[Culprit-IE9!]Completing Installation - takes long time.

[johnhc]

I am installing Windows 7 Ultimate x64 unattended in both HW and VMware Player. When either gets to the Completing Installation step, it seems to stall there for a long time (> 15 minutes). If I let it go on the HW, the monitor goes black due to the time out. When doing an install on my VM, I can see the CPU activity and it is minimal. On either type, the HDD activity is very minimal. Eventually it starts up and completes the install. I hope some will comment on their experience and what may be causing this delay. Thanks, John.

Edited November 25, 2010 by johnhc

[maxXPsoft]

I have seen myself error in xml doing this

Try Unplug all your extra USB devices, printer/scanner, any external USB drives as well. I have a plain jane usb 20gb I leave in with my xml and no problems

Do full formats of target drive

If you running from a burned dvd then make sure you burn at 4x

[johnhc]

I have seen myself error in xml doing this

Try Unplug all your extra USB devices, printer/scanner, any external USB drives as well. I have a plain jane usb 20gb I leave in with my xml and no problems

Do full formats of target drive

If you running from a burned dvd then make sure you burn at 4x

maxXPsoft, thanks for your reply. I observe this on HW and VM. I install on HW from a flat (HDD) and an ISO image as a virtual CD on VM. I do have my USB printer plugged into my HW so I could unplug it when installing on HW, but no USB devices attached to my VM. I also format the partition I am installing on on both HW and VM. When installing on HW, I start it from my XP x64 system and have an active Internet connection. On VM, I am not sure if there is an Internet connection. Perhaps Setup is doing something on the Internet or waiting for a timeout. Thanks, John.

[maxXPsoft]

I make a panther.cmd file on my usb stick and copy the logs when this happens. Just use CD to move to stick and run it. You get command prompt on setup by hitting Shift+F10 up to logon screen if logging in. Helps diagnose

cd /d %~dp0

@ECHO OFF

robocopy %systemroot%\Panther /MIR %~dp0$Panther

robocopy %systemroot%\System32\sysprep /MIR %~dp0$sysprep

robocopy %WINDIR%\Setup\State\State.ini /MIR %~dp0$State.ini

Pause

Edited October 24, 2010 by maxXPsoft

[johnhc]

I make a panther.cmd file on my usb stick and copy the logs when this happens. Just use CD to move to stick and run it. You get command prompt on setup by hitting Shift+F10 up to logon screen if logging in. Helps diagnose

cd /d %~dp0

@ECHO OFF

robocopy %systemroot%\Panther /MIR %~dp0$Panther

robocopy %systemroot%\System32\sysprep /MIR %~dp0$sysprep

robocopy %WINDIR%\Setup\State\State.ini /MIR %~dp0$State.ini

Pause

maxXPsoft, I did not follow your advice exactly, but have looked at the log (setupact.log) at your prompting and see these kinds of things:

2010-10-27 13:50:29, Info [RegisterIEPKEYs LIB] RegisterIEPKEYs() Calling unregister first to ensure no previous schemas are already registered

2010-10-27 13:52:29, Info [RegisterIEPKEYs LIB] RegisterIEPKEYs() Successfully unregistered property schema at $ProgramFiles$\Internet Explorer\ie8props.propdesc

2010-10-27 13:54:29, Info [RegisterIEPKEYs LIB] RegisterIEPKEYs() Successfully unregistered property schema at $ProgramFiles$\Internet Explorer\ie9props.propdesc

2010-10-27 13:56:29, Info [RegisterIEPKEYs LIB] RegisterIEPKEYs() Successfully registered property schema at $ProgramFiles$\Internet Explorer\ie9props.propdesc

2010-10-27 13:56:29, Info CSI 0000016a Done with generic command 20 (0x00000014); CreateProcess returned 0, CPAW returned S_OK

Process exit code 0 resulted in success? TRUE

I ran this install on VM and disabled both VMware Player Connections before the install started to make sure it was not the Internet. In this on example, I have lost 6 minutes and there are more times when 2 minutes go by with nothing happening. I need to look some more at the logs but hope you are someone will recognize what is going and let me know. Thanks, John.

[johnhc]

OK, I have tracked down my delay problem! I did some more searching and testing and found that many people have this symptom. Most blame it on some device such as HDD or USB device being connected during install. I tried installing on VMware Player with the USB controller removed and had the same delay. Since each occurrence of the delay had a reference to IE9 (see my last post), I started with a fresh virgin copy of install.wim, built an ISO and installed (again VM) and no delay. What took 15 minutes before now takes less than one minute! I looked for an IE9 log but found none (W7 search stinks!). There is no IE9_Main.log in the Windows directory. IE9 was injected using DISM, but it seems there is some work done during install, or at least, some time wasted. Since IE9 Beta is so buggy and Chrome is some better, I will stick with Chrome for now. I would enjoy getting any comments on my observations. Thanks, John.

