Automatic update dont happen, manual ones work

I have Windows XP home SP2. I have generally kept it up to date manually -
i.e. I always seem to beat the automatic updates. This machine is on 24
hours a day on a broadband connection, and it still has not yet downloaded
any updated.
Now I could go to the windows update page a download them, but that kind of
defeats the purpose of the whole automatic updates thing.
I am wondering if there is a schedule related to updates. Do different
countries get them first? Do Pro users get them before Home users?

Sean: None of our WinXP SP2 computers at our office work with Automatic
Update. I have been trouble shooting this, and have found out that many,
many people are having this issue.

I'm waiting to see what MS will have to say on this issue.

Tom "Pepper" Willett
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage

"Sean Anderson" <Sean > wrote in message
news:E5626A0D-F869-40B2-BA70-...
|I have Windows XP home SP2. I have generally kept it up to date manually -
| i.e. I always seem to beat the automatic updates. This machine is on 24
| hours a day on a broadband connection, and it still has not yet downloaded
| any updated.
| Now I could go to the windows update page a download them, but that kind
of
| defeats the purpose of the whole automatic updates thing.
| I am wondering if there is a schedule related to updates. Do different
| countries get them first? Do Pro users get them before Home users?

I too am having this same problem, and cannot get anyone to respond to it.

Can no one help us? Where are all the MVP's ?

Hi Tom,

Mine doesn't work either (except for 1 little update awhile back). If there is a
solution I would appreciate knowing it. I get the notification, but have to manually
download the update for the MS site. WinXP SP2 Home.
I can be contacted at .
Kaylene

Tom Pepper Willett wrote:
> Sean: None of our WinXP SP2 computers at our office work with
> Automatic Update. I have been trouble shooting this, and have found
> out that many, many people are having this issue.
>
> I'm waiting to see what MS will have to say on this issue.
>
> Tom "Pepper" Willett
> Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
>
> "Sean Anderson" <Sean > wrote in
> message news:E5626A0D-F869-40B2-BA70-...
>> I have Windows XP home SP2. I have generally kept it up to date
>> manually - i.e. I always seem to beat the automatic updates. This
>> machine is on 24 hours a day on a broadband connection, and it still
>> has not yet downloaded any updated.
>> Now I could go to the windows update page a download them, but that
>> kind of defeats the purpose of the whole automatic updates thing.
>> I am wondering if there is a schedule related to updates. Do
>> different countries get them first? Do Pro users get them before
>> Home users?

"Taurarian" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi Tom,
>
> Mine doesn't work either (except for 1 little update awhile back). If there is a
> solution I would appreciate knowing it. I get the notification,

Did you try checking one at a time?
What does the log look like if you do that?

Also, in order to see more clearly what the log is trying to tell you
I suggest you monitor SoftwareDistribution with FileMon.
In any case, you could still get some more clues about what it did
by searching that directory to find all files changed on that day
and then sorting them by Date Modified (which then lists them down
to the minute.) Further, if you find that .cab files and .xml files are
being sent you can expand those and read them to infer what role
they played in the process. Sometimes after all that it looks as if
the server just isn't giving the client anything to do!

Another diagnostic you can use, to see if something is being downloaded,
is bitsadmin. E.g. bitsadmin /WRAP /MONITOR /ALLUSERS
could be pre-started in a command window to get BITS perspective
of the process. Actually I think that BITS perspective is to some extent
also given in the log. The problem is (IMO) that the PID which shows
with the messages is the same PID that wuauserv has. Maybe that
isn't a problem after all (e.g., if the only messages from that PID are
from BITS) but it sure could be a lot clearer, especially since there
isn't any documentation about *any* of it (that I can find).

BTW that's another reason to use FileMon. It will show you both
an imagename and a PID, allowing you to know which process
the log is referring to when you see just a PID listed. Of course,
when the imagename is svchost.exe we again are on our own
trying to infer which service is causing the action.


