Windows System Software -- Consulting, Training, Development -- Unique Expertise, Guaranteed Results

Before Posting...
Please check out the Community Guidelines in the Announcements and Administration Category.

Download HLK 1809, 1803, 1709. 1703. 1607...

matt_sykesmatt_sykes Member - All Emails Posts: 270
edited March 7 in NTDEV

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/windows-hardware-lab-kit

Just to HLK sign a driver for every flavour of Windows 10?!!?????!!!!! And I thought this was supposed to get easier! At least with the old HLK you could sign everything UP to the max version!

No doubt the test client needs to be every flavour of Windows '10' too... (Just what is Vbox going to look like after this!)

OF course you can self attest a driver for windows 10, with a .cab file, but how about if you want that same driver package to be signed for windows 7 and windows 10?

You have to run HLK 8.1 on a 7 client, and generate a .hlkx, now how do you combine this package with the .cab file?

There is nothing online about this, of course, well, at least nothing self evident, of course it might be mentioned in an obscure link somewhere....

So, to do a combined submission for windows 10 and 7, do you:

a) Install half the known universe and spend the next month swearing.
or...
b) Combine a .hlkx and .cab file into one.

Comments

  • Tim_RobertsTim_Roberts Member - All Emails Posts: 13,033
    via Email
    matt_sykes wrote:
    > Just to HLK sign a driver for every flavour of Windows 10?!!?????!!!!! And I thought this was supposed to get easier! At least with the old HLK you could sign everything UP to the max version!

    No, there is no such requirement.  Just run the newest HLK and you can
    request the older versions when you submit the package. You just need
    the newest HLK for 10, and the HCK for 7 and 8.


    > OF course you can self attest a driver for windows 10, with a .cab file, but how about if you want that same driver package to be signed for windows 7 and windows 10?

    You distribute two separate driver packages.


    > You have to run HLK 8.1 on a 7 client, and generate a .hlkx, now how do you combine this package with the .cab file?

    Not quite.  There is no HLK 8.1; HLK automatically means Windows 10. 
    Earlier systems use the HCK.


    > So, to do a combined submission for windows 10 and 7, do you:
    >
    > a) Install half the known universe and spend the next month swearing.

    No.  You install the HCK and the newest HLK.  That doesn't eliminate the
    swearing, of course.

    Tim Roberts, [email protected]
    Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

  • matt_sykesmatt_sykes Member - All Emails Posts: 270

    OK, thanks Tim.

    So, lets say we dont attestation sign the windows 10 driver, but put it through HLK, and put the same binary through HCK 8.1, can you combine the test packages to create a single submission that is signed for windows 7 and 10 (as you could in the past for windows 7 and 8) ?

    (And I feel some more swearing coming on, ;) )

  • Tim_RobertsTim_Roberts Member - All Emails Posts: 13,033
    via Email
    matt_sykes wrote:
    > So, lets say we dont attestation sign the windows 10 driver, but put it through HLK, and put the same binary through HCK 8.1, can you combine the test packages to create a single submission that is signed for windows 7 and 10 (as you could in the past for windows 7 and 8) ?

    You combine the test packages into one submission.  Google is your friend.

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/dashboard/get-drivers-signed-by-microsoft-for-multiple-windows-versions

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/user/merge-packages

    Tim Roberts, [email protected]
    Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

  • matt_sykesmatt_sykes Member - All Emails Posts: 270

    Thanks Tim

    I know about merging packages, it was merging HLK and HCK I couldnt find any info on. It would be good if MFST put the documentation in one place though, but as always it is in pieces, scatter all over the net.

  • matt_sykesmatt_sykes Member - All Emails Posts: 270

    Hmm, I dont think you are right Tim. I loaded the latest HLK on a 212 server, and tried to install the client on windows 10.0.1058 and I get:

    "this version of hlk client is not compatible with this operating system version"

  • Tim_RobertsTim_Roberts Member - All Emails Posts: 13,033
    via Email
    matt_sykes wrote:
    > Hmm, I dont think you are right Tim. I loaded the latest HLK on a 212 server, and tried to install the client on windows 10.0.1058 and I get:
    >
    > "this version of hlk client is not compatible with this operating system version"

    You'll want to to update your test system to the latest and greatest.  I
    don't think that changes anything.  You can still ask for the older
    versions when you submit.

    Tim Roberts, [email protected]
    Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

  • matt_sykesmatt_sykes Member - All Emails Posts: 270

    This windows 10 I have from an MSDN subscription, it is old, but it is ridiculous that MSFT should for no reason exclude it form being a valid test platform for the latest HLK. Am I and every user supposed to upgrade to some later version?

    But then the entire management of version numbers for Windows 10 is ridiculous. Actually it is a joke.

    And I note that as always the install-uninstall of HLK is as bad as HCK, ie, it leaves the OS unusable. When I tried to down grade the HLK it failed to install, I had to wipe the OS and start again.

    Yeah, the swearing continues Tim.

  • Peter_Viscarola_(OSR)Peter_Viscarola_(OSR) Administrator Posts: 7,376

    Am I and every user supposed to upgrade to some later version?

    In a word: Yes.

    the entire management of version numbers for Windows 10 is ridiculous

    Oh, stop. I’d get that complaint if it was coming from a user... somebody who didn’t do system software for a living. But what do you care what they call the system? Does it really matter to you that it’s Win10 1607 and Win10 1809, as opposed to Windows Bob and Windows Fred?

