Simple question about nLite and hot fix install order

[Bob Jones]

Quick question I have about using nLite and I have not yet found a good answer.

I have all my hot fixes and updates in folders corresponding to their criticality: Critical, Non-Critical, Install if needed, etc. The simple question is if I slipstream XP with all critical hot fixes and then later decide to slipstream the non-critical, is nLite sophisticated enough to know if a subsequent non-critical hot fix has files that are older than what was already applied and NOT apply them?

In other words, can I incrementally slipstream like this or is it recommended to install all of them at the same time and nLite will take care of everything all at once?

I don't want to slipstream and then find out I forgot something and apply a hot fix or update that's actually older than what I've already applied.

Anyone have the simple answer?

Thanks!

Bob

[slipk487]

as far as i know when using nlite to integrate hotfixes it will only update the corresponding files is the hotfix has a newer version of the file then the windows source.

[Legolash2o]

You can add all the hotfixes (critcal, non-critical, etc..) you have and if you click on "Build Date" at the top it will re-arrange them but make sure you put the oldest at the top.

Also if you have SP2 already integrated make sure your not integrating anything older than SP2.

Doing the above 2 simple methods will ensure everything will be updated correctly

Edited August 27, 2007 by legolash2o

[Bob Jones]

You can add all the hotfixes (critcal, non-critical, etc..) you have and if you click on "Build Date" at the top it will re-arrange them but make sure you put the oldest at the top.

Thanks for the suggestion. Assuming I am using all the hot fixes as I originally downloaded them, this should pretty much take care of them all relative to each other. However, is it possible that, if I re-downloaded one for some reason, it might have a newer build date than it originally had and thus get mis-coordinated against all the other hot fixes?

Perhaps the best thing to do would be to take my list of all hot fixes, critical, non-critical, etc. and just go re-download them all tonight and that should give all the hot fixes the latest date they could possibly have and then apply them all at the same time and not do some now and some later.

It would be so nice if Microsoft would provide a foolproof way to know the absolute install order of all hot fixes since you can't go by KB number or even the date on the file as downloaded. I am not 100% sure that build date is foolproof either, but I guess if that Build Date is internal to the package, nLite should be able to handle it.

I'll see what happens.

Thanks for the help,

Bob

[Legolash2o]

You can add all the hotfixes (critcal, non-critical, etc..) you have and if you click on "Build Date" at the top it will re-arrange them but make sure you put the oldest at the top.

Thanks for the suggestion. Assuming I am using all the hot fixes as I originally downloaded them, this should pretty much take care of them all relative to each other. However, is it possible that, if I re-downloaded one for some reason, it might have a newer build date than it originally had and thus get mis-coordinated against all the other hot fixes?

Perhaps the best thing to do would be to take my list of all hot fixes, critical, non-critical, etc. and just go re-download them all tonight and that should give all the hot fixes the latest date they could possibly have and then apply them all at the same time and not do some now and some later.

It would be so nice if Microsoft would provide a foolproof way to know the absolute install order of all hot fixes since you can't go by KB number or even the date on the file as downloaded. I am not 100% sure that build date is foolproof either, but I guess if that Build Date is internal to the package, nLite should be able to handle it.

I'll see what happens.

Thanks for the help,

Bob

as far as i know when using nlite to integrate hotfixes it will only update the corresponding files is the hotfix has a newer version of the file then the windows source.

if you do it by build date it will work fine, ive always done it, and with the info slipk487 said... you can't go wrong. but if its a major update i.e Internet Explorer 7, Windows Media Player 10/11, etc.. then integrate them first otherwise you will have problems.

[Frankenputer]

Are you saying that you should place IE7 Addon and WMP 10(or 11) addon first in the list then, say, RyanVM's post SP2 update pack and then fixes that came after the update pack?

[Legolash2o]

i ALWAYS integrate IE7 seperatly, but just do the following below lol.

1. Arrange everything by build date

2. IE7 at very top - If your not integrating IE7 then skip this step

3. Move you apps to the top (WMP 10/11, any integrated applications really)

4. RyanVM's Pack

5. Rest of updates

Edited August 28, 2007 by legolash2o

[Frankenputer]

Thanks for the information.

I actually didn't mean to include IE7. I was planning on installing that separately like you recommend.

I was going to do it in this order.

DX 9c Addon

WMP 10 Addon

RyanVM's pack

Hotfixes since RyanVM's pack.

[GrofLuigi]

IE7 and WMP aside.

I'm curious who started this "sort by date" nonsense.

I have rarely encountered cases where a higher KB number has a lower version of a particular file (dll, exe... from now on, let's say we're talking about dlls, but same goes for all OS files that can have version numbers).

Three exceptions:

- If it's in the form of WindowsXP-KBxxxxxx-Vx-x86-ENU.exe (but I still think it doesn't change the version number of the dll between V2 and V3, for example).

- If it's speciffic hotfix you want to exclude (examples: multiprocessor patch, update.sys).

- If it's all new support that it adds (examples: SD Card, Remote Desktop higher version) (But in that case the order still doesn't matter).

This goes both for official and unofficial ones. I've unpacked nearly every hotfix before installing.

Additional protection: Nlite asks you if you want to overwrite newer file with older, if it encounters such a situation. If you answer correctly, you could install hotfixes in reverse order, if you want to (at least in theory).

Regular installation of hotfixes on live Windows doesn't even ask you, it never overwrites newer files with older ones.

GL

* edit * Forgot to add the point -> sort by name

* another edit * -> third exception

Edited August 28, 2007 by GrofLuigi

[Legolash2o]

I'm curious who started this "sort by date" nonsense.

I think it was nuhi

Normally, i just add them and don't sort them and it ends up being fine, but i still integrate IE7 & WMP seperate before the rest of the updates, just to be sure. (Integrate to the untouched ISO).

Then as new updates are released i can just add them to the previous ISO (with nothing removed etc...) so my main ISO becomes up-to-date. And everytime i use nLite its always with a fresh ISO (unless im doing the nlite XP > Test > Remove more method).

Edited August 28, 2007 by legolash2o

[Bob Jones]

Uh oh. Two different answers (sort of) that essentially say to worry about chronological order (which is what I am concerned about in the first place) and not to worry about it as nLite will not overwrite newer files with older.

I have a feeling that nLite will (provided I check the box) not overwrite newer with older files so I should be ok by simply selecting all the hot fixes I have and just letting it go. OR, applying some now and some later if I forget them. Which is what I am pretty much trying to confirm.

It's all about "feeling good" about the process as well as getting an end result I don't have to worry about being incorrectly slipstreamed.

Sounds like nLite can handle all at once or some now and some later though it's probably best to just do everything I have in one pass.

BUT I think it's a good idea to periodically re-download hot fixes so that, if any did change for some reason, you have the latest and greatest for all of them to work with and, hopefully, not go wrong.

Again, thank you for the clarifications.

Bob

[Legolash2o]

Personally i think this is the best option.