Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsnt.misc (
More info?)
1. The entry for hotfix KB839645 looks exactly like all the other
KBnnnnnn hotfixes: "Installed"=dword:00000001
2. The Active Desktop entry does not exist.
3. The Shell32.dll file has version 4.00 like the replaced file does.
The old file is dated Feb 12, 2002 while the new file is dated
May 20, 2004. These are the German versions.
Because all this is really like it should be, I'm hesitating to
retrofit an entry for Active Setup that has likely never been there.
So why WU doesn't recognize the patch as being installed remains still
a mystery. May be we approach the issue from another angle and ask why
WU cannot install the path. May be it's because the shell32.dll cannot
be replaced because it's in use somehow? There's also no explanation
for the error message 0x80004005. I've seen several postings here with
this error code but nobody was able to explain the meaning.
Heinz Wehner
(Karlsruhe, Germany)
On 3 Aug 2004 22:19:23 -0700, melee5@my-deja.com (Lee) wrote:
> You are welcome again. Perhaps there is an error in the update's
> registry entries.
> HKLM,SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion
> \Hotfix\KB839645,"Installed",0x10001,1
>
> Typically the Name value for this key would be IsInstalled not
> simply Installed as shown from the non-active desktop update.
> Perhaps WU is looking for IsInstalled which would be the normal
> Name value for this key? It should be a binary value of one as
> well.
>
> Oddly, this is where the info is stored for the active desktop
> update.
> HKLM,"Software\Microsoft\Active Setup\Installed Components
> \{7ac88637-e78a-4036-a333-f65808b791bc}","IsInstalled",
> 0x10001,01,00,00,00
>
> Note that here IsInstalled text is correct. Agreed it is a minor
> issue provided your shell32.dll file is version 4.00 as in the
> 839645 update for non-active desktop update. You could fool
> WinUP site by placing the above (corrected?) entries into the
> registry as a workaround.
>
>
> Heinz Wehner <hwehner@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
> <kcfvg0d9n2fvigjpm3lagc3lpotoccs6cv@4ax.com>...
>
>> Lee,
>>
>> no, I cannot spot any signs or remainders indicating that Active
>> Desktop is installed or has ever been installed. I'm also not sure of
>> the latter. May be I'm mixing it up with another system. All I know is
>> that I've once installed Active Desktop on an NT4 system but later
>> removed it due to performance and stability issues. Also, on the only
>> remaining NT4 system, I don't want to have Active Desktop back.
>>
>> So the bottom line is that it was just an idea if that could be
>> something that confuses WU 3.2. Meanwhile, I don't think it is a good
>> idea to try the patch that is designed for NT4 with Active Desktop.
>>
>> Any other idea? It looks as if I will have to live with this little
>> inconsistency of WU for the time being. After all, it's only a minor
>> issue. Thanks again for your assistance.
>>
>> Heinz Wehner
>> (Karlsruhe, Germany)
>>
>>
>> On 1 Aug 2004 02:22:03 -0700, melee5@my-deja.com (Lee) wrote:
>>
>>> You are welcome, you've got my curiosity piqued at this point.
>>> Yes, WinUP might be trying to read the version of Shell32.dll
>>> file and it's the wrong one? Officially, your Active Desktop
>>> status should be viewable under this key.
>>> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Active Setup\Installed
>>> Components\{89820200-ECBD-11cf-8B85-00AA005B4395}]
>>> @="Windows Desktop Update"
>>>
>>> Look for IsInstalled value to be 1 if it is currently installed.
>>> Even an entry under this CLSID number may mean that you should
>>> install the Active Desktop version of the 839645 update? I
>>> question how it was installed years ago and now is not? Please
>>> explain how the Desktop Update came to be uninstalled? I always
>>> assumed it was kind of like getting pregnant - either you are or
>>> you are not. Does your NT exihibt any of the features of the
>>> active desktop, like the ability to left click and move shortcuts
>>> on the Start Menu|Programs lists? Do you have a quick launch bar?
>>> Are there shortcuts in C:\WINNT\Profiles\Administrator\Application
>>> Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch folder and yet you
>>> don't see them on the quick launch bar?
>>>
>>> I don't see it listed under the Uninstall key even in hidden form
>>> which some ie enhancements will at least have a token entry there.
>>> Do you want the Desktop Update with it's features to work or do
>>> you prefer to do without it? Calvin suggests that it's the main
>>> cause for any of NT's instability, but I'm so new to NT that I
>>> can't claim any such knowledge or bias as of yet. I just did
>>> archive both updates last night and something about the active
>>> update bothered me but I couldn't place my finger on what it was.
>>> I also downloaded some updates for 98 at the same time which
>>> diverted my full attention from your issue or the possiblity that
>>> you were applying the wrong update offline - or perhaps WinUP is
>>> reading the left over key and sending you the wrong update? MS
>>> is notorious about leaving old keys in the registry, everybody
>>> else does it too.
>>>
>>>
>>> Heinz Wehner <hwehner@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
>>> <5g3og0hhnmkhu7g79p03ht6tehjpm6lhgt@4ax.com>...
>>>
>>>> Lee,
>>>>
>>>> thank you for the time spent on trying to help with this minor issue.
>>>>
>>>> I've checked all the causes you've listed:
>>>> 1. Permissions: I aways logon as an administrator.
>>>> 2. PendingFileRenameOperations: no such keys found.
>>>> 3. KB842289: SUS is not installed and I have a fast and reliable
>>>> connection to the internet i.e. all other updates get installed.
>>>> Still, this indicates that a bug in WU 3.2 may well be the cause.
>>>> 4. KB268364: It's not a scripting timeout problem because it's not a
>>>> large download. Also, larger online updates are working and the
>>>> the offline update worked.
>>>> 5. Windows Script 5.6: Refreshed it but has had no effect.
>>>>
>>>> The strange thing is that the online update downloads the patch
>>>> KB839645 completely and the progress bar for the installation also
>>>> starts to fill up. Only then a failure is reported where a success
>>>> message would be expected.
>>>>
>>>> I've noticed that there are 2 updates for WinNT 4.0 SP6a Workstation:
>>>> one with ActiveDesktop and one without. I've used the latter one when
>>>> installing the patch offline. ActiveDesktop is currently not installed
>>>> but it was years ago. Is that something worth to be checked further?
>>>>
>>>> Heinz Wehner
>>>> (Karlsruhe, Germany)