Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


Sign in to follow this  
wupsy2016

Windows Updates filenames confusion

Recommended Posts

Tell ya what...

 

Download *the* latest Z-Zip to unzip EXE's. Some will be un-zippable, others will not.

 

Some EXE's will have a different verrsion of a "stub" to Unpack them Try opening a CMD Prompt, navigate to your Download folder, for one (a copy maybe) and run "NAME.EXE /?" and see if it gives extraction options. You may/may not see a CAB, MSP, or MSU.

 

You could also (maybe) get the latest Reshacker, open the EXE, and literally (maybe) see the Extraction instruction.

 

And like I said, *some* files can *not* be Directly Integrated.

 

Curious - did you read the link? Or even try the ULZ there?

http://www.wincert.net/forum/topic/12103-8-juin-2015-update-list-gdr-pour-windows-7-sp1-x86x64-fr-en-de-es-it/

It's in English part way down (a bit of information re: Integration).

Oh, and the mentioned WinToolkit is just another Integrator (like nuhi's nLite/vLite/NTlite). It's not an OS Hack. Wincert is legit.

 

Google on the last KB you gave above, I found this yuck.

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/update-kb-3004375-and-kb-3031432-windows-7-keeps/28eee421-2491-4470-bb3d-9325f076da34?auth=1

Here's another.

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=2920727

Here's the actual KB, which lists Version/Date for all the Files inside the Package(s) -

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3031432

 

Here's the one preceding it (another yuck!)

http://windowsitpro.com/patch-tuesday/patch-tuesday-kb3033929-causing-problems

The KB article with warnings -

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3033929

And that very one links to the MS#

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/security/3033929

..which tells you that it Supercedes anothe one. Did you install/integrate the older one?

(An example of the below Process.)

 

Sometimes it's good to Google the KB's before assuming they're a good thing and/or not Superseded and/or have no Prerequisites. There have been cases where Fixes actually broke stuff (as seen above). :crazy:

 

I will repeat that getting *all* MS Catalog files for the purpose of Integration is not necessarily a smart thing.

 

I only found out about the Catalog site a week ago

The usual method of someone that actually builds *correct* lists is to -

1 - Install the OS

2 - Go to Windows Update and get the list but DO NOT install

3 - Go to  the KB Articles (one by one) referenced and get the file(s) from the Download(s) link given.

4 - Integrate and reinstall

5 - Go to #2 until no more Updates show (then proceed)

6 - Get that god-awful list and work your way BACKWARDS through it, eliminating *all* Superseded.

7 - Integrate and reinstall to confirm you have Just The Correct Ones. If not, try to figure out where you went wrong.

 

I should point out that integrating out-of-date-order can possibly cause problems as well. We discovered that for nLite for XP and went "safe bet" order by old-to-new. Indeed, some Fixes have Prerequisites and installing out-of-order *may* goof up the Integration.

 

HTH

Edited by submix8c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell ya what...

 

Download *the* latest Z-Zip to unzip EXE's. Some will be un-zippable, others will not.

 

Some EXE's will have a different verrsion of a "stub" to Unpack them Try opening a CMD Prompt, navigate to your Download folder, for one (a copy maybe) and run "NAME.EXE /?" and see if it gives extraction options. You may/may not see a CAB, MSP, or MSU.

 

You could also (maybe) get the latest Reshacker, open the EXE, and literally (maybe) see the Extraction instruction.

 

And like I said, *some* files can *not* be Directly Integrated.

 

 

Thanks, but the matter of the exes has become somewhat moot, as I've found several standalone versions (no accompanying exes) of the files in question in other collections of downloaded updates. As to that, I never had any intention of actually using every update WU showed to be available. All I did was list them, then bulk-downloaded every collection I could find, figuring that I'd have everything on hand, once I'd determined which updates I actually wanted.

 

Curious - did you read the link? Or even try the ULZ there?

http://www.wincert.n...fr-en-de-es-it/

It's in English part way down (a bit of information re: Integration).

Oh, and the mentioned WinToolkit is just another Integrator (like nuhi's nLite/vLite/NTlite). It's not an OS Hack. Wincert is legit.

 

 

Yes, I downloaded everything on that ULZ the week before I posted here. And I have WinTookit and WSUS Offline Updater. So far, NTLite seems the easiest to use, but I'm still researching apps.

 

Google on the last KB you gave above, I found this yuck.

http://answers.micro...f076da34?auth=1

Here's another.

http://forums.mozill...?f=37&t=2920727

Here's the actual KB, which lists Version/Date for all the Files inside the Package(s) -

https://support.micr...n-us/kb/3031432

 

Here's the one preceding it (another yuck!)

http://windowsitpro....ausing-problems

The KB article with warnings -

https://support.micr...n-us/kb/3033929

And that very one links to the MS#

https://technet.micr...ecurity/3033929

..which tells you that it Supercedes anothe one. Did you install/integrate the older one?

(An example of the below Process.)

 

Sometimes it's good to Google the KB's before assuming they're a good thing and/or not Superseded and/or have no Prerequisites. There have been cases where Fixes actually broke stuff (as seen above). :crazy:

 

I will repeat that getting *all* MS Catalog files for the purpose of Integration is not necessarily a smart thing.

 

 

I agree entirely with your statement that not all Update files are worth having. However, I personally find it more convenient to simply grab every file while they're available (which might not be forever, for W7 - the only OS I'm interested in) then troll and discard anything I've proved to be unwanted, redundant or plain evil (like the Telemetry)

 

The usual method of someone that actually builds *correct* lists is to -

1 - Install the OS

2 - Go to Windows Update and get the list but DO NOT install

3 - Go to  the KB Articles (one by one) referenced and get the file(s) from the Download(s) link given.

