KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates

On 1/10/2018 5:14 PM, cameo wrote:
On 1/10/2018 7:01 AM, Ed Cryer wrote:
cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is not
among them. Are these safe to install?

13 new ones here, without KB4056894; and the processor is Intel.

Ed

I think KB4056894 applies only to AMD CPUs.

No, as stated below:

2018-01 Security Monthly Quality Rollup for Windows 7 for x64-based
Systems (KB4056894) 231.4 MB

More information: http://support.microsoft.com/help/4056894

This security update includes improvements and fixes that were a part of
update KB4054518 (released December 12, 2017) and addresses the
following issues:
Security updates to Windows SMB Server, Windows Kernel, Microsoft
Graphics Component, Internet Explorer, and Windows Graphics
Due to an issue with some versions of Anti-Virus software, this fix is
only being made applicable to the machines where the Anti virus ISV have
updated the ALLOW REGKEY.
Contact your Anti-Virus AV to confirm that their software is compatible
and have set the following REGKEY on the machine
Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="SOFTWARE\Microsoft \Windows\CurrentVersion\QualityCompat"
Value Name="cadca5fe-87d3-4b96-b7fb-a231484277cc"
Type="REG_DWORD�
Data="0x00000000�

Therefore, you would have to have KB4054518 installed back in December
and have the reg key as described above. I have both and the only
update I got this month was KB4056894.

I am running Win7 64 bit with an Intel i5-2500K @3.3Gh.

Don

On 1/10/2018 4:39 PM, Don wrote:
On 1/10/2018 5:14 PM, cameo wrote:
On 1/10/2018 7:01 AM, Ed Cryer wrote:
cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is not
among them. Are these safe to install?

13 new ones here, without KB4056894; and the processor is Intel.

Ed

I think KB4056894 applies only to AMD CPUs.

No, as stated below:

2018-01 Security Monthly Quality Rollup for Windows 7 for x64-based
Systems (KB4056894)Â* 231.4 MB

More information: http://support.microsoft.com/help/4056894

This security update includes improvements and fixes that were a part of
update KB4054518 (released December 12, 2017) and addresses the
following issues:
Security updates to Windows SMB Server, Windows Kernel, Microsoft
Graphics Component, Internet Explorer, and Windows Graphics
Due to an issue with some versions of Anti-Virus software, this fix is
only being made applicable to the machines where the Anti virus ISV have
updated the ALLOW REGKEY.
Contact your Anti-Virus AV to confirm that their software is compatible
and have set the following REGKEY on the machine
Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="SOFTWARE\Microsoft \Windows\CurrentVersion\QualityCompat"

Value Name="cadca5fe-87d3-4b96-b7fb-a231484277cc"
Type="REG_DWORD�
Data="0x00000000�

Therefore, you would have to have KB4054518 installed back in December
and have the reg key as described above.Â* I have both and the only
update I got this month was KB4056894.

I am running Win7 64 bit with an Intel i5-2500K @3.3Gh.

Don

OK, but what I've seen on the Internet, only AMD chips caused problem
with this KB. Intel chips had problems with the ...897 KB, I think.
But maybe I don't know the whole story because I was mainly interested
in my situation.

cameo wrote:
On 1/9/2018 11:20 PM, Diesel wrote:
Paul news Jan 2018 19:36:04 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is not
among them. Are these safe to install?

1) Backup
2) Install
3) Test

or alternately...

1) Enable System Restore
2) Manually set a restore point with a good text name for later.
3) Install
4) Test

One of those patches, could be a redesigned '894.

Paul

System restore may/may not be available for use depending on the
exact nature of the OS instability which can be introduced by the
update. Instead, I'd recommend imaging the system as a whole and
reverting to the image if you run into a problem. That way, you're
practically guaranteed not to lose anything other than a little time
to restore the image.

I used Windows backup with system image included. Took forever with my
USB-2 backup drive. I was just thinking how would I be able to restore
it from that USB-2 drive if I had to do it from cmd windoe that does not
have the USB driver for it?

Macrium uses WinPE5 or WinPE10 images from WADK world,
which would include a USB3 generic driver by default.

That's how they get their stuff working.

And Macrium also boils in other drivers, for the target
hardware, at the time the emergency Macrium CD is made.

