WinXP 'Windows Updates'

John Corliss

John Corliss wrote:
> Bob F wrote:
>> Paul wrote:
>>>
>>> When an Internet Explorer patch arrives in January, the same
>>> thing will happen. Long delay on Windows Update. Simply, track
>>> down the Jan.2014 Internet Explorer update, install it separately,
>>> and the long delay will be gone again. You can then open
>>> Windows Update and finish the other Jan.2014 patches.
>>>
>>> While a Microsoft manager claims they've "put the right staff on it
>>> and will fix it", I'm expecting a "sit on my hands" behavior until
>>> April 2014. Causing all sorts of grief for people attempting to
>>> clean install their WinXP later than April 2014, and so on.
>>> It would just be Microsoft's way of "encouraging you to update".
>>>
>>> We'll see whether my cynical speculation pans out or not :-)
>
> I share that exact cynicism.
>
>> Is there really a way to gather up all updates to have on hand to keep XP
>> machines running when MS stops making updates available? I've used the
>> WSUSoffline program, but that seems to get a pretty limited subset of
>> updates, and seems unreliable in it's ability to install the ones it
>> downloads? I found plenty of updates that show the KB# in the downloaded
>> library, but the installer cannot find them.
>
> You should have all the updates that you've installed on a particular
> machine backed up in the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. Each
> update folder contains a subfolder named "update" with an update.exe
> file in it. If you copy that folder to a DVD or whatever,

....by which I meant the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. On my
system, that folder is currently 874 MB (916,549,677 bytes) in size.
YMMV though of course, depending on whether or not you've allowed MS to
install everything they want to put on your system. I did not allow them
to do that, eg. any dotnet version newer than 2.0, ANY driver updates
(they always, *always* mess things up when I download driver updates
from MS for some reason), Bing desktop, various search modules, etc.

> you can have it on hand for that particular machine. Then it would
> probably only be a matter of installing the updates in the order in
> which they were originally. You can use a Nirsoft utility named
> "WinUpdatesList":
>
> http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/wul.html
>
> to provide you with a list of that order. Run that program and then
> click on "View" and then "HTML Report - All Items".

You can convert the generated report to .rtf (there are various methods
for doing this) and then print it out to use as a reference or simply
save the webpage and put it on a thumb drive for future reference. So
far, the only problem I've run into with my idea is that XP doesn't
always write the installation date for an update into the registry. This
is usually dotnet updates though (the updates starting with "M" instead
of "KB".) Often, installing an update is dependent upon another update
already having been installed. This could cause problems so it's very
important to install the updates in the correct sequence.

You can also get a list of the updates you've installed by going to the
MS update website using IE, then click on "Review your update history".
After loading that list, click on "Print All" in the upper right hand
corner. If, like me, you have a print-to-pdf printer driver installed (I
recommend doPDF at http://www.dopdf.com/) you can print the list to a
..pdf file. I just did this and it works nicely.

The next question then, of course, would be to ask "is this list
complete?" and from what I can see, it isn't. It appears that MS only
lists about roughly a quarter of the updates I see in the
C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ folder. Not sure why they do this, it might be that
they only list updates which haven't been superceded by others.

> Note: I've never done it this way, but I don't see why it shouldn't
> work. If I'm wrong, I hope somebody in this thread will point out what
> the problem with my idea is.

