Installing Win7 from scratch, KB 3177467, KB 3020369 and KB 3172605

Topic

New Reply

An update from ch100 (I hope I got the details right this time!): When installing Win7 from scratch, if you install updates as they appear via Windows
[See the full post at: Installing Win7 from scratch, KB 3177467, KB 3020369 and KB 3172605]

1 user thanked author for this post.

jburk07

Reply | Quote

Replies

I thought microsoft had finally fixed this problem so we wouldn’t need to go through these manual steps. I remember a previous thread where users confirmed this without having these service stack updates installed. Or is microsoft’s terminal obfuscation leaving me confuddled and I’m thinking of the windows update agent?

Reply | Quote

It’s possible that Microsoft fixed the problem between the time ch100 sent me the post and the time I actually posted it. Let’s see what ch100 says.

Reply | Quote

@CH100

After reading your information on, “Installing Win7 from scratch, KB 3177467, KB 3020369 and KB 3172605”, I knew that I had both KB3020369 and KB3172605 installed on my computer, but I had hidden KB 3177467 back when it was first offered due to install issues people were having. I decided to try to download and install the stand-alone version of the update, as it seems to bypass the, “Restart stuck on Stage 2 of 2 or Stage 3 of 3” issue.

Before downloading the update I read the catalog details page and saw that once KB3177467 is installed it can not be uninstalled. I also noted this update also replaces KB2533552, along with KB3020369 that both you and the Windows update page, found at ( https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3177467/servicing-stack-update-for-windows-7-sp1-and-windows-server-2008-r2-sp1-september-20,-2016 ) have indicated.

My question is, does installing KB3177467, which removes and replaces both KB2533552 & KB3020369, change or affect your recommended updates, or the order in which they should be installed?

2 users thanked author for this post.

jburk07, Elly

Reply | Quote

Excerpts from recent comments on this site …….

Radek says:
January 27, 2017 at 11:56 am

OK, so I am reinstalling again and MICROSOFT HAS FIXED WINDOWS UPDATE. I installed plain W7 SP1 image, decided to give it a try and ran Windows Update. It very quickly installed something small and restarted itself again, then started looking for updates (CPU usage ~25%, RAM usage on an idle system with 8GB was ~3.8GB). After 5 minutes (yes, FIVE MINUTES) it came back showing 150 important and 67 optional updates.
.
.
messager7777777 says:
January 27, 2017 at 9:38 am

Seems, Win 7 Update has recently been fixed by M$ bc after about 9 months of broken Windows Update, ie since April 2016, today my Win 7 SP1 cptr which had ran well since its purchase in 2013, auto-magically is able to update via Windows Update.
……. I did not pre-install KB3020369 n KB3172605 to get Windows Update working again = my Win 7 SP1 cptr is still using Windows Update Agent/Client version 7.6.7600.320.
……. Of course, I hid all the monthly Patch Rollups from Oct 2016 onward = Group C/W.
.
Recap: ……. Bought my Win 7 SP1 cptr in 2013 n it ran well.
With release of Win 10 on 29 July 2015, I began to hide GWX KB3035583 n Telemetry updates, eg KB2952664.
In April 2016, my cptr could not update anymore via Windows Update. Had to manually install security updates via M$ Download Center or Update Catalog.
In June 2016, M$ removed all KB updates from Download Center. So, I was forced to use IE11 at Update Catalog to manually install updates.

Feeling pi55ed at M$, in Aug 2016, I moved to Linux Mint 17.3 via an external USB hard-drive n kept Win 7 SP1 on my cptr in cold storage – until recently, ie when Win 7 Update got “fixed or unfixed” by M$.
.
I think a clean install of Win 7 SP1 should also hv no problems with Windows Update.

Reply | Quote

Microsoft did fix the problem, and you remembered correctly. Slow W7 WU searches are a thing of the past. I don’t know why fixing something that is no longer broke is still being actively discussed…

Reply | Quote

I believe the problem has been resolved. I’m waiting for ch100 to confirm, but it shouldn’t be necessary to install any of the precursor updates, prior to just letting Windows Update rip.

Reply | Quote

I’m going to pull the post, pending confirmation from ch100.

My bad. His advice is six days old, and may not be accurate any more.

Reply | Quote

So do I understand it correctly that its just a matter of installing from ISO without any special steps?

All patches up to what date in 2016 after which only security patches? Any ones to avoid?

Reply | Quote

Last Sunday, I started installing Win7 SP1 on a brand new cheap home built computer.

I can confirm what Radek says. I did not first pre-install any of the updates which supposedly “fix” Windows Update. Last Sunday when I first ran Windows Update, two updates are automatically installed by Windows Update. They are:

Update for Microsoft Windows (KB976902), dated 2010/11/20. This update prevents a “0xC0000034” error message when you try to install Windows 7 SP1, Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1, or Windows Embedded Standard 7 SP1.

Windows Update Agent 7.6.7600.320 apparently was released in June 2014? This update was automatically installed after Windows Update says that it must install an update for Windows Update.

