When I scan for updates, I get the list of
available/needed updates for my computer.

Do you have to apply these updates in chronological order?

I say no, but my manager says yes. Is it posted on
Microsoft's website anywhere regarding this matter? If
so, where?

Thank you,
D.

DMC wrote:

Hi

That depends on the OS. For Win2k/WinXP, usually, it doesn't matter. For
Win9x/WinME, you should apply updates in chronological order.


--
torgeir
Microsoft MVP Scripting and WMI, Porsgrunn Norway
Administration scripting examples and an ONLINE version of the 1328 page
Scripting Guide: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter

"Torgeir Bakken (MVP)" wrote:

And this is of course if you do not boot in between each update. If you do boot
between each update, you do not need to apply updates in chronological order
even for Win9x/WinME.


--
torgeir
Microsoft MVP Scripting and WMI, Porsgrunn Norway
Administration scripting examples and an ONLINE version of the 1328 page
Scripting Guide: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter

Follow the advice Torgeir gave.
But to add, install Service Pack 1 first, #1 on this link:
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm

Then install Windows XP Rollup 1, #20 on the same link.
That will take care of most of the updates with relatively few left.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...oups/setup.asp
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"DMC" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:651f01c3e5e0$12164430$a601280a@phx.gbl...

I am thinking more of Windows 2000/XP. I would think that
MS would have accounted for this. Is there any clear
writing om this in their site?

DMC wrote:

Hi

How to Install Multiple Windows Updates or Hotfixes with Only One Reboot
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=296861


Updates that uses Update.exe (e.g. the OS updates uses this one) usually
does not have a problem with this, they have built-in qchain functionality
that leave the latest version even if the updates are trying to update
files that are locked so the actual replacing will take place at the next
startup of the computer. But for updates that uses the IEXpress install
engine (e.g. the IE cmulative updates as well as MDAC updates), you
should run qchain.exe yourself before a reboot if you have installed
several hotfixes at the same time.

The latest qchain.exe is available for download here:

The Correct File Is Not Installed When You Chain Multiple Hotfixes
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=815062


--
torgeir
Microsoft MVP Scripting and WMI, Porsgrunn Norway
Administration scripting examples and an ONLINE version of the 1328 page
Scripting Guide: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter

Torgeir,

Are you implying that there is a regression check when modules are
copied during a reboot but not when an update is installed?
What about cases where there is no reboot?

But if that's the only time that there is a regression check it explains
why there are so many "unnecessary" boots prompted when I try to apply
updates in reverse chronological order (at least on NT4). ;(

FWIW I don't like the idea of applying multiple updates at once
even if WU happens to support the creation of dynamically derived
cumulative patches(?) (e.g. accepts the highest version of modules
common to multiple updates). However, it would be nice if WU
would at least recognize that patches which have been superseded
do not have to be listed. That would really simplify a user's task.
E.g. they could apply updates one at time but by starting with the
latest and working backwards they could soon find the list shrinking
more rapidly than if they were applying them one by one in strict
chronological order.

The success of that strategy of course depends on the reliability
of a regression check. If there is no regression check or if it is
not used consistently users would be safer applying their updates
in strict chronological order.


Robert Aldwinckle
---


"Torgeir Bakken (MVP)" <Torgeir.Bakken-spam@hydro.com> wrote in message
news:4018222B.C23F90DA@hydro.com...

to be installed by themselves and no other. You can
choose them all or one at a time for the others. I have
picked all of the small ones and did the larger ones when
I had more time. Tell you manager he blew this one.
Nat

Do you know of any links from MS that supports this?

DMC wrote:

Hi

In case you didn't see my other post to you earlier in this thread, here it is
at the Google newsgroup archive:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...E232@hydro.com


--
torgeir
Microsoft MVP Scripting and WMI, Porsgrunn Norway
Administration scripting examples and an ONLINE version of the 1328 page
Scripting Guide: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter

Robert Aldwinckle wrote:

Hi

No, the updates is version handling all files at the install moment,
and if an update installs without any reboot offer, you will not have
a problem.

The "problem" arises when more than one updates wants to update the same
file, but the file is in use so the file needs to be replaced at reboot
(the update places the file in the Pending File Rename queue).

For NT based OSes, before the qchain.exe / qchain functionality was
added, the latest file added to the queue "won", and that one was not
necessarily the newest version one.

Now, with qchain functionality, the Pending File Rename queue
(a.k.a. the PendingFileRenameOperations value under
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\), if the
same file is to be replaced more than once, it will let the newest
version "win" and remove the other(s).

This will happen at the install moment for the hotfix if it has builtin
qchain functionality (a.k.a. all updates that are using update.exe),
or when you run qchain.exe yourself after all the updates are finished
(but before the reboot).



--
torgeir
Microsoft MVP Scripting and WMI, Porsgrunn Norway
Administration scripting examples and an ONLINE version of the 1328 page Scripting
Guide: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter