Upon further analysis, I'm seeing that the Windows10.0-KB5041582-x64.cab in the MSU file contains the following: SSU-19041.4840-x64.cab toc.xml update.cat update.mum Windows10.0-KB5041582-x64.cab The UUPDump Windows10.0-KB5041582-x64.cab file contains the following: cabinet.cablist.ini Cab_1_for_KB5041582_PSFX.cab Cab_2_for_KB5041582_PSFX.cab update.cat update.mum So the Windows10.0-KB5041582-x64.cab in the MCU embeds another file with the same name as itself, along with another copy of the SSU. From a coherent coding perspective, it doesn't make any sense to have two Windows10.0-KB5041582-x64.cab files with different content, one embedded inside the other. It's like playing with Chinese boxes. But it would probably make sense to someone who works at MSFT. Nonsense to me.
That's been the case since they decided to combine SSU with LCU for Windows 10 1809+ there were not releasing .msu files through uupdump, until Win11 arrived and yes, the Windows 10 LCU msu from UUP is different and does not include SSU
It has been so long since I disassembled an MSU, that I forgot that some of the LCU cabs might have an SSU in them! I got reminded about that today when I took apart the MSU and CABs. Thanks for reminding me about that.
They are not. Another .cab just included the identical cab, that does not make the outer cab identical to it, and that was it all about. I don't think common sense means ignoring of detailed technical facts. Even lesser in a technical forum. Least from someone who publicize all these files here. Uploading an ISO with only changed image- name and post it here, would against forum rules. It is a customized ISO then. Even if its installing the exactly same windows, it is still different ISO, what has a different Hash-value. You can't come and say "those ISOs are identical, you ignore common sense." - They are not. Simple as that.
@donmiller was the actual one who helped you, Enthousiast just said "find out yourself", not really that big help.
It was about lcu cab, not about lcu+ssu combined cab Lcu cabs are identical and it was like this for a lot of years If you can't see the difference then you are as ignorant as him
Then I read it wrong, ...or better say, miller wrote it wrong, mentioned LCU-Only while meaning (and posting the hashes of) the combined one. Edit: Yes I figured, he wrote it wrong, but that still does not change the thing that the combined is not identical. This is technically wrong, too. It giving me headaches either that they packed the cab with the same name within it. Why not giving it the name of what it actual is..
The CAB NAMES are identical. The CAB content is different for the two CABS with the same name. You didn't say that the second cab, with the same name, was embedded in the first cab, and needed to be extracted. I'm sorry that explaining this was a challenge for you. You could have explained this better. 'No need to be insulting.
it has been like this for a ton of years so I never thought I should explain it in detail, and besides, you got correct answer here https://forums.mydigitallife.net/posts/1849979