Win2000Pro unable to install updates

I have recently done a clean re-install of Windows 2000 Pro. I have been
attempting for 3 days now to do the updates. This is the message I am
getting: [The following updates were not installed: Update for Background
Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773)]. Since no
update has ever successfully installed, I have no update history to refer to.
I have searched the MS help, online, message boards and here. I have read
posts from some very knowledgeable folk and have done everything that has
been suggested, to no avail. It seems that this issue is profuse and well
known; that nobody has solved it yet and Microsoft doesn't seem to care. If
you have seen this message and have found a solution, I would love to hear
from you. Thanks in advance.

Did you try manually installing the updates? Just to confirm.

"smores" <> wrote in message
news:9F9EBF73-B3D7-4B21-87D4-...
>I have recently done a clean re-install of Windows 2000 Pro. I have been
> attempting for 3 days now to do the updates. This is the message I am
> getting: [The following updates were not installed: Update for Background
> Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773)]. Since no
> update has ever successfully installed, I have no update history to refer to.
> I have searched the MS help, online, message boards and here. I have read
> posts from some very knowledgeable folk and have done everything that has
> been suggested, to no avail.


Saying you "have done everything that has been suggested" tells us nothing.
Many of the suggestions are in fact requests for diagnostics so at the very least
the results of those analyses should accompany such a claim.


> It seems that this issue is profuse and well known; that nobody has solved it yet
> and Microsoft doesn't seem to care.


Care to try substantiating such claims? ; ]

In the case of XP the need for this update was merely transitional.
In fact, if users' machines came with XPsp2 pre-installed they would
never even see it.


> If you have seen this message and have found a solution, I would love to hear
> from you. Thanks in advance.


Previously when W2K users have posted questions about WU
I have asked what version of it are they using. E.g. if they are still using WUv4
then presumably their log records would all be in the old log files (pre BITS).
Otheriwse, e.g. if you are using WUv5 or WUv6 and you have logging appeariing
in WindowsUpdate.log (without the space) I suspect the update is unnecessary
and a symptom of some other problems on your system--all of which would have
been carefully analysed by those suggestions you claim to have done. ; )


Good luck

Robert Aldwinckle
---

"Robert Aldwinckle" wrote:

> "smores" <> wrote in message
> news:9F9EBF73-B3D7-4B21-87D4-...
> >I have recently done a clean re-install of Windows 2000 Pro. I have been
> > attempting for 3 days now to do the updates. This is the message I am
> > getting: [The following updates were not installed: Update for Background
> > Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773)]. Since no
> > update has ever successfully installed, I have no update history to refer to.
> > I have searched the MS help, online, message boards and here. I have read
> > posts from some very knowledgeable folk and have done everything that has
> > been suggested, to no avail.

Robert, thank you for your response. Actually, you were one of the
knowledgeable folk I was referring to.

> Saying you "have done everything that has been suggested" tells us nothing.
> Many of the suggestions are in fact requests for diagnostics so at the very least
> the results of those analyses should accompany such a claim.

The suggestions I am referring to were more actions to take that analyses to
perform. They included such thing as re-registering dlls, removing objects,
deleting files, changing security settings...that type of thing.

> > It seems that this issue is profuse and well known; that nobody has solved it yet
> > and Microsoft doesn't seem to care.
>
>
> Care to try substantiating such claims? ; ]

I can only admit to a degree of frustration having pored through a fair
pecentage of over 11,500 posts regarding Update issues...many from people
even more frustrated than I.

> Previously when W2K users have posted questions about WU
> I have asked what version of it are they using. E.g. if they are still using WUv4
> then presumably their log records would all be in the old log files (pre BITS).
> Otheriwse, e.g. if you are using WUv5 or WUv6 and you have logging appeariing
> in WindowsUpdate.log (without the space) I suspect the update is unnecessary
> and a symptom of some other problems on your system--all of which would have
> been carefully analysed by those suggestions you claim to have done. ; )

This is a clean install of W2K v5 with SP4 done successfully. The next
search for available updates revealed a total of 54 including BITS and SP4
roll-up. They downloaded but wouldn't install. I manually installed them all.
This is where I am now: the most recent update session shows 5 new critical
updates with the information '0kb download - updates have been downloaded and
need to be installed'. Installation fails and the Downloads folder in
Software Distribution is empty. I managed to find the Malicious Software
Removal tool (KB890830) and installed that, leaving 4 (KB922582, KB917344,
KB832483 and Microsoft VM). I would like to get them if they are critical
but, even more important, I would like to see the Automatic Updater succeed
on its own. This is a computer that I resurrected for someone else and I hate
to give it back not fully functional. At this point I consider the time I am
putting into this as 'tuition'...worthwhile if I come out having learned
something. The log file is pretty large, but I would gladly provide anything
that would help me resolve this. Can you help? Thank you.
Scott

