Litestep bad install
Saturday, May 29, 2004 by tjesterb | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
The story so far:
Created new user acct and installed Litestep to that acct, only it didn't work very well, some sort of bad mix of windows and LS. I changed back to the Explorer shell and the new acct was fine but my personal acct was running LS, but with no wharf or icons to change the shell or anything else. When I tried to uninstall from any acct or even as Admin in safemode it said I didn't have access to uninstall.
At that point I created a 3rd admin acct and deleted the LS acct from there. Now when I open my normal acct I get a window open to My Documents, but nothing else, no wallpaper taskbar, or any other Windows controls. I got Objectdock open via task mgr. and also went into control panel and was now able to uninstall LS. I tried opening explorer.exe from task mgr, but it didn't change anything. Can I use regedit to set explorer back to default shell? and if so what do I edit?
If that doesn't work I guess I'll have to do a repair reinstall of XP, though I'm leaving that as a last option.
Sorry for the long post but if someone can help I wanted them to have all the info up front. [BTW I,m running XP Home SP1 ]
Created new user acct and installed Litestep to that acct, only it didn't work very well, some sort of bad mix of windows and LS. I changed back to the Explorer shell and the new acct was fine but my personal acct was running LS, but with no wharf or icons to change the shell or anything else. When I tried to uninstall from any acct or even as Admin in safemode it said I didn't have access to uninstall.
At that point I created a 3rd admin acct and deleted the LS acct from there. Now when I open my normal acct I get a window open to My Documents, but nothing else, no wallpaper taskbar, or any other Windows controls. I got Objectdock open via task mgr. and also went into control panel and was now able to uninstall LS. I tried opening explorer.exe from task mgr, but it didn't change anything. Can I use regedit to set explorer back to default shell? and if so what do I edit?
If that doesn't work I guess I'll have to do a repair reinstall of XP, though I'm leaving that as a last option.
Sorry for the long post but if someone can help I wanted them to have all the info up front. [BTW I,m running XP Home SP1 ]
tjesterb
Reply #3 Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:19 AM
Reply #3 Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:19 AM
Like a DA I had System restore turned off, so I have no reatore points. 
Watson
Reply #4 Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:22 AM
Reply #4 Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:22 AM
Oh Ummm... That's bad... Are you running service pack 1?
There is a service pack 2 available now if you didn't know, but I have to say I really have no idea what you can do, because I'm not familiar with Lite Step or Regedit. Hopefully someone else will see this topic soon...?
There is a service pack 2 available now if you didn't know, but I have to say I really have no idea what you can do, because I'm not familiar with Lite Step or Regedit. Hopefully someone else will see this topic soon...?
Jafo
Reply #5 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:35 AM
Reply #5 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:35 AM
An old way to solve this is to install a shell switcher such as 'ShellON' and when it loads choose 'Explorer.exe' as your shell....and Litestep won't be loaded at all....
Jafo
Reply #7 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:38 AM
Reply #7 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:38 AM
Depending on exactly what version of LS...and how it was installed, there will be other ways to correct this.....and NONE will require a system restore at all.
tjesterb
Reply #8 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:46 AM
Reply #8 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:46 AM
Jafo,
version 0.2.4.7 everything seems to be OK except for my primary acct. My kids have two accts that are set to limited and they weren't affected.
version 0.2.4.7 everything seems to be OK except for my primary acct. My kids have two accts that are set to limited and they weren't affected.
Jafo
Reply #9 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:52 AM
Reply #9 Saturday, May 29, 2004 10:52 AM
Rather than editing the registry...just install ShellON...and set explorer as the default from there.
I have never in 6 or 7 years bothered with an LS Installer...as pre NT it was a system.ini edit that took two seconds...but in NT [XP] you need to set a few lines in the registry....and ShellON can do that for you...so again it is painless.
I'm sure someone will come along with the reg settings to alter....but it doesn't have to be that 'complicated'...
tjesterb
Reply #10 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:13 AM
Reply #10 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:13 AM
Thanks Jafo. I DLed ShellOn and will give that a shot.
Jafo
Reply #11 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:16 AM
Reply #11 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:16 AM
Best thing about XP is that the task manager means you don't actually need a shell at all...and if you 'lose' one...you just restart it via the manager...
Phar0e
Reply #12 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:23 AM
Reply #12 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:23 AM
It sounds like your runninga build of Omars Litestep installer (I hope so).
I would boot into that user and via the task manager open windows explorer.
In the main Litestep directory there is a subdirectory called utilities. There is an exe in there called setshell.exe.
Just fire that up, click explorer. and reboot (may reboot automatically).
Only problem I could see might be admin privilidges, but might be worth a try.
I would boot into that user and via the task manager open windows explorer.
In the main Litestep directory there is a subdirectory called utilities. There is an exe in there called setshell.exe.
Just fire that up, click explorer. and reboot (may reboot automatically).
Only problem I could see might be admin privilidges, but might be worth a try.
tjesterb
Reply #13 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:48 AM
Reply #13 Saturday, May 29, 2004 11:48 AM
I got explorer back. ShellON didn't want to startup without any shell running, even though I told it to set Shellon as the shell nothing happened. I ended up reinstalling LS on my primary acct and then ed explorer as shell. After rebooting I have everything back. I had wanted to have LS on a separate acct so I wouldn't screw up my primary, but that's what happened anyway. At least now I have LS on here and I can work with it.
PharOe I think you're right, it is an Omars installer. Idid notice that the versiion on the installer is 3.0.2, which is different than the LS version. Could that have been part of the problem to begin with?
Thanks to all [especially Jafo] for your help.
PharOe I think you're right, it is an Omars installer. Idid notice that the versiion on the installer is 3.0.2, which is different than the LS version. Could that have been part of the problem to begin with?
Thanks to all [especially Jafo] for your help.
Phar0e
Reply #14 Saturday, May 29, 2004 1:27 PM
Reply #14 Saturday, May 29, 2004 1:27 PM
No, in terms of the installer..
3.0.2 is the newest version of the installer.
0.24.7 is the most recent version of Litestep itself.
That the numbering sequences are different doesn''t really matter. The package is a good one. Although things can obviously go wonky once in a while.
Glad to hear you sorted it out
[Message Edited]
3.0.2 is the newest version of the installer.
0.24.7 is the most recent version of Litestep itself.
That the numbering sequences are different doesn''t really matter. The package is a good one. Although things can obviously go wonky once in a while.
Glad to hear you sorted it out
[Message Edited]
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Saturday, May 29, 2004 9:17 AM