none
KB935509 Vista Ultimate x32 Error 80004005

    Question

  •  

    I have tried to install this update (KB935509) on Dell Precision 690 (BIOS A06 with TPM Enabled), but it continuously fails for the same error everyone else is reporting.  I am not using BitLocker, as it says my hard drives are not partitioned properly. Is KB935509 required if I am not going to use BitLocker?

     

    Otherwise, if it is required for SP1 update, has anyone from Microsoft addressed what is up with this buggy patch?  Or anyone else ever gotten it to install?

     

    Thanks in advance for any replies.

    Thursday, January 10, 2008 9:20 PM

Answers

  •  

    This is a known bug, already reported.  It has recently been fixed and integrated into later internal builds.

     

    The only possible work-around is to disable System Restore for all drives, restart the computer, enable the System Restore for all drives and then attempt the update again.

     

    Additionally starting from a clean install of Vista_RTM (or OEM pre-installs), then updating to the available beta build.

     

    Thank you for testing Microsoft Products,

     

    Geoffrey Raynor

    Microsoft Windows Beta Team

    Friday, January 11, 2008 8:10 PM
  • Thanks rcostello.

     

    For others, the summary was that rcostello and some others that were hitting the generic "failed to install" error 0x80004005, he found that it was caused by a dual-boot Linux partition, and the update could not replace the system bootloader.   You may also hit this when subsequently installing the SP itself as it also needs to update bootloader and other system files.

     

    I wanted to clarify one thing; the KB935509 is not a fix for the BitLocker code or feature. It is an update to the bootloader itself, which is necessary just in case you have a partition encrypted with BitLocker.  If you have a partition encrypted with BitLocerk, and installed the next pre-req or the SP itself, it would have resulted in losing access to that partition and your data.  This update handles keeping access to the partition when installing other core system updates.


    The next question then is typically: But I don't have bitlocker encryption enabled, so why do I need this?  The answer is that someone might not currently have BitLocker enabled, and the SP could download and be ready to install, and then they enable BitLocker - and then install the SP.  The only way to guarantee that this doesn't happen is to make it required for any system that is BitLocker capable before the SP will install.

     

    So far, the possible causes of this update failing to install with 0x80004005 seem to be:

    • Antivirus holding a file handle open on the bootloader, thus it can't be replaced.  This may be due to the antivirus programs trying to prevent a boot loader virus, but they also may be preventing a valid update by Windows itself.  Temporarily disabling or uninstalling your antivirus program may be necessary.  Be sure to re-enable your antivirus program after installing the update or the Service Pack. 
    • Dual/Multiboot OS versions where the Windows Vista bootloader is not the default bootloader.  The other programs may be preventing Windows from updating the core MBR or bootloader code.  You will need to enable this in your boot management code.

    Thanks for all the people troubleshooting - we'll keep trying to figure this out.

     

    jg

     

     

     

    Sunday, January 13, 2008 6:32 PM

All replies

  • I had the same problem. I resolved this issue by downloading and installing the 'standalone' KB935509 Patch from the

    Windows website:

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=403a47fc-38b9-4375-a115-df403b0db5ef&DisplayLang=en

     

     

    Friday, January 11, 2008 3:44 PM
  •  

    I have the same problem, I download the patch from microsoft and the error continue.

     

    Any idea?

     

    Regards

    Friday, January 11, 2008 3:47 PM
  • I also directly download the patch and installed it. It said it installed successfully.  However, it does not show up as an installed patch and Vista Update still says it is a patch available for install.

     

    I have also tried:

    Upgrading my system BIOS

    Enabling the TPM capability in the BIOS

    Telling BitLocker it was Ok to use a non-compatible TPM

     

    The only think I have not tried is turning on Bitlocker, as I do not want to re-partition my disk and re-install Vista and everything else.

     

    Would someone from Microsoft PLEASE, fix this patch, or make it optional for those of us who will not use BitLocker?!?!?

     

     

    Friday, January 11, 2008 4:47 PM
  •  

    This is a known bug, already reported.  It has recently been fixed and integrated into later internal builds.

     

    The only possible work-around is to disable System Restore for all drives, restart the computer, enable the System Restore for all drives and then attempt the update again.