Nearly years ago (2014-02-28) when I built up a new Win7 SP1 system, an older version of Windows Update Agent, version 7.6.7600.256, is what got installed at the time. This version of Windows Update Agent apparently was released in June 2012?

In any event, both of these WU Agents are too old to be the cause of the slow Windows Update issues which everyone has experienced for nearly two years. My gut instinct is that Microsoft deliberately affected Windows Update for Win7 in their push to first get consumers to upgrade to Windows 8.1, and then to get consumers to upgrade to Windows 10. Now that Microsoft has stopped pushing Windows 10 on consumers, Windows Update slowness issues for Windows 7 have magically disappeared.

So riddle me this: MS agreed to support Windows 7 through 2020, at least as far as security updates are concerned. If MS sabotaged Windows Update on their end in order to deliberately prevent its customers from being able to easily update their Win7 computers and/or to prevent Windows Update from finding needed security updates for Win7, would this be a deliberate breach of contract on behalf of MS?

Reply | Quote

Woody, see my other email.
Microsoft has fixed the problem only TEMPORARILY and few of us know the details. The reason is that the original agent cannot cope with a certain number of patches above a threshold and the only real solution is contained partially in KB3138612 (and few other agents released in the previous months superseded by it) and completely in KB3172605.
The new agents dramatically reduce the RAM and CPU cycles used by WU and contain many other optimizations.

Reply | Quote

This article is still as current as ever, only that not everyone understands the background details behind what is described here.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3200747/windows-update-is-taking-an-unusually-long-time-to-scan-and-install-updates

1 user thanked author for this post.

walker

Reply | Quote

Note: Some people have already noticed that Windows 8.1/2012 R2 experience slow scanning when installed clean or even from the most recent officially released ISO for 2012 R2 (version 4) which contains everything until December 2014. The solution is still the same, although Microsoft started expiring old updates with IE CUs, which is not enough as it appears.
See the best approach here on Dalai’s site, still the best reference since the first day when it was published.
http://wu.krelay.de/en/

1 user thanked author for this post.

Reply | Quote

No, you can skip both KB2533552 & KB3020369.
KB2533552 will still be offered in disguise as Windows 7 Service Pack 1, the reasons behind it are long and not worth addressing again. It is only cosmetic. This is why I recommend still installing it first, to avoid later user confusion.

2 users thanked author for this post.

tbsky, jelson

Reply | Quote

I completed a complete rebuild yesterday.

Immediately after the OS install of Win7 SP1 and all the drivers, I installed KB3020369, then KB3172605. In 6 minutes I had over 200 updates to install. I unselected post 2014 non-security updates and proceeded to do the updates. 1 hour 45 minutes later, complete. There were several more iterations before no more updates were offered.

All in all an easy and event-free installation.

Reply | Quote

Oh, no need to feel bad about this, you put so much work into documenting what microsoft should be doing in the first place that you’re allowed to make a mistake like this. I don’t know how you keep on top of it all as it is.

This kind of thing would be ideal for the lounge though: pinned topics that can be updating with new information when reinstalling windows, blocking certain updates etc.

Reply | Quote

The post is still current, even if for now there is an acceptable response from the default configuration, i.e. installing from WU as it comes.
There are people still experiencing issues though
https://www.askwoody.com/2016/ms-defcon-3-cautiously-update-windows-and-office/comment-page-2/#comment-116647

This is something to be posted as sticky in the lounge.

Reply | Quote

VERY good news.

1 user thanked author for this post.

iawake

Reply | Quote

@Woody
Then there is no reason to pull the original post. What I said is around the same method with few extra steps to avoid end-user confusion along the way.

Reply | Quote

@Canadian Tech
How do you unselect based on date of release in WU? Do you go through each update one at a time?
I know how to do this with third-party tools, but I think it is not easy with WU.

Reply | Quote

KB 3177467 and KB 3172605 are installed on two different Win 7 systems and no issues with WU slowness.

I did a repair install using the upgrade in place method on both earlier this month.

Reply | Quote

WSUS offline community tool is much easier than bloatware windows update

Reply | Quote

Good news indeed.

So would I be correct in saying that Canadian Tech/ Woody’s walk-through published on AskWoody.com, is still the easiest way to Fresh Install windows 7?

sorry cant find link

Reply | Quote

Look at the info I just published – and wait for ch100 to confirm it.

Reply | Quote

@Rob
Yes, absolutely yes! 🙂

1 user thanked author for this post.

Microfix

Reply | Quote

Good to know CH100 🙂

‘can’t see the wood for the trees’ discussions overly complicates things albeit informative IMHO which, kind of deviates from the task/goal.
I know the method works as I have done it on two devices without an issue in November 2016.

Reply | Quote

You can put it this way, I have another third-party preferred tool working perfectly, but not everyone is keen to use third-party tools for such a sensitive subject.

