21 replies to this topic

[aleatorul]

I want to make it official but this is what autopatcher.log says:

Module 'Update for Windows Media Player 9 or 10 (KB895181)' (unique id: 'KB895181_WMP10_X86_ENU') reports 'WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT' as its parent, but such module does not exist or is not loaded in the right order.

The contents of KB895181_wmp.apm :

AutoPatcher 5.6 Module]

[General]
Title=Update for Windows Media Player 9 or 10 (KB895181)
Title_1040=Aggiornamento per Windows Media Player 9,10 (KB895181)
Title_1046=CORRECAO para videos MPEG4 no Windows Media Player 9 ou 10 (KB895181)
Title_2070=CORRECCAO para videos MPEG4 no Windows Media Player 9 ou 10 (KB895181)
Description=You may experience a color smearing or bleeding effect when you play MPEG4 videos in Windows Media Player 10.
Description_1040=Correzione: si potrebbe verificarsi un colore smearing o smarginature effetto durante la riproduzione di video MPEG4 in Windows Media Player 9 o 10
Description_1046=CORREÇÃO: É possível que haja um efeito de mancha ou sangramento nas cores ao reproduzir vídeos MPEG4 no Windows Media Player 9 ou 10
Description_2070=CORREÇÃO: É possível que haja um efeito de mancha ou sangramento nas cores ao reproduzir vídeos MPEG4 no Windows Media Player 9 ou 10
Author=Microsoft
ModuleAuthor=Erik Ramey
WebPage=http://support.microsoft.com/kb/895181/
ReleaseDate=20050502

[Behavior]
ParentID=WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT
UniqueID=KB895181_WMP10_X86_ENU
Critical=False
Recommended=True
AutoExpand=False
Depends=
TimeToInstall=25
TimeToRemove=25
RequiresReboot=False

[DetectionRegistry]
RegistryPath=HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Updates\Windows Media\SP0\KB895181
KeyName=Type
KeyValue=Update

[DetectionFile]
FilePath=
FileName=
FileVersion=ANY
FileMD5=

[OperatingSystem]
WindowsVersion=XP_X86,XP_MCE2004_X86,XP_MCE2005_X86,2K3_SP1_X86,2K3_SP0_X86
SystemLanguage=ANY

[SystemComponents]
InternetExplorer=ANY
WindowsMediaPlayer=9,10
DotNetFramework=ANY
WindowsInstaller=ANY
DirectX=ANY
MSNMessenger=ANY

[OfficeComponents]
Word=ANY
Excel=ANY
PowerPoint=ANY
Outlook=ANY
Publisher=ANY
Visio=ANY
Project=ANY
OneNote=ANY
FrontPage=ANY
InfoPath=ANY
Access=ANY
SharePointDesigner=ANY
Groove=ANY

[Installation]
"Module:\windowsmedia-kb895181-x86-enu.exe" /quiet /overwriteoem /norestart

[Removal]
"Module:\windowsmedia-kb895181-x86-enu.exe" /quiet /overwriteoem /norestart /uninstall

[Slipstream]
"Module:\windowsmedia-kb895181-x86-enu.exe" /quiet /overwriteoem /norestart /integrate:"share:"

Contents of __WMP10_noncritical.apm

[AutoPatcher 5.6 Module]

[General]
Title=WMP - Recommended updates
Title_1036=WMP 10 - Mises a jour recommandées
Title_1040=WMP 10 - Aggiornamenti Consigliati
Title_1043=WMP 10 - aanbevolen updates
Title_1046=WMP 10 - Atualizacoes Recomendadas
Title_2067=WMP 10 - Aanbevolen Updates
Title_2070=WMP 10 - Actualizacoes Recomendadas
Description=Non-critical but recommended updates for Windows Media Player 10
Description_1036=Mises à jour non impératives mais néanmoins recommandées pour Windows Media Player 10
Description_1040=Aggiornamenti non critici, ma raccomandati, per Windows Media Player 10
Description_1043=Verzameling van de meest recente aanbevolen updates voor Windows Media Player 10
Description_1046=Atualizacoes não-críticas, mas recomendadas para o Windows Media Player 10
Description_2067=Aanbevolen Updates voor Windows Media Player 10
Description_2070=Actualizações Recomendadas para o Windows Media Player 10
Author=Microsoft
ModuleAuthor=Cristiano Portela
WebPage=
ReleaseDate=00001202