[cluberti]

IE9 slipstream is still being worked on, from what I understand, so it's not surprising it's buggy. Anything you slipstream isn't actually finished installing until the image is specialized, so the more that slipstreamed update or software package does, the longer it will take (and the more things you slipstream, the longer this takes too). This is normal, but you might want to post it on connect anyway as a bug to make sure MS is aware of it just in case. Remember IE9 installs 4 or 5 prerequisite patches as well, for what it's worth.

[johnhc]

IE9 slipstream is still being worked on, from what I understand, so it's not surprising it's buggy. Anything you slipstream isn't actually finished installing until the image is specialized, so the more that slipstreamed update or software package does, the longer it will take (and the more things you slipstream, the longer this takes too). This is normal, but you might want to post it on connect anyway as a bug to make sure MS is aware of it just in case. Remember IE9 installs 4 or 5 prerequisite patches as well, for what it's worth.

cluberti, thanks. If IE9 installs 4 or 5 updates, where does it get them? I guess they could come with the IE9 DL. Remember that one of my tests disabled the VM internet connection, so Setup could not have DLed them. It could have tried and timed out repeatedly, though. Thanks, John.

[cluberti]

Actually, I do not see that these are included in the IE9 beta download itself - if you're slipstreaming IE9 right now, this could be a problem for you above and beyond the slowness, and worth checking to make sure these updates are installed on any Win7 system you might be putting IE9 on via slipstream (and you'd probably want them on there anyway, IE9 or not):

KB 2028551 - An update is available that contains improvements to XPS in Windows 7 or in Windows Server 2008 R2

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2028551

KB 2028560 - An update is available for Windows 7 and for Windows Server 2008 R2 which provides new functionality and performance improvements for the graphics platform

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2028560

KB 2120976 - Streaming issues that are related to Microsoft Media Foundation in Windows 7

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2120976

KB 2259539 - An update is available that enables the thumbnail controls of certain applications to be displayed correctly on the taskbar in Windows 7 or in Windows Server 2008 R2

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2259539

[johnhc]

Actually, I do not see that these are included in the IE9 beta download itself - if you're slipstreaming IE9 right now, this could be a problem for you above and beyond the slowness, and worth checking to make sure these updates are installed on any Win7 system you might be putting IE9 on via slipstream (and you'd probably want them on there anyway, IE9 or not):

cluberti, I have none of these updates. I did a Get-Packages and looked at Windows Update on my running system. Not only do I not have any, I am not being offered any of these. I guess I am not sure how I am supposed to even know about them except through you. I am also curious how you know about them. Thanks, John.

[cluberti]

If you installed IE9 beta manually, you'd see it try and download/install these via WindowsUpdate.log or the CBS.log file. However, if you slipstream it, you won't see them installed because the setup engine isn't technically running to fetch the prereq's from the manifest. Hence, the updates are required, but they're not required or even recommended updates otherwise (hence you won't be offered these via WU). You *do* need them for IE9 to work properly on Win7, though, fyi.

[johnhc]

If you installed IE9 beta manually, you'd see it try and download/install these via WindowsUpdate.log or the CBS.log file. However, if you slipstream it, you won't see them installed because the setup engine isn't technically running to fetch the prereq's from the manifest. Hence, the updates are required, but they're not required or even recommended updates otherwise (hence you won't be offered these via WU). You *do* need them for IE9 to work properly on Win7, though, fyi.

cluberti, thanks again. This tells me that I should not inject IE9 and maybe any other package that might need updates. Enjoy, John.

[cluberti]

You can inject it, but I wouldn't do it yet (it's still beta, for one). If you slipstream the updates + IE9 you will get a working IE9 slipstream at the end, but it will take time. This is the tradeoff of not having to update an image post-install; those updates still have to finish installing into the image that you've slipstreamed, and it will take time during the actual install. However, I think the IE9 slipstream perf issues might come down to beta and checked code versus retail optimized code.

[johnhc]

You can inject it, but I wouldn't do it yet (it's still beta, for one). If you slipstream the updates + IE9 you will get a working IE9 slipstream at the end, but it will take time. This is the tradeoff of not having to update an image post-install; those updates still have to finish installing into the image that you've slipstreamed, and it will take time during the actual install. However, I think the IE9 slipstream perf issues might come down to beta and checked code versus retail optimized code.

cluberti, thanks. I have concluded that IE9 should not be injected. It comes from MS in a form that is not amenable to injection and we are cheating my fooling around with the .exe file. I am beginning to worry that the same applies to SP1. MS may have a really good reason why it should not be injected but they are not inclined to tell us. By messing with it we are possibly asking for trouble. As far as IE9 is concerned, I suspect that I have not really given it a fair trial, but I am using Chrome now and have found no faults that would get me back to IE at this time. I will quit injecting IE9 and possibly try it again when it is RTM, but inject it only if MS makes it possible. Thanks for all your comments. I continue to learn much hanging around here. Enjoy, John.

[maxXPsoft]

I injected IE9 cause I have 1 site my work email that works better with IE

I only have 1 of those updates 2028560 here on my machine and I have saved/injected almost any that it offers