I can see "Windows 7 Backup" using the equivalent of a
WinPE3 maybe, in which case you'd get a USB2 driver, but
not a USB3 driver. And the transfer would run at 30MB/sec approx.

I've even had some amount of luck with NIC methods, and using
the Macrium fake file explorer window, there's a menu item to
"map a drive as a letter". It allows you to log into a share
on your other computer, make that Z: and then restore using
Z: as your source. I used that the other day to do a restore
(to replace an EXT4 partition, for Ubuntu!!!). See the kind of
fun you're missing ? :-) Backup software is wonderful fun.
You can even use the Macrium CD to service your Linux machine.
Although the output file size, is a tiny bit larger than
it should be. I figure that's the EXT4 journal it is writing
out, but I don't know that for sure.

Paul

"s|b" wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:31:05 +0000, Ed Cryer wrote:

Still no sign of the KB4056894.

I installed that on Jan 8.
(AMD CPU)

Same here. [Thinkpad E560 (Intel Skylake), Avast IS 17.9.2322].
MS pushed it on 1/8. I manually installed KB4056897 on 1/7,
after confirming the registry entry.

cameo wrote:
On 1/10/2018 4:39 PM, Don wrote:
On 1/10/2018 5:14 PM, cameo wrote:
On 1/10/2018 7:01 AM, Ed Cryer wrote:
cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is not
among them. Are these safe to install?

13 new ones here, without KB4056894; and the processor is Intel.

Ed

I think KB4056894 applies only to AMD CPUs.

No, as stated below:

2018-01 Security Monthly Quality Rollup for Windows 7 for x64-based
Systems (KB4056894)Â* 231.4 MB

More information: http://support.microsoft.com/help/4056894

This security update includes improvements and fixes that were a part
of update KB4054518 (released December 12, 2017) and addresses the
following issues:
Security updates to Windows SMB Server, Windows Kernel, Microsoft
Graphics Component, Internet Explorer, and Windows Graphics
Due to an issue with some versions of Anti-Virus software, this fix is
only being made applicable to the machines where the Anti virus ISV
have updated the ALLOW REGKEY.
Contact your Anti-Virus AV to confirm that their software is
compatible and have set the following REGKEY on the machine
Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="SOFTWARE\Microsoft \Windows\CurrentVersion\QualityCompat"

Value Name="cadca5fe-87d3-4b96-b7fb-a231484277cc"
Type="REG_DWORD�
Data="0x00000000�

Therefore, you would have to have KB4054518 installed back in December
and have the reg key as described above.Â* I have both and the only
update I got this month was KB4056894.

I am running Win7 64 bit with an Intel i5-2500K @3.3Gh.

Don

OK, but what I've seen on the Internet, only AMD chips caused problem
with this KB. Intel chips had problems with the ...897 KB, I think.
But maybe I don't know the whole story because I was mainly interested
in my situation.


The 894 has turned up now and installed with no problem.

Ed

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 22:05:17 +0000, Ed Cryer wrote:

I installed that on Jan 8.
(AMD CPU)

From Windows Update?

Yes. I was a little surprised since it wasn't Patch Tuesday yet.

--
s|b

cameo news Jan 2018 22:12:07 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

On 1/9/2018 11:20 PM, Diesel wrote:
Paul news 09 Jan 2018 19:36:04 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is
not among them. Are these safe to install?

1) Backup
2) Install
3) Test

or alternately...

1) Enable System Restore
2) Manually set a restore point with a good text name for later.
3) Install
4) Test

One of those patches, could be a redesigned '894.

Paul

System restore may/may not be available for use depending on the
exact nature of the OS instability which can be introduced by the
update. Instead, I'd recommend imaging the system as a whole and
reverting to the image if you run into a problem. That way,
you're practically guaranteed not to lose anything other than a
little time to restore the image.

I used Windows backup with system image included. Took forever
with my USB-2 backup drive. I was just thinking how would I be
able to restore it from that USB-2 drive if I had to do it from
cmd windoe that does not have the USB driver for it?






You might want to check Clonezilla out. You'll know pretty quick
after booting the cd/dvd/usb stick with it present if it can see the
external drive you're going to be using or not. I prefer doing a
complete backup outside the host OS myself. Alas, I'm old school
though and there was a time when you didn't do a complete backup with
the host OS running, unless it was DOS or something. Old habits die
hard sometimes.


