Cixert

The numbers match mine except I have 559 in the folder client\wxp\esn instead of 564. I'm afraid we both have these files wrong, I just found a major bug. I just compared the downloads made by running WSUS 9.2.6 with wsusscn2.cab version 2024 and re-running the same installation with wsusscn2.cab version 2019. This has preserved the previous downloads. I expected the difference to be 16 more files with wsusscn2.cab version 2019 but it was only two more: \client\win\esn windows-kb913433-x86-esn.exe \client\wxp\esn windowsxp-kb923789-x86-esn.exe But the important error I saw when comparing the "exclude" folder In 2024 ExcludeList-superseded.txt measures 0 KiB In 2019 ExcludeList-superseded.txt measures 1640 KiB I am reviewing the downloads made for XP with WSUS 9.2.6 without the .NET option and ExcludeList-superseded.txt measures 1911 KiB. This file is downloaded when running WSUS, it does not come with the program, and with the .NET option checked it is downloaded empty, so we have outdated updates. Please check how many KiB yours is.

Yes, thank you very much, if it weren't for your help I wouldn't have achieved anything. After everything works correctly I will make a summary of all the necessary steps. Let's go by systems, for the moment the question is as follows: WSUS 9.2.6 option XP x86 with .NET Framework and C++: Adding these lines to ExcludeList-dotnet-x86.txt & ExcludeList-dotnet-x64.txt does work. ndp35- ndp45- ndp46- ndp47- ndp48- The .NET 3.5 installer is normally downloaded, what is not downloaded are the updates for .NET 3.5 but are for .NET 2.0, 3.0... The problem was that on my computer WSUS does not work well with the temporary files that contain the download lists, the strange thing is that downloading the XP updates without .NET did work but with .NET it failed. I have run it on another computer and it worked with the latest wsusscn2.cab version. The following files are not downloaded but I add them manually thanks to your pause functions on the correct lines: \client\dotnet -NDP40-KB2600211-x86.exe \client\win\glb -Silverlight.exe \client\wxp\esn -wmp11-windowsxp-x86-ES-ES.exe \client\wxp\glb -WindowsXP-KB942288-v3-x86.exe Also I delete for x64: \client\cpp -vc_redist_x64.exe (all) \client\win\glb -Silverlight64.exe and... dotnetfx35langpack_x86de.exe (only for German language) Now I have this problem in the log and I don't know how to add these missing downloads or what the message exactly means, I see in some old forums that there are more than 2 downloads: 2024-08-02 22:09:12,83 - Info: Downloaded/validated 2 statically defined updates for dotnet x86-glb failed: Unknown error. failed: Unknown error. 2024-08-02 22:15:09,45 - Info: Downloaded/validated 14 statically defined updates for wxp esn failed: Unknown error. failed: Unknown error. All other files download correctly, how do I guess which ones are missing? The error does not occur with the XP option without .NET I don't know what "statically defined updates" means. I think it's the links contained in the "static" folder. EDIT: I have tried with old wsusscn2.cab (2019-04-06) and these files have been downloaded correctly. The pity is that this file has 54 dynamic updates less. I will try to make a mix between both. And also the pity is that this wsusscn2.cab is dated 3 days before the end of support for Windows XP Embedded. It seems to make no sense that if they are URLs contained in a .txt file, they are downloaded or not depending on the version wsusscn2.cab and whether or not the .NET option is checked in WSUS.

I follow your instructions @AstroSkipper I put download .NET and C++ for Windows XP in Spanish and it tries to download .NET 4.6.2 in German. Maybe because the program WSUS is made by Germans... EDIT: FIXED: I have deleted most the links contents in StaticDownloadLinks-dotnet.txt Which most contains links in German. Delete for all languages except German.

