Third Tuesday patches just appeared, with one surprise

Topic

New Reply

Microsoft just released: .NET rollup previews https://support.microsoft.com/kb/3195382 https://support.microsoft.com/kb/3195383 https://support.micros
[See the full post at: Third Tuesday patches just appeared, with one surprise]

Reply | Quote

Replies

Previously you had mentioned it’s was safest to set to auto update. I’m on Windows 7 because the model of my Dell laptop isn’t supporting Windows 10. I learned the hard way and had to do a factory reset and redo my whole hard drive. Should I take it off auto update now? Thanks for any suggestions you have at this point.

Reply | Quote

I have Win 10 version 1511. The new KB3191208 did not show up in a search with the wushowhide tool, but KB3150513 showed up today–3rd Tuesday so I had it. It also showed up on 5he 1st Nov. Tuesday and I hid it. I also installed it again 2 months ago. Very weird.

I suppose the KB3191208 should show up, but is it being sent out in stages? It is about 7:30 EDT.

Reply | Quote

When we went to MS-DEFCON 2, I had full instructions. It’s also discussed at the top of each page, under Automatic Updates. You should leave Auto Update set to “Never”….

Reply | Quote

Where is the surprise?

Win8.1 preview rollup includes a fix for an issue caused by security update

Reply | Quote

The surprise is in the changing metadata for the Win10 1511 patch.

Any idea why or how it was changed?

Reply | Quote

@abbodi86 A fix for which security update specifically? I’m a Plan B user, unfortunately I won’t be installing that. Just curious.

@woody “With Win 7 and 8.1, that usually means it went from Optional to Recommended.” My Win8.1 shows both .Net and Monthly Preview updates as optional. So, what do you mean?

Reply | Quote

I have been following Woody for a long time (few years) and I don’t recall the recommendation to set to auto-update.

Reply | Quote

Reply | Quote

If you look at Win8.1 KB article page for the .Net rollup preview (https://support.microsoft.com/kb/3196684), it provides the update catalog link for KB3172729 instead of KB3196684. The page mentions about improvements made on three different .Net version products (i.e. KB3195388,KB3195363,KB3195788) which are all not for Win8.1. Even when I manually got to KB3196684 update catalog, it provides download links for three different msu files that has no KB article or any information about them in existence yet:
windows8.1-kb3195387.msu
windows8.1-kb3195792.msu
windows8.1-kb3195361.msu

This occurs to all versions of Win8.1 update catalog. Although it may be too early for me to say anything about this confusing situation that Microsoft made regarding this particular update’s catalog and KB article documentation, am I the only one seeing this? Has this ever happened before? I haven’t checked for the other windows versions besides this one yet though.

Reply | Quote

Hi WOODY.
I still haven’t got my head around a ‘KB-PREVIEW’.
Downloading for VISTA, once a month, is hard enough. Twice would be really painful.
Is it just hide a ‘KB-PREVIEW’, until it’s released substantively on a 2nd week update.
Confused of Olde London Town !
Regards. AK

Reply | Quote

Don’t touch anything marked “Preview.”

I’ll have an article up on InfoWorld about that shortly.

Reply | Quote

I’ve recommended against it, in print, since XP days.

Reply | Quote

This is a Win10 version 1511 patch. The metadata was changed – but I have no idea why. If the patch were for Win7 or 8.1, a metadata change almost always means that the KB went from optional to recommended. I have no idea what it means for a Win10 patch.

Reply | Quote

I figured I had things down pat: I updated all three computers (2 w7 and 1 w8.1) at the end of September. My plan was then to go to Group B, doing a backup and then installing the security-only monthly patch on each computer.

So far, I have backed up ONE computer; and I have not installed the Oct. Security patch.

I thought I was all set; but severe anxiety has set in, brought about by this whole complicated manual process. I think what set it off was when Microsoft changed the name of the all-in-one comprehensive rollup patch — the word “Security” is now part of the name of both the Security monthly patch and the non-Security all-in-one comprehensive patch.

I’m not sure if I’m up to the task of keeping up with Group B; I’m thinking that it’s either group A or group W.

Any words of encouragement, Mr. Woody?

Reply | Quote

Sure. If you can look up a KB article, download an MSU file and install it – and KEEP AUTOMATIC UPDATE TURNED OFF – it’s really not difficult.

