Glenn9999
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Glenn9999
-
-
Ok as I mentioned before, I could comment on the program, but would be off-topic to the other thread. Now that this thread exists:
This happens on your 32-bit version.
// for some retarded reason, %windir%\sysnative\wusa.exe does not exist// so we must tell x64 users to run the x64 executable until we can figure// out how to use the native system wusa from a 32-bit application
As for this, look up DisableWow64Redirection and RevertWow64Redirection. (Edit: I got reminded by reading rn10950's new code that these are wrong. These are the aliases I used. The real functions of concern are Wow64DisableWow64FsRedirection and Wow64RevertWow64FsRedirection. While the OP figured out the right functions, I thought I'd add this for anyone who might search looking for this answer here) You will need to call those as you did IsWow64Process and need to use them anytime you have a 32-bit process that needs to address configuration assets of a 64-bit system to work properly. Be sure to call the Revert function very soon after you have to Disable.
you must be an Administrator
You can force that through your application manifest to elevate itself to Administrator privileges (with the accompanying "do you wish this program to change things?" dialog box).
<trustInfo xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3"> <security> <requestedPrivileges> <requestedExecutionLevel level="requireAdministrator" uiAccess="false"/> </requestedPrivileges> </security></trustInfo>
Interesting idea, though. I don't know how much demand you're getting, but it'd be half-interesting to make this app more generic if there is some interest.
0 -
FWIW, since you can open the manifest and look at the files involved:
KB2976978 is the application compatibility stuff. Basically this is what Microsoft does to try and help Windows run more stuff than it might otherwise. This is basically so they can check whether the Win 10 upgrade will work correctly on the systems it applies to.
KB3050267 is an update to Windows Update itself.
KB3068708 is pretty much as advertised.
Of course, a lot of the problem is that Windows is getting so massive that it's hard for anyone to track everything packaged with it, and especially track the updates in terms of what *exactly* they are updating.
Of course, the problem with a massive closed-source system such as Windows is that no one knows exactly what any of it really does, as it would require much research and reverse-engineering, which no one does because it (convienently) got made illegal. I wouldn't be surprised if when the whole thing might be revealed that the KB3035583 malware is a light thing compared to the other things the OS does that aren't advertised.
0 -
Assuming it works ... it's not for me as I still have the processes on my system with the claim it's uninstalled.
So I created a GUI shell for the WUSA command to make it easy for anyone to uninstall this piece of adware.
Did you reboot after you ran the program? If you did and it's still there let me know.
I'm just saying you can't necessarily rely on WUSA to work right 100% of the time. I installed the update, then ran the command (manually) and got it gone that way. Really wasn't commenting on your program at all (though I could, but it would be off-topic to the thread at hand).
0 -
Assuming it works ... it's not for me as I still have the processes on my system with the claim it's uninstalled.
So I created a GUI shell for the WUSA command to make it easy for anyone to uninstall this piece of adware.0 -
FWIW, I'm getting a permanent icon on my notification area now about the Windows 10 upgrade (I guess designed to start on 06/01). Basically a download scheduler for an automatic upgrade to Windows 10. While I don't mind claiming the offline file for upgrade consideration, it looks like they might possibly be total dicks about it and claiming automatic upgrade/scheduler through this app instead of letting you just download it yourself. We'll see though. Screen shots to come.
GWX.EXE is the process you need to kill to rid yourself of the notification.
0 -
Is there any interest in more development of this app I posted in here?
0 -
Version 2.11 is released and can be found on the first post.
2.11 - fixed a couple of small bugs.
Please let me know if you try it and run into any issues. Hopefully this should be good for a little while, unless something big comes up.
0 -
Version 2.10 is released and can be found on the first post.
2.10 - rewrote a lot of the back-channel code to be more extensible.
2.10 - rewritten the logging system. Now it makes sense with the newer functions involved.
2.10 - Again, returns error levels off of patch runs. Note some non-zero error levels are NORMAL.Please let me know if you try it and run into any issues.