Reply | Quote

There’s an excellent tutorial here on how to roll-up all of the patches onto your install media PRIOR to actually installing anything:

https://www.raymond.cc/blog/create-an-integrated-up-to-date-windows-7-install-disc/view-all/

And the links to all the ISOs and how to create a ‘universal’ Windows 7 set-up disk:

https://www.raymond.cc/blog/links-for-windows-7-sp1-iso-from-microsofts-official-distributer/

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

I use a vastly simpler process to select windows updates than many who have written here. I use the built-in Windows Update tool. It works for me flawlessly and every time. I always start with an SP1 installer. I did this just yesterday.

IE11 is installed of its on course in this process and I take no specific steps regarding IE11 other than initiation and setup.

During install, select ask me later
Install all drivers
Activate

Set WU at Never….

Install KB3020369
Install KB3172605
Restart

Note well. I and my clients are in Group C, and very happy with that.

Start Windows Update

When updates are presented to me:

Accept all Microsoft Office Updates and ones like C++.

Do not accept any Optional updates – NONE

Accept ALL updates that begin with the word Security

Do not accept any roll up update EXCEPT for .net roolups

As you come down the list of WINDOWS (as opposed to Office or the like) Updates proposed by WU, you will see security ones first, then you will see the rest. Select the first non-security update. You will see on the right the issue date of that recommended but not security update. If that update was issued AFTER Dec 31, 2014, hide it (right click on it and choose hide). Move down one line and repeat till you come to the end of the list.

Hide Malicous removal tool.

Install, restart, wait about 5 or 10 minutes for the update process to complete, start WU again and repeat the same strategy. Keep doing this until no more updates are offered.

chkdsk, Disk cleanup, defrag, make system image

6 users thanked author for this post.

walker, SueW, ch100, woody, Elly, iawake

Reply | Quote

Wanted to confirm that Canadian Tech’s method is exactly the method I have used 2 times now.

Works perfectly.

Some questions in parallel to this topic.

1) Given that MS uses telemetry and all of the invasive methods in Win 10. Does anyone here know of any full proof method, to ensure that nothing from a win 10 upgrade is left over? I did the upgrade to Win 10. Rolled back to win 7. Then did a clean reinstall twice.

Any hidden files that MS places on those pc’s that upgraded but then rolled back? And if so, would a clean reinstall of Win 7 be enough to wipe any traces of Win 10 files? (I did use the GWX Control Panel[standalone] and it is not showing any Win 10 files.)

2) If a person agrees to win 10 EULA, for the upgrade. But then rolls back to 7. Or does a complete reinstall Win 7. Is a person in any way bound to the win 10 EULA, having agreed to it, but then gone back to Win 7?

3) Running 3 Hd’s in total. All of them are able to defrag, except for the 2nd partition of the root drive.
I use Defrag tool, through properties. It Analyzes all the other drives just fine, except for the 2nd partition of the boot drive. For that one, it starts to Analyze, flashes by quickly, and just stops. Same thing if I try to Defrag. Flashes a few numbers and just stops. All other drives analyze and defrag options work fine.

Any idea why the 2nd partition of the main drive, is doing this? I just did a 2nd reinstall. Win 7 Sp1. Using CT’s method. All updates apply fine. Can’t seem to fix this issue with partition 2 of the main drive not defragging.

Thanks to CT, ch100 for great posts and info. And to Woody for launching The Lounge. This is a great site, which I have been using regularly. Group B route much clearer due to the resources offered here.

3 users thanked author for this post.

woody, Microfix, Elly

Reply | Quote

iawake wrote:

I did the upgrade to Win 10. Rolled back to win 7. Then did a clean reinstall twice.

Clean install should fix you up. Win10 is no longer free, so GWX Control Panel is no longer needed.

iawake wrote:

2) If a person agrees to win 10 EULA, for the upgrade. But then rolls back to 7. Or does a complete reinstall Win 7. Is a person in any way bound to the win 10 EULA, having agreed to it, but then gone back to Win 7?

The PC you did the upgrade on is forever “for the supported life of the device” qualified for a reinstall of Win10. Support for Win7 ends in 2020, Win8.1 in 2023. You are good to use them until then.

iawake wrote:

3) Running 3 Hd’s in total. All of them are able to defrag, except for the 2nd partition of the root drive.

Open Control Panel\Administrative Tools\Computer Management\Disk Management and it will show you what each partition is. It may be the OEM partition, which is usually very small, or a Recovery partition (factory restore)

2 users thanked author for this post.

ch100, iawake

Reply | Quote

I understand that you follow Group C and I respect your choice. My question was about finding the date of release and as I expected, you check this for each update, one at a time. I hoped that you had an easier method which unfortunately does not exist. For me, the RDP 8 Optional updates are important, but this does not apply to your clients and anyone else using one of the Home editions.
Now because you said in your reply that you skip all Optional updates, I assume that this does not include the Recommended updates, or it does?
I would say that at least few selected Recommended are useful, like the one improving Disk Cleanup, but there are few more.

Reply | Quote

FYI, many of my clients in fact run “pro” versions of Windows. However, from their perspective this set of features have no value. The only reason they have that edition is because the vendor sold them their computer that way. When it came to a decision to buy home or pro for my clients, I always recommended the Home edition if it would save them money.

