I have an "old" windows seven install (home premium x64, installed the day it came out) + I regularly installed updates (like the zukona or george king ones, and now the ones from solor's website). I've made the "packageindex" reg file, but I can't put a mediafire link here (I don't have enough posts on my post count) nor send a MP (again: not enough posts^^) And I can't copy/paste here the contents of the reg file: I get a "message too long" error
Yes thats right, asssuming you are up to date with SoLoR's update list. The permanent link just lists the mediafire folder where the uninstaller and updater are lister, which then can be clicked on to download. The direct link just takes you straight to the download page.
I've been installing most of the updates. If the uninstaller can't find an update, does it just move on, or will it give an error? Also, in the list.txt file, are those the numbers of the updates that will be removed? Edit: It doesn't seem like the uninstaller is working for me. When I run the uninstaller, it just goes through all the updates very quickly, but all the updates are still installed. Also, when I try to check for updates, WU just hangs and does nothing, and when I try to view installed updates, it also hangs and does nothing.
Thanks Burfadel ! I've ran the uninstaller, rebooted, everything went fine but upon rebooting windows update prompted me to download and install three IE8-related updates: kb976662, kb2362765 and kb2360131 I've checked on solor's website and they are not yet obsolete, so I think that these three values have to be removed from the "list.txt" file.
Ah ok! sorry about that The updates were removed because I was forgetting when you install the ie9 beta it automatically removes those updates. The uninstaller has been rectified and reuploaded without the lines to remove the ie8 updates.
The installer for Windows update has been updated to version 2 (V2) Changes: Bugfixes and cosmetics The uninstaller has been updated to version 3 (v3). The version number is pertinent for the current release, so next release will have just the date but still contain all the changes. Changes: - The date of the list is now shown in the filename - A menu has been added with options to install, run the system file check utility, or for information. - A check has been added for wusa.exe and sfc.exe
SoLoR, I have a question for you: Recently I tried out a silent (updated) NET Framework 4 package for x86 only, but even though it shows up as installed, it didn't actually work. Well, as it turns out the package doesn't contain the KB958488 and KB979900 which is why it failed. BUT... shouldn't there be an update somewhere in your pack that represents those two updates mentioned above? I ask you because on page 11 of this thread amires says: Well, KB981429 can be found in your update log but not in my updates anymore. So is there yet another update that superseded 981429? Even if so, it apparently doesn't work to the extent that it will let me install the NET4 package that doesn't contain those original KB's (KB958488 and KB979900). So my question is, do I need to still install those older updates anyway, or *should* one of the superseded updates take their places? Even so, the Net4 pack didn't install properly... So I'm trying to figure this out but can't make sense of it. Thanks! EDIT: I just noticed in your "Additions" folder that KB958488 is still there. Is this what I need then? If so, what about 979900? Sorry to bother you with this EDIT2: btw, kb979900 doesn't apply to my system for some reason. That's what it says when I try to install it. So only kb958488 installs, and it looks like this is what I need to be able to use those updated NET install packages. It was just when I read Amires' comments about 958488 being superseded that I thought I might already have the newer update in my collection. So will it hurt to install 958488 I guess is what I'm asking?
Yes KB958488 should be moved out of additions in to regular updates when it was released as KB982526... ill fix it next time ill be updating repo. About KB981429 most components of that update gets superseeded by later update as well. Also afaik only thing needed for .net framework is KB958488, so if you intergrate this with dism you should be probably able to silent install .net 4.0 because then it wont ask for reboot and probably thats why it fails... .net 4.0 is crap btw... i wouldnt be suprised if you wouldnt be able to install .net4 + hotfixes without reboot and things like that...
Thanks for your take on that, SoLoR. As for NET4 being crap, it may very well be. The only reason I even install it is so I can install Expression Web (Frontpage replacer -- but they can be run side by side on a system), and I think one other app that I install requires it. The previous package of NET4 updated (a silent installer that works on both x86 and x64) did not require a restart for it to work, which is how I realized something was wrong with the latest x86-only updated NET4 I tried off RyanVM. And yes it turned out the x86-x64 package I had been using previously included the KB958488 inside its archive (!) so that's why that one was working for me as it should. They new x86 only NET4 updated that I tried now works after installing 958488 so that's what caused my problem earlier. Thanks for clarifying, I learned something
Hm i need to clarify i dont think .net 4.0 is crap, i think it has crappy instalation and hotfix process... i dont know why they couldnt just go with .msus, but i guess because this way they can make universal installer/patcher for all OSes... lazy MS!
Oh, OK Yeah, I don't know why they do it like this either, but I guess that's why I'm seeing so many custom updated packs around as people get tired of having to do it manually and in a cumbersome way.
Why not to actually add updates for each month into seperate folder? And the bonus in one zipfolder? Updatemap >June x86 > Bonus >July > Bonus etc
because thats impossible with officaly released hotfixes... they release them randomly and not month by month... for example on one day they can release hotfix from current month, a month ago or even few months back.