Another .NET Framework 3.5 Family Update Problem

This .NET framework 3.5 stuff is becoming more and more annoying. Seems like
everything that has to do with it is doomed to not work properly.

Here's the situation:

My WSUS 3.1 shows the following update:

Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Family Update (KB959209) x86 - (NOT APPROVED)

The above update has been superseded by the following 2 updates:

1) Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 and .NET Framework 3.5 Family
Update for .NET versions 2.0 through 3.5 (KB951847) x86 - (APPROVED for a
computer group)

2) Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 and .NET Framework 3.5 Family
Update (KB951847) x86 - (NOT APPROVED)

(1) is approved for installation for a group of computers that need it. A
computer downloaded patch (1) yesterday and installed it at the end of the
day when user shutdown the PC.

That PC reported back at 8:45 am (Last Status Report). There was no update
installation error yesterday. Problem is it has been 2+ hours and it still
says that it needs KB959209.

Why does it need an update that's been superseded by another update
(KB951847) which is already installed successfully?

"John" <a> wrote in message news:...

> 1) Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 and .NET Framework 3.5
> Family Update for .NET versions 2.0 through 3.5 (KB951847) x86 - (APPROVED
> for a computer group)

> (1) is approved for installation for a group of computers that need it. A
> computer downloaded patch (1) yesterday and installed it at the end of the
> day when user shutdown the PC.
>
> That PC reported back at 8:45 am (Last Status Report). There was no update
> installation error yesterday. Problem is it has been 2+ hours and it still
> says that it needs KB959209.
>
> Why does it need an update that's been superseded by another update
> (KB951847) which is already installed successfully?


Ostensibly, according to the metadata (if you trust it), KB959209 "provides
compatibility roll-up updates found after the release of Microsoft .NET
Framework 3.5 SP1". Interestingly enough, though, the actual contents of the
KB959209 package don't contain any content that could be considered
post-NET35SP1.

Of course, that also depends on what exactly "compatibility roll-up updates
found after the release" actually means. If it simply means that "Ooopsss..
guess what... we found out that .NET35SP1 requires .NET20SP2 and .NET30SP2
and we're not forcing them to be installed, and we're not detecting to
verify their presence before installing .NET35SP1..." then who knows why
it's detecting as needed on a NET35SP1 installation.

Of course, this is all false evidence anyway, since the KB959209 package
contains exactly the same content as the KB951847 package. Thus, I'm more
inclined to think that the KB959209 package was "broken" from the day it was
released, and the KB951847 was designed to fix it -- nevermind that this
whole distribution philosphy was flawed long before the packages were
actually published.


But, to be honest, it's really not worth worrying over.

Mark all instances of KB959209 as DECLINED, since they're superseded and
you're never going to approve them anyway -- and your "problem" will be
solved.


--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP:EA, MCDBA
Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas
Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009)

MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com;
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pro...awrence.Garvin

I'm not worried. I'm confused why an update is still marked as needed when a
newer update is already installed successfully. For sure I've never seen
this problem before.

Superseded updates normally would eventually disappear from "Updates needed
by computers" list once all computers have got the latest updates and
reported back to WSUS.

I'll decline it later. Thanks much.

"Lawrence Garvin [MVP]" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
>
> But, to be honest, it's really not worth worrying over.
>
> Mark all instances of KB959209 as DECLINED, since they're superseded and
> you're never going to approve them anyway -- and your "problem" will be
> solved.
>
>
> --
> Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP:EA, MCDBA
> Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas
> Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009)
>
> MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
> My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com;
> http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
> My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pro...awrence.Garvin
>

"John" <a> wrote in message news:...
> I'm not worried. I'm confused why an update is still marked as needed when
> a newer update is already installed successfully. For sure I've never seen
> this problem before.

Agreed. It's a strong indication that the metadata in the superseded update
is defective.


> Superseded updates normally would eventually disappear from "Updates
> needed by computers" list once all computers have got the latest updates
> and reported back to WSUS.

Correct.

--
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP:EA, MCDBA
Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas
Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009)

MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com;
http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pro...awrence.Garvin

Lawrence,

I forgot to decline KB959209 after posting my last reply on Friday. That
update is left untouched.

I went back to my WSUS today. It turns out that KB959209 does disappear from
the list on its own. It just takes a little longer than usual. My guess is
it finally sorted itself out on Monday morning when user turned on the PC. I
can't say that for sure because I did not logon to WSUS on Monday but it
definitely took several PC reboots.

"Lawrence Garvin [MVP]" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> "John" <a> wrote in message news:...
>> I'm not worried. I'm confused why an update is still marked as needed
>> when a newer update is already installed successfully. For sure I've
>> never seen this problem before.
>
> Agreed. It's a strong indication that the metadata in the superseded
> update is defective.
>
>
>> Superseded updates normally would eventually disappear from "Updates
>> needed by computers" list once all computers have got the latest updates
>> and reported back to WSUS.
>
> Correct.
>
> --
> Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP:EA, MCDBA
> Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas
> Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009)
>
> MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus
> My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com;
> http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com
> My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pro...awrence.Garvin
>