[RJARRRPCGP]

Why when I install a stock Windows 2000 Pro, install SP4, then after I go to Windows Update, it appears to be fine, but in the \WINNT directory, I have a lot of hotfix log files.

The majority of the hotfix log files contain these lines:

KBxxxxxx installation did not complete.
Update.exe extended error code = 0xf201

I installed all of the prerequisites!

This post has been edited by RJARRRPCGP: 09 November 2006 - 09:49 AM

[Ctrl-X]

Google is your friend

[RJARRRPCGP]

Ctrl-X, on Nov 9 2006, 11:36 AM, said:

Google is your friend

Wow, I just checked Google! Google didn't give sufficient results!

BTW, this was despite I installed Windows 2000 and SP4 from scratch.
The updates seems to just be making excuses! That error message looks like just an excuse!

This post has been edited by RJARRRPCGP: 09 November 2006 - 12:25 PM

[Ctrl-X]

RJARRRPCGP, on Nov 9 2006, 07:21 PM, said:

Wow, I just checked Google! Google didn't give sufficient results!

"Only" 670 Most of the suggestions seem to be permission related. Have you checked these? A fresh install is no guarantee for a trouble-free system, as you have now discovered.

[RJARRRPCGP]

Ctrl-X, on Nov 9 2006, 06:02 PM, said:

RJARRRPCGP, on Nov 9 2006, 07:21 PM, said:

Wow, I just checked Google! Google didn't give sufficient results!

"Only" 670 Most of the suggestions seem to be permission related. Have you checked these? A fresh install is no guarantee for a trouble-free system, as you have now discovered.

I wiped the HDD with MHDD, thus I repartitioned and reformatted the HDD!

Also, a lot of the problems found with Google aren't even the same problem I have!

I can install the service pack. It's just the hotfixes that refuse to continue.
The hotfixes think that my Windows 2000 installation was tampered, even when it wasn't!

[stephens316]

Um well first off you need to slipstream Sp4 into windows 2000 disk then create a bootable disk this article will help you with that http://www.petri.co....ipstreaming.htm

then from there run Mircosoft Upadate. if you need help just message me.

Always slipstream service packs because they work better that way

[cluberti]

Since the error isn't really an error (0xf201 means "STATUS_READY_TO_INSTALL", might be DCOM permissions:

1. Change DCOM default security
- Open Dcomcnfg
- Click on the Default Security tab
- Click "Edit" on "Default Access Permissions"
- Add the Administrators group, Allow Access

2. Check DCOM communication
- Open Dcomcnfg
- Click on the Default Properties tab
- In the "Default Distributed COM communication Properties" section:
Default Authentication Level should be set to "Connect".
Default Impersonation Level should be set to "Identify".

Apply the changes and reboot the machine, and update.exe should work again.

[RJARRRPCGP]

cluberti, on Nov 10 2006, 03:24 PM, said:

Since the error isn't really an error (0xf201 means "STATUS_READY_TO_INSTALL", might be DCOM permissions:

1. Change DCOM default security
- Open Dcomcnfg
- Click on the Default Security tab
- Click "Edit" on "Default Access Permissions"
- Add the Administrators group, Allow Access

2. Check DCOM communication
- Open Dcomcnfg
- Click on the Default Properties tab
- In the "Default Distributed COM communication Properties" section:
Default Authentication Level should be set to "Connect".
Default Impersonation Level should be set to "Identify".

Apply the changes and reboot the machine, and update.exe should work again.

Have you recently found this out? Boy, Microsoft is ticking me off!

Also, while I never saw the following problem under Windows 2000, under Windows XP SP2,
I get the following error message in logs for important hotfixes:

The Update.ver file is not correct.

Also, this error message can repeat up to 20 times! (up to 20 in a row)

Appears to be a Microsoft bug that Microsoft won't admit.

This post has been edited by RJARRRPCGP: 10 November 2006 - 06:17 PM

[cluberti]

Easy there - I know nothing of your setup other than the error you're seeing, and that it happens after SP4. The status message that the error is giving is that the update is ready to install, but fails. I know I've seen this when DCOM permissions are screwed, or the OLE key contains entries that are invalid or too restrictive for DCOM settings. No need to get angry.

One other point - you state that you're getting an error installing updates on a 2000 Pro machine after installing SP4, and now you state that you're also seeing different update errors on an XP SP2 machine. Does this happen for every install you do on 2000 w/SP4 or XP w/SP2, or just the current installations? Have you modified any of the files on the installation source for either install disc?

[RJARRRPCGP]

cluberti, on Nov 10 2006, 10:11 PM, said:

Easy there - I know nothing of your setup other than the error you're seeing, and that it happens after SP4. The status message that the error is giving is that the update is ready to install, but fails. I know I've seen this when DCOM permissions are screwed, or the OLE key contains entries that are invalid or too restrictive for DCOM settings. No need to get angry.

One other point - you state that you're getting an error installing updates on a 2000 Pro machine after installing SP4, and now you state that you're also seeing different update errors on an XP SP2 machine. Does this happen for every install you do on 2000 w/SP4 or XP w/SP2, or just the current installations? Have you modified any of the files on the installation source for either install disc?