HTH

Robert Aldwinckle
---


> but have to manually download the update for the MS site.
> WinXP SP2 Home.
> I can be contacted at .
> Kaylene
>
> Tom Pepper Willett wrote:
>> Sean: None of our WinXP SP2 computers at our office work with
>> Automatic Update. I have been trouble shooting this, and have found
>> out that many, many people are having this issue.
>>
>> I'm waiting to see what MS will have to say on this issue.
>>
>> Tom "Pepper" Willett
>> Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
>>
>> "Sean Anderson" <Sean > wrote in
>> message news:E5626A0D-F869-40B2-BA70-...
>>> I have Windows XP home SP2. I have generally kept it up to date
>>> manually - i.e. I always seem to beat the automatic updates. This
>>> machine is on 24 hours a day on a broadband connection, and it still
>>> has not yet downloaded any updated.
>>> Now I could go to the windows update page a download them, but that
>>> kind of defeats the purpose of the whole automatic updates thing.
>>> I am wondering if there is a schedule related to updates. Do
>>> different countries get them first? Do Pro users get them before
>>> Home users?
>

Thanks Robert, I've downloaded FileMon - and will check it out later (perhaps when
the next lot of updates is happening) - I'll try one at a time and see what happens
then with the auto download and monitor it at the same time.

Same thing happened on my friends computer last night - the auto updates didn't work,
but the icon sat at 0% in the system tray. Manually downloaded updates okay for his
computer.

Oh well, until the next round of updates - thanks for your assistance, I'll
definitely check that out.

Kaylene


"Robert Aldwinckle" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> "Taurarian" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> Mine doesn't work either (except for 1 little update awhile back). If there is a
>> solution I would appreciate knowing it. I get the notification,
>
> Did you try checking one at a time?
> What does the log look like if you do that?
>
> Also, in order to see more clearly what the log is trying to tell you
> I suggest you monitor SoftwareDistribution with FileMon.
> In any case, you could still get some more clues about what it did
> by searching that directory to find all files changed on that day
> and then sorting them by Date Modified (which then lists them down
> to the minute.) Further, if you find that .cab files and .xml files are
> being sent you can expand those and read them to infer what role
> they played in the process. Sometimes after all that it looks as if
> the server just isn't giving the client anything to do!
>
> Another diagnostic you can use, to see if something is being downloaded,
> is bitsadmin. E.g. bitsadmin /WRAP /MONITOR /ALLUSERS
> could be pre-started in a command window to get BITS perspective
> of the process. Actually I think that BITS perspective is to some extent
> also given in the log. The problem is (IMO) that the PID which shows
> with the messages is the same PID that wuauserv has. Maybe that
> isn't a problem after all (e.g., if the only messages from that PID are
> from BITS) but it sure could be a lot clearer, especially since there
> isn't any documentation about *any* of it (that I can find).
>
> BTW that's another reason to use FileMon. It will show you both
> an imagename and a PID, allowing you to know which process
> the log is referring to when you see just a PID listed. Of course,
> when the imagename is svchost.exe we again are on our own
> trying to infer which service is causing the action.
>
>
> HTH
>
> Robert Aldwinckle
> ---
>
>
>> but have to manually download the update for the MS site.
>> WinXP SP2 Home.
>> I can be contacted at .
>> Kaylene
>>
>> Tom Pepper Willett wrote:
>>> Sean: None of our WinXP SP2 computers at our office work with
>>> Automatic Update. I have been trouble shooting this, and have found
>>> out that many, many people are having this issue.
>>>
>>> I'm waiting to see what MS will have to say on this issue.
>>>
>>> Tom "Pepper" Willett
>>> Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
>>>
>>> "Sean Anderson" <Sean > wrote in
>>> message news:E5626A0D-F869-40B2-BA70-...
>>>> I have Windows XP home SP2. I have generally kept it up to date
>>>> manually - i.e. I always seem to beat the automatic updates. This
>>>> machine is on 24 hours a day on a broadband connection, and it still
>>>> has not yet downloaded any updated.
>>>> Now I could go to the windows update page a download them, but that
>>>> kind of defeats the purpose of the whole automatic updates thing.
>>>> I am wondering if there is a schedule related to updates. Do
>>>> different countries get them first? Do Pro users get them before
>>>> Home users?
>>
>
>
>

"Taurarian" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> Thanks Robert, I've downloaded FileMon - and will check it out later (perhaps when
> the next lot of updates is happening) - I'll try one at a time and see what happens
> then with the auto download and monitor it at the same time.
>
> Same thing happened on my friends computer last night - the auto updates didn't work,
> but the icon sat at 0% in the system tray. Manually downloaded updates okay for his
> computer.
>
> Oh well, until the next round of updates - thanks for your assistance, I'll
> definitely check that out.



FWIW I downloaded and installed them all today.
No problems except it was slow.

I used my idea of watching what was going on using

bitsadmin /WRAP /MONITOR /ALLUSERS

It makes a huge difference if you care about what is happening
during the download phase.