--
John Corliss

John Corliss

John Corliss wrote:
> John Corliss wrote:
>> Bob F wrote:
>>> Paul wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When an Internet Explorer patch arrives in January, the same
>>>> thing will happen. Long delay on Windows Update. Simply, track
>>>> down the Jan.2014 Internet Explorer update, install it separately,
>>>> and the long delay will be gone again. You can then open
>>>> Windows Update and finish the other Jan.2014 patches.
>>>>
>>>> While a Microsoft manager claims they've "put the right staff on it
>>>> and will fix it", I'm expecting a "sit on my hands" behavior until
>>>> April 2014. Causing all sorts of grief for people attempting to
>>>> clean install their WinXP later than April 2014, and so on.
>>>> It would just be Microsoft's way of "encouraging you to update".
>>>>
>>>> We'll see whether my cynical speculation pans out or not :-)
>>
>> I share that exact cynicism.
>>
>>> Is there really a way to gather up all updates to have on hand to
>>> keep XP
>>> machines running when MS stops making updates available? I've used the
>>> WSUSoffline program, but that seems to get a pretty limited subset of
>>> updates, and seems unreliable in it's ability to install the ones it
>>> downloads? I found plenty of updates that show the KB# in the downloaded
>>> library, but the installer cannot find them.
>>
>> You should have all the updates that you've installed on a particular
>> machine backed up in the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. Each
>> update folder contains a subfolder named "update" with an update.exe
>> file in it. If you copy that folder to a DVD or whatever,
>
> ...by which I meant the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. On my
> system, that folder is currently 874 MB (916,549,677 bytes) in size.
> YMMV though of course, depending on whether or not you've allowed MS to
> install everything they want to put on your system. I did not allow them
> to do that, eg. any dotnet version newer than 2.0, ANY driver updates
> (they always, *always* mess things up when I download driver updates
> from MS for some reason), Bing desktop, various search modules, etc.
>
>> you can have it on hand for that particular machine. Then it would
>> probably only be a matter of installing the updates in the order in
>> which they were originally. You can use a Nirsoft utility named
>> "WinUpdatesList":
>>
>> http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/wul.html
>>
>> to provide you with a list of that order. Run that program and then
>> click on "View" and then "HTML Report - All Items".
>
> You can convert the generated report to .rtf (there are various methods
> for doing this) and then print it out to use as a reference or simply
> save the webpage and put it on a thumb drive for future reference. So
> far, the only problem I've run into with my idea is that XP doesn't
> always write the installation date for an update into the registry. This
> is usually dotnet updates though (the updates starting with "M" instead
> of "KB".) Often, installing an update is dependent upon another update
> already having been installed. This could cause problems so it's very
> important to install the updates in the correct sequence.
>
> You can also get a list of the updates you've installed by going to the
> MS update website using IE, then click on "Review your update history".
> After loading that list, click on "Print All" in the upper right hand
> corner. If, like me, you have a print-to-pdf printer driver installed (I
> recommend doPDF at http://www.dopdf.com/) you can print the list to a
> .pdf file. I just did this and it works nicely.
>
> The next question then, of course, would be to ask "is this list
> complete?" and from what I can see, it isn't. It appears that MS only
> lists about roughly a quarter of the updates I see in the
> C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ folder. Not sure why they do this, it might be that
> they only list updates which haven't been superceded by others.
>
>> Note: I've never done it this way, but I don't see why it shouldn't
>> work. If I'm wrong, I hope somebody in this thread will point out what

You can also get the order the updates were installed by looking at the
"Date Created" column in the original C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ folder. It
even gives the time.

--
John Corliss

Henry

John Corliss wrote:
> John Corliss wrote:
>
>> John Corliss wrote:
>>
>>> Bob F wrote:
>>>
>>>> Paul wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When an Internet Explorer patch arrives in January, the same
>>>>> thing will happen. Long delay on Windows Update. Simply, track
>>>>> down the Jan.2014 Internet Explorer update, install it separately,
>>>>> and the long delay will be gone again. You can then open
>>>>> Windows Update and finish the other Jan.2014 patches.
>>>>>
>>>>> While a Microsoft manager claims they've "put the right staff on it
>>>>> and will fix it", I'm expecting a "sit on my hands" behavior until
>>>>> April 2014. Causing all sorts of grief for people attempting to
>>>>> clean install their WinXP later than April 2014, and so on.
>>>>> It would just be Microsoft's way of "encouraging you to update".
>>>>>
>>>>> We'll see whether my cynical speculation pans out or not :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> I share that exact cynicism.
>>>
>>>> Is there really a way to gather up all updates to have on hand to
>>>> keep XP
>>>> machines running when MS stops making updates available? I've used the
>>>> WSUSoffline program, but that seems to get a pretty limited subset of
>>>> updates, and seems unreliable in it's ability to install the ones it
>>>> downloads? I found plenty of updates that show the KB# in the
>>>> downloaded
>>>> library, but the installer cannot find them.
>>>
>>>
>>> You should have all the updates that you've installed on a particular
>>> machine backed up in the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. Each
>>> update folder contains a subfolder named "update" with an update.exe
>>> file in it. If you copy that folder to a DVD or whatever,
>>
>>
>> ...by which I meant the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. On my
>> system, that folder is currently 874 MB (916,549,677 bytes) in size.
>> YMMV though of course, depending on whether or not you've allowed MS to
>> install everything they want to put on your system. I did not allow them
>> to do that, eg. any dotnet version newer than 2.0, ANY driver updates
>> (they always, *always* mess things up when I download driver updates
>> from MS for some reason), Bing desktop, various search modules, etc.
>>
>>> you can have it on hand for that particular machine. Then it would
>>> probably only be a matter of installing the updates in the order in
>>> which they were originally. You can use a Nirsoft utility named
>>> "WinUpdatesList":
>>>
>>> http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/wul.html
>>>
>>> to provide you with a list of that order. Run that program and then
>>> click on "View" and then "HTML Report - All Items".
>>
>>
>> You can convert the generated report to .rtf (there are various methods
>> for doing this) and then print it out to use as a reference or simply
>> save the webpage and put it on a thumb drive for future reference. So
>> far, the only problem I've run into with my idea is that XP doesn't
>> always write the installation date for an update into the registry. This
>> is usually dotnet updates though (the updates starting with "M" instead
>> of "KB".) Often, installing an update is dependent upon another update
>> already having been installed. This could cause problems so it's very
>> important to install the updates in the correct sequence.
>>
>> You can also get a list of the updates you've installed by going to the
>> MS update website using IE, then click on "Review your update history".
>> After loading that list, click on "Print All" in the upper right hand
>> corner. If, like me, you have a print-to-pdf printer driver installed (I
>> recommend doPDF at http://www.dopdf.com/) you can print the list to a
>> .pdf file. I just did this and it works nicely.
>>
>> The next question then, of course, would be to ask "is this list
>> complete?" and from what I can see, it isn't. It appears that MS only
>> lists about roughly a quarter of the updates I see in the
>> C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ folder. Not sure why they do this, it might be that
>> they only list updates which haven't been superceded by others.
>>
>>> Note: I've never done it this way, but I don't see why it shouldn't
>>> work. If I'm wrong, I hope somebody in this thread will point out what
>
>
> You can also get the order the updates were installed by looking at the
> "Date Created" column in the original C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ folder. It
> even gives the time.
>
My $hf_mig$ folder only goes through 5/14/13. Where are the rest of them please?