In all my years of working with and supporting Windows, I have never found any value to the higher cost edition. I do however realize at this point that issue has changed.

There is no “recommended” update category in WU. WU has two categories: “important” and “Optional”.

I ignore all WUs in the Optional category.
All the updates that I would consider are in the Important category.

Within the Important category, there are several sub-categories:

Security, as defined by the fact that its description begins with the word Security. I make the assumption that these are the ones that fulfill MS obligation to provide Security updates till 1-1-20. I fully realize that MS trustworthiness is an issue in this assumption, but I have no other choice in this case but to accept it.

The second sub-category are the updates that are in the Important category but are not labeled Security. I presume those are there to improve the Win7 OS.

Based on well-founded dis-trust of MS, I assume that all Important updates that are not Security and were issued AFTER all Win7 development work ended at the end of 2014, are in fact either Win10 related or attempts to install Win10 like features in Win7, e.g. telemetry.

I am quite certain that if you take all the many lists of “updates to ignore” that thousands of Win7 owners use, you would find they all fall in the category of being issued after 12-31-14. I use no such lists and this makes updating vastly simpler — a good thing.

There is a third sub-category in Important. Updates that are listed but are not pre-checked. I make the assumption that these updates are in fact Optional and mis-placed in the Important category

Let me once again make the point that all that I have said here does not apply to MS Office updates.

A note of importance here: Not a single one of my clients uses any Office version issued after 2010.

I would be interested in your recommendation of updates that you would recommend. I have one consideration though. Simplicity, significant value and no telemetry or other Win10 issues.

7 users thanked author for this post.

walker, SueW, Bill C., ch100, jelson, Elly, iawake

Reply | Quote

@ GTP ……. American M$-apologists/shills will likely say that u r full of conspiracy theories against their beloved American company.
……. It’s like Rihanna protecting her abusive beloved bf, Chris Brown, a few years ago.
.
Seems, they can’t add 1+1, wrt the slowness n brokenness of Windows 7 Update since Aug 2015 n the very recent “auto-fix” of Windows Update by M$.

Reply | Quote

@ Bob ……. Thanks alot.

Reply | Quote

@messager7777777…

Do you just post whatever comes in to your head, or do you actually give it some thought?

I think I know the answer.

You’re analogies make no sense at all…”it’s like Rihanna…” “it’s like blaming a sexual assault victim”, blah, blah, blah.

You keep saying the same crap over and over, but you know what? Doesn’t make it true.

And it helps no one.

Reply | Quote

It has all been explained before which updates cause what and it has been written everywhere on this site.
It used to be 7.6.7600.320 which is mandatory and hardcoded at certain levels of Windows Update and the underlying cause has been worked around for now, but if there is no continuous maintenance on the Microsoft Update servers, then the issue will come back.
The only safe known solution is to have KB3172605 installed.
This issue may be a sticky for the new Lounge.

Reply | Quote

Canadian Tech wrote:

There is no “recommended” update category in WU. WU has two categories: “important” and “Optional”.

How is it so?!
There is the Recommended category which can show either in Italic in the Optional category, or as Important without distinction from the true Important updates, those about which you said “I presume those are there to improve the Win7 OS”. This is correct, but my interpretation is bit more on the repairing side, in the sense that they do not bring new features, but provide mandatory fixes. For functionality, I consider them more important than the Security updates and as such, a must. It is also true that you could rightly qualify them as early (good) and later, after January 2015 as ‘dubious’, which need further analysis.
It is also true that Microsoft is now blurring the lines between Important not security and Recommended, but in the original concept, they were distinct.

To answer your last question, in relation to what I would recommend, I personally prefer to install them all, but if anyone is interested in which I would place some doubt and potentially avoid, they are those discussed here previously:

KB971033 – Windows Activation checker – known to cause false positives, better to avoid
KB2952664 – telemetry, the worst of all, not compliant with CEIP settings, if only one is to be avoided, this is the one
KB3021917 – telemetry, not widely known, does not have server equivalent, which for me is a red flag, seems to be CEIP compliant.
KB3022345 – first patch to introduce DiagTrack, now expired. Some users may have it since the time when was available, compliant with CEIP.
KB3068708 – telemetry, compliant with CEIP
KB3080149 – telemetry, compliant with CEIP
KB3150513 – companion to KB2952664, offered only after KB2952664 is installed

6 users thanked author for this post.

walker, Bill C., jelson, Microfix, Elly, iawake

Reply | Quote

ch100, I was hoping you would recommend specific updates that are not entitled Security but in the “important” group and were issued after 12-31-14, that you think are good to have and do not pose a Win10 like threat.

If I understand you correctly, you more or less agree on the issue of updates not labeled security that have issue dates post 12-31-14.

As for nomenclature, the following is an image of WU on my Win7 system:

CT

1 user thanked author for this post.

ch100

Reply | Quote

Canadian Tech wrote:

ch100, I was hoping you would recommend specific updates that are not entitled Security but in the “important” group and were issued after 12-31-14, that you think are good to have and do not pose a Win10 like threat.

