Jump to content
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. ×

Any disadvantage with no integrating the hotfixes?


 Share

Recommended Posts

Recently, I've discovered that no integrating the hotfixes in the UA CD takes much less space than integrating them. Has this way (no integrate) any disadvantage over the other one? Are the updates applied in the same way? If so, why MS adds the /integrate option in their hotfixes?

I only think that some update may not be used during the install process because that update is not integrated, and therefore the files in the I386 directory are the old ones, they're not the new versions included in the hotfixes.

Any idea or opinions about this? Thanks and regards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The main advantage I see is a much cleaner install. You won't have all the crazy directories left over in the Windows directory with a slipstreamed install. Try this: Install from a non-patched source cd, then do all the normal drivers, updates, etc... and see how many extra directories are left in c:\windows. All those "$NtUninstallxxxxxxxx$" will be very numerous. How about being able to install and not have a bunch of junk to do in the way of downloading patches, installing drivers, etc...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the top of my site sums up pretty efficiently why integrating the fixes (specifically by my method) is superior to other hotfix installation methods.

1. Since the files are being directly overwritten on the CD, there is no period of vulnerability between when the files are copied to the hard drive and the hotfixes are run. This guarantees maximum stability and security.

2. All necessary registry entries needed by Windows Update, QFECheck, and Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer are imported during Windows setup, meaning that the integration is transparent to Windows.

3. Security Catalogs necessary for Windows File Protection to recognize the updated files as digitally signed are installed, once again ensuring maximum transparency to Windows.

4. Since the updated files are being directly overwritten on the CD, this pack has the minimum possible amount of overhead associated with integrating hotfixes in comparison to other methods - both in space used on the CD and in Windows installation time.

5. This pack works regardless of whether or not the Windows installation is unattended.

While some of these points are specific advantages over the /integrate method, some are generic to just integrating hotfixes into the CD in general.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting aside all the benefits of bug fixes and increased security, a huge benefit to integrating the hotfixes is that you won't have to spend a long time inside of Windows Update / Microsoft Update after the OS installation is finished. Depending on your connection to the internet, this could take hours. If you are working with a non-connected machine, then you're stuck installing them all by hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK guys, thank you very much for your answers :)

I would intend to include the hotfixes in my CD, with this manner or another one. My doubt is about why the KBxxxxx.exe files contained in SVCPACK\ folder must be there even when integrating the hotfixes with the /integrate argument. I think this is redundant and it takes more space than necessary...

Regards.

PD: RyanVM: Do you have your update pack translated for the spanish language?

Edited by ponghy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think somebody made a thread in my forum about it once upon a time, but that's as far as it's gone. But hey, somebody's got to start one :P

And yes, the EXE still does need to be run when using /integrate, or else no registry entries will be properly created and I can guarantee you that Windows Update will pitch a fit on at least a few of them (like the IE cumulative update).

Edited by RyanVM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm able to reproduce manually these registry entries with a script of my own, can I get rid of those EXE files from the SVCPACK folder? The HF goal is ONLY to recreate the registry entries? If so, I think I can to recreate the needed registry entries by doing a regshot and finding out the differences.

And you didn't answer to my postdata: Is your update pack available for the spanish language? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm able to reproduce manually these registry entries with a script of my own, can I get rid of those EXE files from the SVCPACK folder? The HF goal is ONLY to recreate the registry entries? If so, I think I can to recreate the needed registry entries by doing a regshot and finding out the differences.
Well, you still have the disadvantage of the files sitting uncompressed in i386 using way more space than they should.
And you didn't answer to my postdata: Is your update pack available for the spanish language? Thanks.
I think somebody made a thread in my forum about it once upon a time, but that's as far as it's gone. But hey, somebody's got to start one :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Ryan, you're right, if I use the /integrate method, the I386 files remain uncompressed. But, Is it possible to compress them manually? (with the MAKECAB command). And when done, what files I should to change aswell to reflect the new compressed files? (any problem with CAT files or digital signatures when doing this?)

Sorry for several questions. Thanks for your valuable help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion I would never intergrate anything with xp, if something isn't right I no its not xp itself I no its an install ive done. I don't really care how big the xp install is as long as it fits on a 4GB DVD.

As a personal opinion i prefer the manual way of batch files and registry editing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...