[Behavior]
ParentID=WMP_NONCRITICAL_PARENT
UniqueID=WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT
Critical=False
AutoExpand=True
Depends=
TimeToInstall=0
TimeToRemove=0
RequiresReboot=False

[DetectionRegistry]
RegistryPath=
KeyName=
KeyValue=

[DetectionFile]
FilePath=
FileName=
FileVersion=

[OperatingSystem]
WindowsVersion=2K,XP_SP1,XP_SP2,XP_SP3,XP_MCE2004_X86,XP_MCE2005_X86,2K3,VISTA,LHSERVER
SystemLanguage=ANY

[SystemComponents]
InternetExplorer=ANY
WindowsMediaPlayer=10
DotNetFramework=ANY
WindowsInstaller=ANY
DirectX=ANY
MSNMessenger=ANY

[OfficeComponents]
Word=ANY
Excel=ANY
PowerPoint=ANY
Outlook=ANY
Publisher=ANY
Visio=ANY
Project=ANY
OneNote=ANY
FrontPage=ANY
InfoPath=ANY
Access=ANY
SharePointDesigner=ANY
Groove=ANY

[Installation]


[Removal]


[Slipstream]

KB895181_wmp.apm_files exists, inside it has a windowsmedia-kb895181-x86-enu.exe with MD5 f677cddb647c19de819c8035e9b29187

Don't know what else to say... XP sp3 Eng here.

[_def_x_]

aleatorul said:

I want to make it official but this is what autopatcher.log says:

If your release is Unofficial it is likely due to something else. If you have more than one release in your '\modules' folder - start AutoPatcher - click 'About' - click 'Release Info', the 'Title' in Red is your failing release, this is the release you need to fix.

If you have an .md5 file in your '\apup' root folder, run it (for any release that has one) - does it report an error? Run APUP and update the release - does this fix anything? If nothing works post a log file of only the failing release in the proper forum - XP issues in the XP forum, Extras issues in the Extras forum etc.

Btw, the issue with KB895181 has been ongoing, I mentioned it a long time ago, here are a few more threads...
...link
...link

[Cristiano]

this one is more than annoying since some time ago. even worst, because every single module into modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical\wmp10 has the exact same parent module and yet, KB895181 is the only one that has this issue. so, let's try solve this issue that i can't reproduce in here for once, ok? i've toke an random module into modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical\wmp10 as template, didn't touched in the ParentID=WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT and then everything else was pasted into it. so please, can you download the attached file, extract it into modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical\wmp10 and look for any report related to the attached module?

thanks in advance

[]s

[aleatorul]

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 10 September 2010 - 06:16 PM, said:

If you have more than one release in your '\modules' folder - start AutoPatcher - click 'About' - click 'Release Info', the 'Title' in Red is your failing release, this is the release you need to fix.

All modules there are set to "True".

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 10 September 2010 - 06:16 PM, said:

If you have an .md5 file in your '\apup' root folder, run it (for any release that has one) - does it report an error?

Only 3 md5s, for dotnet, extras and xp. All give the OK.

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 10 September 2010 - 06:16 PM, said:

Run APUP and update the release - does this fix anything?

Nope, I ran apup several times, nothing new to download.

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 10 September 2010 - 06:16 PM, said:

Btw, the issue with KB895181 has been ongoing, I mentioned it a long time ago, here are a few more threads...
...link
...link

I've looked over such threads, but since I'm not familiar with the inner workings of autopatcher, I didn't understood much, that's why I opened a new topic. It took me some time to even find autopatcher.log (I still don't understand why it's created in C:\Windows instead of Autopatcher's folder).

Cristiano, on 10 September 2010 - 10:20 PM, said:

can you download the attached file, extract it into modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical\wmp10 and look for any report related to the attached module?

With that file the log is this:

AutoPatcher 5.6 loaded the filesystem.