If I understand you correctly, you more or less agree on the issue of updates not labelled security that have issue dates post 12-31-14.

As for nomenclature, the following is an image of WU on my Win7 system:

I don’t have a strong opinion about patches released before or after 12-31-2014, or to be more strict, 01-13-2015, when the mainstream support ceased for Windows 7.
What I said is that I normally install all patches released before and after, but for those overly concerned, I listed what I consider the patches that need further analysis.
I didn’t list any of the rollups released after October 2016, as this would really be too much work for very little benefit.

As an exception of a patch which I think is good, true Important and released after 12-31-2014, this is the one, in particular if there are still people trying to avoid KB3172605, which should never be the case.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3138612/windows-update-client-for-windows-7-and-windows-server-2008-r2-march-2016

Reply | Quote

PKCano wrote:

iawake wrote:

I did the upgrade to Win 10. Rolled back to win 7. Then did a clean reinstall twice.

Clean install should fix you up. Win10 is no longer free, so GWX Control Panel is no longer needed.

iawake wrote:

2) If a person agrees to win 10 EULA, for the upgrade. But then rolls back to 7. Or does a complete reinstall Win 7. Is a person in any way bound to the win 10 EULA, having agreed to it, but then gone back to Win 7?

The PC you did the upgrade on is forever “for the supported life of the device” qualified for a reinstall of Win10. Support for Win7 ends in 2020, Win8.1 in 2023. You are good to use them until then.

iawake wrote:

3) Running 3 Hd’s in total. All of them are able to defrag, except for the 2nd partition of the root drive.

Open Control Panel\Administrative Tools\Computer Management\Disk Management and it will show you what each partition is. It may be the OEM partition, which is usually very small, or a Recovery partition (factory restore)

Thanks for the help PKCano!

I’m reasonably clear about Win 10 being wiped by doing a Win 7 clean install. I will just have to “trust” that M$ did not place anything malicious on my primary drive. In the partitions which a full format cannot reach.

Having now done 2 clean reinstalls, I should be ok in terms of not having any Win 10 files left. GWX Control Panel, does not see any Win 10 files. And you’re right, Win 10 is no longer free, so it should not in theory be pushed out again, but I still used it to block win 10 app and win 10 upgrades.

To clarify on this point. When I agreed to EULA of Win 10. Am I subject to those terms, despite having rolled back to Win 7 and then reinstalled Win 7? I found their EULA very threatening, and although you answered my question. I was inquiring in terms of whether I am in any way under the Win 10 EULA from the moment I chose to rollback to Win 7? In other words, am I under the Win 7 EULA and not Win 10? Because I rolled back and then did 2 clean reinstalls? This is the point I am trying to clarify, as again, the wording in the EULA for Win 10 is not something I was comfortable with. Nor would I want to be bound to that agreement in any way.

The 2nd partition is just my main drive, which I split into 2. It shows up in disk management as a Primary Partition. Not an OEM partition. And the size is in the 300 GB area. So it is not small. All other drives and partitions Analyze and Defrag just fine. Except this 2nd Primary Partition, from my main hd. 1st partition where win 7 OS is loaded, is listed as (Healthy System Boot, Page File, etc).

Any thoughts on a possible fix for this? It’s not the end of the world. I can just format that partition, using a full format. Which I think will more or less achieve the same goal as defragging. Does that sound right?

Reply | Quote

iawake wrote:

To clarify on this point. When I agreed to EULA of Win 10. Am I subject to those terms, despite having rolled back to Win 7 and then reinstalled Win 7?

I believe Win7 EULA applies when you’re using Win7 and Win10 EULA applies when you’re using Win10. Like the license plate on your car.

iawake wrote:

Any thoughts on a possible fix for this?

Is there data on that partition. If no data, nothing to defrag. If there is data there, my answer is “I dunno.” Try running defrag (just on that partition) as Administrator – just a suggestion.

1 user thanked author for this post.

iawake

Reply | Quote

Please forgive me slightly off topic, I know, and more of a test mode but in my humble submission the easy way to install Win7 from the desktop with music (tunes) and all less than the install time from a disk or USB stick inc. “Rufus” Ohh! forgot to check the “Emoji’s” 😉

Reply | Quote

PKCano wrote:

iawake wrote:

To clarify on this point. When I agreed to EULA of Win 10. Am I subject to those terms, despite having rolled back to Win 7 and then reinstalled Win 7?

I believe Win7 EULA applies when you’re using Win7 and Win10 EULA applies when you’re using Win10. Like the license plate on your car.

iawake wrote:

Any thoughts on a possible fix for this?

Is there data on that partition. If no data, nothing to defrag. If there is data there, my answer is “I dunno.” Try running defrag (just on that partition) as Administrator – just a suggestion.

Many thanks PKCano!

Will rest easy now, knowing that EULA for Win 10 ended, when I rolled back to Win 7. 2 clean installs should be sufficient, plus other steps taken to stay within Group B. At least for now.