I still don’t recommend Group W. It’s just too risky for most people.

Reply | Quote

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/24717

“Addressed issue with the boot partition appearing in File Explorer after installing MS16-100.”

Reply | Quote

Metadata doesn’t just means optional and important
so, what’s changed in KB3191208 could be simply the detection rules
i.e. the update is now offered for wider range of machines

if the update binaries isn’t changed, there is nothing worth it in the metadata

Reply | Quote

I can understand if it’s detection logic, but I still wonder why. Guess it’s an old habit.

Reply | Quote

Sometimes the supersedence information in the metadata changes when more information becomes available or if the developers have missed something during the previous release(s) of the update.
As abbodi86 points out, if it is only metadata, this is largely cosmetic. It may mean that administrators do not need to approve previously released patches because now they are declared superseded or the same superseded updates are no longer offered to Windows Update. What I learned from abbodi86 and confirmed myself is that if metadata does not declare a certain patch as superseded and it is installed being indeed superseded, then there are no practical consequences because the TrustedInstaller.exe/TiWorker.exe take care and only install the needed components once.
It is actually worse when an update is declared superseded and it is not in fact, because the consequence in such a situation would be that some components are not getting installed.
In summary, metadata is not authoritative, it is just there mostly for convenience and to avoid waste of time and space by installing more patches than actually needed.

Reply | Quote

Thanks!

Reply | Quote

Another major surprise is the release of the update for .NET Framework 3.5.1 and 4.x in a single patch, KB3196686.
This is a first time and is significant, because .NET Framework 3.5.1 is built in Windows 7 / 2008 R2, while .NET Framework 4.x is external software, very much like Office.
Only in Windows 8 and later, both versions of .NET Framework are integrated in the OS.

Reply | Quote

More revised patches for Windows 10 and Windows 2016, the other versions, i.e. 1507, 1607.
I find it interesting that the Windows 2016 Technical Preview 5 (1511 build) is still supported with updates after the full release of the server which is equivalent to 1607.

Reply | Quote

It’s just a wrapper to reduce the number of shown updates
the actual files are separate for each version
Windows 7 gets .msu for 3.5.1 and .exe for 4.5.2/4.6.1

Vista got the same wrapped up update on October patch tuesday, which caused an issue in WSUS supersedence for windows 7, due that .net 4.5.2/4.6.1 updates are shared and the same for Vista & 7

Reply | Quote

It seems that Microsoft has corrected the KB3196684’s referenced .Net article pages as well as the numbering of the MSU files in the update catalog download page. It’s just me being too early and not patient enough to wait for the typo fix :p However, the file size for the optional .Net Rollup Preview update for Win8.1 x64 in Windows Update is 81.0MB while in Microsoft Update Catalog is 153.3MB for the 3 MSU files combined. Why the size difference?

Reply | Quote

Thanks
I didn’t get to that level of detail with my research, but it was expected.
I don’t remember them doing this before, but I may be wrong. This means that in an extreme situation, there could be a single CU for Windows, Office and all .NET Framework versions, although they use different technologies for updating!

Reply | Quote

So, any reported problems with that .NET rollup? I’m haven’t installed it yet.

Reply | Quote

I’m looking at going to MS-DEFCON 3 in the next few hours.

Reply | Quote

See my comment here (it’s been corrected)
https://www.askwoody.com/2016/mistake-in-the-microsoft-update-catalog/

Reply | Quote

@Woody:

Quick question. I hid the PREVIEW for NET FRAMEWORK (KB3196686) because it is my understanding that all “PREVIEWS” should not be installed. (Optional 68.5MB).

Is this information still correct? Just trying to ensure that I’ve got my directions straight relevant to “PREVIEWS”.

As always, “Thank you” for your help.

Reply | Quote

There’s no need to hide anything, ever, with Win7 or 8.1. If it’s hidden, that’s fine, but you don’t need to hide it.

You should never, ever install a preview. Ever.

Reply | Quote

@Woody:

Thank you for the advice about “no need to h hide anything, ever, with Win7 or 8.1. That is good to be aware of.
************************
Also, “Thank you SO much” for verifying that “You should never, ever install a preview. Ever.

Now I have that “fixed” in my mind permanently!!
Thank you once again for your invaluable help!

Reply | Quote