I also used my FileMon idea just in case something broke
but it wasn't needed. Because of the number and size of the updates
I suggest a tighter filter, e.g. one which at least discards Directory and
QUERY. What on earth are they doing *all* those for? I suspect there is
a good opportunity for optimization there. Another bizarre observation
was seeing update.exe trying to read C:\AUTOEXEC.BAT! For XP?
When client is running in D:? BTW I only saw that by accident because
I added ;update to my filter so I could spot writes to WindowsUpdate.log
in my trace. That was really useful because it was showing how the updates
were processed after the download but before the install phase.


Robert
---

> FWIW I downloaded and installed them all today.
> No problems except it was slow.
>
> I used my idea of watching what was going on using
>
> bitsadmin /WRAP /MONITOR /ALLUSERS
>
> It makes a huge difference if you care about what is happening
> during the download phase.
>
> I also used my FileMon idea just in case something broke
> but it wasn't needed. Because of the number and size of the updates
> I suggest a tighter filter, e.g. one which at least discards Directory and
> QUERY. What on earth are they doing *all* those for? I suspect there is
> a good opportunity for optimization there. Another bizarre observation
> was seeing update.exe trying to read C:\AUTOEXEC.BAT! For XP?
> When client is running in D:? BTW I only saw that by accident because
> I added ;update to my filter so I could spot writes to WindowsUpdate.log
> in my trace. That was really useful because it was showing how the updates
> were processed after the download but before the install phase.
>
>
> Robert
> ---
Thanks for the information and ideas - I've saved your email - in the meantime, I've
done a massive clean out on the computer and got rid of a lot of rubbish etc. I tend
to do that every now and again. Next updates, I'll definitely look into it. Might
discover something of interest, especially now I know about the BitsAdmin Tool &
FileMon.
In my case when asked for all the updates to download, the wu icon simply disappeared
and no further activity was observed (same with my friend's computer) No downloading
was happening at all. Nothing was registering as being downloaded from anywhere
through my connection. I left it for a day, thinking it might download later, but
nothing happen the next day, no icon showed at all.
When I did the manual updates, the icon came back and showed progress. Manual updates
installed fine on both computers without problems. At least I'm getting the
notifications and the newsletter, so I'm aware when the updates are out.

Kaylene

"Taurarian" <> wrote in message
news:e%
....
> In my case when asked for all the updates to download, the wu icon simply disappeared
> and no further activity was observed (same with my friend's computer) No downloading
> was happening at all. Nothing was registering as being downloaded from anywhere
> through my connection.

Then that is definitely when the bitsadmin command may help.
I think I saw that disappearing icon symptom happen briefly
with mine as well.

In fact, one surprise I had was that I saw two instances of wuauclt.exe,
one which was apparently started under my userid and another one
which was started by System. I'm not sure but I think that the user-
started wuauclt.exe went away during the download phase and the
System one stayed up. The icon disappeared briefly even though
I have it set for Always show in the Customize Notifications dialog.
Unfortunately, I didn't make notes of these observations and don't
think I am recalling the details really precisely. <sigh>

The newest surprise is now that the icon doesn't even show up
in the list of Past Items in that dialog! But there is a bunch of stuff
in there regarding CPU utilization which I have never noticed before.
I wonder what that means for the next time I see wuauclt.exe?


> I left it for a day, thinking it might download later, but
> nothing happen the next day, no icon showed at all.

Then you should also try interpreting the log messages you got
at the time. I think that the log might be showing
(e.g. using its cryptic "pruned out due to potential supersedence"
or its equally arcane "matching criteria..." terminology)
that some second thoughts have been given to the list of updates
which are available for download and hence at that time
there was "nothing to do."

Perhaps the AU servers give the client the same kind of problem
that OE sometimes sees in the newsgroups? E.g. in the same
way that OE can pick up a list of headers which can only be
satisfied from a particular server (so then discovers when connecting
to another supposedly identical server that the messages
associated with that header "don't exist"), perhaps one AU server
tells you one thing and then another AU server tells you something
else. AU downloads are probably also made different from WU
downloads because they filter out only critical updates, so the
first list is probably always bigger than the one it can use.

I bet by the time we understand this UI it will have changed
and there *still* won't be adequate documentation about it.

The expression "smoke and mirrors" comes to mind a lot
when trying to understand AU.


;]

Robert
---