0 -
Got the logging rewrite done, it looks and acts a lot more sensibly given all the other changes that have happened since that part got written.
2015/04/19 02:11:30 ========================
2015/04/19 02:11:30 Batch Patcher Invocation on Windows Version 6.3
2015/04/19 02:11:33 Searching patches for: D:\BACKUP\BatchPatcher 2.10
2015/04/19 02:11:33 QCHAIN.EXE is not a valid patch.
2015/04/19 02:11:33 batpatcher.exe is not a valid patch.
2015/04/19 02:11:34 Command Issued: dism.exe /Online /Add-Package /PackagePath:"D:\BACKUP\BatchPatcher 2.10\windows8.1-kb3038314-x64.cab" /quiet /norestart
2015/04/19 02:11:58 Command Result: Errorlevel 0
2015/04/19 02:12:02 Batch Patcher TerminationI'm still not quite sure what jaclaz talks about would look like, but if anyone has any ideas on fixes, changes, improvements or whatever, feel free to suggest.
0 -
Yep
, you can specify in your command line to which file (overruling the default setting for <WinDir>/Logs/DISM/dism.log) to direct the log message and also the level of verbosity 1/2/3/4...I thought this was what you might have meant, but wasn't sure that there was much interesting in that log file, when I looked at it.
0 -
BUT, specifically for DISM, and for DISM in servicing mode:
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh825079.aspx
you could use DISM's own LOG mechanisms (as opposed to logging the console output).
jaclaz
You mean the content that defaults to <WinDir>/Logs/DISM/dism.log as opposed to anything the console might produce ?
0 -
Definitely something to look at. The plan was always for Batch Patcher to log things, but like I wrote above, it really bothers me that it was never too structured. Then, error levels were something that kind of went by the wayside too (1.01 or 2) since the patches of the time were throwing some wonky error levels out even upon success. Logging to window wouldn't be much harder than logging to file, so I'll have to see what can be done.
Tee looks like what you get in DOS when you use > or >>, which again seems defeating given what little real information that gets revealed by a DISM call:
C:\Windows\System32\DISM.exe /Online /Add-Package /PackagePath:"D:\BACKUP\BatchPatcher 2.10\windows8.1-kb3038314-x64.cab"
Deployment Image Servicing and Management tool
Version: 6.3.9600.17031
Image Version: 6.3.9600.17031
Processing 1 of 1 - Adding package Package_for_KB3038314~31bf3856ad364e35~amd64~
~6.3.1.3
[===========================99.8%========================= ]
The operation completed successfully.
Personally I would have a /v (verbose switch) that logs *everything* (to be used only when needed) but normally the log would contain only the actual commands issued and whether they were successful or not, i.e. lines *like*:
2015/04/15 11:12:10 Command issued: C:\temp\fgrtys.exe -c C:\Windows\System32\whatever.ext
2015/04/15 11:12:12 Command result: Errorlevel 0
Some tools have two switches, where /v (verbose) increases the amount of output and only a further switch like /vv (very verbose) logs integrally ...
the "tee" program is a Unix originated tool that simply copies something that would go to the console (like it is "normal") to one (or more) files:
0 -
What I find useful (which might or might not be what you want/need) is the making of a "tee" of the commands (and of their output if any) into a .log file, then the press of the button would simply open the .log, which could be a plain text file and as such usable through Notepad or any other text editor for copy/paste.
To further simplify it, the button could simply run Notepad.exe yyyymmddhhmmssBP.log.
jaclaz
You'll have to elaborate on what you mean. I think I'll probably scrap the "capture the output idea" I mentioned in #36 anyway, given what I saw with DISM when I did. I don't think it really added anything that couldn't be figured out by the UI sitting on "Installing" for a particular thing. That said, if it's what it sounds like, it might be worth redoing the logging system (it already logs to batpatcher.log in <WindowsDir>). There's parts of it that I'm really not too thrilled about, and not sure that more data couldn't be pieced together, too. Anyway, let me know what you think.