Detected 
English (1033) Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3
System Components:
	Internet Explorer: 6.0.2900.5945
	Windows Media Player: 9.0.0.4507
	.NET Framework: 1.1.4322|1.1SP1|2.0.50727.3053|2.0SP2|3.2.30729.01|3.2SP2|3.5|3.5SP1
	Windows Installer: 4.5.6001.22159
	DirectX: 4.09.00.0904
	MSN/Live Messenger: 

Office Components:
	Microsoft Word: 10.0.6612.0
	Microsoft Excel: 10.0.6501.0
	Microsoft PowerPoint: 
	Microsoft Outlook: 
	Microsoft Access: 
	Microsoft Project: 
	Microsoft Publisher: 
	Microsoft OneNote: 
	Microsoft FrontPage: 
	Microsoft InfoPath: 
	Microsoft Visio: 
	Microsoft SharePoint Designer: 
	Microsoft Groove: 

Module 'Update for Windows Media Player 9 or 10 (KB895181)' (unique id: 'KB895181_WMP10_X86_ENU') reports 'WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT' as its parent, but such module does not exist or is not loaded in the right order.
Module 'Update for Windows Media Player 9 or 10 (KB895181) reloaded' (unique id: 'KB895181_WMP10_X86_ENU_reloaded') reports 'WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT' as its parent, but such module does not exist or is not loaded in the right order.

The rest is still the same (red Unofficial/Unsupported release, About/Realease info: all modules True)

[Cristiano]

so, even rebuilding this one, the problem remains in there and only with this one, that is quire annoying. do you wanna do an simple test? first, remove every single .apm file that is located under modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical\wmp10 and also __WMP10_noncritical.apm, that is located at modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical. then, run apup again, select the xp enu script and let it go. will be an small download. then, run autopatcher again and look at the log. if this doesn't fix, i can try another one shot: fully re-do this module, without take anything from it, but that it's the last resource, since i never was able to reproduce this issue in here

[]s

[aleatorul]

Cristiano, on 11 September 2010 - 08:14 PM, said:

so, even rebuilding this one, the problem remains in there and only with this one, that is quire annoying. do you wanna do an simple test? first, remove every single .apm file that is located under modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical\wmp10 and also __WMP10_noncritical.apm, that is located at modules\NonCritical\__WMP_noncritical. then, run apup again, select the xp enu script and let it go. will be an small download. then, run autopatcher again and look at the log.

Same thing.


Just an idea:
I was looking at different .apm files in there, and this jumped into my eyes: WindowsMediaPlayer=9,10
The rest, including the parent, have just 10. I tried to change the parent to 9,10 by myself, now also the parent module gave the same error (and also made 'false' the xp release, but I guess that is because some crc check)
Then I tried setting both to 10, no more errors in the log (but still false release).

[Cristiano]

now we are going to fix this... i've figured the issue. the problem isn't at this module is at __WMP10_noncritical.apm, that has WindowsMediaPlayer=10 as restriction and KB895181 is WindowsMediaPlayer=9,10. it may also be the reason why i don't see this issue in here: i've updated to wmp11 long ago and, due that, this set of modules aren't loaded. if not loaded, then no issue at all, but again, that is annoying, because it's an inconsistency that should be pointed in the log anyway. so, one simple action shall fix it:
please open __WMP10_noncritical.apm with notepad and for WindowsMediaPlayer, set WindowsMediaPlayer=9,10

yes, the version will show as unofficial, but run autopatcher again and then look at the log. if the message is gone, then i will do the proper changes in the script and sign it, to solve this issue once for all

again, thanks for your cooperation. it takes several steps to track issues like those, but a lot of times, people just point fingers instead try track the issue, like you are doing

[]s

[_def_x_]

I have WMP9... The '__WMP10_noncritical' fix alone doesn't work - not for me anyway.

To have this update show up in AutoPatcher for installation and to remove the error from autopatcher.log 2 .apm files need editing otherwise there is still a restriction to WMP10. In fact there are 2 possibilities that I tried and both work.

The 2 apm files are '__WMP_noncritical.apm' and '__WMP10_noncritical.apm' //// The fixes -> 'WindowsMediaPlayer=>9' or 'WindowsMediaPlayer=9,10'

Both worked, KB895181 was ready for installation and the error was gone from the log.

As long as __WMP_noncritical.apm restricts to WMP10 I figure more WMP9 updates will fail - and as long as AutoPatcher supports WMP9 updates 'WMP=' will need a reference to or support for 'WMP9' starting from the root -> '__WMP_noncritical.apm' - just my guess

[aleatorul]

Indeed, both files were needed to be changed to get rid of the error. With just __WMP10_noncritical.apm errors are shown for both files:

Module 'WMP - Recommended updates' (unique id: 'WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT') reports 'WMP_NONCRITICAL_PARENT' as its parent, but such module does not exist or is not loaded in the right order.
Module 'Update for Windows Media Player 9 or 10 (KB895181)' (unique id: 'KB895181_WMP10_X86_ENU') reports 'WMP10_NONCRITICAL_PARENT' as its parent, but such module does not exist or is not loaded in the right order.