(cross-post added to Windows 2000 WU and BITS NG)
"smores" <> wrote in message
news:F8CCA718-C1DB-4568-857C-...
>
>
> "Robert Aldwinckle" wrote:
>
>> "smores" <> wrote in message
>> news:9F9EBF73-B3D7-4B21-87D4-...
>> >I have recently done a clean re-install of Windows 2000 Pro. I have been
>> > attempting for 3 days now to do the updates. This is the message I am
>> > getting: [The following updates were not installed: Update for Background
>> > Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773)]. Since no
>> > update has ever successfully installed, I have no update history to refer to.
>> > I have searched the MS help, online, message boards and here. I have read
>> > posts from some very knowledgeable folk and have done everything that has
>> > been suggested, to no avail.
>
> Robert, thank you for your response. Actually, you were one of the
> knowledgeable folk I was referring to.
>
>> Saying you "have done everything that has been suggested" tells us nothing.
>> Many of the suggestions are in fact requests for diagnostics so at the very least
>> the results of those analyses should accompany such a claim.
>
> The suggestions I am referring to were more actions to take that analyses to
> perform. They included such thing as re-registering dlls, removing objects,
> deleting files, changing security settings...that type of thing.


That's like saying you have thoroughly searched a room for something
you "know" is there--without bothering to turn the lights on. ; )


>
>> > It seems that this issue is profuse and well known; that nobody has solved it yet
>> > and Microsoft doesn't seem to care.
>>
>>
>> Care to try substantiating such claims? ; ]
>
> I can only admit to a degree of frustration having pored through a fair
> pecentage of over 11,500 posts regarding Update issues...many from people
> even more frustrated than I.


But most of them are trying to use it with XP not your OS.
So you might not even be looking in the right room... <eg>


>
>> Previously when W2K users have posted questions about WU
>> I have asked what version of it are they using. E.g. if they are still using WUv4
>> then presumably their log records would all be in the old log files (pre BITS).
>> Otheriwse, e.g. if you are using WUv5 or WUv6 and you have logging appeariing
>> in WindowsUpdate.log (without the space) I suspect the update is unnecessary
>> and a symptom of some other problems on your system--all of which would have
>> been carefully analysed by those suggestions you claim to have done. ; )
>
> This is a clean install of W2K v5 with SP4 done successfully.


Would that be a slipstreamed version of W2Ksp4?
Perhaps it includes other superseding updates integrated as well?


> The next
> search for available updates revealed a total of 54 including BITS and SP4
> roll-up. They downloaded but wouldn't install. I manually installed them all.
> This is where I am now: the most recent update session shows 5 new critical
> updates with the information '0kb download - updates have been downloaded and
> need to be installed'. Installation fails and the Downloads folder in
> Software Distribution is empty.


I can imagine that trying to install 0Kb updates might result in an extra diagnostic or two... ; }


> I managed to find the Malicious Software
> Removal tool (KB890830) and installed that, leaving 4 (KB922582, KB917344,
> KB832483 and Microsoft VM). I would like to get them if they are critical
> but, even more important, I would like to see the Automatic Updater succeed
> on its own. This is a computer that I resurrected for someone else and I hate
> to give it back not fully functional. At this point I consider the time I am
> putting into this as 'tuition'...worthwhile if I come out having learned
> something. The log file is pretty large, but I would gladly provide anything
> that would help me resolve this. Can you help? Thank you.


Did you miss my point? If your log file is WindowsUpdate.log it means
that you are using WUv5 or WUv6 (not WUv4) so then my guess would be
that you might not need the update that you are trying to install.
Otherwise I think it would have to be installed manually or via WUv4.

I suspect the fact that you are having to do manual installs and the indication
that this update is needed may both only be symptoms that your BITS support
is broken somehow. I.e. fixing that might make both problems disappear.


If there is a W2K version of bitsadmin you could try using its /util /version /verbose
options to see what it says about your BITS support. Otherwise how about
at least disclosing the versions of the modules you have that 842773 would
be trying to install? The KB article itself documents those files. A suprise for me
is finding that it even applies to W2Ksp3 which makes me think having it already
integrated in your W2Ksp4 may be possible.

I don't have your OS so I'm cross-posting this to both BITS and W2K WU
in case somebody there can provide any additional facts for us about this
situation.


HTH

Robert
---

Just wanted to let you know that. I too, today had seen a W2K Pro SP4 could
not successfully install KB842773 BITS 2.0 WinHttp 5.1 update files.
The machine appears to not have had any automatic updates applied.

