Jump to content

On decommissioning of update servers for 2000, XP, (and Vista?) as of July 2019


Recommended Posts

Posted

Ah thanks, I didn't realise that you had to keep the two stores separate or one would over-write the other.
I must remember that!
The last version of wsusscn2.cab that I can get to work offline with WUMT is the version from November 2019.
The next version, from July 2020, which is supposed to be the last SHA-1 signed version, just throws an error message, something like "no signature found".
I know some people have had that version working, and I never determined why it didn't work for me.
:dubbio:


Posted
10 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

The last version of wsusscn2.cab that I can get to work offline with WUMT is the version from November 2019.

My version of 11/12/2019 is probably the same that you have used from November 2019. Then it works offline with this version but using WSUS server + WUMT doesn't work in your system. Is that correct?

Posted
24 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

My version of 11/12/2019 is probably the same that you have used from November 2019. Then it works offline with this version but using WSUS server + WUMT doesn't work in your system. Is that correct?

That's right, I can use that version of wsusscn2.cab in WUMT using offline mode, but no later versions work, including the July 2020 version which should.
Online scans always fail or never complete.
:)

Posted
3 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

Is that the same thing that @maile3241has been posting about?
:dubbio:

Yes, didn't see his post there. He is correct when he says it works in IE6 in XP. I wonder though if this method also works on 2000.

Posted
8 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

Online scans always fail or never complete.

Very strange! WSUS server + WUMT was the first method which worked without any problems from the first time I tried.

 

9 minutes ago, Dave-H said:

Is that the same thing that @maile3241has been posting about?

Yes, it's the same.

Posted
Just now, AstroSkipper said:

Very strange! WSUS server + WUMT was the first method which worked without any problems from the first time I tried.

 

Yes, it's the same.

Due to this new method, I am considering ending support for my version of Restore_WU and endorse the nginx one. Should I go ahead with it?

Posted
1 minute ago, AstroSkipper said:

But does anyone still use IE6 in Windows XP seriously? IE8 is crap but IE6...No way!

What I mean is use the nginx method on a clean install of XP SP3 and then upgrade to IE8 using the nginx method. Because using my method you need to install IE8 manually.

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

Of course,. I said to @Dave-H some posts above the more the better and he agreed by replying the more the merrier.

Thanks for your advice! I will make a final decision in the coming weeks. If I decide to discontinue support, this is what will happen:

No more support from me for the product, All download links will be made private or removed, I will recommend you move to the nginx method.

Edited by xpandvistafan
Posted
4 minutes ago, xpandvistafan said:

What I mean is use the nginx method on a clean install of XP SP3

There are a lot of clean installations using a CD including SP3 and IE8. If I had to install from scratch I would use a version which contains all updates until 2014 and therefore including IE8.

Posted
1 minute ago, AstroSkipper said:

There are a lot of clean installations using a CD including SP3 and IE8. If I had to install from scratch I would use a version which contains all updates until 2014 and therefore including IE8.

Well, I don't necessarily trust CD's modified like that. I use the original SP3 MSDN ISO file.  

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...