Thank you both for your quick replies.

[_def_x_]

aleatorul said:

The rest is still the same (red Unofficial/Unsupported release, About/Realease info: all modules True)

When the release shows Unofficial in AutoPatcher but the 'Release Info' show all 'Titles' as True - you have a stray(s) file in your '\modules' folder causing the problem.

You will need to create a .md5sum of your '\modules' folder, zip it up and attach it to a post, we will run it against the same collection of releases - hopefully the file will show up as missing at our end.

Please create a .md5. Also, can you let us know exactly what releases you have in this one collection that is Unofficial, it looks as if it is XP SP3, DotNet, and Extras?

[Cristiano]

well, __WMP_noncritical.apm could be left as WindowsMediaPlayer=ANY, since this one is an parent module and an wmp update could arrive. but then if no updates to be applied, this one could make someone think as something is missing. so, right now, i'm thinking more about restrict this one to wmp 9 and 10. this issue could be fixed right now, but at september 14 ms will release several updates. there's an problem if this unofficial issue wait until those updates be released?

but it's good to know that this issue is finally tracked down

[]s

[aleatorul]

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 12 September 2010 - 01:36 AM, said:

When the release shows Unofficial in AutoPatcher but the 'Release Info' show all 'Titles' as True - you have a stray(s) file in your '\modules' folder causing the problem.

Oh, so it's not the bloody wmp then...

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 12 September 2010 - 01:36 AM, said:

Also, can you let us know exactly what releases you have in this one collection that is Unofficial, it looks as if it is XP SP3, DotNet, and Extras?

There's also office_xp_enu and seven_x86

[aleatorul]

Oopss. Here's the file.

Attached Files

•  modules.zip   33.13K   0 downloads

[_def_x_]

Quote

There's also office_xp_enu and seven_x86

Well that throws a monkey wrench in it for me, I'm on dialup so I can't download those 2 additional packages - sorry, which brings me to a point I wish more users would understand - this creates extra work for the AP Team, as it stands now it seems it is 20% scripts and 80% support. The user needs to be pro-active when / if they are going to have multiple packages in one '\modules' folder.

The easiest way to monitor such large folders is by creating a before and after .md5 of the release. If a problem occurs you can use a simple comparison tool to compare the contents of the .md5sums. When I'm done updating a release(s) I create a md5 and name it accordingly 'myap090510.md5'. Down the road I update again, when done I create a second .md5 - 'myap091110.md5'. If any release has a problem and it isn't easily resolved I can compare the contents of both files with tools like 'Winmerge' or 'TextDiff' (both free, there are others) that highlight changes line by line (a .md5 file is essentially a text file).

Here's a simple example. The changes here are expected. I updated the Extras release, my apup.log file changed (of course), the Extras release has a new '.md5' and '.rti' file. You can see at the bottom I'm viewing Difference 4 of 6 total differences. The boxes at the bottom are the contents of the left and right panes of the selected difference (in red).

The color scheme (you can create your own) lets you know what kind of change, blue (not seen here) lists a file present either before or after change - again expected with AutoPatcher, files get added and removed regulary, it's nice to see the change first hand.

Anyway, this really is smart to do

[Cristiano]

well, right now, i don't have any of those scripts. but i will let the xp script downloading and tomorrow i will download seven x86. anyway, i'm doing an collection of all the scripts

[]s

[aleatorul]

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 12 September 2010 - 09:22 PM, said:

sorry

No problem

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 12 September 2010 - 09:22 PM, said:

this creates extra work for the AP Team, as it stands now it seems it is 20% scripts and 80% support. The user needs to be pro-active when / if they are going to have multiple packages in one '\modules' folder.

I don't mind spending some time with this, although I think it also kinda negates the whole reason for autopatcher. If every time I update the autopatcher I have to spend some hours for such fixes, for me it's better to just use the autoupdate. If the cleanup routines would do their job, I won't post such help requests.
Now don't get me wrong, I have all the respect for those who develop, maintain and provide community help for such a project. But don't blame me because I don't know the inner workings of AP, I don't think I came here like a kid with "meh, AP sucks, I got dis err0r, fix it" attitude.

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 12 September 2010 - 09:22 PM, said:

Anyway, this really is smart to do

I'll keep this in mind for the next time.