With Windows 2000 Pro, some 2005 hotfixes appeared to have been installed. The majority of the failures probably are the 2006 hotfixes. I saw a 2005 date for a system file. If it wasn't updated, it would be a June, 2003 date.

Also, under Windows XP SP2, the "The Update.ver file is not correct." error message can repeat up to 20 times or more in a hotfix log, it would look like this:

The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.
The Update.ver file is not correct.

This post has been edited by RJARRRPCGP: 11 November 2006 - 09:22 PM

[RJARRRPCGP]

I just noticed the same type of s*** on somone's Dell PC.

This smells like a Microsoft bug that Microsoft won't admit! This appears to be enough that Microsoft shall be taking action!

[LeveL]

Why don't you just slipstream SP4 and the hotfixes?

http://www.vorck.com/2ksp5.html

Before Microsoft stop supporting windows 2000 altogether.

This post has been edited by LeveL: 01 February 2007 - 02:11 PM

[RJARRRPCGP]

LeveL, on Feb 1 2007, 03:10 PM, said:

Why don't you just slipstream SP4 and the hotfixes?

http://www.vorck.com/2ksp5.html

Before Microsoft stop supporting windows 2000 altogether.

Yep. Also, I saw the above s*** on someone's Dell Dimension with Windows XP 2002 SP2.
It appears that Windows Update likely isn't applying the updates in the right order!

[Tarun]

More than likely, you had something broken on your computer before Windows Updates. Have you tried running Dial-a-fix and then attempting to reinstall the updates?

[RJARRRPCGP]

Tarun, on Feb 1 2007, 09:32 PM, said:

More than likely, you had something broken on your computer before Windows Updates. Have you tried running Dial-a-fix and then attempting to reinstall the updates?

Nope. Still the same after I reformatted the HDD then reinstalled Windows from scratch.

[Tarun]

Again, try Dial-a-fix.

[nmX.Memnoch]

So quick to blame Microsoft....


Did you also do the install on the Dell PC or was the same media use for both installs?

As has been recommended several times...slipstream the service pack into your CD and see if you have the same issue.

This post has been edited by nmX.Memnoch: 04 February 2007 - 02:08 AM

[fraquar]

RJARRRPCGP, on Feb 2 2007, 08:56 PM, said:

Nope. Still the same after I reformatted the HDD then reinstalled Windows from scratch.

Here's what you do - save or redownload a couple of hotfixes and apply them manually after a fresh install - then check the logs.

Seriously, if you let Windows Update go hog boar wild and try to install some 10, 20 or 50 updates at once no telling what is gonna get broke. As it is the one time I did use Automatic Updates I had to reboot my computer and re-enter Windows Update no fewer than 4 different times - because Windows Update needed this, that or the other upgraded on my system before it would even let me access the actual updates. Off to the alternative methods of patching my computer I went.

I've been using Windows 2000 for 7 years - and only once did I ever have problems with a hotfix install (and that was because Microsoft 5cr3w3d the pooch with an update and had to come out with an update to fix what that update broke). Then again, (since that 1 time above) I don't let Windows Automatic Updates within a country mile of my computer - I research hotfixes and only install the ones I really need (and those are few and far between anyway).

Of the 52 "Critical Updates" that the Automatic Updates says I need - I install about 8 of them - the rest are useless (to me anyway). If you research those "Critical Updates" you will find the vast majority of them are either IE/OE related, Windows Update related, some component that IE/OE relies on or deals with remote administration - many of the rest patch a component I either don't have installed or don't use anyway.

As for Microsoft's love affair with remote administration (and the source for most of their exploits), ain't nobody "remotely" coming near my computer unless they knock on my door and I invite them in - Microsoft or anyone else.

Sorry for going off on a tangent like that - need coffee.

[nmX.Memnoch]

fraquar, on Feb 7 2007, 12:26 PM, said:

many of the rest patch a component I ......... don't use anyway.

Just because you don't use it doesn't mean it you shouldn't be patched. An unpatched vulnerability can be exploited by malware whether you use the application or not. Simply having the application installed on the computer can be enough to have your system compromised.

This post has been edited by nmX.Memnoch: 09 February 2007 - 12:31 AM

[RJARRRPCGP]

fraquar, on Feb 7 2007, 01:26 PM, said:

RJARRRPCGP, on Feb 2 2007, 08:56 PM, said:

Nope. Still the same after I reformatted the HDD then reinstalled Windows from scratch.

Here's what you do - save or redownload a couple of hotfixes and apply them manually after a fresh install - then check the logs.

Seriously, if you let Windows Update go hog boar wild and try to install some 10, 20 or 50 updates at once no telling what is gonna get broke. As it is the one time I did use Automatic Updates I had to reboot my computer and re-enter Windows Update no fewer than 4 different times - because Windows Update needed this, that or the other upgraded on my system before it would even let me access the actual updates. Off to the alternative methods of patching my computer I went.

Are you saying that Windows Update sucks when it comes to applying many hotfixes?