--
To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
================================================== =
Fight War, Not Wars!

On 1/10/2018 7:51 PM, Paul wrote:
cameo wrote:
On 1/9/2018 11:20 PM, Diesel wrote:
Paul news Jan 2018 19:36:04 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is not
among them. Are these safe to install?

1) Backup
2) Install
3) Test

or alternately...

1) Enable System Restore
2) Manually set a restore point with a good text name for later.
3) Install
4) Test

One of those patches, could be a redesigned '894.

**** Paul

System restore may/may not be available for use depending on the
exact nature of the OS instability which can be introduced by the
update. Instead, I'd recommend imaging the system as a whole and
reverting to the image if you run into a problem. That way, you're
practically guaranteed not to lose anything other than a little time
to restore the image.

I used Windows backup with system image included. Took forever with my
USB-2 backup drive. I was just thinking how would I be able to restore
it from that USB-2 drive if I had to do it from cmd windoe that does
not have the USB driver for it?

Macrium uses WinPE5 or WinPE10 images from WADK world,
which would include a USB3 generic driver by default.

That's how they get their stuff working.

And Macrium also boils in other drivers, for the target
hardware, at the time the emergency Macrium CD is made.

I can see "Windows 7 Backup" using the equivalent of a
WinPE3 maybe, in which case you'd get a USB2 driver, but
not a USB3 driver. And the transfer would run at 30MB/sec approx.

I've even had some amount of luck with NIC methods, and using
the Macrium fake file explorer window, there's a menu item to
"map a drive as a letter". It allows you to log into a share
on your other computer, make that Z: and then restore using
Z: as your source. I used that the other day to do a restore
(to replace an EXT4 partition, for Ubuntu!!!). See the kind of
fun you're missing ? :-) Backup software is wonderful fun.
You can even use the Macrium CD to service your Linux machine.
Although the output file size, is a tiny bit larger than
it should be. I figure that's the EXT4 journal it is writing
out, but I don't know that for sure.

Since Win7 comes with its own backup/restore functionality, I was hoping
that I could deispense with 3rd party software to do the same. Those
also had to be updated separately and why bother with it if I can do
that with Win7 itself?

On 1/11/2018 3:52 PM, Diesel wrote:
cameo news Jan 2018 22:12:07 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

On 1/9/2018 11:20 PM, Diesel wrote:
Paul news 09 Jan 2018 19:36:04 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is
not among them. Are these safe to install?

1) Backup
2) Install
3) Test

or alternately...

1) Enable System Restore
2) Manually set a restore point with a good text name for later.
3) Install
4) Test

One of those patches, could be a redesigned '894.

Paul

System restore may/may not be available for use depending on the
exact nature of the OS instability which can be introduced by the
update. Instead, I'd recommend imaging the system as a whole and
reverting to the image if you run into a problem. That way,
you're practically guaranteed not to lose anything other than a
little time to restore the image.

I used Windows backup with system image included. Took forever
with my USB-2 backup drive. I was just thinking how would I be
able to restore it from that USB-2 drive if I had to do it from
cmd windoe that does not have the USB driver for it?






You might want to check Clonezilla out. You'll know pretty quick
after booting the cd/dvd/usb stick with it present if it can see the
external drive you're going to be using or not. I prefer doing a
complete backup outside the host OS myself. Alas, I'm old school
though and there was a time when you didn't do a complete backup with
the host OS running, unless it was DOS or something. Old habits die
hard sometimes.

But could Clonzilla restore from a backup created by the Win7 OS?

On 1/11/2018 4:14 AM, Ed Cryer wrote:
cameo wrote:
On 1/10/2018 4:39 PM, Don wrote:
On 1/10/2018 5:14 PM, cameo wrote:
On 1/10/2018 7:01 AM, Ed Cryer wrote:
cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is not
among them. Are these safe to install?

13 new ones here, without KB4056894; and the processor is Intel.

Ed

I think KB4056894 applies only to AMD CPUs.

