira

***********************

Windows ME
IE 6.0 SP1
Anonymous
July 15, 2005 7:37:10 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Your problems is usually caused by reinstalling Win Me over itself. All
patches reported by Belarc as missing or damaged will need to be
reinstalled as the files updated by the various hotfixes installed prior
to reinstalling Win Me over itself will have been replaced by the earlier
versions present on the Win Me CD.

You need to use the Windows Update Catalogue
(http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/en/defaul...) to get this
hotfix as the Windows Update site uses a detection mechanism that doesn't
check for the presence of specific file versions and assumes that the
patches and files are present and correct from flags set in the registry
when the patch is installed and these are not removed when Win Me is
reinstalled over itself.

I think it is entirely up to you whether you uninstall this patch before
reinstalling, it shouldn't make any difference really to the final
outcome.
--
Mike Maltby
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Ira <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote:

> Hello:
>
> I ran the Belarc Advisor 7.0 , and I'm told that Q823559 needs to be
> reinstalled.
>
> This is a windows ME Update from July 2003.
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x
>
> There is an entry for this in my Control Panel.
>
> Should I uninstall it from the Control Panel before reinstalling it,
> or could I simply install it OVER what is already there?
>
> Furthermore, I see the two files of this patch on my system with the
> version numbers as given by :
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x..
>
> One of those files: "Html32.cnv"
> has three locations on the PC . Two of these have the correct version
> number
> as indicated by that patch. The third instance of that file is in the
> Common Files \Microsoft Shared subfolder and still a version number
> lower and earlier than what that patch should have.
>
> The second file of that patch "Msconv97.dll" also has three
> locations, two of them at the indicated version and one at a higher
> version number
>
> The Installation history at windows Update shows this Q823559 update
> to have been
> successfully installed.
>
> What is the optimal way to reinstall this update given that Belarc
> Advisor report?
>
> Thanks in advance
Anonymous
July 15, 2005 7:37:11 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Mike wrote:

<<<
Your problems is usually caused by reinstalling Win Me over itself.
>>>>

Makes sense. However, I never reinstalled Mindows ME at all. The Q823559 is
the only update listed which the Belarc Advisor instructs me to reinstall.

Thnaks again:

-Ira

******************************
"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:erQZdqUiFHA.1480@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Your problems is usually caused by reinstalling Win Me over itself. All
| patches reported by Belarc as missing or damaged will need to be
| reinstalled as the files updated by the various hotfixes installed prior
| to reinstalling Win Me over itself will have been replaced by the earlier
| versions present on the Win Me CD.
|
| You need to use the Windows Update Catalogue
| (http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/en/defaul...) to get this
| hotfix as the Windows Update site uses a detection mechanism that doesn't
| check for the presence of specific file versions and assumes that the
| patches and files are present and correct from flags set in the registry
| when the patch is installed and these are not removed when Win Me is
| reinstalled over itself.
|
| I think it is entirely up to you whether you uninstall this patch before
| reinstalling, it shouldn't make any difference really to the final
| outcome.
| --
| Mike Maltby
| mike.maltby@gmail.com
|
|
| Ira <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote:
|
| > Hello:
| >
| > I ran the Belarc Advisor 7.0 , and I'm told that Q823559 needs to be
| > reinstalled.
| >
| > This is a windows ME Update from July 2003.
| >
| > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x
| >
| > There is an entry for this in my Control Panel.
| >
| > Should I uninstall it from the Control Panel before reinstalling it,
| > or could I simply install it OVER what is already there?
| >
| > Furthermore, I see the two files of this patch on my system with the
| > version numbers as given by :
| > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x..
| >
| > One of those files: "Html32.cnv"
| > has three locations on the PC . Two of these have the correct version
| > number
| > as indicated by that patch. The third instance of that file is in the
| > Common Files \Microsoft Shared subfolder and still a version number
| > lower and earlier than what that patch should have.
| >
| > The second file of that patch "Msconv97.dll" also has three
| > locations, two of them at the indicated version and one at a higher
| > version number
| >
| > The Installation history at windows Update shows this Q823559 update
| > to have been
| > successfully installed.
| >
| > What is the optimal way to reinstall this update given that Belarc
| > Advisor report?
| >
| > Thanks in advance
|
Related resources
Anonymous
July 15, 2005 7:37:11 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Mike wrote:

<<<
Your problems is usually caused by reinstalling Win Me over itself.
>>>>

It's odd that I never reinstalled Windows ME. .

The Q823559 [MS03-023] is the only update listed by the Belarc Advisor
which I'm told to reinstall. The others apparently are properly installed.

