code.kliu.org Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 it's a GDR update, not a LDR (Hotfix). Um, first, it's still a hotfix. GDR and LDR simply refer to the two separate maintenance branches. GDR is the more conservative branch, while LDR (or QFE in NT5 terminology) is the cumulative branch with all sorts of non-critical fixes (LDR branch later becomes the next SP). Second, you cannot have something that's only a "GDR update", because every single hotfix that is available as GDR also contains a corresponding set of LDR files, and you can install the LDR version if you want. I have never known MSFT to release GDR-only hotfixes. Every "GDR hotfix" must bundle a LDR version (otherwise people who use the LDR branch will "lose" their accumulated fixes). If you download the hotfix and install it manually, you can opt to install the LDR version, in which case, your QFE build number will be something in the 2xxxx range, and not 16399. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Can anyone confirm what the hotfix is actually for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windows7even Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 thats easy...to plug the leaked oem key issue they had to change the code. the real and most important questions though is will the oem partners get another hand-off party? :laugh: Fox News too busy with Windows 8 leaked builds. what? no way...fox news is still running on windows for workgroups 3.11..at least they think they are up-to-date with the times :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 No, they wouldn't have to change the code, key blacklisting is done server side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windows7even Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 from what i understand its not "You cannot blacklist a OEM_SLP key by updating the configuration file on their WGA/Windows Update servers. They can mark it as non genuine at wga check that's all. I'M quite sure the worst case scenario would be a non genuine W7, but not a deactivation of it. To disable the key you have to update the validation code of W7. This will IMHO happen (if at all) soonest at SP1, same was FCGKW- at xp (except this was a VLK key)" http://forums.mydigitallife.info/showpost....p;postcount=113 funny thing is that they didnt even update the oem certificate in the rtm build of 7..hasn't been updated since vista apparently because people were using old vista certificated and activation the 7 rtm with them...sounds like microsoft got a lil lax on the activation/wga with 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajua Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Maybe it is to parch some sort of critical vulnerability. Will look around for more info about this update. I'm running RTM on my laptop but I haven't check Windows Update. As another user said, if it is important, it will show on next patch tuesday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicAndre1981 Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 @code.kliu.org I know, but unless you don't install a LDR update you will get the GDR files from a update. That's why the buildlabEx is 16xx not 20xxx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JK_MoTs Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Hi! I found on DrWindows.de, a german Windows-News-Site (http://www.drwindows.de/windows-7-allgemei...n-gilt-nur.html) a download-link with a bunch of Windows 7 RTM updates, including the one that updates the build-strings to 7600.16399.x86fre.win7_gdr.090722-1835 or 7600.16399.x64fre.win7_gdr.090722-1835. There's also a description given for each update (so KB675605 is the GDR-update we're talking about here): ?KB123334 (Windows6.1-KB123334-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB123334-x64.msu) Microsoft-Windows-IEInstal assembly that updates IEInstal.exe in %ProgramFiles%\Internet Explorer\ folder to version 8.0.7600.16399 or 8.0.7600.20495. ?KB123456 (Windows6.1-KB123456-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB123456-x64.msu) Microsoft-Windows-notepad revision distribution that updates Notepad.exe to 6.1.7600.16399 or 6.1.7600.20495. ?KB674103 (Windows6.1-KB674103-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB674103-x64.msu) A update that upgrades Win32k, User32, TCP/IP Binaries (tcpip.sys), SxS, NDIS (ndis.sys), GDI32 and Common Controls components to version 6.1.7600.14000 or 6.1.7600.20496. ?KB675605 (Windows6.1-KB675605-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB675605-x64.msu) A GDR update that upgrades Windows 7 OS Kernel, HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer), BootEnvironment Core BootManagerPCAT components to 6.1.7600.16399 or 6.1.7600.20495. This update package is responsible for changing the BuildLabEx string to 7600.16399.x86fre.win7_gdr.090722-1835 or 7600.16399.x64fre.win7_gdr.090722-1835 and changing win7_rtm in the BuildLab string to win7_gdr. ?KB972636 (Windows6.1-KB972636-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB972636-x64.msu) IE compatibility update with new version of 6.1.7600.14000 or 6.1.7600.20497. ?KB973751 (Windows6.1-KB973751-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB973751-x64.msu) Update to Windows 7 Image Based Setup-Media and Setup Navigation Wizard Framework to version 6.1.7600.20497. ?KB974039 (Windows6.1-KB974039-v2-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB974039-v2-x64.msu) Update to Windows Search Engine to version 7.0.7600.16401 or 7.0.7600.20497. ?KB974138 (Windows6.1-KB974138-x86.msu or Windows6.1-KB974138-x64.msu) Update to Windows GI and Font Embedding components to version 6.1.7600.16402 or 6.1.7600.20498 