4 - Integrate and reinstall

5 - Go to #2 until no more Updates show (then proceed)

6 - Get that god-awful list and work your way BACKWARDS through it, eliminating *all* Superseded.

7 - Integrate and reinstall to confirm you have Just The Correct Ones. If not, try to figure out where you went wrong.

 

I should point out that integrating out-of-date-order can possibly cause problems as well. We discovered that for nLite for XP and went "safe bet" order by old-to-new. Indeed, some Fixes have Prerequisites and installing out-of-order *may* goof up the Integration.

 

 

 

All of the foregoing is pretty much what I've been doing for the last month. Most of my questions have been aimed at bringing myself up to speed with a subject I'd never bothered to study until now, when it's become obvious that W7 will soon cease to be the renewable resource of old.

On that note, I think this whole business of  integrating Windows Updates has become unnecessarily complicated and confusing.

I mean, we're only talking about a few hundred Update files, the reason for whose existence is thoroughly documented by the manufacturer, and whose performance, benefits, and\or infamy have been thoroughly explored and documented by thousands of users.

In my opinion, the key to simplifying the system would be the creation of a comprehensive Master Index of every available Windows Update, together with a readable explanation of each file's purpose, its real-life effect on the intended operating system, and its possible impact on other update files.

The files themselves are readily available, as are various applications for creating integrations.

So, armed with such an Index, it would only be necessary for computer users to download all the available files, then decide at their leisure which group of files were best suited to their needs and which method they should use to deploy the collection.    

Update-integrating the Windows operating system shouldn't be the trial and error process that it's become.

Googling for 'slip-streaming Windows 7' gets more than 60,000 hits, which is hardly surprising, considering the numbers of individuals and groups who are involved in a continual reinvention of the this particular wheel, instead of cooperating and coordinating their efforts to produce an effective and simple system, that's workable by everyone with modest computer knowledge, instead of just geeks and gurus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On that note, I think this whole business of  integrating Windows Updates has become unnecessarily complicated and confusing.

I mean, we're only talking about a few hundred Update files, the reason for whose existence is thoroughly documented by the manufacturer, and whose performance, benefits, and\or infamy have been thoroughly explored and documented by thousands of users.

Update-integrating the Windows operating system shouldn't be the trial and error process that it's become.

You know what?  It's only as confusing as Microsoft wants to make it.  The problem is that they really don't want people evaluating and making choices about updates.  They never did.  There's very little to no information out there about any of it (your second statement quoted isn't true).  The simple statement of it is that what we are seeing with Windows 10 is how Microsoft always wanted it to be.  Auto updates, no control of what updates get applied.  They couldn't do it for the anti-trust stuff back in the 90's, or just didn't have the cajones.  So they make it as confusing as possible to manage the system by yourself. Document nothing, make anything like manual patching or selection of specific patches a nightmare and especially non-uniform.  People will just either give up or stop caring, at least their thought until they started cramming things down people's throat.

 

But such is a monopoly on Desktop OSes like what Microsoft has.  Or a mobile monopoly like Google.  Or anything of that nature.  When there's no alternatives, you pretty much have to take what you get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Glenn9999, I think you've nailed it.

 

So, as I said earlier, a good start to making the whole process simpler would be the creation of a list (a Word table, perhaps) that explains, in a reasonably comprehensible way, just which W7 updates do what, as well as any possible pitfalls, like whether update X causes problems for other updates. 

 

Information on the replacement sequence of superseded updates would also be handy i.e., KB123 was replaced by KB456, which was itself replaced by KB789. So, use KB789.

 

Obviously, such an 'Index' would mainly be of use to those of us who want to get involved with manual updating. But I suspect there are a great many users who might be interested in the procedure if was properly documented and simpler to carry out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, as I said earlier, a good start to making the whole process simpler would be the creation of a list (a Word table, perhaps) that explains, in a reasonably comprehensible way, just which W7 updates do what, as well as any possible pitfalls, like whether update X causes problems for other updates. 

 

Information on the replacement sequence of superseded updates would also be handy i.e., KB123 was replaced by KB456, which was itself replaced by KB789. So, use KB789.

Supposedly, one could pull a lot of this information out of Windows Update itself.  As I mentioned above, they did a better job of documenting their patches once upon a time, but now (especially looking at my Windows 8.1 patch list), they do a copy/paste on a lot of it and leave a lot more of it out.  More or less they're saying "we don't care and you shouldn't either".  Of course, I mentioned the ability to drop a list of installed updates to text file, which reasonably does update itself on superseded updates.  Ironically, the capability to get this information was intended in querying the Windows Update database, but I never pulled back any real information in my tests.  Then, the biggest problem I found was the inability to query it for other OSes outside of the one you're running, which cripples Windows update for any serious patch management.   One could crack open WSUSSCN2.CAB and process (thinking of trying it) for any OS, but the problem there is making sure the data are unchanged (this is very undocumented by Microsoft, on purpose).  Even just making API access to Microsoft Update Catalog (OS KB) would make matters like this so much easier, but we're kind of lucky Microsoft even bothered with an API for Windows Update given their obvious stance against user control of their own systems.  At least they did reserve the option to pull patch files off of Windows Update and save them to disk, so that makes it a whole lot easier than manually searching and downloading files or hoping someone's external patch file is correct/updated (IMO the predominant weakness/failure of WUD).

Edited by Glenn9999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...