Sysprep/Vista problem with a Dell Latitude D630

Looking for thoughts on this...

Faculty member bought a D630. The only driver needed for vista was
the graphics driver -- an "Intel GM965 Express Chipset Family" driver.

However, when I run sysprep on this machine (to update my load
image), a box comes up during sysprep that seems to be uninstalling the
driver (the box says something along the lines of "are you sure you
want to run this in "0x0" resolution").

Restarting the computer post-sysprep, the driver is no longer
installed (and can be manually reinstalled, but I'd rather not do
that...)


Anybody see anything similar with other hardware and, if so, is
there a workaround you are supposed to implement in the "unattend.xml"
file to avoid this type of driver unloading?

And is this a "bug" or "expected behavior"?

Thanks!

- Steve

The Windows Vista sysprep process removes all drivers and allows them to be
reinstalled using PnP during the deployment process. You can prevent it
from doing this using the "PersistAllDeviceInstalls" setting in unattend.xml
(see
http://technet2.microsoft.com/Window...c32ce1033.mspx),
but this is not recommended. It would be better to get a driver from Dell
or Intel that doesn't have this problem.

-Michael

"Steve Maser" <maser@umich.edu> wrote in message
news:060620071255321957%maser@umich.edu...
> Looking for thoughts on this...
>
> Faculty member bought a D630. The only driver needed for vista was
> the graphics driver -- an "Intel GM965 Express Chipset Family" driver.
>
> However, when I run sysprep on this machine (to update my load
> image), a box comes up during sysprep that seems to be uninstalling the
> driver (the box says something along the lines of "are you sure you
> want to run this in "0x0" resolution").
>
> Restarting the computer post-sysprep, the driver is no longer
> installed (and can be manually reinstalled, but I'd rather not do
> that...)
>
>
> Anybody see anything similar with other hardware and, if so, is
> there a workaround you are supposed to implement in the "unattend.xml"
> file to avoid this type of driver unloading?
>
> And is this a "bug" or "expected behavior"?
>
> Thanks!
>
> - Steve