     

    Additionally starting from a clean install of Vista_RTM (or OEM pre-installs), then updating to the available beta build.

     

    Thank you for testing Microsoft Products,

     

    Geoffrey Raynor

    Microsoft Windows Beta Team

    Friday, January 11, 2008 8:10 PM
  • Thanks for your reply.  I did your proposed work-around, yet KB935509 still failed to install.  I'll wait for the next fix.

     

    Friday, January 11, 2008 9:05 PM
  • See this thread Update For Windows Vista (KB935509) -v1.008 Failed To Install. for the solution that worked for me.

     

    Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:46 PM
  • Thanks rcostello.

     

    For others, the summary was that rcostello and some others that were hitting the generic "failed to install" error 0x80004005, he found that it was caused by a dual-boot Linux partition, and the update could not replace the system bootloader.   You may also hit this when subsequently installing the SP itself as it also needs to update bootloader and other system files.

     

    I wanted to clarify one thing; the KB935509 is not a fix for the BitLocker code or feature. It is an update to the bootloader itself, which is necessary just in case you have a partition encrypted with BitLocker.  If you have a partition encrypted with BitLocerk, and installed the next pre-req or the SP itself, it would have resulted in losing access to that partition and your data.  This update handles keeping access to the partition when installing other core system updates.


    The next question then is typically: But I don't have bitlocker encryption enabled, so why do I need this?  The answer is that someone might not currently have BitLocker enabled, and the SP could download and be ready to install, and then they enable BitLocker - and then install the SP.  The only way to guarantee that this doesn't happen is to make it required for any system that is BitLocker capable before the SP will install.

     

    So far, the possible causes of this update failing to install with 0x80004005 seem to be:

    • Antivirus holding a file handle open on the bootloader, thus it can't be replaced.  This may be due to the antivirus programs trying to prevent a boot loader virus, but they also may be preventing a valid update by Windows itself.  Temporarily disabling or uninstalling your antivirus program may be necessary.  Be sure to re-enable your antivirus program after installing the update or the Service Pack. 
    • Dual/Multiboot OS versions where the Windows Vista bootloader is not the default bootloader.  The other programs may be preventing Windows from updating the core MBR or bootloader code.  You will need to enable this in your boot management code.

    Thanks for all the people troubleshooting - we'll keep trying to figure this out.

     

    jg

     

     

     

    Sunday, January 13, 2008 6:32 PM
  • Hi John

     

    I would like to add to the troubleshooting steps, but before that, can you tell me:

     

    If you have a Vista build with NO TPM chip on the motherboard, do you still need to use this update?

     

    For others who don't want to read the whole troubleshooting bit then read my post at my usual forum here:

    http://forums.windrivers.com/showthread.php?t=81176

     

    I am concerned that being a bootloader update, not installing this update will have ramifications further down the line even if it is not possible to use bitlocker because the hardware doesn't support it.

     

    Troubleshooting carried out on an OEM Vista Ultimate (32bit).  Motherboard Gigabyte P35C-DS3R, 4 gigs of RAM of which 3.50 is showing as usuable.  ATI HD2600PRO video card.  Booting from SATA in AHCI mode.  Two physical drives, one partitioned into C and D, the other E is for backing up.

     

    Software on machine:

    Adobe Photoshop CS3 Extended

    EmsiSoft A-Squared full version

    Avast AntiVirus Home Edition

    Comodo Firewall with Defense+ active.

    Open Office

    Email all done via webmail.

    Windows Defender

    Windows Update set to Automatic

    HP MultiFunction printer and software

    Quick Time

    Java Runtime

     

    Up until 8th January all updates were done automatically. 

     

    Behaviour

    Update installs in background and user doesn't notice the restart - machine shuts down right in the middle of some difficult piece of photoshopping (not a happy bunny).  Says configuring updates, continues to restart.  Screen blanks after the little green loading bar for varying amount of time but not more than 10 seconds.  Message configuring updates is displayed.  Sometimes the machine would restart on its own during the configuring updates message.  The configuring updates message remains for between 5 and 30 minutes... eventually it allows logon.

     

    I presume that somewhere something kicks in to timeout the update installation and produces the failed message.