0 -
I'm looking at doing 2.10, which is mainly a back-end change about how the patches are run. One of the things that I could probably do on the program screen is show the outputs of the command-line programs that are called. But I haven't determined the best way from a UI standpoint. I'll have to see what I can make work, but would a "Details" tab or a button from the main screen that reveals this output be preferable?
0 -
FWIW, this update has a history of files from 2014 (see the link), and the file is currently marked as "v7", which tells me it's a long standing patch, especially if the Windows Customer Experience Improvement Program is involved. I recognize that term from previous versions, so it's been going a while. I see pages which indicate that Windows CEI can be disabled, so I can't say it's a new thing.
Somewhat related, another new update has shown up for me:
At the overview level it says: "Install this update to resolve issues in Windows"
0 -
(File Removed)
0 -
Hi,
Do you know if the wpchange is available in X64 version?
Regards
I happened to pull this out today to look at it, and it worked on my Windows 8.1 x64. Is there any particular reason why it wouldn't work on any other x64 version?
0 -
Which updates? Have you looked at the logs you get after attempting to install them?
0 -
When used on newer versions of Windows, such as Windows 7 and Windows 8, does Batch Patcher use DISM to install the updates?
Phil
If it finds it, yes.
0 -
It's been the case for quite some time that the Internet Explorer "cumulative" updates only apply to a certain section of things - this explains multiple "cumulative" updates that are often required for Internet Explorer. Then they do little "out of band" updates for "severe" security problems. This is what 3034196 is, which is dependent on 3021952. Can't blame 'em for being consistent, to be sure, to see the whole required list of IE updates for Win 8.1 x64 (as listed below)
I think MS doesn't know what the hell it's doing
halfmost of the time. A cumulative update is just that, it should supercede all previous updates. As it stands now I have five IE11 updates, KB2909210, KB2929437, KB2976627, and now KB3021952 and KB3034196. I add them all to a base image containing only IE11 and it says I still need KB3021952. I updated my laptop by WU and it doesn't need KB3021952 a second time, but it also doesn't install KB3034196. You have to run WU twice to install KB3034196. Some dependency on KB3021952? Strange things at Redmond to be sure. How about rolling them into one update? Oh there I go making sense.To wit:
2014-08-12 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 8.1 for x64-based Systems (KB2976627)Security Bulletin IDs: MS14-051 Listing of File URLs: windows8.1-kb2976627-x64Description: Installing the Microsoft Camera Codec Pack enables the viewing of a variety of device-specific file formats and will allow supported RAW camera files to be viewable in applications in Windows. For a complete listing of supported cameras, see the associated Microsoft Knowledge Base Article for more information. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.----------------------------------------------------------------2015-02-05 Security Update for Internet Explorer Flash Player for Windows 8.1 for x64-based Systems (KB3021953)Listing of File URLs: windows8.1-kb3021953-x64Description: A security issue has been identified in a Microsoft software product that could affect your system. You can help protect your system by installing this update from Microsoft. For a complete listing of the issues that are included in this update, see the associated Microsoft Knowledge Base article. After you install this update, you may have to restart your system.----------------------------------------------------------------2015-02-10 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 8.1 for x64-based Systems (KB3021952)Security Bulletin IDs: MS15-009 Listing of File URLs: windows8.1-kb3021952-x64windows8.1-kb3023607-x64windows8.1-kb3036197-x64Description: A security issue has been identified in a Microsoft software product that could affect your system. You can help protect your system by installing this update from Microsoft. For a complete listing of the issues that are included in this update, see the associated Microsoft Knowledge Base article. After you install this update, you may have to restart your system.----------------------------------------------------------------2015-02-10 Security Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 8.1 for x64-based Systems (KB3034196)Security Bulletin IDs: MS15-009 Listing of File URLs: windows8.1-kb3034196-x64Description: A security issue has been identified in a Microsoft software product that could affect your system. You can help protect your system by installing this update from Microsoft. For a complete listing of the issues that are included in this update, see the associated Microsoft Knowledge Base article. After you install this update, you may have to restart your system.----------------------------------------------------------------
0 -
Your first question, they probably was just late on getting it out when you looked at it. Or they felt they didn't need to update IE11 that month for some reason. I'm sure there's a legit reason.