Can you tell me please in what situations apup downloads the official md5 for the release? I have md5 for 3 out of 5 releases. I could combine the contents of all 5 md5 and then compare with what I currently have.

[Cristiano]

well, i'm keeping one md5 for each scripts that i'm updating, but only for the big scripts. those that have just a few files, there's no reason for it. taking directx as an sample, this one contains the module, the installer and the rti, that it's pretty easy to check. by other hand, the xp script has a lot of files and track unofficial issues without it becomes an nightmare. by other hand, this is an choice of the releaser manager. so far i know, i'm the only one doing that

[]s

[aleatorul]

I solved the problem, I found the rogue files (in wmp critical).

[_def_x_]

aleatorul said:

I don't mind spending some time with this, although I think it also kinda negates the whole reason for autopatcher.

Spending what time, just the opposite, what I suggested is a time saver. Really, how long does it take to scan a folder, 30 seconds? WinMerge is a zip file about 3MB in size, create a folder, unzip the file, and go. So, let me understand you, downloading a 3MB zip file is too much trouble, scanning a folder that has 5 or 6 AutoPatcher releases containing close to 1000 updates, a 30 second task is too much trouble? It takes maybe 15 seconds to load 2 md5 files into WinMerge to scan and reveal the changes.

So, your initial investment is maybe 5 minutes, there after maybe 1 minute once a month to stay on top of your AutoPatcher release, this is too problematic for you?

aleatorul said:

for me it's better to just use the autoupdate.

Your choice. It sounds like you may not really need an AutoPatcher package, it is designed primarily for people who need a portable collection of updates to update multiple computers, or the hobbyist. It seems you have other needs and prefer not to be put out with having to do anything at your end except hit the go button and be done with it. Microsoft is perfect for this. AutoPatcher does expect a bit of technical know-how and a willingness to get your hands dirty at times, this seems to annoy you. No problem, you need to find a solution that is 'point-and-click-and-go' - WU / MU. Btw, I'm not telling you to do this, it's my point of view based on your response to my post.

aleatorul said:

If the cleanup routines would do their job,

This is where you should be careful, you could be responsible for the problem, this wouldn't be the first time a user has created an issue for themselves. If you have a md5 tool that renames files, this can cause an issue, don't expect the script to find a file that has been renamed. Also, if a user doesn't run APUP regularly they may miss a cleanup - the scripts have to be trimmed down, one way is to remove some cleanup commands, but they are in the script for months before getting removed. It is possible the script maintainer has made an error as well - no one is expected to be perfect, the user or the script maintainer. The point is to find the problem, not take issue with the process.

aleatorul said:

But don't blame me because I don't know the inner workings of AP,

No one was blaming or flaming or anything. I thought it may be worth mentioning that the AP Team spends hours putting together the scripts for the community so whatever we can do to make things easier helps in the long run - you took this personal, sorry, that wasn't my intention.

[aleatorul]

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 13 September 2010 - 09:38 PM, said:

So, your initial investment is maybe 5 minutes, there after maybe 1 minute once a month to stay on top of your AutoPatcher release, this is too problematic for you?

Not at all, like I said before: I'll keep your advice in mind for the next time. With 'time spent' I was referring not to your solution, but to what I had to do before finding out about your solution.

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 13 September 2010 - 09:38 PM, said:

prefer not to be put out with having to do anything at your end except hit the go button and be done with it.

Well, in the century of speed... less clicks for the same goal is to be desired. Thinks me.

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 13 September 2010 - 09:38 PM, said:

this seems to annoy you.

'Cause I was raving and cursing and mouth foaming, right?

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 13 September 2010 - 09:38 PM, said:

if a user doesn't run APUP regularly they may miss a cleanup - the scripts have to be trimmed down, one way is to remove some cleanup commands, but they are in the script for months before getting removed.

Then I guess this is what caused the problem, last time I've updated the releases in May.

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 13 September 2010 - 09:38 PM, said:

The point is to find the problem, not take issue with the process.

I didn't take any issue with the process. It's what I believed to be an accusation from you, that I wasn't "pro-active" enough or something like that, when I really think I was doing the right thing by coming here and trying to solve the issue, without accusations but with info when requested to provide it, with testing when asked to do so, and so on.

gUiTaR_mIkE, on 13 September 2010 - 09:38 PM, said:

you took this personal, sorry, that wasn't my intention.

It's all clear then. No hard feelings, right?