Yes, the partition had some data, but it was only a few gigs. I emptied it onto backup, before I did the 2 reinstalls. So that entire hd, would be ok, if I had to format the entire thing and not just the os partition.

I will put back more data, and try it again. I was running it as admin.

The odd thing, is that even with 4 GB of data on that 2nd partition, it was showing 2% fragmentation. Which I tried to resolve, but forgot that it was mostly empty. You hit the nail right on the head.

Less concerned, and more clear now. Much appreciated PKCano.

Reply | Quote

iawake wrote:

The 2nd partition is just my main drive, which I split into 2. It shows up in disk management as a Primary Partition. Not an OEM partition. And the size is in the 300 GB area. So it is not small. All other drives and partitions Analyze and Defrag just fine. Except this 2nd Primary Partition, from my main hd. 1st partition where win 7 OS is loaded, is listed as (Healthy System Boot, Page File, etc).

Any thoughts on a possible fix for this? It’s not the end of the world. I can just format that partition, using a full format. Which I think will more or less achieve the same goal as defragging. Does that sound right?

Very, very strange. I’m assuming the 2nd partition is also a Primary and not an Extended partition — not that that should cause problems with degfrag. The first thing I would try is to run <b>Chkdsk</b> –via command prompt– to ensure that Windows finds no problems with the partition.

BTW, a clean install of Win7 by itself should have erased all traces of the Win10 upgrade. But it does seem something is off with the 2nd partition on your 1st HDD.

1 user thanked author for this post.

iawake

Reply | Quote

jelson wrote:

iawake wrote:

The 2nd partition is just my main drive, which I split into 2. It shows up in disk management as a Primary Partition. Not an OEM partition. And the size is in the 300 GB area. So it is not small. All other drives and partitions Analyze and Defrag just fine. Except this 2nd Primary Partition, from my main hd. 1st partition where win 7 OS is loaded, is listed as (Healthy System Boot, Page File, etc).

Any thoughts on a possible fix for this? It’s not the end of the world. I can just format that partition, using a full format. Which I think will more or less achieve the same goal as defragging. Does that sound right?

Very, very strange. I’m assuming the 2nd partition is also a Primary and not an Extended partition — not that that should cause problems with degfrag. The first thing I would try is to run <b>Chkdsk</b> –via command prompt– to ensure that Windows finds no problems with the partition.

BTW, a clean install of Win7 by itself should have erased all traces of the Win10 upgrade. But it does seem something is off with the 2nd partition on your 1st HDD.

Hi Jelson, and thank you for taking the time to write.

I find it odd as well. PKCano may have nailed it, as I had very few, maybe 4 Gb of data on the 2nd partition, which is Primary and not extended, to confirm what you wrote.

Even more odd, is that in the Defrag tool, it shows 2% Fragmentation. I can’t make sense of that, as there is barely 4 Gb there.

Nevertheless, it should still defrag correctly. But if it was some system wide thing, the other drives would not first Analyze and then Defrag without any issues.

I am left to conclude that either it is not defragging because there is too little data. Or perhaps, I need a 3rd round of a clean install. Before reinstalling, I will try to dump more of my back up stuff on that partition, and then see what happens.

Reply | Quote

@ iawake

Even more odd, is that in the Defrag tool, it shows 2% Fragmentation. I can’t make sense of that, as there is barely 4 Gb there.

Just to be clear–that 2% is in regards to the 4 GB, and not the *entire* drive (partition) size.

I don’t know if that makes any difference?

If that partition is being used by the Windows *Restore Point* activity–2% fragmentation would seem likely.

NightOwl posting anonymously

Reply | Quote

Or maybe the swap file?? Hiberfile??

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

@ iawake

Even more odd, is that in the Defrag tool, it shows 2% Fragmentation. I can’t make sense of that, as there is barely 4 Gb there.

Just to be clear–that 2% is in regards to the 4 GB, and not the *entire* drive (partition) size.

I don’t know if that makes any difference?

If that partition is being used by the Windows *Restore Point* activity–2% fragmentation would seem likely.

NightOwl posting anonymously

When I create Restore Points, the only drive that seems to have that enabled is the C: drive, main partition.(Boot drive)

The contents of Drive D:, Primary Partition of that same drive. Is mostly files and back up data, but not windows restore points. Unless those are somehow hidden, and it while it applies restore points for C:, if you’re suggesting it places them on the 2nd Primary partition of that same drive. I guess this could be possible.

To answer Jelson. I forgot to mention, that I had already run a chkdsk on that 2nd partition of the main drive a few hours ago. And it found no errors whatsoever.

Thanks NightOwl. I almost forgot, your question. The 2% fragmentation is referring to the total disk size of that partition, not the 4 Gb there. Not sure if this helps at all to narrow things down.

Reply | Quote

PKCano wrote:

Or maybe the swap file?? Hiberfile??

Great deduction. I looked up the Hiberfile. It is roughly 4 Gb in size. But the articles stated it is stored on the root drive.

