Tomorrow

Windows 7 SP1 is supported until January 14, 2020. Currently it is on extended support. We don't know what happens on January 15, 2020. Will MS extend support atleast one more time like they did with XP multiple times or not. I'm thinking they won't.

That's a question to the developer although i imagine this has been discussed in MDL forums somewhere. Due to the bendwidth requirements i imagine most updates are coming from MS servers. Obviously this does not include updates that are request only (to fix a specific rare issue) and updates that are superseded but are kept around to satisfy WU.

Frankly i don't really care if the list is encrypted or not. What i care is that it downloads current updates and removes superseded updates already on disk (i mean HDD not Win7 image). I admit it's not perfect tho. First the removal of superseded updates from disk takes several steps and the program itself has confusing UI. Plus the developer is a jerk (banned me from MDL forums for having the audacity to suggest improvements to his program). The list maintainers like abbodi and others are great tho.

Yes. As a matter of fact.

You fix this by not running an abandoned program. Use WTK instead: http://www.afterdawn.com/software/system_tools/system_tweaking/win_toolkit.cfm

Move to NTFS formatted USB stick then. But yes it is a problem since on FAT32 install.wim cannot be larger than 4GB and thus one has to use other filesystems but booting install from those is not as easy as booting from FAT32 (and not as fast imo). Sorry for OT.

Use Disk Cleanup. This removes superseded updates. Did you even read my post? How is a feature of an installed os relevant to the question i asked? What i wanted to see is something along the lines of this: Updates removed since december 2014 - march 2015 (for me at least) IE11-Windows6.1-KB2956283-x64 IE11-Windows6.1-KB3008923-x64 IE11-Windows6.1-KB3025390-x64 Windows6.1-KB2785220-x64 Windows6.1-KB2847311-x64 Windows6.1-KB2926765-x64 Windows6.1-KB2952664-v7-x64 Windows6.1-KB3002885-x64 Windows6.1-KB3013126-x64 Windows6.1-KB3013455-x64 Windows6.1-KB3023266-x64 Windows6.1-KB3023562-x64 Windows6.1-KB3029944-x64 I had a hunch some updates were obsolete by now, therefore after some googling on how to compare folder contents, found out that these ones are no longer relevant. Btw is there a website to check which updates were superseded, my google fu gave me irrelevant results. And once you find out what updates are superseded you do what? remove them one by one?. This is what disk cleanup is made for. It removes (among other things you select) superseded updates from the system. Essentially eliminating the quessing game about wich updates are superseded and wich are not. If you're talking about removing superseded update packages (.msu or .cab) from disk then that's another matter. Generally you're better offf deleting the previously downloaded files and redownloading the the nessesary updates each month. Trust me when i say that trying to figure out wich updates are currently superseded and keeping such a list updated is something many people have tried in the past (me included) and given up. It's a lot more complicated than you think. Often requiring extraction and examination of individual files inside the packages to deterimine if they're newer.

Use Disk Cleanup. This removes superseded updates.

Yes im pretty sure you can. Since i dont do this myself (no point in relocating user stuff from SSD with 90GB free to slower HDD) i cant offer any examples.

Hmm. Seems RT7L is very much stuck in peoples mind. Unfortunately it's completely abandoned and unsupported. Using it will cause many issues. Use WTK instead: http://www.wincert.net/forum/files/file/5-win-toolkit/

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/139877-post-sp1-updates-for-windows-7-updated-13052014/page-18#entry1077997

Hmm i see a hotfix coming : KB???????? - Windows setup creates ESP partition with incorrect size on advanced format (4K) drives on UEFI capable systems.

Fsutil fsinfo ntfsinfo c: (Where C: is drive letter). If "Bytes per Sector" = 512 then: 512 If "Bytes per Sector" = 4096 then: 4K If "Bytes per Physical Sector" = 4096 then: 4K Emulated? Read up: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2510009 My SSD is 512 wich explains why windows setup created 100MB partition not 260MB.

Even windows installation itself creates a 100MB partition on SSD: Microsoft DiskPart version 6.1.7601Copyright (C) 1999-2008 Microsoft Corporation.On computer: PHOENIXDISKPART> list disk Disk ### Status Size Free Dyn Gpt -------- ------------- ------- ------- --- --- Disk 0 Online 59 GB 0 B * Disk 1 Online 698 GB 0 B * Disk 2 Online 2794 GB 0 B *DISKPART> select disk 0Disk 0 is now the selected disk.DISKPART> list part Partition ### Type Size Offset ------------- ---------------- ------- ------- Partition 1 System 100 MB 1024 KB Partition 2 Reserved 128 MB 101 MB Partition 3 Primary 29 GB 229 MB Partition 4 Primary 30 GB 29 GB

Yeah i have always used 100MB ESP partition. Not sure why MS would suggest 200MB. Btw fixed code: <DiskConfiguration> <Disk wcm:action="add"> <DiskID>0</DiskID> <WillWipeDisk>true</WillWipeDisk> <CreatePartitions> <CreatePartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>1</Order> <Type>EFI</Type> <Size>100</Size> </CreatePartition> <CreatePartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>2</Order> <Type>MSR</Type> <Size>128</Size> </CreatePartition> <CreatePartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>3</Order> <Type>Primary</Type> <Extend>true</Extend> </CreatePartition> </CreatePartitions> <ModifyPartitions> <ModifyPartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>1</Order> <PartitionID>1</PartitionID> <Label>ESP</Label> <Format>NTFS</Format> </ModifyPartition> <ModifyPartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>2</Order> <PartitionID>2</PartitionID> <Label>MSR</Label> <Format>NTFS</Format> </ModifyPartition> <ModifyPartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>3</Order> <PartitionID>3</PartitionID> <Label>System</Label> <Letter>C</Letter> <Format>NTFS</Format> </ModifyPartition> </ModifyPartitions> </Disk> <WillShowUI>OnError</WillShowUI> </DiskConfiguration>

