Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Batch Patcher 2.11

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#26
pcalvert

pcalvert

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 134 posts
  • Joined 21-May 05

I wrote a program that I've been using on Windows ME and XP to apply a number of patches at once to the system.

Is there any reason why this program wouldn't run on Windows 98 SE?

Phil

"Thinking is hard work, which is why so few people do it." - Henry Ford


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#27
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Is there any reason why this program wouldn't run on Windows 98 SE?


There is no reason that I know of that it shouldn't work on Windows 98 SE. However, I can only claim that it works on something when I tested it and know it works. That happens to be Windows ME and Windows XP. If it happens to work on other things (and it reasonably should) that I can't test it on, great! In fact, it'd be great to know what it works on and doesn't work on outside of what I can test.

#28
lulu

lulu
  • Member
  • 1 posts
  • Joined 27-August 09
WHERE IS THE DOWNLOAD PROGRAM???

I wrote a program that I've been using on Windows ME and XP to apply a number of patches at once to the system.

The basic idea of how it works: There's an interactive mode and non-interactive mode. Select the patches (or provide the directory on the command line) and then it runs the patches then offers to reboot. More details are in the text file with the program.

Comments or questions welcome in this thread.



#29
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,475 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

WHERE IS THE DOWNLOAD PROGRAM???

Instead of SHOUTING:
http://www.msfn.org/...ead-t18408.html

11. Do not use CAPITALIZATIONS in the topic title or when participating in threads because they will not attract attention - instead it will annoy many of MSFN's members. Using unnecessary font formatting (i.e., bold font, increased font sizes, colored fonts, etc.) on the full body of posts is also discouraged.


simply READ the thread:
your post is this one:
http://www.msfn.org/...54-page-27.html
just scroll up 6 posts or click here:
http://www.msfn.org/...54-page-21.html
the program is in the attachment.

jaclaz

#30
pompeyrodney

pompeyrodney
  • Member
  • 2 posts
  • Joined 12-October 07

I can't say I know the issue, since the link works fine for me and always has. :S

And I can't change the attachment facility link upon edit either, so really can't do much more.


Hi Glen
I just found your program but am also unable to download it. I get a blank window and if I add the link to free Download Manager it says file not found on server?

#31
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

I just found your program but am also unable to download it. I get a blank window and if I add the link to free Download Manager it says file not found on server?


http://www.msfn.org/...54-page-21.html

Edited by Glenn9999, 20 December 2009 - 09:56 AM.


#32
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Version 2.00 is released and can be found on the first post.  The main change is that it supports CAB files via pkgmgr and dism and MSU via wusa.  I tested it against Windows 8.1 and Windows XP.  Given I used the same code base for handling EXE, there shouldn't be any reason why it shouldn't support Windows ME as well.


Edited by Glenn9999, 29 July 2014 - 08:35 AM.


#33
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Version 2.02 is released and can be found on the first post.

2.01 - changed patch listing routine so they would be listed in order from oldest date to newest date.  This should aid the proper installation of patches if it becomes an issue.

 

2.02 - I fixed it so it would work in patching my Windows 8.1 x64.   It worked, and hopefully it will still work in other things.  Please let me know if it doesn't, if you try it and run into problems.



#34
pcalvert

pcalvert

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 134 posts
  • Joined 21-May 05

When used on newer versions of Windows, such as Windows 7 and Windows 8, does Batch Patcher use DISM to install the updates?

 

Phil

 



"Thinking is hard work, which is why so few people do it." - Henry Ford

#35
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

When used on newer versions of Windows, such as Windows 7 and Windows 8, does Batch Patcher use DISM to install the updates?

 

Phil

 

If it finds it, yes.



#36
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

I'm looking at doing 2.10, which is mainly a back-end change about how the patches are run.  One of the things that I could probably do on the program screen is show the outputs of the command-line programs that are called.  But I haven't determined the best way from a UI standpoint.   I'll have to see what I can make work, but would a "Details" tab or a button from the main screen that reveals this output be preferable?



#37
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,475 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

What I find useful (which might or might not be what you want/need) is the making of a "tee" of the commands (and of their output if any) into a .log file, then the press of the button would simply open the .log, which could be a plain text file and as such usable through Notepad or any other text editor for copy/paste.

To further simplify it, the button could simply run Notepad.exe yyyymmddhhmmssBP.log. 

 

jaclaz



#38
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

What I find useful (which might or might not be what you want/need) is the making of a "tee" of the commands (and of their output if any) into a .log file, then the press of the button would simply open the .log, which could be a plain text file and as such usable through Notepad or any other text editor for copy/paste.

To further simplify it, the button could simply run Notepad.exe yyyymmddhhmmssBP.log. 

 

jaclaz

 

You'll have to elaborate on what you mean.  I think I'll probably scrap the "capture the output idea" I mentioned in #36 anyway, given what I saw with DISM when I did.  I don't think it really added anything that couldn't be figured out by the UI sitting on "Installing" for a particular thing.  That said, if it's what it sounds like, it might be worth redoing the logging system (it already logs to batpatcher.log in <WindowsDir>).  There's parts of it that I'm really not too thrilled about, and not sure that more data couldn't be pieced together, too.  Anyway, let me know what you think.