No, as stated below:

2018-01 Security Monthly Quality Rollup for Windows 7 for x64-based
Systems (KB4056894)Â* 231.4 MB

More information: http://support.microsoft.com/help/4056894

This security update includes improvements and fixes that were a part
of update KB4054518 (released December 12, 2017) and addresses the
following issues:
Security updates to Windows SMB Server, Windows Kernel, Microsoft
Graphics Component, Internet Explorer, and Windows Graphics
Due to an issue with some versions of Anti-Virus software, this fix
is only being made applicable to the machines where the Anti virus
ISV have updated the ALLOW REGKEY.
Contact your Anti-Virus AV to confirm that their software is
compatible and have set the following REGKEY on the machine
Key="HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE"Subkey="SOFTWARE\Microsoft \Windows\CurrentVersion\QualityCompat"

Value Name="cadca5fe-87d3-4b96-b7fb-a231484277cc"
Type="REG_DWORD�
Data="0x00000000�

Therefore, you would have to have KB4054518 installed back in
December and have the reg key as described above.Â* I have both and
the only update I got this month was KB4056894.

I am running Win7 64 bit with an Intel i5-2500K @3.3Gh.

Don

OK, but what I've seen on the Internet, only AMD chips caused problem
with this KB. Intel chips had problems with the ...897 KB, I think.
But maybe I don't know the whole story because I was mainly interested
in my situation.


The 894 has turned up now and installed with no problem.

Ed

It hasn't shown up for me yet since the old one was withdrawn by MS.

cameo news Jan 2018 00:24:13 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

[snip]

You might want to check Clonezilla out. You'll know pretty quick
after booting the cd/dvd/usb stick with it present if it can see
the external drive you're going to be using or not. I prefer
doing a complete backup outside the host OS myself. Alas, I'm old
school though and there was a time when you didn't do a complete
backup with the host OS running, unless it was DOS or something.
Old habits die hard sometimes.

But could Clonzilla restore from a backup created by the Win7 OS?

As far as I know, it cannot. I don't know why any reasonable person
would it expect that from it. Typically (granted, exceptions do
exist) the software which created the backup/image is the software
that'll be reloading it, in the event it's required.

I suggested CloneZilla for the purposes of making a decent image of
your entire machine. I didn't and wouldn't have suggested it to
restore a backup created by other software. If you trust that the
built in backup program is sufficient for your needs, then, by all
means continue to use it. It's your data and your machine.

With Clonezilla, I only need to boot the live image, point it to the
drive containing my backup image and let it load it. I don't have to
install an OS to gain access to the imaging program, or use a
recovery disk and hope for the best. Nor do I have to worry about
files missing because the Windows 7 program couldn't copy them over
for one reason or another. Not all programs are volume shadow copy
friendly, nor do they respect sharing their file content while the
program is running.

It was simply another option that you have, you certainly don't have
to use it if you don't want to do so.

--
To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
================================================== =
Cats can catch snowflakes through a closed window if they try hard
enough.

On 1/11/2018 8:08 PM, Diesel wrote:
cameo news Jan 2018 00:24:13 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

[snip]

You might want to check Clonezilla out. You'll know pretty quick
after booting the cd/dvd/usb stick with it present if it can see
the external drive you're going to be using or not. I prefer
doing a complete backup outside the host OS myself. Alas, I'm old
school though and there was a time when you didn't do a complete
backup with the host OS running, unless it was DOS or something.
Old habits die hard sometimes.

But could Clonzilla restore from a backup created by the Win7 OS?

As far as I know, it cannot. I don't know why any reasonable person
would it expect that from it.

Because I just made a Win7 backup and took many hours. I don't want to
repeat it now with Clonzilla.

Typically (granted, exceptions do
exist) the software which created the backup/image is the software
that'll be reloading it, in the event it's required.

I suggested CloneZilla for the purposes of making a decent image of
your entire machine. I didn't and wouldn't have suggested it to
restore a backup created by other software. If you trust that the
built in backup program is sufficient for your needs, then, by all
means continue to use it. It's your data and your machine.

With Clonezilla, I only need to boot the live image, point it to the
drive containing my backup image and let it load it. I don't have to
install an OS to gain access to the imaging program, or use a
recovery disk and hope for the best. Nor do I have to worry about
files missing because the Windows 7 program couldn't copy them over
for one reason or another. Not all programs are volume shadow copy
friendly, nor do they respect sharing their file content while the
program is running.