Bruce Hagen

"John Corliss" <q34wsk20@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:TKWdnbnX8JruZSLPnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@posted.ccoun trynet...
> Bruce Hagen wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:
>>> Bruce Hagen wrote:
>>>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The WinXP Windows Updates seem to have been given the lowest priority.
>>>> If manually searching for updates, it sure does take a
>>>> loooooooooooooooong time.
>>>>
>>>> Download this update manually then restart the PC. It should make WU/MU
>>>> run smooth after that. It did for me.
>>>> Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 8 for Windows XP
>>>> (KB2898785)
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl....aspx?id=41404
>>>
>>> Bruce, thanks very much. I was having a problem updating too and as
>>> the others have said, this fixed the problem.
>>
>> You're welcome.
>
> Bruce, Paul (in this discussion) has said the following:
>
> "If you can guess at what the KB is of the latest Internet Explorer
> security patch, you can download that patch separately. Once
> installed, your Internet Explorer version is up to date.
>
> The very next attempt to reach Windows Update, because it has
> no need to burrow into all the old Internet Explorer information,
> wuauserv finishes its job in ten to fifteen seconds.
>
> When an Internet Explorer patch arrives in January, the same
> thing will happen. Long delay on Windows Update. Simply, track
> down the Jan.2014 Internet Explorer update, install it separately,
> and the long delay will be gone again. You can then open
> Windows Update and finish the other Jan.2014 patches."
>
> I don't run Automatic Updates on my XP MCE SP3 computer, do it manually
> every couple of weeks or so. My question would be then, how does one guess
> at what the KB name of the next Internet Explorer 8 security patch so as
> to be able to download and install it before attempting to update one's
> system? Or is there a way to find that update which is easier?
>
> TIA
>


I have my machines set to notify, but not install. When the patches are
released on January 14, they will all be labeled and finding the IE patch
will be easy. Only 3 more updates after that.
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP 2004 ~ 2010
Imperial Beach, CA

Paul

John Corliss wrote:
> Bruce Hagen wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:
>>> Bruce Hagen wrote:
>>>> David H. Lipman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The WinXP Windows Updates seem to have been given the lowest priority.
>>>> If manually searching for updates, it sure does take a
>>>> loooooooooooooooong time.
>>>>
>>>> Download this update manually then restart the PC. It should make WU/MU
>>>> run smooth after that. It did for me.
>>>> Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 8 for Windows XP
>>>> (KB2898785)
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl....aspx?id=41404
>>>
>>> Bruce, thanks very much. I was having a problem updating too and as
>>> the others have said, this fixed the problem.
>>
>> You're welcome.
>
> Bruce, Paul (in this discussion) has said the following:
>
> "If you can guess at what the KB is of the latest Internet Explorer
> security patch, you can download that patch separately. Once
> installed, your Internet Explorer version is up to date.
>
> The very next attempt to reach Windows Update, because it has
> no need to burrow into all the old Internet Explorer information,
> wuauserv finishes its job in ten to fifteen seconds.
>
> When an Internet Explorer patch arrives in January, the same
> thing will happen. Long delay on Windows Update. Simply, track
> down the Jan.2014 Internet Explorer update, install it separately,
> and the long delay will be gone again. You can then open
> Windows Update and finish the other Jan.2014 patches."
>
> I don't run Automatic Updates on my XP MCE SP3 computer, do it manually
> every couple of weeks or so. My question would be then, how does one
> guess at what the KB name of the next Internet Explorer 8 security patch
> so as to be able to download and install it before attempting to update
> one's system? Or is there a way to find that update which is easier?
>
> TIA
>

Well, you know it's a Catch 22.