I don't understand your sentence either. "I deleted the default download links pointing to .NET Frameworks installer files higher than 4.0 inside WSUS Offline Update 9.2.6 and then enabled their download. " Does this mean you remove the shortcuts to 4.6 and 4.6.2 inside StaticDownloadLinks-dotnet-x86-esn.txt and StaticDownloadLinks-dotnet-x64-esn.txt in static folder???? I don't understand you delete and then say "and then enabled their download"

Let's see if I do it correctly... In the folder "exclude" the file ExcludeList-dotnet-x86.txt & ExcludeList-dotnet-x64.txt I add these lines, each name with the minus symbol after it. ndp45- ndp46- ndp47- ndp48- But this file already contains this line, without me adding it: ndp35- And WSUS downloads the .NET 3.5 installer anyway I think 3.5 should be excluded, so why is it downloaded? I will try it, thanks

I have tried it with wsusscn2 (2019-04-06).cab and the result is the same. When do you paste wsusscn2.cab? When the process of verifying that the latest version is available is finished, the process of extracting package.xml immediately begins. I have tried to make it as precise as possible. I think the problem must be something else, this hasn't worked for me either. The process stops with error 404 even though I follow the steps you indicate.

Yes, I have tried on another computer with Windows XP and I see that the temporary files are created in: C:\Documents and Settings\User\Local Settings\Temp But the operation has not been successful. It has taken 20 minutes to determine the package.xml downloads (on the first computer it took 1 minute). And finally it tries to download 2529 updates not related to Office. I have tried with Office 2003 and with Office 2007, the result is the same. In summary, in Windows Seven it tries to download 800 unrelated updates and in XP it tries 2529 updates not related to Microsoft Office. The screenshot corresponds to Office 2003 but in Office 2007 it is similar

The first time I ran WSUS 9.2.5 I didn't have the problem. Please make a backup of your downloaded file and run "UpdateGenerator exe" again and also on a new copy, see what happens. I can't understand the problem with the temp folder, when I download updates from any other system (Office 2010, XP, Seven...) WSUS works fine and I don't see that in the temp folder there are copies of: \Temp\OfficeUpdateAndFileIds.txt \Temp\OfficeUpdateCabExeIdsAndLocations.txt \Temp\UpdateTableURL-ofc-glb.csv FINDSTR \Temp\DynamicDownloadLinks-ofc-glb.txt etc, etc I will try with another computer.

This is a great find. Original wget in WSUS 9.2.6 is only 236 KiB, this seems to be a faulty file. Downloading wget 1.19.4 x86 from wget GNU it is 3804 KiB. https://eternallybored.org/misc/wget/ After copying wget to the bin folder and trying to get XP updates the new thing was that in addition to the updates listed for Windows XP in Downloading/validating update 1 of 1... This has managed to download several previous files that previously gave the "failed" error. Now only 2 files give the failed error: -wmp11-windowsxp-x86-ES-ES.exe -WindowsXP-KB942288-v3-x86.exe As well as Silverlight. I have found that the trick to include them in the ISO is to download them from another source and paste them into the WSUS Offline Update folders: wXP -esn -glb after the moment when the message "Downloading/validating update 1 of 1..." appears At that moment we press pause and paste the files. If they are pasted before they disappear. The trick does not work with "KB968930" in XP64. It has not been necessary to modify the DownloadUpdates.cmd file in line 206 for wget to work correctly, I have not seen any change if the "verify downloads updates" option is disabled. The pity is that wget has not been able to solve the problem with downloads for Office 2003 and 2007. The problem here is that errors similar to this one appear dozens of times in XP: The system cannot find the file D:\DOCUME~1\User\CONFIG~1\Temp\OfficeUpdateCabExeIdsAndLocations.txt. Cannot find D:\DOCUME~1\User\CONFIG~1\Temp\OfficeUpdateAndFileIds.txt Cannot find D:\DOCUME~1\User\CONFIG~1\Temp\OfficeUpdateCabExeIdsAndLocat ions.txt Cannot find D:\DOCUME~1\User\CONFIG~1\Temp\UpdateTableURL-ofc-glb.csv FINDSTR: Cannot open D:\DOCUME~1\User\CONFIG~1\Temp\DynamicDownloadLinks-ofc-glb.txt While on Windows 7 and 10 WSUS downloads 800 updates that are not related to Office.

