If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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)* 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 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. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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 |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
"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. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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)* 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 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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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 |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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! |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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)* 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 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. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
KB4056894 not included in today's bunch of updates
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 |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|