The Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 SP1 Redistributable Package (x64) is newer than the Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 RTM Redistributable MFC Security Update (x64). The security update internally has files dated January, and the SP1 redist has files internally dated late February, so the SP1 redist should include the security updates. With the redists, don't forget to do both x86 and x64 versions, and to download the x86 and x64 versions for 2005, 2008, and 2010! The reason why you need both is 32-bit programmes use the 32-bit redists, and 64-bit programmes use the x64 redist. 32-bit computers only need the 32-bit redists because they can't run 64-bit programmes! x64 computers require the 32-bit redists because 32-bit programmes can't call 64-bit dll's etc (which the runtime is).
There suppose to be few more updates avilable according to KB database + and updated WAT however for now when you want to request hotfix they are not there...
Is there any progress/update concerning this yet? I've read the LDR vs GDR updates posts here and there, but must confess I always get lost somewhere along the way in understanding it. But from what I gather we would be better off when integrating the updates when updates of a certain branch are applied before updates of another branch, as to be 'more up to date' in the end. Is there a script possible that would force this, or how does that work. Thanks...
Well, the idea is to install LDR updates whenever they are available because they are cumulative and contains most up to date version of files versus GDR which only contains security fixes. ricktendo64 posted a modfied version of burfadel's script on post #1402 that can accomplish this. I tried it and it worked perfectly. I have even omitted updates listed in orange on SOLOR list as they are not needed with this method.
did you try to do this with mounted image? im constantly geting errors edit: i think i figured it out why im geting errors.... 7z does not decompress majority of .cabs correctly im trying now with expand.
You need to edit the script, find the lines with dism commands and put the correct folder for your mounted image in there. No other change is necessary. Also make sure you run the script as admin. You also need to have Windows AIK for Windows 7 installed on your system. These are the lines I am talking about (replace C:\Mount with the correct folder for your mounted image) : Code: %z%"%programfiles%\windows aik\tools\%PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE%\servicing\dism" /image:C:\mount /add-package /packagepath:%temp%\cabtemp\qfeldr\update-bf.mum /packagepath:%temp%\cabtemp\qfeldr\update.mum >>%userprofile%\desktop\log.txt %z%"%programfiles%\windows aik\tools\%PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE%\servicing\dism" /image:C:\mount /add-package /packagepath:%temp%\cabtemp\qfeldr\update.mum >>%userprofile%\desktop\log.txt
Well im not using that script i have my own "iso maker" and that one didnt work as it should since i was using 7z command line unpacker instead of expand. now ill think about if i would remove those "orange" updates compleatly...
Well I just made a new DVD ISO using the mentioned script and I removed orange updates. I am going to test it in vmware tonight. Populating list of installed updates with /Get-Packages switch of dism showed that all LDR updates are there. Also could you please share your iso maker with us, sounds interesting.
I noticed that too, its not the first time it has happened! Same thing has happened in the past with XP and Vista hotfix requests. Its just like those Office 2010 updates that were missing last year... If anyone has issues doing this, particularly with specific updates, let me know.
@burfadel, thanks for all the hard work you are doing on your script. Looking forward for direct integration support in your future versions. Actually I manually integrated IE9, KB974405 and fmapi and then used modified script by ricktendo64 to integrate the rest. It worked flawlessly.
It was actualy something that someone else started on this forums (cant rememeber who exactly), then i started to modify it to suit me... ill share once i test this new intergrating hotfix method (so i guess in a day or two ).
I'm also quite willing to include a script in the installer if it works better/more consistently, of course referring to the author of that script, and if its okay with that author!
Also it seems if there is update-bf.mum integrating update.mum seems pointless. Im half way thru integrating all hotfixes in to install DVD for now without any issues and i dont integrate update.mum if there is update-bf.mum.
I thought so too but its not pointless, do it and let me know if MU asks you to reinstall any hotfixes