Was there a conclusion to a simple fix ?
charlie

"Robert Aldwinckle" wrote:

> (cross-post added to Windows 2000 WU and BITS NG)
> "smores" <> wrote in message
> news:F8CCA718-C1DB-4568-857C-...
> >
> >
> > "Robert Aldwinckle" wrote:
> >
> >> "smores" <> wrote in message
> >> news:9F9EBF73-B3D7-4B21-87D4-...
> >> >I have recently done a clean re-install of Windows 2000 Pro. I have been
> >> > attempting for 3 days now to do the updates. This is the message I am
> >> > getting: [The following updates were not installed: Update for Background
> >> > Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773)]. Since no
> >> > update has ever successfully installed, I have no update history to refer to.
> >> > I have searched the MS help, online, message boards and here. I have read
> >> > posts from some very knowledgeable folk and have done everything that has
> >> > been suggested, to no avail.
> >
> > Robert, thank you for your response. Actually, you were one of the
> > knowledgeable folk I was referring to.
> >
> >> Saying you "have done everything that has been suggested" tells us nothing.
> >> Many of the suggestions are in fact requests for diagnostics so at the very least
> >> the results of those analyses should accompany such a claim.
> >
> > The suggestions I am referring to were more actions to take that analyses to
> > perform. They included such thing as re-registering dlls, removing objects,
> > deleting files, changing security settings...that type of thing.
>
>
> That's like saying you have thoroughly searched a room for something
> you "know" is there--without bothering to turn the lights on. ; )
>
>
> >
> >> > It seems that this issue is profuse and well known; that nobody has solved it yet
> >> > and Microsoft doesn't seem to care.
> >>
> >>
> >> Care to try substantiating such claims? ; ]
> >
> > I can only admit to a degree of frustration having pored through a fair
> > pecentage of over 11,500 posts regarding Update issues...many from people
> > even more frustrated than I.
>
>
> But most of them are trying to use it with XP not your OS.
> So you might not even be looking in the right room... <eg>
>
>
> >
> >> Previously when W2K users have posted questions about WU
> >> I have asked what version of it are they using. E.g. if they are still using WUv4
> >> then presumably their log records would all be in the old log files (pre BITS).
> >> Otheriwse, e.g. if you are using WUv5 or WUv6 and you have logging appeariing
> >> in WindowsUpdate.log (without the space) I suspect the update is unnecessary
> >> and a symptom of some other problems on your system--all of which would have
> >> been carefully analysed by those suggestions you claim to have done. ; )
> >
> > This is a clean install of W2K v5 with SP4 done successfully.
>
>
> Would that be a slipstreamed version of W2Ksp4?
> Perhaps it includes other superseding updates integrated as well?
>
>
> > The next
> > search for available updates revealed a total of 54 including BITS and SP4
> > roll-up. They downloaded but wouldn't install. I manually installed them all.
> > This is where I am now: the most recent update session shows 5 new critical
> > updates with the information '0kb download - updates have been downloaded and
> > need to be installed'. Installation fails and the Downloads folder in
> > Software Distribution is empty.
>
>
> I can imagine that trying to install 0Kb updates might result in an extra diagnostic or two... ; }
>
>
> > I managed to find the Malicious Software
> > Removal tool (KB890830) and installed that, leaving 4 (KB922582, KB917344,
> > KB832483 and Microsoft VM). I would like to get them if they are critical
> > but, even more important, I would like to see the Automatic Updater succeed
> > on its own. This is a computer that I resurrected for someone else and I hate
> > to give it back not fully functional. At this point I consider the time I am
> > putting into this as 'tuition'...worthwhile if I come out having learned
> > something. The log file is pretty large, but I would gladly provide anything
> > that would help me resolve this. Can you help? Thank you.
>
>
> Did you miss my point? If your log file is WindowsUpdate.log it means
> that you are using WUv5 or WUv6 (not WUv4) so then my guess would be
> that you might not need the update that you are trying to install.
> Otherwise I think it would have to be installed manually or via WUv4.
>
> I suspect the fact that you are having to do manual installs and the indication
> that this update is needed may both only be symptoms that your BITS support
> is broken somehow. I.e. fixing that might make both problems disappear.
>
>
> If there is a W2K version of bitsadmin you could try using its /util /version /verbose
> options to see what it says about your BITS support. Otherwise how about
> at least disclosing the versions of the modules you have that 842773 would
> be trying to install? The KB article itself documents those files. A suprise for me
> is finding that it even applies to W2Ksp3 which makes me think having it already
> integrated in your W2Ksp4 may be possible.
>
> I don't have your OS so I'm cross-posting this to both BITS and W2K WU
> in case somebody there can provide any additional facts for us about this
> situation.
>
>
> HTH
>
> Robert
> ---
>
>
>