I made the suggestion, as a means to state what the
"most efficient" solution would be. Can we know
using ESP, what the KB number of the January release
of IE Cumulative Security Update will be ?

One of the MVPs, seemed to have advanced warning of
incoming updates, implying the "numbers" of the
updates were available, somewhere. As for me
personally, I just "Google and hope for the best".
I have no "guaranteed good source" of info. I'm not
an insider.

Some of the security institutions (SANS institute),
may have notices concerning IE issues and have an
MS security bulletin number. So there may be
scraps of information floating around.

But if you rely on Windows Update to "fetch" the
information, then we have to wait the "30 minutes
plus, running at 100% CPU" to get the KB number.
Surely not a good way to get the KB number :-)

If Google gives you the number, then great.
If not, be patient, and sit on your hands for
30 minutes, until WU "coughs up the number". Argh!

Paul

John Corliss

Henry wrote:
> John Corliss wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:
>>> John Corliss wrote:
>>>> Bob F wrote:
>>>>> Paul wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When an Internet Explorer patch arrives in January, the same
>>>>>> thing will happen. Long delay on Windows Update. Simply, track
>>>>>> down the Jan.2014 Internet Explorer update, install it separately,
>>>>>> and the long delay will be gone again. You can then open
>>>>>> Windows Update and finish the other Jan.2014 patches.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While a Microsoft manager claims they've "put the right staff on it
>>>>>> and will fix it", I'm expecting a "sit on my hands" behavior until
>>>>>> April 2014. Causing all sorts of grief for people attempting to
>>>>>> clean install their WinXP later than April 2014, and so on.
>>>>>> It would just be Microsoft's way of "encouraging you to update".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We'll see whether my cynical speculation pans out or not :-)
>>>>
>>>> I share that exact cynicism.
>>>>
>>>>> Is there really a way to gather up all updates to have on hand to
>>>>> keep XP
>>>>> machines running when MS stops making updates available? I've used the
>>>>> WSUSoffline program, but that seems to get a pretty limited subset of
>>>>> updates, and seems unreliable in it's ability to install the ones it
>>>>> downloads? I found plenty of updates that show the KB# in the
>>>>> downloaded
>>>>> library, but the installer cannot find them.
>>>>
>>>> You should have all the updates that you've installed on a particular
>>>> machine backed up in the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. Each
>>>> update folder contains a subfolder named "update" with an update.exe
>>>> file in it. If you copy that folder to a DVD or whatever,
>>>
>>> ...by which I meant the C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ hidden system folder. On my
>>> system, that folder is currently 874 MB (916,549,677 bytes) in size.
>>> YMMV though of course, depending on whether or not you've allowed MS to
>>> install everything they want to put on your system. I did not allow them
>>> to do that, eg. any dotnet version newer than 2.0, ANY driver updates
>>> (they always, *always* mess things up when I download driver updates
>>> from MS for some reason), Bing desktop, various search modules, etc.
>>>
>>>> you can have it on hand for that particular machine. Then it would
>>>> probably only be a matter of installing the updates in the order in
>>>> which they were originally. You can use a Nirsoft utility named
>>>> "WinUpdatesList":
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/wul.html
>>>>
>>>> to provide you with a list of that order. Run that program and then
>>>> click on "View" and then "HTML Report - All Items".
>>>
>>>
>>> You can convert the generated report to .rtf (there are various methods
>>> for doing this) and then print it out to use as a reference or simply
>>> save the webpage and put it on a thumb drive for future reference. So
>>> far, the only problem I've run into with my idea is that XP doesn't
>>> always write the installation date for an update into the registry. This
>>> is usually dotnet updates though (the updates starting with "M" instead
>>> of "KB".) Often, installing an update is dependent upon another update
>>> already having been installed. This could cause problems so it's very
>>> important to install the updates in the correct sequence.
>>>
>>> You can also get a list of the updates you've installed by going to the
>>> MS update website using IE, then click on "Review your update history".
>>> After loading that list, click on "Print All" in the upper right hand
>>> corner. If, like me, you have a print-to-pdf printer driver installed (I
>>> recommend doPDF at http://www.dopdf.com/) you can print the list to a
>>> .pdf file. I just did this and it works nicely.
>>>
>>> The next question then, of course, would be to ask "is this list
>>> complete?" and from what I can see, it isn't. It appears that MS only
>>> lists about roughly a quarter of the updates I see in the
>>> C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ folder. Not sure why they do this, it might be that
>>> they only list updates which haven't been superceded by others.
>>>
>>>> Note: I've never done it this way, but I don't see why it shouldn't
>>>> work. If I'm wrong, I hope somebody in this thread will point out what
>>
>> You can also get the order the updates were installed by looking at
>> the "Date Created" column in the original C:\Windows\$hf_mig$ folder.
>> It even gives the time.
>>
> My $hf_mig$ folder only goes through 5/14/13. Where are the rest of
> them please?

