Manual patching vs Windows Update question

[Mike Hood]

I let my W2k Pro PC automatically check for updates on the Microsoft site. I
note down the files needed, cancel the update and then download and install
them "manually". This works fine, and seems to me a good idea against the
day I need to reinstall W2k afresh as I'll have all the updates I need
together in one place (and being on a 56k dial-up, this makes a lot of
sense).

My question relates to reboots during the installing of these patches. When
doing a bunch "manually", the system will often demand a reboot after
certain of the fixes. From the Windows Update site, however, it just runs
through them all and asks for a reboot at the end, if necessary. Is it safe
to "manually" install a bunch of fixes all together (well, consecutively,
obviously) and say "no" to any reboot requests, leaving that until the end?

Many thanks.

 

[Mark]

Some patches, require other patches installed, before
they can be installed. So it is best to reboot, when
prompted.

 

[Mike Hood]

So installing them in MS03- or MS04- number order
(or KB number order - is that the same thing?) is the
best bet. But IIRC, patching from the Windows update
site runs right through a number of updates without asking
for an Update until the end, if necessary. Or am I wrong?
This is (to quote John Cleese) the nub of the thrust of the
gist of my question.

Thanks!

 

[Torgeir Bakken \(MVP\)]

So installing them in MS03- or MS04- number order
(or KB number order - is that the same thing?) is the
best bet. But IIRC, patching from the Windows update
site runs right through a number of updates without asking
for an Update until the end, if necessary. Or am I wrong?
This is (to quote John Cleese) the nub of the thrust of the
gist of my question.

Thanks!

Hi

Take e.g. a look at this two posts:

http://groups.google.com/[email protected]

http://groups.google.com/[email protected]