     

    Actions

    Enabled Administrator Account and tried the installation from the Administrator Account - same behaviour

    Disabled ALL start up items, Comode, Avast and A-Squared and tried again in Administrator Account - same behaviour

    Checked in safe mode to see if windows updates would work - hey it was a long shot....they didn't, but noticed that the configuring updates message happened on startup for a few seconds.

     

    Read this thread and downloaded the file manually, installed using the Administrator Account, rebooted to the User Account (spent some two minutes configuring updates on startup) and logged into the User Account.

     

    Checked the update history and showed one less update to do and KB935509 had installed successfully - WoooHooo!  BUT that was very short lived.  Went back to install the rest of the updates KB935509 had reappeared on the update list and so I let all the updates install, but it returned to the same behaviour.

     

    Disabled System Restore - same behaviour

    Unchecked this update and allowed two of the five others to install - No problem, installed fine.

    Updated Bios - same behaviour

    Re-enabled Avast, A-Squared and Comodo and was about to give up and just hide the update when I had a thought...

     

    What Worked...

    Logged into the User Account (normal startup with AV etc., but System Restore was still off), set system configuration to boot to safe mode, but did not reboot.  Set the windows update for 935509 going.  System requested restart, it restarted, configured updates and then booted to safe mode.  Logged in as the User Account.  Unchecked safe mode in system configuration and rebooted to normal mode.  Logged in on the User Account and there it was... Success.

     

    Given that it was thought that AV was still holding a file - even if the AV is disabled, and rather than uninstalling all (and therefore having to retrain everything) I decided that if something was hanging on to the update, it couldn't hang on to it in a boot to safe mode. 

     

    Allowed the rest of the updates to install - no problems and KB935509 remained installed and was not offered again.  It took some 4 hours of troubleshooting, but it looks like a combination of System Restore Off and forcing a boot to safe mode did the trick (otherwise it would have installed the first time I went to safe mode).  I had to deliver the machine to my customer 20 minutes later, so I can't go back and confirm these steps, but hopefully this should give you enough to be able to set up a lab machine to duplicate my work here.

     

    Good Luck!

     

     

    Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:18 AM
  • This thread seems to have gone dead.  I have tried all the advice given above and I am still having the same problem regarding kb935509 and error 80004005.

     

    I have seen that many people have had sucsess with NooNoo's solution, but not me.

     

    I'm runing Ultimate and using the Vista bootloader (I have XP installed on a seperate disk).  If there are any new solutions or workarounds I would be very grateful for the info.

     

    Thanks

     

    Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:02 PM
  •  

    I'm still trying to figure it out as well.. I've tried everything I could find (except a reinstall) for months now, and it just won't install.

     

    Every other update is installed, and since I 'hid' that one others since have installed withour incident.

     

    I have no dual boot, never have.  Vista Ultimate was installed clean from a DVD (MSDN release), not a beta or RC or anything.  Never had Bitlocker installed. Everything reports the boot sector and partitions are fine.

     

     

    Saturday, March 08, 2008 10:58 PM
  • Me too, as MartijnS, 'standalone' KB935509.

    But after a succesful installation, Windows Update shows Update for Windows (KB935509) as installed, but still wants me to install Update for Windows Vista (KB935509) !

     

    The title in http://www.microsoft.com/Downloads/details.aspx?familyid=403A47FC-38B9-4375-A115-DF403B0DB5EF&displaylang=en

    is "Update for Windows Vista (KB935509)".

     

    What is this?

     

    Saturday, March 29, 2008 10:41 AM
  • Now I also tried NooNoo's advice, to no avail. I don't have dual boot, but the first thing I did when I got the machine was splitting the partition into two with Paragon's Partition Manager.

     

    I read somewhere that you could still be able to install SP1 with the standalone exe regardless of 935509 - is this true?

    John Gray, or anyone at MS, are you still listening to us?

     

    Saturday, April 05, 2008 8:24 AM
  •  

    I have the same problem installing KB 935509 and have spent over 20 hours working on the phone with Microsoft India (CTS Platforms) and yet Microsoft is still unable to resolve the issue. We have attempted to instal SP1 via a stand-alone exe and it still fails due to the missing patch KB 935509. It appears that they do not have a solution, my SRX file has already been archived twice. One day someone at Microsoft will take ownership of this issue, until then do not hold your breath.......................................
    Tuesday, April 08, 2008 7:22 PM