Thanks again:

-Ira

************************




..
"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:erQZdqUiFHA.1480@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Your problems is usually caused by reinstalling Win Me over itself. All
| patches reported by Belarc as missing or damaged will need to be
| reinstalled as the files updated by the various hotfixes installed prior
| to reinstalling Win Me over itself will have been replaced by the earlier
| versions present on the Win Me CD.
|
| You need to use the Windows Update Catalogue
| (http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/catalog/en/defaul...) to get this
| hotfix as the Windows Update site uses a detection mechanism that doesn't
| check for the presence of specific file versions and assumes that the
| patches and files are present and correct from flags set in the registry
| when the patch is installed and these are not removed when Win Me is
| reinstalled over itself.
|
| I think it is entirely up to you whether you uninstall this patch before
| reinstalling, it shouldn't make any difference really to the final
| outcome.
| --
| Mike Maltby
| mike.maltby@gmail.com
|
|
| Ira <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote:
|
| > Hello:
| >
| > I ran the Belarc Advisor 7.0 , and I'm told that Q823559 needs to be
| > reinstalled.
| >
| > This is a windows ME Update from July 2003.
| >
| > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x
| >
| > There is an entry for this in my Control Panel.
| >
| > Should I uninstall it from the Control Panel before reinstalling it,
| > or could I simply install it OVER what is already there?
| >
| > Furthermore, I see the two files of this patch on my system with the
| > version numbers as given by :
| > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q823559#Win9x..
| >
| > One of those files: "Html32.cnv"
| > has three locations on the PC . Two of these have the correct version
| > number
| > as indicated by that patch. The third instance of that file is in the
| > Common Files \Microsoft Shared subfolder and still a version number
| > lower and earlier than what that patch should have.
| >
| > The second file of that patch "Msconv97.dll" also has three
| > locations, two of them at the indicated version and one at a higher
| > version number
| >
| > The Installation history at windows Update shows this Q823559 update
| > to have been
| > successfully installed.
| >
| > What is the optimal way to reinstall this update given that Belarc
| > Advisor report?
| >
| > Thanks in advance
|
July 15, 2005 7:56:34 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

"Ira" <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote in message
news:o cX7bNViFHA.3608@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Mike wrote:
>
> <<<
> Your problems is usually caused by reinstalling Win Me over itself.
> >>>>
>
> It's odd that I never reinstalled Windows ME. .
>
> The Q823559 [MS03-023] is the only update listed by the Belarc Advisor
> which I'm told to reinstall. The others apparently are properly installed.
>

Just out of interest, you can run QFECHECK (from Start/Run). You should see
a list of updates, with Q823559 and a warning mark. If you fully expand the
entry (or it may already be so) it will tell you which component(s) of the
update is at fault.

Sometimes it will be that, for example, a particular .dll is in the earlier
version - presumably never properly installed in the first place, or
replaced by some other installation - and simply by copying the correct
version over, the problem will be fixed.

Of course, the easiest way - usually - to copy the correct version over is
to run the update again (like I said, it's just out of interest! But
alternatively you can often extract the files from the update's installer -
using eg Winzip or Winrar - to get at just the single file in question,
which you might then be able to install using msconfig, or you might have to
boot to DOS and manually copy it to, eg the System folder).

Shane
Anonymous
July 15, 2005 11:41:56 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Yes.QFECHECK does tell me that one of the two files--html32.cnv-- in that
update is invalid.

My concern is that the other file--- msconv97.dll----as it now exists in
the Microsoft Shared folder has a HIGHER version number and a LATER date
[Feb. 2004] than that same file as listed in the update files and in the
Options\Cabs and Options\Install folders.

If I were to simply reinstall that update from the Windows Catalogue as
Mike suggested, would the higher-versioned--msconv97.dll-- file be revised
back to the lower version, or will reinstalling the update this way only
update the other invalid file--html.cnv-- which now has the lower version
number?

Thanks in advance:

-ira

=============================

Shane wrote:

<<<| Just out of interest, you can run QFECHECK (from Start/Run). You should
see
| a list of updates, with Q823559 and a warning mark
>>>
"Shane" <arthursixpence@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S0RBe.2224$si5.288@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
|
| "Ira" <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote in message
| news:o cX7bNViFHA.3608@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| > Mike wrote:
| >
| > <<<
| > Your problems is usually caused by reinstalling Win Me over itself.
| > >>>>
| >
| > It's odd that I never reinstalled Windows ME. .
| >
| > The Q823559 [MS03-023] is the only update listed by the Belarc Advisor
| > which I'm told to reinstall. The others apparently are properly
installed.
| >
|
| Just out of interest, you can run QFECHECK (from Start/Run). You should
see
| a list of updates, with Q823559 and a warning mark. If you fully expand
the
| entry (or it may already be so) it will tell you which component(s) of the
| update is at fault.
|
| Sometimes it will be that, for example, a particular .dll is in the
earlier
| version - presumably never properly installed in the first place, or
| replaced by some other installation - and simply by copying the correct
| version over, the problem will be fixed.
|
| Of course, the easiest way - usually - to copy the correct version over is
| to run the update again (like I said, it's just out of interest! But
| alternatively you can often extract the files from the update's
installer -
| using eg Winzip or Winrar - to get at just the single file in question,
| which you might then be able to install using msconfig, or you might have
to
| boot to DOS and manually copy it to, eg the System folder).
|
| Shane
|
|
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 5:48:27 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

> If I were to simply reinstall that update from the Windows Catalogue
> as Mike suggested, would the higher-versioned--msconv97.dll-- file be
> revised back to the lower version,