#39
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,475 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Personally I would have a /v (verbose switch) that logs *everything* (to be used only when needed) but normally the log would contain only the actual commands issued and whether they were successful or not, i.e. lines *like*:

2015/04/15 11:12:10 Command issued: C:\temp\fgrtys.exe -c C:\Windows\System32\whatever.ext

2015/04/15 11:12:12 Command result: Errorlevel 0

 

Some tools have two switches, where /v (verbose) increases the amount of output and only a further switch like /vv (very verbose) logs integrally ...

 

the "tee" program is a Unix originated tool that simply copies something that would go to the console (like it is "normal") to one (or more) files:

http://unixhelp.ed.a...CGI/man-cgi?tee

there are windows ports of it, a few ones:

http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/

https://code.google.com/p/wintee/

http://david.tribble.com/programs.html

 

 

jaclaz



#40
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Definitely something to look at.  The plan was always for Batch Patcher to log things, but like I wrote above, it really bothers me that it was never too structured.  Then, error levels were something that kind of went by the wayside too (1.01 or 2) since the patches of the time were throwing some wonky error levels out even upon success.  Logging to window wouldn't be much harder than logging to file, so I'll have to see what can be done.

 

Tee looks like what you get in DOS when you use > or >>, which again seems defeating given what little real information that gets revealed by a DISM call:

 

C:\Windows\System32\DISM.exe /Online /Add-Package /PackagePath:"D:\BACKUP\BatchPatcher 2.10\windows8.1-kb3038314-x64.cab"

Deployment Image Servicing and Management tool
Version: 6.3.9600.17031

Image Version: 6.3.9600.17031

Processing 1 of 1 - Adding package Package_for_KB3038314~31bf3856ad364e35~amd64~
~6.3.1.3
[===========================99.8%========================= ]
The operation completed successfully.
 

 

 

Personally I would have a /v (verbose switch) that logs *everything* (to be used only when needed) but normally the log would contain only the actual commands issued and whether they were successful or not, i.e. lines *like*:

2015/04/15 11:12:10 Command issued: C:\temp\fgrtys.exe -c C:\Windows\System32\whatever.ext

2015/04/15 11:12:12 Command result: Errorlevel 0

 

Some tools have two switches, where /v (verbose) increases the amount of output and only a further switch like /vv (very verbose) logs integrally ...

 

the "tee" program is a Unix originated tool that simply copies something that would go to the console (like it is "normal") to one (or more) files:



#41
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,475 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

BUT, specifically for DISM, and for DISM in servicing mode:

https://technet.micr...y/hh825079.aspx

you could use DISM's own LOG mechanisms (as opposed to logging the console output).

 

jaclaz



#42
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

BUT, specifically for DISM, and for DISM in servicing mode:

https://technet.micr...y/hh825079.aspx

you could use DISM's own LOG mechanisms (as opposed to logging the console output).

 

jaclaz

 

You mean the content that defaults to <WinDir>/Logs/DISM/dism.log as opposed to anything the console might produce ?



#43
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,475 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

 

You mean the content that defaults to <WinDir>/Logs/DISM/dism.log as opposed to anything the console might produce ?

 

Yep :),  you can specify in your command line to which file (overruling the default setting for <WinDir>/Logs/DISM/dism.log) to direct the log message and also the level of verbosity 1/2/3/4...

 

jaclaz



#44
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Yep :),  you can specify in your command line to which file (overruling the default setting for <WinDir>/Logs/DISM/dism.log) to direct the log message and also the level of verbosity 1/2/3/4...

 

 

 

 

I thought this was what you might have meant, but wasn't sure that there was much interesting in that log file, when I looked at it.


Edited by Glenn9999, 16 April 2015 - 04:11 AM.


#45
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Got the logging rewrite done, it looks and acts a lot more sensibly given all the other changes that have happened since that part got written.

 

 

2015/04/19 02:11:30 ========================
2015/04/19 02:11:30 Batch Patcher Invocation on Windows Version 6.3
2015/04/19 02:11:33 Searching patches for: D:\BACKUP\BatchPatcher 2.10
2015/04/19 02:11:33 QCHAIN.EXE is not a valid patch.
2015/04/19 02:11:33 batpatcher.exe is not a valid patch.
2015/04/19 02:11:34 Command Issued: dism.exe /Online /Add-Package /PackagePath:"D:\BACKUP\BatchPatcher 2.10\windows8.1-kb3038314-x64.cab" /quiet /norestart
2015/04/19 02:11:58 Command Result: Errorlevel 0
2015/04/19 02:12:02 Batch Patcher Termination

 

I'm still not quite sure what jaclaz talks about would look like, but if anyone has any ideas on fixes, changes, improvements or whatever, feel free to suggest.



#46
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Version 2.10 is released and can be found on the first post.

 

2.10 - rewrote a lot of the back-channel code to be more extensible.

2.10 - rewritten the logging system.  Now it makes sense with the newer functions involved.

2.10 - Again, returns error levels off of patch runs.  Note some non-zero error levels are NORMAL.

 

Please let me know if you try it and run into any issues.



#47
Glenn9999

Glenn9999

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Joined 23-April 07
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Version 2.11 is released and can be found on the first post.

 

2.11 - fixed a couple of small bugs.

 

Please let me know if you try it and run into any issues.   Hopefully this should be good for a little while, unless something big comes up.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users