It was simply another option that you have, you certainly don't have
to use it if you don't want to do so.

cameo wrote:
On 1/10/2018 7:51 PM, Paul wrote:
cameo wrote:
On 1/9/2018 11:20 PM, Diesel wrote:
Paul news Jan 2018 19:36:04 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:

cameo wrote:
Seven new updates from MS today but the problem KB4056894 is not
among them. Are these safe to install?

1) Backup
2) Install
3) Test

or alternately...

1) Enable System Restore
2) Manually set a restore point with a good text name for later.
3) Install
4) Test

One of those patches, could be a redesigned '894.

Paul

System restore may/may not be available for use depending on the
exact nature of the OS instability which can be introduced by the
update. Instead, I'd recommend imaging the system as a whole and
reverting to the image if you run into a problem. That way, you're
practically guaranteed not to lose anything other than a little time
to restore the image.

I used Windows backup with system image included. Took forever with
my USB-2 backup drive. I was just thinking how would I be able to
restore it from that USB-2 drive if I had to do it from cmd windoe
that does not have the USB driver for it?

Macrium uses WinPE5 or WinPE10 images from WADK world,
which would include a USB3 generic driver by default.

That's how they get their stuff working.

And Macrium also boils in other drivers, for the target
hardware, at the time the emergency Macrium CD is made.

I can see "Windows 7 Backup" using the equivalent of a
WinPE3 maybe, in which case you'd get a USB2 driver, but
not a USB3 driver. And the transfer would run at 30MB/sec approx.

I've even had some amount of luck with NIC methods, and using
the Macrium fake file explorer window, there's a menu item to
"map a drive as a letter". It allows you to log into a share
on your other computer, make that Z: and then restore using
Z: as your source. I used that the other day to do a restore
(to replace an EXT4 partition, for Ubuntu!!!). See the kind of
fun you're missing ? :-) Backup software is wonderful fun.
You can even use the Macrium CD to service your Linux machine.
Although the output file size, is a tiny bit larger than
it should be. I figure that's the EXT4 journal it is writing
out, but I don't know that for sure.

Since Win7 comes with its own backup/restore functionality, I was hoping
that I could deispense with 3rd party software to do the same. Those
also had to be updated separately and why bother with it if I can do
that with Win7 itself?


I run many different versions of Macrium here. No problem
with any of them, making a full backup. Obviously, a
backup made on 6.3 is going to refuse to restore if
I use a Version 5 CD, but other than that, the reverse
works OK. I can take Version 5 backups and restore them
with a Version 6.3 CD. And Macrium has four choices for
WinPE base material. WinPE5 and WinPE10 have USB3 support
for example.

So far, the only issue I have with Macrium, is Version 7,
one of the services it loads, is wasting CPU cycles. And
that makes it unwelcome on a computer here. Version 6
doesn't do that. Version 6 has a service, but it's quiescent
and is used only to "mount" an MRIMG as if it's a hard drive.
You can recover single random files from the mounted image,
so it's not necessary to restore the entire backup to get
a single file out of it. Acronis and other products have
their own similar capability, so this is quite commin.

Win7 Backup is easy too. The format is .vhd, and as long
as you know how to access those, it's easy to get a single
file off it. Some OSes support VHD attachment, which is
one way to do it, or you could access it with Virtual PC
or with VirtualBox hosting softwares.

I wouldn't say Windows 7 backup is bad. I used it for a
while, to do full backups, but I switched to Macrium because
the single file it created for output, was easier to move
from one backup device to another. Just use a descriptive
name for the backup (or Macrium has a comment field, if
you can find the time to type in a bunch of stuff). I prefer
file name tagging, as it's easier to search.

Win10P5E_Before_16299_Update_5_3_7277.mrimg

That identifies the OS and computer (P5E), and suggests
15063 was the OS version at the time. As 16299 comes
after that. The digits at the end might identify the
version of Macrium used, so I know what restoration CDs
won't work.

Macrium also supports a Verify command, so if you suspect
an MRIMG is corrupt, it'll tell you without doing a restore.
That's one means I discovered this computer has bad RAM,
as a couple backups taken when I was having "computer trouble"
were ruined. By running a Verify, I knew I should just throw
the affected backups away, as recovery isn't worth it (if
it's even possible). I don't know if Win7 backup has verify.

Paul