"Robert Aldwinckle" <> дÈëÏûÏ¢ÐÂÎÅ
:#...
> (cross-post added to Windows 2000 WU and BITS NG)
> "smores" <> wrote in message
> news:F8CCA718-C1DB-4568-857C-...
> >
> >
> > "Robert Aldwinckle" wrote:
> >
> >> "smores" <> wrote in message
> >> news:9F9EBF73-B3D7-4B21-87D4-...
> >> >I have recently done a clean re-install of Windows 2000 Pro. I have
been
> >> > attempting for 3 days now to do the updates. This is the message I am
> >> > getting: [The following updates were not installed: Update for
Background
> >> > Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773)].
Since no
> >> > update has ever successfully installed, I have no update history to
refer to.
> >> > I have searched the MS help, online, message boards and here. I have
read
> >> > posts from some very knowledgeable folk and have done everything that
has
> >> > been suggested, to no avail.
> >
> > Robert, thank you for your response. Actually, you were one of the
> > knowledgeable folk I was referring to.
> >
> >> Saying you "have done everything that has been suggested" tells us
nothing.
> >> Many of the suggestions are in fact requests for diagnostics so at the
very least
> >> the results of those analyses should accompany such a claim.
> >
> > The suggestions I am referring to were more actions to take that
analyses to
> > perform. They included such thing as re-registering dlls, removing
objects,
> > deleting files, changing security settings...that type of thing.
>
>
> That's like saying you have thoroughly searched a room for something
> you "know" is there--without bothering to turn the lights on. ; )
>
>
> >
> >> > It seems that this issue is profuse and well known; that nobody has
solved it yet
> >> > and Microsoft doesn't seem to care.
> >>
> >>
> >> Care to try substantiating such claims? ; ]
> >
> > I can only admit to a degree of frustration having pored through a fair
> > pecentage of over 11,500 posts regarding Update issues...many from
people
> > even more frustrated than I.
>
>
> But most of them are trying to use it with XP not your OS.
> So you might not even be looking in the right room... <eg>
>
>
> >
> >> Previously when W2K users have posted questions about WU
> >> I have asked what version of it are they using. E.g. if they are
still using WUv4
> >> then presumably their log records would all be in the old log files
(pre BITS).
> >> Otheriwse, e.g. if you are using WUv5 or WUv6 and you have logging
appeariing
> >> in WindowsUpdate.log (without the space) I suspect the update is
unnecessary
> >> and a symptom of some other problems on your system--all of which would
have
> >> been carefully analysed by those suggestions you claim to have done.
; )
> >
> > This is a clean install of W2K v5 with SP4 done successfully.
>
>
> Would that be a slipstreamed version of W2Ksp4?
> Perhaps it includes other superseding updates integrated as well?
>
>
> > The next
> > search for available updates revealed a total of 54 including BITS and
SP4
> > roll-up. They downloaded but wouldn't install. I manually installed them
all.
> > This is where I am now: the most recent update session shows 5 new
critical
> > updates with the information '0kb download - updates have been
downloaded and
> > need to be installed'. Installation fails and the Downloads folder in
> > Software Distribution is empty.
>
>
> I can imagine that trying to install 0Kb updates might result in an
extra diagnostic or two... ; }
>
>
> > I managed to find the Malicious Software
> > Removal tool (KB890830) and installed that, leaving 4 (KB922582,
KB917344,
> > KB832483 and Microsoft VM). I would like to get them if they are
critical
> > but, even more important, I would like to see the Automatic Updater
succeed
> > on its own. This is a computer that I resurrected for someone else and I
hate
> > to give it back not fully functional. At this point I consider the time
I am
> > putting into this as 'tuition'...worthwhile if I come out having learned
> > something. The log file is pretty large, but I would gladly provide
anything
> > that would help me resolve this. Can you help? Thank you.
>
>
> Did you miss my point? If your log file is WindowsUpdate.log it means
> that you are using WUv5 or WUv6 (not WUv4) so then my guess would be
> that you might not need the update that you are trying to install.
> Otherwise I think it would have to be installed manually or via WUv4.
>
> I suspect the fact that you are having to do manual installs and the
indication
> that this update is needed may both only be symptoms that your BITS
support
> is broken somehow. I.e. fixing that might make both problems disappear.
>
>
> If there is a W2K version of bitsadmin you could try using its /util
/version /verbose
> options to see what it says about your BITS support. Otherwise how
about
> at least disclosing the versions of the modules you have that 842773
would
> be trying to install? The KB article itself documents those files. A
suprise for me
> is finding that it even applies to W2Ksp3 which makes me think having it
already
> integrated in your W2Ksp4 may be possible.
>
> I don't have your OS so I'm cross-posting this to both BITS and W2K WU
> in case somebody there can provide any additional facts for us about this
> situation.
>
>
> HTH
>
> Robert
> ---
>
>