On your second question, Microsoft often bundles updates. For instance, Win8.1 x64 3021952 also has 3023607 and 3036197. It just seems in this case that you are missing one of the "other" updates if you show 3021952 installed.
I was building a new image of Windows 7 HP 64 bit. I am confused about IE11 cumulative security updates. In 8/14 there was update KB2976627. It was superceded by KB2977629 in 9/14, except for IE11. Each cumulative update always replaces the previous, except in this case. Anybody know why?
Now onto the lastest issue. I added the February updates to my image with DISM, but after install WU still wants IE11 cumulative security update KB3021952. Checking installed updates, KB3021952 is listed. The WU update must be some smaller component of KB3021952 because the download is only listed as 5-6 MB. Can anybody help me straighten this out? TIA.
Title: Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 8.1 for x64-based Systems (KB3021952)KB IDs: 3021952 Security Bulletin IDs: MS15-009 Date Issued: 2015-02-10Installed: TRUEHidden: FALSECategories: Security Updates, Windows 8.1, MSRC Severity: CriticalListing of Files: windows8.1-kb3021952-x64 - windows8.1-kb3021952-x64_ec6b557f24c7677460253d5fa08ec26acaae279a.cab (51874 KB)windows8.1-kb3023607-x64 - windows8.1-kb3023607-x64_749da24d6f5b99697e408a690acda5516fc8c5e3.cab (391 KB)windows8.1-kb3036197-x64 - windows8.1-kb3036197-x64_251b1867a07951f96e4f7badbf7c11a5193018f1.cab (1334 KB)Description: A security issue has been identified in a Microsoft software product that could affect your system. You can help protect your system by installing this update from Microsoft. For a complete listing of the issues that are included in this update, see the associated Microsoft Knowledge Base article. After you install this update, you may have to restart your system.
0 -
You can try this , which downloads off the links presented on the Windows Update site. Basically, as long as whatever you have installed is current, you'll get all the files you need. Windows 7, AFAIK, presents CAB files, which should be fine for whatever slipstreaming needs you have. The default is whatever things you don't have installed, but clicking "installed" will present what Windows Update/Microsoft considers as "fully patched".
As for installing the stand-alone patches (CAB, MSU, or EXE), you can try this , though it will just install any of the updates that are presented.
0 -
I calculated SHA-1, using a program called Hash.
Where might one obtain this program? I get the feeling that checking its output against a known good SHA-1 generator will reveal this "Hash" program to be in error, if you are getting the values right out of the security catalogs.
0 -
When I was reading things trying to solve my other problem, I did read reports of people cleaning cable plugs and drive sockets (for lack of a better term). Basically, as it was described, it reminded me a lot of the old Nintendo cartridges and the cleaning kits that they sold for those for the connection problems there. I also noticed myself how "unstable" the plugs are (short description of what was wrong with my "other problem"). It's always good practice anyway to reseat any cables if you run into problems, and check for dirt in them, and if worse comes to worse, rubbing alcohol on a cotton swab followed up by pressurized air to make sure it's dry and the cotton is gone.
0
, you can specify in your command line to which file (overruling the default setting for <WinDir>/Logs/DISM/dism.log) to direct the log message and also the level of verbosity 1/2/3/4...
Windows 10 GWX Update Removal Tool for Windows 7 and Windows 8.1
in Windows 10
Posted
Resolved the first error myself (deinstalled/reinstalled all VC++ runtimes). Went ahead and ran your app and received "This application needs Windows 7 or Windows 8.1" unconditionally.
Minor version may be 2 as well in order for your app to be valid.