Nice trick, usually when I'd go to catalog I'd just type "windows 10 version 1809 for x64" which would show a little too much information. But typing "yyyy-mm build number" is better and I just didn't think of it. As for the update post, at the risk of sounding like a noob I just have trouble understanding what I'm looking at. It's too nosy with too much information. Don't worry about simplifying it I'll figure it out. Before typing this response I just realized that you're right about NDP48. The update does not actually install dot net. What a stupid system, I was sure MS updates used to put it in. Should I still it from the msu file or the offline installer?
What's stupid about installing a feature and next frequently update it? Some want to stay on 4.7.2 (arm64 has no 4.8). The info is correct, informative and complete you mean?
Why would anyone want to stay on 4.7.2? 4,8 can do everything it can do right? Pretty much. As I said I'll look at it later. At the moment I'm running some tests in virtual machine. I want to see if the dot net updates change anything after 4.8 has already been installed. Then I'll install the updates prior to installing 4.8 and see if that makes a difference.
A. is not by dism but a standalone installer. B. is the actual one mentioned in the overview. I have no idea, i already mentioned arm64 never got .NDP48 on 1809. Not according to @abbodi1406 but it doesn't hurt to have it integrated. Win 10 can't handle the bundled ssu, win 11 should be able to handle the combined update. This was already mentioned here. Whatever you desire and fits your situation. UUP only provides updates you can use for updating the LTSC ISO. Atcually it doesn't use OSCDIMG for updating the ISO, as you were explained a couple of times before, OSCDIMG is for ISO creation. W10UI uses DISM to install/integrate the updates.
Yes I know, but why though. Wouldn't 17763.316/19044.1288 save you time because the cab files are already there? Whatever you desire and fits your situation. I didn't see LTSC listed anywhere on the UUP website, only standard enterprise and home versions. My bad
All three released Enterprise 2019 LTSC ISOs (17763.1/17763.107/17763.316) will get the same updates offered on WU/need the same updates to get uptodate.
That makes no sense, the high build numbers means already containing the lcu right? UUP or MS Catalog?
They contain an old LCU and that won't give you any advantage. For integration it's best using a .1 base image, as this will be the leanest in the end.
There's actually no proof a .1 base is always better. On the contrary, there are counter-examples where the base needs to be a minimal .xxxx so that every feature works correctly. Does not matter much what version the superseded components are or how many of them. In the end, the outcome is just as "clean". Plus Windows Update itself expects certain builds, and is actually tuned for the latest esd distribution (and when doing repairs, using the esd build is preferred over using the latest LCU-integrated one) . That said, most scripts around MDL, including uupdump stuff are tested more, hence optimized, for the naked .1 builds. So if you use MDL scripts, just follow the instructions to use .1 builds, don't experiment yourself.
Yes, and in the past (and when offline updating) it always was best to start with the baseline wim to integrate updates, specially for when FODs/LPs were integrated too, when done manually one would need to re-integrate the LCU after LPs were integrated but with W10UI that's automated anyway, hence the advise to use it. Can you give us an example of this scenario? I only know of (IoT) Enterprise 2021 LTSC, it's officially starting from 19044.1288 (not mentioning the stuff from the, what now has become, the "frankenbuild" thread).
Yes, it happens more on ltsc-and-above frankenbuilds since product policies gets involved and whatnot. Some editions get supported later on, as an afterthought Hit a brick couple times migrating features like refs, deduplication, even store and apps, that went trough when having the older (intermediary?) mums preset as well. It's less relevant now with modern versions, but you can still see warnings logged with package versions that happens to be precisely the ones from the esd release (neither .1, nor the integrated latest). And does not microsoft themselves author the MVS releases not from the .1 builds, looking at multiple session traces they leave behind? At least, not always. I might be wrong on this one, I have to admin I don't use MVS iso's much, I prefer to always start from the latest esd, then update via WU - it's a safeguard as well, since if WU fails, then the system is not in a good shape.
Aren't those traces left behind because they didn't properly cleanup their sysprepped ISOs? But afaik all are still once based on the initial .1 build.
Not just logs, WinSxS always felt more bloated with more past-versions in their refresh than the equivalent uupdump made for example. Did not do a hard-compare tough - I tend to bork those, remember the IoT vs. non-IoT LTSC I made - it was epic fail
That makes a lot of sense, but I would still like an example of specific feature or function not working due to this. Something that I could test in a virtual machine or something. Well that explains why W10UI is popular, but I have no need for language packs and LTSC doesn't use FOD. As with AveYo do you have an example of a pre updated ios such as .316 having problems? Something I could test in a virtual machine. I just wish to see this for myself is all.
The main feature chased for any "homebrew" is Windows Update. For me it's tied to the state of windows at particular times, in the context of doing both upgrades and downgrades across the whole windows 10 version range and their variable EoS times. LTSC-like or above while still retaining monthly LCU update proves quite difficult, specially when you also get greedy with de-bloating and server features on client or the other way around. Activation and edition support is a close-second, and then there's os integrity, repairing , defender and store apps. I had dolby support issues. I had .net framework issues. I had packages single-instancing (compact os +) issues - and those are common features, not the server-based. LCU-integrated from .1 images ever since EPs are a thing have simply been less forgiving for me - even without "tweaking" and only integrating updates, still randomly happens that the next LCU or the one after it to fail installing and that's such a waste of time. Most people around here tank it by always creating a new iso each month, so basically circumventing WU and doing perpetual repair-install. I do not enjoy that. My main devices are incrementally upgraded from base builds (latest esd) and I can count on one hand the times I had to do repair installs because of LCU failures in the last five years. I'm done chasing. You want reproducible bad scenarios? Tough luck. Just look at Windows Editions Reconstruction Project thread for a glimpse at the s**tshow of un-reproducible results - people there have gone hex-editing product policies level of losing it. If it was easy to reproduce, it would be documented, reported and probably fixed by now. There's no progress on that front with 11, and statistically, the number of LCU failing reports spiked. And no, MVS official refreshes are not perfect either. So again, stick with the recommended procedure as you've got all the testing already done for you. Or do like me and stop bothering with refreshing media yourself, and just manage WU.
Sorry for the late reply. Wow that sounds like a lot. My style of doing things is this. I have a hombrew version of Windows LTSC that I've updated and setup to the way I like it. I also have a clean version of LTSC that I can use to rebuild encase something goes wrong. Thing is I ever run Windows update once it's setup. If I get to a point where I think I need to update my system I build another iso from the clean one I have in storage. For LTSC 1809 I would keep a copy of 17763.1 and updated with the latest ssu, lcu, .NET 4.8 and that was it. No microcode or defender updates. In fact I would kill Defender though the registry because I can't have any security software running in the background with the kind of stuff I do with my computer It's never online during the setup phase and when everything has been setup and 3rd part software has been installed updated and expectations added; then and only then will I connect it to the internet. This habbit has worked flawlessly until one day Nvidia decided to only support DCH drivers. Now I must rebuild my homebrew OS and change it to make CDH drivers work correctly.
I know i will shoot myself in the foot because of this but what do you actually do with your computer?
Is it really that bad? I use my computer to internet proof as much software as I can. The idea being that the internet and DRM should never be required to make your software work.