When manually installing windows creates nessesary partitions itself. With XML this is a part of my UEFI XML for virtual machine (Formats and creates partitions on a single drive). Might be dangerous on a multi-drive system as the wrong disk may be selected for format (thats why i never use automatic partitioning on a real machine in XML). Goes under windowsPE pass under diskconfiguration: <DiskConfiguration> <Disk wcm:action="add"> <DiskID>0</DiskID> <WillWipeDisk>true</WillWipeDisk> <CreatePartitions> <CreatePartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>1</Order> <Type>Primary</Type> <Size>300</Size> </CreatePartition> <CreatePartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>2</Order> <Type>EFI</Type> <Size>100</Size> </CreatePartition> <CreatePartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>3</Order> <Type>MSR</Type> <Size>128</Size> </CreatePartition> <CreatePartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>4</Order> <Type>Primary</Type> <Extend>true</Extend> </CreatePartition> </CreatePartitions> <ModifyPartitions> <!-- Windows RE Tools partition --> <ModifyPartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>1</Order> <PartitionID>1</PartitionID> <Label>WINRE</Label> <Format>NTFS</Format> </ModifyPartition> <ModifyPartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>2</Order> <PartitionID>2</PartitionID> <Label>ESP</Label> <Format>FAT32</Format> </ModifyPartition> <Order>3</Order> <PartitionID>3</PartitionID> <ModifyPartition wcm:action="add"> <Order>3</Order> <PartitionID>4</PartitionID> <Label>System</Label> <Letter>C</Letter> <Format>NTFS</Format> </ModifyPartition> </ModifyPartitions> </Disk> <WillShowUI>OnError</WillShowUI> </DiskConfiguration>Im not saying its correct as mostly you only need 3 partitions: 1. ESP (100MB) > 2. MSR (128MB) > 3. Windows (Expanding). Also for some reason i've set my ESP to sit on FAT32 not NTFS. God knows why...

Hmm i wondered why i didnt get any errors when integrating WMF 4.0. Apparently i used my sysprepped ISO that had .NET 4.5 integrated. Lucky me i guess..

Hmm yes i figured as much by googling various topics that dealt with integration woes. Mostly the case was that the user had not properly unpacked the drivers (there were ati.ex_ and ati.dl_ files present). Thats not the case with me however as i take the drivers from live system's FileRepository folder (C:\Windows\System32\DriverStore\FileRepository) and everything is properly unpacked already. Best i figured was that the inf-s had some extra dependecies that i was not able to satisfy by integration. I guess sysprep or setupcomplete are maybe options to get amd drivers working before arriving at the desktop? Btw subsequent integrations showed success with DISM but im still at the process of evaluating if the driver actually installs during installation (i rather prefer to use the $WinPEDriver$ method in unnatend.xml so i dont have to bloat install.wim with drivers that quickly go out of date).

For some reason AMD graphics drivers refuse to integrate into Win7 x64. Specificly Catalyst 13.12 but as far as i've seen that has been the case last few years. DISM complains that it was unable to integrate amd drivers. I wonder why because Nvidia drivers integrate just fine. So is anyone manage to sucessfully integrate drivers into install.wim with DISM? (or some other method?)

Well speaking from personal experience including USB 3.0 drivers (Renesas) was a major pain for me. Even after i correctly integrated drivers into boot.wim with DISM half the time on bootup (Win7 x64 UEFi install from USB 3.0 flashdrive) nothing was found. I found out that i also needed to include Intel chipset drivers for everything to work the way it should. Took a lot of trial and error. Oh and to make things even better latest Renesas drivers (2.1.39.0) caused a BSOD on startup. I had to use 2.1.36.0 wich was the previous release. And that is nothing compared to magic i had to perform to properly update renesas's firmware. It kept complaining about plurar controllers so i had to do it via obscure commandline commands. Sigh...

Yeah IE is always gimmicky. New versions can break previously working unnatend settings and add new ones.

KB971033 is not included in SP1 image. Atleast not in Win7 SP1 ISO. Im not sure about standalone exe but you should always use latest ISO anyway. Downloads are here: http://forums.mydigitallife.info/threads/28517-Windows-7-w-o-SP1-and-SP1-Media-Refresh-Direct-Download-Links

The code above needs review. Not sure about blank password. May not work. Also use processorArchitecture="x86"For 32bit XML.

<settings pass="oobeSystem"> <component name="Microsoft-Windows-Shell-Setup" processorArchitecture="amd64" publicKeyToken="31bf3856ad364e35" language="neutral" versionScope="nonSxS" xmlns:wcm="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WMIConfig/2002/State" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"> <OOBE> <ProtectYourPC>1</ProtectYourPC> <HideWirelessSetupInOOBE>true</HideWirelessSetupInOOBE> </OOBE> <UserAccounts> <LocalAccounts> <LocalAccount wcm:action="add"> <Name>sal</Name> <Group>Administrators</Group> <Password> <Value></Value> <PlainText>false</PlainText> </Password> <DisplayName>sal</DisplayName> </LocalAccount> </LocalAccounts> </UserAccounts> </component> </settings>

The main problem with RT7L was that it deleted components forcefully where as WTK uses built in component removal that is a lot safer. I used RT7L up to beginning of this year. Now using WTK.