That doesn't mean the file is absent. (If that was the case it would simply be not in the list of files at all. For example, look at the KB article and the file listing for Windows 8.1, it shows only 2 files and the other files are simply not listed because they are not used there.) The "not applicable" under the file version column means the file does not have a version number and the one under platform means that 32bit vs 64bit is not relevant. Both of these make sense since if you view the file in Notepad, it is basically a text file, and text files generally do not have those features. The eventID 1542 does look like the similar problem that was seen in the past. I'm not sure why it is "from time to time" rather than consistent. It does generally mean that some permissions thing is not set correctly at the times it does appear. Could you post the other ones too? And the recent 1502 you mention - or was that a typo and you mean the 1542 you posted is the one happening after system restore cleans up the mess? Also it is the Feb updates KB4537813 (security only) or KB4537820 (rollup), not the Jan ones nor any IE Cum that triggers the problem? Here's another thing to try - after system restore cleans up and reboot, try to manually install one of those updates without first doing the bypass stuff. It should fail to install. Reboot anyway, maybe twice. Does the profile still get hosed?
Wow man. Just reinstall. Snatch what you want and reinstall. I started a New 7 pro October with 2 more. My games are good on 7. COPY the saved files in case a reinstall has to be done! Steam is on 7 and 10. Storage has all my software. A day a broke pc can be fixed better than new. Waiting on March. I wouldnt have my system perfect without this page. I went through this with XP. Was a ride. Thanks!!
That's correct. The paid ESU may not work either under these circumstances. Profile corruption tends to either be fairly EASY to correct, or quite DIFFICULT to. There's very little in between based on what I've seen. Part of the reason is such a wide variety of things can contribute to creating this kind of condition. For now trying to work with w2k4eva on this may be your most promising avenue since it is directly related to a prior updating issue he experienced that caused a like condition. So at least this offers some kind of identifiable and related footprint. But short of this, it'll be back to the pick and shovel method of attempting various measures that have been known to correct this type of issue, or of course turning to bigger corrective guns like a repair install or a format + re-installation of the OS. Unfortunately no one shoe fits all cleanly when it comes to profile compromisation.
Quick question @abbodi1406 Is it possible to do backport the new bypass method for windows vista? The only extra step that it's probably needed is to trick windows update services to "think" that you have server 2008 installed. That bypass would make Vista a "supported and safe" operating system once again and a viable option to extremely old devices with vista COAs.
@craftech Format your machine and install clean Win7, or don't but please, stop posting in this thread or you will be reported
Server 2008 updates do not get "fully" installed on Vista, i verified this myself there is no point into tricking WU or the OS itself that your are using Server edition, the updates will not be complete and the test update KB4528081 is available for x64 only so, i will prepare Bypass-v5 variant for Server 2008 anyway
Well, the reason that I'm asking is that, from January up until now, I've been taking care of the ESUs the same way others here have: by manually downloading & installing them. So, what I'm asking the members of this forum is if it's worth it for those like me in Group A (the monthly rollup group) to switch from the way we've been taking care of the ESUs (manual download & install) to the new way via v5 of the bypass (getting the ESUs through Windows Update).
I'm guessing they don't fully install because Vista doesn't have certain Server components, like Hyper-V. At least from what I've observed, most critical OS components do get updated (from a brief analysis of the updated dll and exe files in various system folders).
I don't know if this is just coincidence but since running BypassESU v5 my laptop fan has stopped working. Has anyone else had the same issue? Probably not related but seems strange it happened just after running v5. Anyway I'll keep an eye on things.
Thank you guys,the V5 bypass is working perfectly on my Windows 2008 R2. At least i don't have to upgrade immediately and stay updated. Thanks again !
@craftech - I've started a thread in the W7 forum https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...ventid-1542-and-others-broken-profiles.81210/ and requested moderators to move a list of "off-topic" stuff from here to there, let's give it some time to see if they move stuff so we can continue there without further cluttering up this thread!
@Bill_Boquet Nope, doesn't work. Still shows "Unsupported Hardware". Whenever I install both things (wufuc and Bypassv5) it just doesn't work. Wufuc modifies wuaueng and v5 creates additional dll. I don't know why can't both dlls be used at the same time as they use different names. It seems that Windows likes the v5 dll instead of the original (modified by wufuc). So if v5 isn't patched to support wufuc, I guess I'll just stick with manual install of updates. Edit: Oh Jesus, how stupid am I?! All I had to do was to reboot the system! I can now confirm that WU ESU Patcher from v5 is working with wufuc.
The BypassESU v5 uses the wuaueng.dll to create the wuaueng3.dll, so if the wuaueng.dll is already patched by wufuc, the wuaueng3.dll is also patched by wufuc. The system uses only one dll (the wuaueng3.dll if BypassESU v5 is installed).
Of course. I'm using W7 Ultime x64 with wufuc and the operative system and Windows Update work both properly since I've installed WU ESU Patcher from v.5.
great job, seems to be working. @abbodi1406 Concerning the LiveOS-Setup.cmd script, the variable _bat is set on line 30 and is then used on line 109. line 109 : 1>null 2>null %xSU% /c cmd.exe /c ""!_bat!" -su" &exit /b shouldn't it be this instead: 1>null 2>null %xSU% /c cmd.exe /c ""%_bat%" -su" &exit /b it would seem that with the <! > the variable is undefined whereas with < % > it is well defined.
Will the WU patch leave the current WU settings as they are, such as letting me choose what to download and what to update?