Vista SP2 is live

[blueball]

I fail to see how that is Microsoft's fault. It's more your fault for using 3rd party software to modify the installation.

See my above response to previous comments

[Funkstar]

Not really. If an item isn't installed there is no need to update it. Just skip it and update the next item.

And then you re-enable the unpatched service that could potentially bring down your whole system as it isn't the correct version to play nice with everything else, or it becomes a massive security vulnerability. Windows will then report that it is fully patched to SP2, so that service/feature you re-enabled will probably never be patched again, increasing the likelihood of instability or security problems.

To be able to handle this situation would make the SP far more complex and error prone. Being able to deal with these edge cases, which are outwith the scope of Microsoft support of the OS, would be pointless.

As a user you used vLite, so it is up to you to restore the OS to a state in which the vendor expects to find it before you can install a fundamental update to the OS. Then it is up to you to re-run vLite to hack it about to the way you want it.

[blueball]

And then you re-enable the unpatched service that could potentially bring down your whole system as it isn't the correct version to play nice with everything else, or it becomes a massive security vulnerability. Windows will then report that it is fully patched to SP2, so that service/feature you re-enabled will probably never be patched again, increasing the likelihood of instability or security problems.

To be able to handle this situation would make the SP far more complex and error prone. Being able to deal with these edge cases, which are outwith the scope of Microsoft support of the OS, would be pointless.

As a user you used vLite, so it is up to you to restore the OS to a state in which the vendor expects to find it before you can install a fundamental update to the OS. Then it is up to you to re-run vLite to hack it about to the way you want it.

Microsoft can manage fine patching Office with service packs when not everything is installed so why not the OS?

If I install office 2007 but I don't install Word I can still patch my installation to the latest SP without having to go through hoops to install Word first. If I subsequently add Word to the installation I can go to Windows Update and it will get patched properly. I see no reason why the OS service pack cannot be made to work the same way!

[Funkstar]

But why should they?

You are an edge case. One that isn't supported by Microsoft or perhpas even allowed by the EULA (I don't know how much of Windows vLite can modify, but I wonder if it technically conflicts with the do-not-modify statements in the EULA).

An office SP is different though. It is a collection of SPs for the seperate apps, just as Office is a collection of seperate apps. Granted some of the smaller ones are exclusive to Office and you wouoldn't have them if you bought all the individual apps seperately. But that doesn't change they they are distinct parts, this is not the same as services or components within the OS.

Windows and its Service Packs have been designed this way and while I don't doubt it would be possible to make it all work if you have modified things with a third party application, I still don't see whay Microsoft should.

[Paul Adams]

If I install office 2007 but I don't install Word I can still patch my installation to the latest SP without having to go through hoops to install Word first.

The installer for Office allows you to select which components to install, so the Service Packs accomodate a custom installation.
Using a third party program do decide what to rip out of the base image for the OS is not supported for exactly the reason you have encountered.

[jim]

Actually there's a bit more to this than first meets the eye. I hadn't received the update through Windows Update - thinking it a bit strange, I thought I'd just go and download it directly. Then, it said I was missing vital system components, which again seemed strange as I didn't remember using vLite.

Then I remembered - I used vLite to create a Vista SP1 disk, and installed this PC from that. I removed no features, left everything the same, just added the service pack.

Turns out that SP2 doesn't generate that message because you're missing components - just because it knows you've used vLite. If you delete the registry entry for vLite, it installs properly. Why on earth did they need to lie?

[unreal]

Thanks, it's maxing out my 20mb connection!

[Funkstar]

Turns out that SP2 doesn't generate that message because you're missing components - just because it knows you've used vLite. If you delete the registry entry for vLite, it installs properly. Why on earth did they need to lie?

I guess it's an easy way to check for vLite. Your use of vLite is probably quite rare.

Either that or MS really do have something against the app

[Blaineoliver]

Microsoft even encourage the use of vLite! Its bloody annoying!

[Singh400]

Actually there's a bit more to this than first meets the eye. I hadn't received the update through Windows Update - thinking it a bit strange, I thought I'd just go and download it directly. Then, it said I was missing vital system components, which again seemed strange as I didn't remember using vLite.

Then I remembered - I used vLite to create a Vista SP1 disk, and installed this PC from that. I removed no features, left everything the same, just added the service pack.

Turns out that SP2 doesn't generate that message because you're missing components - just because it knows you've used vLite. If you delete the registry entry for vLite, it installs properly. Why on earth did they need to lie?

They didn't lie. The use of vLite isn't supported by Microsoft. And thus, if they detect vLite has been used on this install. Even to slipstream SP1 (which even WAIK can't do, so it's unsupported). SP2 won't install, and rightly so.

The way vLite "slipstreams" SP1 into Vista Gold. Is very 'dirty', and god knows what it has to do to get everything working again.

It's Microsoft protecting itself from hundreds of users complaing about the fact that SP2 won't install properly (in your case, you got lucky imo).

[jim]

They didn't lie. The use of vLite isn't supported by Microsoft. And thus, if they detect vLite has been used on this install. Even to slipstream SP1 (which even WAIK can't do, so it's unsupported). SP2 won't install, and rightly so.

The way vLite "slipstreams" SP1 into Vista Gold. Is very 'dirty', and god knows what it has to do to get everything working again.

It's Microsoft protecting itself from hundreds of users complaing about the fact that SP2 won't install properly (in your case, you got lucky imo).

No, they did lie. The screen said that I was missing system components, which is simply untrue.

It should have said "It appears that this installation was created with the use of vLite software. Continuing with the SP2 install process may severely damage your Windows Vista install. If you wish to proceed, please ensure that all vital files are backed up."

Which would have been the truth.

[Blaineoliver]

Delete the vlite key in the registry, that will make it run, wether it will have all the needed components depends on how much you vlite'd. Backup that key before deletion though!

[Paul Adams]

Microsoft even encourage the use of vLite! Its bloody annoying!

Not sure we "encourage" the use of any software that leaves you in an unsupported scenario.
KB968279 lists the only supported methods to resolve this error message.

There are simply too many variables to take into account for what state the system might be in if components were removed outside of the knowledge of the OS or its supported setup tools.
It's not practical to cater for every possible error and document its root cause, so sometimes you get a seemingly incorrect error message (or a vague "generic error", "unexpected error" or "unspecified error" reported).

[Blaineoliver]

I got told to use vLite to combine service pack1, and now with sp2 i am trying to find a way of geting it to install... Ive got past the vLite problem, just making sure ive got all the required updates installed.

[Funkstar]

I got told to use vLite to combine service pack1

I would have thought ordering new media would have been a more likely sugestion.

[Singh400]

I got told to use vLite to combine service pack1, and now with sp2 i am trying to find a way of geting it to install... Ive got past the vLite problem, just making sure ive got all the required updates installed.

By Microsoft? I highly doubt that. If Microsoft themselves don't support slipstream SP1 into Vista. Because of the way Vista updates it's servicing stack. It's hardly likely to endorse what is a "dirty" method and unsupported way of slipstreaming SP1.

IIRC, vLite hasn't been updated to support SP2, because of the same problem.

Pretty sure you can order new media from Microsoft for something like a fiver.