Yep, you're right. Mine is the same way, so I guess my suggestion is
only a partial solution at best. IIRC, that folder contains updates
which can be affected by other updates. "Its name $hf_mig$ stands for
'Hotfix Migration'. It's for tracking versioning information about
hotfixes to keep from accidentally breaking or downgrading your system."

Maybe the best thing to do at this point is to do a format and reinstall
of the hard drive, then redo all the updates. *Groan*.

Either that, or simply make an iso of your hard drive if it's running
well at this point, and then back that iso up on safe media.

I've been removing the KB folders from the Windows folder all along in
order to save space. Maybe that wasn't such a great idea after all.

My update history isn't complete at the Microsoft update website because
somewhere along the line, I was switched from the Windows Update website
to the Microsoft Update website. That came about maybe because I'm
running XP MCE SP3. So now, I don't even have a way to find out which
updates I'd need to rathole for this computer.

--
John Corliss

Motor T

>
> My update history isn't complete at the Microsoft update website
> because somewhere along the line, I was switched from the Windows
> Update website to the Microsoft Update website. That came about maybe
> because I'm running XP MCE SP3. So now, I don't even have a way to
> find out which updates I'd need to rathole for this computer.

Will a Belarc Advisor profile tell you which one's you have currently
installed? (Even though you deleted the listings from the Windows
folder).


--
Ed Mc
Nam Vet '66-'67
Semper Fi

John Corliss

Motor T wrote:
>
>>
>> My update history isn't complete at the Microsoft update website
>> because somewhere along the line, I was switched from the Windows
>> Update website to the Microsoft Update website. That came about maybe
>> because I'm running XP MCE SP3. So now, I don't even have a way to
>> find out which updates I'd need to rathole for this computer.
>
> Will a Belarc Advisor profile tell you which one's you have
> currently installed? (Even though you deleted the listings from the
> Windows folder).

Sorry, I don't use that particular program. I use several others though,
one of which is WinAudit:

http://www.pxserver.com/WinAudit.htm

I just ran it and it provides what looks like a nice list of all the
updates that are installed along with the dates they were installed.

--
John Corliss

Henry

John Corliss wrote:

> Motor T wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> My update history isn't complete at the Microsoft update website
>>> because somewhere along the line, I was switched from the Windows
>>> Update website to the Microsoft Update website. That came about maybe
>>> because I'm running XP MCE SP3. So now, I don't even have a way to
>>> find out which updates I'd need to rathole for this computer.
>>
>>
>> Will a Belarc Advisor profile tell you which one's you have
>> currently installed? (Even though you deleted the listings from the
>> Windows folder).
>
>
> Sorry, I don't use that particular program. I use several others though,
> one of which is WinAudit:
>
> http://www.pxserver.com/WinAudit.htm
>
> I just ran it and it provides what looks like a nice list of all the
> updates that are installed along with the dates they were installed.
>

What a neat program. Thanks. Henry

Henry

John Corliss wrote:

> Motor T wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> My update history isn't complete at the Microsoft update website
>>> because somewhere along the line, I was switched from the Windows
>>> Update website to the Microsoft Update website. That came about maybe
>>> because I'm running XP MCE SP3. So now, I don't even have a way to
>>> find out which updates I'd need to rathole for this computer.
>>
>>
>> Will a Belarc Advisor profile tell you which one's you have
>> currently installed? (Even though you deleted the listings from the
>> Windows folder).
>
>
> Sorry, I don't use that particular program. I use several others though,
> one of which is WinAudit:
>
> http://www.pxserver.com/WinAudit.htm
>
> I just ran it and it provides what looks like a nice list of all the
> updates that are installed along with the dates they were installed.
>
AIDA32 and AIDA64 will also show your updates. Google them. Henry