Possibly since this file isn't one of those files protected by Win Me's
system file protection. The later version isn't from a hotfix and was
possibly installed as part of another application. Normal behaviour would
suggest that if it is a later version than in Q823559 then it won't be
overwritten by an older version. It's not something though that I would
worry about particularly as if it goes wrong you can always use system
restore to roll back and then manually update just html.cnv.
--
Mike Maltby
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Ira <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote:

> Yes.QFECHECK does tell me that one of the two files--html32.cnv-- in
> that update is invalid.
>
> My concern is that the other file--- msconv97.dll----as it now exists
> in the Microsoft Shared folder has a HIGHER version number and a
> LATER date [Feb. 2004] than that same file as listed in the update
> files and in the Options\Cabs and Options\Install folders.
>
> If I were to simply reinstall that update from the Windows Catalogue
> as Mike suggested, would the higher-versioned--msconv97.dll-- file be
> revised back to the lower version, or will reinstalling the update
> this way only update the other invalid file--html.cnv-- which now has
> the lower version number?
>
> Thanks in advance:
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 5:48:28 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Thanks, Mike.

I'll give it a try from that hotfix and check the resulting version number.
Would you suggest installing the file in safe Mode?



By any chance, would this be a Word Perfect dll file? [I don't use that
program]

-Ira

****************************8
"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:%23MTVfAaiFHA.708@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| > If I were to simply reinstall that update from the Windows Catalogue
| > as Mike suggested, would the higher-versioned--msconv97.dll-- file be
| > revised back to the lower version,
|
| Possibly since this file isn't one of those files protected by Win Me's
| system file protection. The later version isn't from a hotfix and was
| possibly installed as part of another application. Normal behaviour would
| suggest that if it is a later version than in Q823559 then it won't be
| overwritten by an older version. It's not something though that I would
| worry about particularly as if it goes wrong you can always use system
| restore to roll back and then manually update just html.cnv.
| --
| Mike Maltby
| mike.maltby@gmail.com
|
|
| Ira <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote:
|
| > Yes.QFECHECK does tell me that one of the two files--html32.cnv-- in
| > that update is invalid.
| >
| > My concern is that the other file--- msconv97.dll----as it now exists
| > in the Microsoft Shared folder has a HIGHER version number and a
| > LATER date [Feb. 2004] than that same file as listed in the update
| > files and in the Options\Cabs and Options\Install folders.
| >
| > If I were to simply reinstall that update from the Windows Catalogue
| > as Mike suggested, would the higher-versioned--msconv97.dll-- file be
| > revised back to the lower version, or will reinstalling the update
| > this way only update the other invalid file--html.cnv-- which now has
| > the lower version number?
| >
| > Thanks in advance:
|
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:36:33 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Ira <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote:

Ira,

> I'll give it a try from that hotfix and check the resulting version
> number. Would you suggest installing the file in safe Mode?

I feel there's nothing to be lost by installing in Safe Mode.

> By any chance, would this be a Word Perfect dll file? [I don't use
> that program]

No. It's the Microsoft Conversion Library and used to convert many
different document formats some of which may be those created by Word
Perfect. This file is installed as part of the base operating system and
also as part of Microsoft Office so your 2004 version could be the result
of installing an Office service pack containing an updated copy of this
file or perhaps KB824938 which in addition to containing an updated copy
of wpft532.cnv (which is a Word Perfect filter used by MS Office) also
includes an updated copy of msconv97.dll - v2003.1100.5510.0.
--
Mike Maltby
mike.maltby@gmail.com
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:51:52 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

Hi again:

I installed that hotfix from the WU Catalogue , but both Belarc and QFECHECK
reported that the update wasnt installed.

After a System Restore, I installed that file directly via msconfig--as
both you and Shane suggested-- from Windows\Options\Install into that
Microsoft Shared\TEXTCONV folder. It updated the html32.cnv file and of
course left that higher versioned msconv97.dll file intact.

Both Belarc and QFECHECK report Q823559 as installed.

My thanks to both of you for your guidance on this.

-Ira

***************************

Both Belarc Advisor and

"Mike M" <No_Spam@Corned_Beef.Only> wrote in message
news:uunuJcaiFHA.2916@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| Ira <oncemore@outthere.invalid> wrote:
|
| Ira,
|
| > I'll give it a try from that hotfix and check the resulting version
| > number. Would you suggest installing the file in safe Mode?
|
| I feel there's nothing to be lost by installing in Safe Mode.
|
| > By any chance, would this be a Word Perfect dll file? [I don't use
| > that program]
|
| No. It's the Microsoft Conversion Library and used to convert many
| different document formats some of which may be those created by Word
| Perfect. This file is installed as part of the base operating system and
| also as part of Microsoft Office so your 2004 version could be the result
| of installing an Office service pack containing an updated copy of this
| file or perhaps KB824938 which in addition to containing an updated copy
| of wpft532.cnv (which is a Word Perfect filter used by MS Office) also
| includes an updated copy of msconv97.dll - v2003.1100.5510.0.
| --
| Mike Maltby
| mike.maltby@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
!