I'm revisiting this topic in 2024 because the same thing happens to me as the OP @LORPAL with Office 2003 and Office 2007. I was trying with WSUS 9.2.1 and suffering from the download of many GB of files that apparently have nothing to do with it. I then saw that among the versions on the website there is the WSUS 9.2.5 ESR version dated 04.06.2019. So I ran that version and the files with the Office 2003 and Office 2007 updates were downloaded correctly. "Only the specific files" occupying a few GB. Since I didn't check the "create ISO file" option, I repeated the operation 2 days later. And surprise, it doesn't work anymore, it downloads files again that have nothing to do with it and it deleted the files that I downloaded correctly. I don't remember what operating system I used when it worked well. It could be XP, Seven or 10. Now I try and from XP it doesn't download almost anything, while with Seven it downloads 800 files that I don't care about. The files that the program requires and no longer downloads, such as sigcheck and mkisofs, I manually copy them to the bin folder. What could be happening? I have also tried with Windows XP updates and the first time it works very well, but when I run it again it doesn't download anything even if I delete the temporary files and try to perform a new clean process. I have seen that there is also a WSUS 9.2.6 version dated 08.11.2019 but it is not currently offered on the website. This is the download link, the problem is the same. https://download.wsusoffline.net/wsusoffline926.zip There seems to be a problem with temporary files.

Thanks, that FileFormatConverters version is signed 2009-08-21, in properties it says v. 12.0.6500.5000. How do you know it's version 12.0.6514.5001? I have a version that is signed 2009-08-28 but it also says 12.0.6500.5000. *I'm seeing that maybe it only changes the installation language. I don't understand the difference between FileFormatConverters and Compatibility Pack... is the same? And what is Office File Converter Pack? https://filehippo.com/download_microsoft-office-file-converter-pack/

I have a problem replacing KB2760494 in the "Updates_ELL" folder with the KB in Spanish. You say in info.txt: "For languages other than English, we need these 5 updates in our language." I don't know what ELL means. No languages are seen in Microsoft Catalog for any of those KBs. Although downloads measure differently. How is this? In any case, I only have the problem with KB2760494, since there are 40 files in the download with the same name. which one do I choose? https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=KB2760494 EDIT: From what I read, ELL stands for Modern Greek. I have replaced these ELL KBs with their Spanish version (ESN) and named them ESN. I have also modified the titles of the .reg files in the folder that modifies the registry. But I still have the problem with KB2760494. I see that if I extract the 40 files, the language appears in the properties. But strangely none of the 40 are in Spanish. EDIT 2: There are not 40 links, there are 41 links. Unfortunately, I only didn't download the file in Spanish. msconv_efb7c52332d941fc3f194e230384e8b9bc0bec85.cab

I have never gotten a list of updates for Office XP. From the list you give, I see that the following are not in the Microsoft Catalog: officexp-kb833858-fullfile-enu officexp-kb837253-fullfile-enu officexp-KB904018-FullFile-ENU officexp-KB905758-FullFile-ENU officexp-KB911701-FullFile-ENU officexp-KB920816-FullFile-ENU But it is possible to get these on webarchive in its English USA version. I don't know if these are obsolete, some are from 2004. https://superuser.com/questions/1185038/how-do-i-download-kb-updates-for-office-xp-under-windows-10-that-are-no-longer-o Additionally, there are 2 more downloads that come in the Microsoft Catalog and that are not on that list project2002 KB961079 visio2002 kb2434711 https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=Office XP

I usually read the license files. Most Service Packs and loose operating system updates are freely distributed. I would invite you to post links here to Office 97-2000-XP-2003-2007-2010 updates without fear of violating any terms of service. The only requirement is to share the terms of the different licenses, which are included in each installer file. If you create your own Service Pack it should include all these licenses, but if you just distribute the original files you can do it directly.