Greetings from Germany, JK_MoTs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code.kliu.org Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Someone did a disassembly of the KB123456 Notepad and compared to the the RTM Notepad: the two are identical except for things like the version and timestamp; the code is exactly the same. Also, the KB number is obviously suspicious... I mean, how much more obvious can you get than 123456? My guess is that all the low-number KBs (the ones that are not 9xxxxx) are probably test updates used for internal testing that somehow got leaked out. These are probably similar to the test updates offered for the Beta and RC, in which the updates installed version-bumped files that were otherwise identical to the original. If this theory holds up, this would also include the kernel update (makes sense for them to try to update the kernel and HAL--perhaps the two most "core" elements of Windows, to make sure that they are properly handled by Windows Update). This also means, that, in all likelihood, the kernel "update" that bumped up the reported version number and that has some people so excited in this thread was probably just a test update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilovetech Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Someone did a disassembly of the KB123456 Notepad and compared to the the RTM Notepad: the two are identical except for things like the version and timestamp; the code is exactly the same. Also, the KB number is obviously suspicious... I mean, how much more obvious can you get than 123456?My guess is that all the low-number KBs (the ones that are not 9xxxxx) are probably test updates used for internal testing that somehow got leaked out. These are probably similar to the test updates offered for the Beta and RC, in which the updates installed version-bumped files that were otherwise identical to the original. If this theory holds up, this would also include the kernel update (makes sense for them to try to update the kernel and HAL--perhaps the two most "core" elements of Windows, to make sure that they are properly handled by Windows Update). This also means, that, in all likelihood, the kernel "update" that bumped up the reported version number and that has some people so excited in this thread was probably just a test update. a good point & equally a good possibility. since disassembly is showing no changes in code it seems to be test updates. but lets see if they appears on windows update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ci7 Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 funny . i had installed 7/8 hotfixes the build# remained the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JK_MoTs Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 (edited) funny .i had installed 7/8 hotfixes the build# remained the same Take a look at your ntoskrnl.exe for example, it's 7600.16399 after installing the updates... Edited August 2, 2009 by JK_MoTs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chosen One Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Take a look at your ntoskrnl.exe for example, it's 7600.16399 after installing the updates... Odd, My ntoskrnl.exe has stayed same 7600.16385 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codenamepenryn Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Odd, My ntoskrnl.exe has stayed same 7600.16385 Are you sure you installed all of the updates? Mine is at 6.1.7600.16399 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code.kliu.org Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Before people get too excited about updating their kernel to 16399, please note that every hotfix from the 16399 build set have an abnormally low KB # and are almost certainly dummy test updates. All the hotfixes that contain a normal KB number have build numbers higher than 16399, and all the hotfixes that are suspected of being just a test update have the 16399 build number. If people really can't wait for August 11 and must have the latest hotfix installed right now, at least steer clear of the low-# hotfixes, since those are almost certainly not "real". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argi Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Less speculating/installing random updates, more waiting until it's on Windows Update tbh. Given that OEM's already have the build that was leaked this is most likely an update for important changes that have been made since then (that didn't make it in in time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ci7 Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Take a look at your ntoskrnl.exe for example, it's 7600.16399 after installing the updates...*sniped* it look like it did. THX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Access Denied Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codenamepenryn Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 The updates are not available through Windows Update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy422 Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 I hope these updates don't somehow mess with the speed of the RTM, it's so much better than the RC right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rev Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Did anyone consider the possibility that the updates are only for people with systems that demand it? EG, if an update is targeted at resolving the way certain OEM hardware works with it, and your computer is not from that OEM, you won't get it, and thus it will not "change your build number?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts