AutoPatcher downloader?

[itsnotabigtruck]

Couldn't AutoPatcher circumvent its copyright problems by having a downloader that acquires necessary copyrighted content off the MS website and assembles the full AutoPatcher package?

This would only work for updates and hotfixes that are available from the Download Center (i.e. not only through MS support), but it's better than no AutoPatcher at all.

[Shof]

The main problem is that MS wants to force everyone to use windows updates and that you have to use Windows updates since they no longer want people hosting there patches

[guenther]

hi,

had just finished downloading the august core for autopatcher half an hour before they "closed the shop".

Did not have time to get the AP 5.6. Any ideas where to get it. What are the risks by installing the august core with version 5.1.

thanx for any info

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

hi,

had just finished downloading the august core for autopatcher half an hour before they "closed the shop".

Did not have time to get the AP 5.6. Any ideas where to get it. What are the risks by installing the august core with version 5.1.

thanx for any info

All of the latest releases use 5.6

[itsnotabigtruck]

The main problem is that MS wants to force everyone to use windows updates and that you have to use Windows updates since they no longer want people hosting there patches

Did you read the OP? What I was proposing was a system where *Microsoft* would be hosting the patches, not AutoPatcher. The downloader would have a list of the URLs to all the Windows patches and would download them straight from Microsoft and assemble a full AutoPatcher build.

The technique would be similar to BartPE, where the necessary files from Windows are copied from the user's Windows CD.

[cykosis]

it sounds like an interesting solution.. given that microsoft's main gripe (as far as I've gathered) is the distribution of their updates from a third party source. All you would be doing here automating the creation of your own offline repository using their own servers as the source. Only difference here would be the Autopatcher core generating the list of updates to download based on OS choice.

Monthly updates could be released as they are now telling your repository to delete certain updates that are replaced by new ones.

[beltman713]

I've seen other sites hosting MS updates, so why hassle AP?

[myrhymeandreason]

I've seen other sites hosting MS updates, so why hassle AP?

AutoPatcher was something that I used often, and will miss quite a bit. But if they took down sites like you are talking about (my favorite being Software Patch) I would be so angry.

EDIT: Typo.

[beltman713]

AutoPatcher was something that I used often, and will miss quite a bit. But if they took down sites like you are talking about (my favorite being Software Patch) I would be so angry.

EDIT: Typo.

That was the main one I was thinking of.

[Teerex20]

I wonder if ms made a deal with the other guys that made a setup that does the same exact thing autopatcher did?.I checked it out and it"s made by some german people and it's available . i could't get it to work right though and the error codes are in german-lol.It has all of the updates though and you pick which you wants. it touts it will only take a few minutes to update your computer.

Maybe that's why no more autopatcher.

[Angel Blue01]

There are lots of third-party providers of Windows patches, usually for slipstreaming that Microsoft has not shutdown. I like your idea Memodude, but Microsoft for whatever reason likes to force everyone to download patches only through Windows update.

[jebus197]

Couldn't AutoPatcher circumvent its copyright problems by having a downloader that acquires necessary copyrighted content off the MS website and assembles the full AutoPatcher package?

This would only work for updates and hotfixes that are available from the Download Center (i.e. not only through MS support), but it's better than no AutoPatcher at all.

I think the same. I mean you could have a completely Microsoft free autopatcher, which simply assembled itself on a per user basis, by downloading patches from the official Microsoft servers. If Microsoft don't want people to download these packages, then they are going to have to stop supplying them on their servers.

The objective of course will be that once downloaded, the Autopatcher package can then build it's own executable/installable package that would allow administrators to install it on other PC's (with a full compliment of patches) at their discretion. At no time is Autopatcher at any way at fault in this, since the Autopatcher package contains no Microsoft code at all and is simply doing what any user would normally be able to do anyway.

Besides which MS are the biggest bunch of hypocrites ever. What about all the PC and technical magazines that bundle updates on their included free CDs? Oh, except I forgot, MS likes to stay on their good side because they think they can make money out of them. (Autopatcher I believe has even been on one of these CD's in the past and noone complained then).

Anyway it's stupid to stop Autopatcher. Unless MS stops distributing updates over the web for administrators and starts requiring WGA checks on every single minor update, there is no need to stop it at all.

If they think it's bypassing WGA, well screw them, it's not Autopatcher that is bypassing it, it's they themselves who are doing this.

Anyway I think the folks here should make the autopatcher author aware of this idea.

[Jock Horror]

That was the main one I was thinking of.

apparently they only have links to microsoft stuff...

[Japlabot]

I fullheartedly support a BartPE-style builder to get the patches from the Microsoft server.

I don't understand the rumor about Microsoft trying to kill AP because of security concerns, if it was true, then they might as well sent Cease & Desists to all 3rd Party software vendors because they can potentially have security issues

[Panacik]

I don't understand the rumor about Microsoft trying to kill AP because of security concerns, if it was true, then they might as well sent Cease & Desists to all 3rd Party software vendors because they can potentially have security issues

Its not a rumor, they did eventually state it was because of security concerns.

[JRosenfeld]

Couldn't AutoPatcher circumvent its copyright problems by having a downloader that acquires necessary copyrighted content off the MS website and assembles the full AutoPatcher package?

This would only work for updates and hotfixes that are available from the Download Center (i.e. not only through MS support), but it's better than no AutoPatcher at all.

In another thread here someone (sorry, forgotten who) posted the link to heise security, that does just that.

I've tried it and it works well. It will install all security patches in a similar manner to Autopatcher (only those not aleady installed), for the optional patches you install the ones you want manually.

http://www.heise-security.co.uk/articles/80682

[jebus197]

There are other sites (including some universiies etc) that do host these other patches - and which Microsoft don't seem to have any issues with. So again, AP could just point to these, or any number of mirrors (AKA Debian apt-get stlyle) whether anonymous, or public or whatever and obtain them from there. The important thing is that AP it'self will never contain any Mircosoft code. That is what Microsoft seems so hot and bothered about. So the fix for that is realtively easy.

Anyway, I don't know why we are having this diiscussion in the absence of the author of AP. Someone should PM him or something and let him know about this thread - and that the show is really far from over.

[dr.bisho]

microsoft just keeps on making me hate it... i even turned linux :p

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

AutoPatcher will be back, doing pretty much this so hold tight ;)

[Angel Blue01]

There already is a utility like this: Windows Update Downloader!

[Raging Demon]

Could someone please confirm the CRC of the august 2007 update? Just want to make sure that my update file has not been tampered with.

[andrewwan1980]

All we need to do is google: AutoPatcher XP x86 ENU Core

and you'll find plenty of torrents for the August release.

Shame that we can't have a centralised collaboration of doing future releases....

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

All we need to do is google: AutoPatcher XP x86 ENU Core

and you'll find plenty of torrents for the August release.

Shame that we can't have a centralised collaboration of doing future releases....

sigh, AutoPatcher is coming back... officially and legally.

[andrewwan1980]

sigh, AutoPatcher is coming back... officially and legally.

Yes, all AutoPatcher needs to do is rewrite the basecode to be similar to:

- http://wud.jcarle.com/UpdateLists.aspx

- http://www.heise-security.co.uk/articles/80682

- http://softwarepatch.com/

slap on AutoPatcher infamous logo brand name and there you go, all new AutoPatcher 6.0, legal version.

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

Yes, all AutoPatcher needs to do is rewrite the basecode to be similar to:

- http://wud.jcarle.com/UpdateLists.aspx

- http://www.heise-security.co.uk/articles/80682

- http://softwarepatch.com/

slap on AutoPatcher infamous logo brand name and there you go, all new AutoPatcher 6.0, legal version.

No, no changes to the core AutoPatcher, just the way that patches are downloaded... at the end you still have the AutoPatcher we all know and love.