The file that is downloaded is: Office 2007 Compatibility Pack cab.rar And inside it only contains 2 files: xlconv-x-none.msp xlconv-x-none.xml There is no file in .CAB format I have checked the hash and it is correct.

I receive 3 drives in 3 envelopes inside a larger envelope. One drive with supposed capacity 64 TB, truly contains an 8GB SD card, this card is not even fixed with a sticker or silicone. The other 2 drives are a surprise, in theory I had requested 2 drives with a capacity of 2 TB to check if this was real. I opened them expecting to find an SD card but I found that these are 2 Flash drives with a chip. Its true capacity is 7.4 GB & 6.9 GB. I have not yet attempted to format them to their true capacity and I am not sure how I could do that. If no other option works, I will try with RMPrepUSB.

I receive a drive that says it has 128 TB, I have opened it and it contains an 8GB SD card. CHKDSK & Victoria test do not give errors with 128 TB. To format the card to its true capacity the trick is not to perform any operations on the original drive. You just have to remove the SD card and insert it into another SD card reader, then any partition program will indicate the real capacity and say that the card is not yet formatted.

As @jaclaz said inside there is an SD card reader, with an SD card. While the size is different. SSD 12 TB Its opening has been complicated, the trick consists of introducing a screwdriver between plastic and metal on the connector side by hitting a hammer very carefully. Then you have to pull up with the screwdriver. It cannot be done on the opposite side since there is a lid. The unit is sealed with silicone, even the card is sealed with silicone. Flash 16 TB Its opening has been very easy, I have only had to throw slightly with an pliers and the circuit has left the capsule. Now I extract the SD cards and introduce them to my SD card reader. SSD 12 TB - Introduced the card in my reader Windows says: Generic-Multi-Card (121MB) - I have not yet managed to format this card in my reader, the cyclical redundancy error occurs. I am surprised to say 121 MB (no 128 GB). It looks like a 64GB SD card. Flash 16 TB - Introduced the card in my card reader, Windows says: RD3: Generic-Multi-Card (4GB) - Once the card is formatted when it is reintroduced in the flash 16 TB marks the correct size, 3.1 GB It is clear that these products are a scam and that the price is very expensive for what it really is. Apparently the trick is introduced into the SD card and not in the reader. The reader works correctly with any card. What surprises me is that now these drives work properly at Windows XP. So I would like to know why with false size data Windows XP does not recognize these units and yes Windows Seven.

Before testing with real data, I have carried out a third test with the 12TB SSD drive with H2testw. This time there was no error in the writing phase with verification and I stopped the test at 592 GB. However, upon subsequent checking, H2testw says that only 48.2 GB are successfully recorded. Later I tested it with real data. SSD 12TB -Trying to format from the Windows Seven menu gives an error. -Everything over 48.2 GB is recorded defective. FLASH 16TB -Any file larger than 1 GB is recorded defectively. -Recorded files less than 1 GB are replaced with new ones less than 1 GB. -Some defragmenters show the drive others do not. The ones that show the drive do not give an error when defragmenting. -Chkdsk from Windows Seven does not complete the operation and leaves the disk defective. This automatically changes the disk drive name to: RD3:ChipsBnkFlashReader (4GB) CONCLUSIONS: SSD 12 TB really has a size of 48.2 GB. FLASH 16 TB really has a size of 3.1 GB. Now I'm going to open the drives and see what's inside.

