Setup Failing with Printer Driver for AMD64

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.device_driver.dev (More info?)

Hello,

I posted this question to development.device.drivers, but maybe asking it
here
would be better.

I have built our (Konica Minolta) user-mode rendering driver for the AMD64,
and am trying to install it into Windows XP 64-bit Edition, Version 2003,
SP1, v.1069. (Because I don't have the actual printer connected to a COM or
LPT port, I created a new local port... how does that affect the
installation?)

I found and followed instructions from MS about manually removing
spool/driver files and registry entries from safe mode, verified that policy
settings allow unsigned drivers to be installed, ensured the .INF is
decorated properly and that the AMD64 versions of the driver are being
copied. Also, the registry entry "DisableDecoratedModelsRequirement" was
set to 1, the system rebooted, but still the problem occurs.

SETUPAPI.LOG is complaining about unsigned drivers, of course, and plenty of
times I have goofed the .INF so that Error 87 "The parameter is incorrect."
is reported. But when that situation is corrected, files get copied into
system32\spool\drivers\amd64\konicaminoltaXXXX , and \spool\drivers\amd64\3,
but then this "operation could not be completed" message pops up, and
nothing informative is in SETUPAPI.LOG. The last line is the same as all
the other lines, "Error 0xe000022f: The third-party INF does not contain
digital signature information."

Of course, the 32-bit version has been working fine, so the problem seems to
be something that has changed either with the AMD64 build of the driver, or
something expected by Windows XP that I am unaware of, or maybe even that
this version of Windows needs to be updated (from Windows Driver Development
Conference 2003, the CD is labeled "Microsoft Windows XP 64-Bit Edition
SP1 - Beta 1 for 64-bit Extended Systems, with the AMD logo on it).

I have successfully installed an HP printer from NTPRINT.INF using the
same "new local port".

I found information about the "version" needing to be "0.3.XXXX.X" for XP,
and
verified that the HP driver had such a version. The people here say that
this driver
has been shipping for XP for quite a while, but the DDK header PDRVVER.H was
not
being referenced. So, I added it, undef'ed and redef'ed VER_FILEVERSION
to #define VER_FILEVERSION 0, 3, 0X0501, 0X0001... but still, after
copying all the files over, this "Unable to Install Printer. Operation could
not be
completed." message.

What operation is setup trying to accomplish that is failing?

Could it be that the driver files have longer names than 8.3?

SETUPAPI.LOG says: "Driver date: 12/21/2004 Version: 0"... why is the
version
0 when the INF says "DriverVer=12/21/2004,5.2.3790.1069" I remember
reading somewhere that "unsigned drivers" get a "version" of 0. Is the
requirement of 0.3.x.x being not-met because of this?

Thanks in advance,

Bart.