To be sure, I disabled hibernate feature using an elevated cmd prompt.

Then tried to analyze and defrag the 2nd Primary Partion on my main drive. It did the same thing as before, flashed a few numbers quickly and stopped. When I hit Analyze. And then did the sane thing when I hit Defrag. Whereas if I try to analyze/defrag all the other drives and partitions, it analyzes to 100% and I can then proceed to defrag.

It is a bit of a mystery. I’m wondering if is at all worth any time to figure it out. I notice in the system maintenance, it is scheduled to defrag all drives on a weekly basis. My other drives are either at 0 or 1% fragmentation. So perhaps this task is performing and keeping the disks defragged.

A bit frustrating that I cannot initiate that on my own, for that partition, but if windows is still getting around to doing it because it is a scheduled task. Then perhaps the best option, is to just let it be, and do what it has been doing.

I do recall at one point, when I tried to scan or defrag that partition, a message came up to the effect that the partition would need to be uncoupled. And that the OS may not boot properly. I had never seen this error message/prompt, I do not know too much about this, so I left it alone.

But again, perhaps with these little bits, it can give clues and a possible resolution. Either way, thank you everyone, who has written and tried to lend a hand.

My thanks to all of you. I look forward to interacting as we continue down this rabbit hole.

Reply | Quote

Did you reboot after disabling hibernation? The hiberfile is sorta an untouchable.

Reply | Quote

@ iawake

I do recall at one point, when I tried to scan or defrag that partition, a message came up to the effect that the partition would need to be uncoupled. And that the OS may not boot properly. I had never seen this error message/prompt, I do not know too much about this, so I left it alone.

Given that message, I think it’s a good idea to *leave it alone*! Any utility that says it might leave your system in a non-boot state is asking for problems!

I have never heard of *uncoupling* anything when it comes to a defragmentaion procedure! So don’t know what that’s about.

The 2% fragmentation is referring to the total disk size of that partition, not the 4 Gb there

Fragmentation only refers to the *data* on the disk–the rest of the disk is *empty* as far as a utility that looks at fragmentation. Sure, it’s looking at the whole disk, but it’s only that 4 GB that has the fragmentation.

There are other utilities out there for doing defragmentation–some free–besides what’s included with Windows. You could give one of them a try to get a *second opinion* as to whether there has to be a *uncoupling*, and danger of making the system un-bootable.

NightOwl posting anonymously

Reply | Quote

Is it possible that “uncoupling” is “Dismounting?”

When you attempt to scan and repair errors on the OS volume, it won’t work because the volume is in use. It will offer to schedule the scan for the next boot cycle.

If you attempt to scan and repair volumes other than the OS volume, it should ask if you wish to force a dismount the volume to accomplish this; it’s the only way to do it without scheduling at boot time as with the OS drive.

The message reads:
Windows can’t check the disk while it’s in use
Do you want to dismount this volume first? Note: All opened handles to the volume will become invalid.

Is it possible, iawake, that this is what it was asking?

I’ve never seen it warn about boot failure,so I don’t know what that would be about. I have separate data and boot volumes on both of my main PCs, and I’ve allowed it to dismount the data (D:) volume numerous times for chkdsking. It’s a pretty normal and harmless thing (as long as it is the same message as above; if it says something about making it unbootable, don’t do it, but please do cite the exact message here).

You can also uncheck the box for “automatically fix file system errors” and let it scan the disk while it is mounted to see if there are errors that it might need to fix. If it finds something, you can then schedule it or force a dismount; otherwise, you should be good.

Dell XPS 13/9310, i5-1135G7/16GB, KDE Neon 6.2
XPG Xenia 15, i7-9750H/32GB & GTX1660ti, Kubuntu 24.04
Acer Swift Go 14, i5-1335U/16GB, Kubuntu 24.04 (and Win 11)

Reply | Quote

ch100 wrote:

It has all been explained before which updates cause what and it has been written everywhere on this site.
It used to be 7.6.7600.320 which is mandatory and hardcoded at certain levels of Windows Update and the underlying cause has been worked around for now, but if there is no continuous maintenance on the Microsoft Update servers, then the issue will come back.
The only safe known solution is to have KB3172605 installed.
This issue may be a sticky for the new Lounge.

Hi:
I checked our wsus server. both KB2533552 and KB3172605 are blocked, since they had problems at that time. I am glad to know that KB2533552 is no longer necessary. do I need to release KB3172605 if I don’t met any slow update problem (since we use wsus to update)?

thanks a lot for confirm.

Reply | Quote

KB3172605 did have problems with certain Intel Wi-Fi drivers, but I believe those have been cleared up.

1 user thanked author for this post.

tbsky

Reply | Quote

woody wrote:

KB3172605 did have problems with certain Intel Wi-Fi drivers, but I believe those have been cleared up.

ok. I will approve the update for our wsus server. thanks a lot for confirm!!

Reply | Quote

After reading the information which was posted, I have a question regarding KB2952664.

If a user has this one hidden is it recommended that it be unhidden (BUT NOT INSTALLED)? Thank you for guidance with this one. It is very much appreciated.