From what it seems, this 16 TB Flash would only have 3.1 GB, unless we multiply 3.1 x 15.3 TB. H2testw has finished checking the 1TB partition and still says that only 3.1 GB is correctly written, the same as at the beginning of the check. Warning: Only 1047140 of 1048577 MByte tested. The media is likely to be defective. 3.1 GByte OK (6685504 sectors) 1019.4 GByte DATA LOST (2137857216 sectors) Details:0 KByte overwritten (0 sectors) 0 KByte slightly changed (< 8 bit/sector, 0 sectors) 1019.4 GByte corrupted (2137857216 sectors) 0 KByte aliased memory (0 sectors) First error at offset: 0x00000000cb168000 Expected: 0x00000000cb168000 Found: 0x0000000000000000 H2testw version 1.3 Reading speed: 10.7 MByte/s H2testw v1.4 I point out that the "Write+verify" button verifies the written data, but that does not mean that at the end of the test the data is still written. Once the "Write+verify" test is finished, you must press the "Verify" button, then a process begins that will take even more hours. I don't know what these 2 values mean: 0 KByte slightly changed (< 8 bit/sector, 0 sectors) 0 KByte aliased memory (0 sectors) I think that the stores that are selling these products are primarily responsible for scamming people. The first people interested in reporting this are the legitimate manufacturers, Kingston, Sandisk, Crucial... If they don't care, there is little we can do. Anyway, anyone can write a letter to Aliexpress giving them the link to this post and informing them that they are scamming buyers. If after sending the letter they do not remove these products, there is judicial proof of fraud. I am now going to do tests with real data.

H2testw has completed the test on the 1 TiB partition on 16 TB Flash drive. Despite the message, I think that the operation has been a success. It was expected to fill only 4 MB more. Media has filled up earlier than expected! In the beginning there were 1047144 MByte free, but only 1047140 MByte could be written. Warning: Only 1047144 of 1048577 MByte tested. Writing speed: 25.2 MByte/s H2testw v1.4 The partition now has 512 KiB free. Now I am going to verify that the written data is correct with H2testw itself. It seems that the results are not going to be correct. If any of you want me to perform another type of test, this is the time to indicate it. Later I will enter real data into the drive and verify it.

I think that the tests carried out with FakeFlashTest are not correct. The tool is not able to show the disk drives capacity in the preview. I think it doesn't work with such large units. Regarding H2testw, it is clear that it gives errors in the 12 TB SSD drive, and after carrying out two tests, the errors are not in the same GB amount (8 & 44 GB). On the 16 TB flash drive the H2testw tool has written and verified more than 600 GB in two tests without errors. At this moment I let the test continue. A strange thing, at this moment while the 16 TB Flash test is being carried out, the light on the 12 TB SSD unit is blinking. The Windows Seven resource monitor shows some activity on all disk drives even though they are not working. I don't know if this is normal.

Test performed from Windows Siete / Windows 10 Chip Genius - SSD 12 TB Chip Genius - Flash 16 TB FakeFlashTest - SSD 12 TB FakeFlashTest - Flash 16 TB H2testw - SSD 12 TB 1st test error at 8 GB 2nd test error at 44 GB H2testw - Flash 16 TB 1st test 634 GB stopping without error 2nd test 650 GB test in progress without error Usb Device Tree Viewer -SSD 12 TB Usb Device Tree Viewer - Flash 16 TB HD Tune - SSD 12 TB (by USB 2.0) HD Tune - SSD 12 TB (by USB 2.0)

These programs do not recognize the drives in Windows Seven, so it is not possible to test. -Checkflash (check sectors). -Flash Drive Tester ---> does not recognize this drives installed how flash units, this confirms both that are SSD units. -RMPrepUSB ---> does not list these units although yes other disk drives (PATA/SATA & USB)

Winhex in XP is not able to open the drive, gives in/out error. In Windows Seven it gives the same values for the SSD 16 TB drive and for the Flash 16 TB drive. This says that both drives have capacity 16 TB. XP WinHex - SSD 12 TB Seven WinHex - SSD 12 TB Seven WinHex - Flash 16 TB