Reply | Quote

PROBLEM WITH WINDOWS UPDATE MENU:

Group B, Win 7 x64 – – – Home Prem

The last time I downloaded & installed an update was on January 20th. It was the January Security Only update (KB3212642). Shows successfully installed in the Update History.

I Have Office, however have never kept any of it updated as I don’t use it.

I normally check every few days to see if there is anything new. Well, yesterday I checked (it’s set to NEVER check for updates), and when I did I wanted to see if KB2952664 was in the “Hidden Updates”. When I clicked on that, there were NO HIDDEN UPDATES SHOWN!

The “Check for Updates” panel showed the last “update” was on January 4th, not January 20th.
I went through a lot of gyrations trying to find out what the problem was. It actually showed that “something” had been downloaded (est. Feb. 2nd) to Note Pad, which I also NEVER use. I tracked that down by going to C Driver, and clicking on Windows Update, it came up with NOTE PAD, over 1800 kb, and all gibberish to me.

****Any and all ideas on this one would be appreciated, as well as a recommendation as to just leaving KB2952664 in the “Optional Updates” and not installing. There are varying opinions on this.****** It is not checked, and is italicized.

The other question I have is: If the user does not use the “Windows Defender” or the MSRT can these just remain in the “Update List” or should they be HIDDEN? Anything which would
improve the performance of the Windows Update would be of help.
I do not use the Security Quality Monthly Rollups because I am Group B. Should this just be left there (KB3212646), and it will disappear when the new one comes out?

Thank you to any and all who can cast some “clues” this way.

*****
In the interim while I was trying to determine what was wrong, on one occasion I had the Win Update menu pop up with ****Red Warning about an “Error Code 80244019”. I checked the NET on that, and it showed that it had been referenced back in 2015 (and prior) (I don’t understand what it says).

I shut the computer down and waited a while before starting up again. After starting up, I did a reboot, and after it came up again – – – – the “HIDDEN UPDATES” were back, and the Win Update RED Error warning was gone. Here is one link I located about this “error code”. It appears that it comes and goes on some computers. Here is the link to one of them:

****
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/occasionally-get-error-code-80244019/f07492d9-0141-4d80-8436-872d2eb1f59f

I have done a complete malware/virus scan and it was clean.
did the “Check for Updates”, and after that, the HIDDEN UPDATES returned.

**** I then searched for KB2952664 in the HIDDEN UPDATES, found it and moved it back to the Important Updates, where it is presently sitting.

At this point in time I can work with this situation, however I am frustrated because I know that “something” corrupted my Windows Update menu. I noted that MS did issue “something” yesterday (appears to be related to Office), and there was “nothing” NEW showing when I did the “Check for Updates” yesterday.

Any and all ideas about this problem would be very much appreciated. Apologies for this being so lengthy. 🙁 🙁

Reply | Quote

So, to clarify my understanding, a fresh install of Windows 7 should be followed by a manual install of the following KBs before Windows Update is run…. in the same order as listed in the article at the top of this page:
1.) KB2533552 (May 2011)
2.) KB3177467 (September 2016)
3.) KB3172605 (July 2016)

Or, should KB3172605 (July 2016) be installed before KB3177467 (September 2016), since it was released first?

In a ComputerWorld article on 3/7/17, Woody also recommended KB3020369.  Is that no longer needed?
Thanks.

Reply | Quote

Based on all indications, KB2952664 for Windows 7 functionality is built-in Windows 10.

1 user thanked author for this post.

walker

Reply | Quote

@jmwoods:

First of all, I should have put the following LINK into my post. It has all of the
information about “WHAT MS DID ON FEB. 2ND”: HERE IT IS:

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/office_sustained_engineering/2017/02/

***********************************************************

I am the epitome of the “Dummy”. I don’t know where the “Run” box is located. I am so
intimidated by the acronyms that I see on the posts that I don’t even ask what they mean.

I do have another question:

If I do get Note Pad OPEN, and it comes up all garbled, is there something I can do about it? I have never done a maneuver like this one before, and I am afraid I may do something “wrong”.

I have spent “thousands” of hours keeping up with all of the information on Ask Woody, and have been able to follow everything and remain in Group B. Now, I am so intimidated I am a “wreck”.

Thank you for the information you provided. I think this question should have probably been posted on “Ask Woody Support” as well. Perhaps “someone” knows what MS has done. The link to their message doesn’t reveal anything.

Thank you once again. 🙂

Reply | Quote

@jmwoods & @Woody:

I just located another reference to this “fiasco”, which is from April 20, 2016,
HOWEVER it references “blocking SHA-2, REMOVING address bar lock icon, etc.)
in (paragraph 2). It states this will occur in – – – –

FEBRUARY 2017:

Here is the link to that one:

https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2016/04/29/sha1-deprecation-roadmap/#ojj7WSXjwODfuS71.97

*************************************************************
I don’t understand it, however it appears to be related to what occurred with me.
*************************************************************************************

Reply | Quote