    I mean, with everything in the universe to whine about, from Climate change, to Trump, to Brexit, to how Code Analysis changes on every minor release of Visual Studio — thereby fucking up my driver build settings — you really want to complain about Windows versioning?

    Peter

    Peter Viscarola
    OSR
    @OSRDrivers

  • matt_sykesmatt_sykes Member - All Emails Posts: 270

    What is ridiculous Peter is moving the change to the minor number and saying "see, we dont do any more new OS's'!!!" Really, who are they kidding? LOL!

    Anyway, I note, from updating 1511 to the year Bismark unified Germany, and going back to the latest HLK, that it is still terrible at cleaning up despite uninstalling the old client off windows 10 before the upgrade and putting a brand new 2012 image on the server. The HLK tool couldnt move a machine to a machine pool because I had reused an old name. Clearly there is some residue on the windows 10 client.

  • Peter_Viscarola_(OSR)Peter_Viscarola_(OSR) Administrator Posts: 7,376

    moving the change to the minor number and saying "see, we dont do any more new OS's'!!!"

    /rolls eyes

    You’re talking like somebody who works part-time in IT... not a system software engineer. I mean... really: who gives a fuck WHAT they call it. We know what it is.

    I don’t think anybody’s saying what I quoted above, either. But if it makes you happy to think so, and to complain about it, go for it and enjoy.

    The HLK tool couldnt move a machine to a machine pool because I had reused an old name. Clearly there is some residue on the windows 10 client.

    Yes. This is indeed a long-standing issue and an annoyance.

    Peter

    Peter Viscarola
    OSR
    @OSRDrivers

  • matt_sykesmatt_sykes Member - All Emails Posts: 270

    And in five years we will have ten more windows 10 versions. SO about fifteen of them, each one with their own special trick, their own subtle GUI differences... (and this is REALLY annoying)

    I like this quote off wiki: "Terry Myerson, executive vice president of Microsoft's Windows and Devices Group, said that the goal of this model was to reduce fragmentation across the Windows platform"

    Reduce fragmentation? Chortle chortle! Really, who are they kidding! :)

    There are many annoyances with the HLK. I cant count the number of times I have had to reinstall the OS and HCK from scratch because it got into a mess, but from the very start, if you dont install the OS as a US system, in the US, the HCK/HLK wont even install. This is of course ridiculous.

    And guess what I am doing again, right now, because HCK couldnt connect to its data base.....

    Queue the swearing...

  • Peter_Viscarola_(OSR)Peter_Viscarola_(OSR) Administrator Posts: 7,376

    Reduce fragmentation?

    Sure Windows 10 is annoying. No doubt. Every single operating system is annoying. You wanna know what’s really annoying? Having the parameters to a common kernel mode function intentionally change between releases. THAT’s annoying. And I haven’t seen it happen in Windows her.

    Sure... we all still have to support Windows 7. Given.

    But, if you’re still supporting Win10 versions 1507 or 1511, you’re doing something wrong. Unless you care about the LTSB, if you’re supporting anything that’s earlier than 1709, you’re doing it wrong. If you care about LTSB, you ONLY need to worry about 1607 and 1809, nothing older and nothing newer.

    Call it whatever you want, right? Call them each a new OS. The reduction of fragmentation relates to the release versions you need to support. By my count. There have been 7 Win10 releases (2 Thresholds, 5 Redstones). Of those 7, you need to be concerned with maybe two or three. And they all work pretty much the same, in terms of drivers. That’s all good by me.

    Now, look... there’s a lot to downright loathe about Windows As A Service. Like the fact that it’s always updating, or that you can seemingly never download the same kit twice, or the fact that you never know for sure what’s going to be in the field until 3 months after it’s shipped so that your testing with the pre-release OS to be sure your customer’s systems will work across an upgrade is an effectively pointlessexercise in futility.

    But, really. Whinging about version numbers? C’mon... I have drivers that I wrote for Windows 2000 that still work on customer systems today. Let’s not lose sight of the forest for the trees.

    Peter

    Peter Viscarola
    OSR
    @OSRDrivers

  • blangeblange Member Posts: 15

    Just for my clarification, because I am also confused now with the new Windows 1903 policy (no "forced" updates anymore for 18 months):

    Do I need to sign my drivers now with reports from HLK 1903 AND HLK 1809 to get the signature for both operating systems ? I remember that I read something like this on MSDN, but maybe I misinterpret MSDN language. It is not always clear ;-) Of course I would prefer if I just need to run the latest HLK version to get signatures for all possible Windows 10 versions instead of preparing a "signing lab" which runs HLK 1903 till 1607 and Windows Clients running Windows 10 1903 - 1607.

  • Tim_RobertsTim_Roberts Member - All Emails Posts: 13,033
    via Email
    blange wrote:
    > Do I need to sign my drivers now with reports from HLK 1903 AND HLK 1809 to get the signature for both operating systems ?

    This has always been a matter of confusion, it seems to me.  I think we
    all know that a package that was signed for 1607 will continue to load
    just fine on all of the more recent systems.  If not, a lot of users
    would get ticked off really quickly when an update broke all of their
    devices.  So, should we be offering the general advice to test and sign
    only for the oldest system you need to support?

    Tim Roberts, [email protected]
    Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

  • blangeblange Member Posts: 15

    @Tim_Roberts said:

    So, should we be offering the general advice to test and sign only for the oldest system you need to support?

    I recall that the change from 1607 to 1703 broke some parts of my driver, so I am definitly fine with using always the latest HLK version. Especially, since the tests improved over the versions and pointed out some real errors in my driver. So far using the latest version of HLK was also not an issue since the user was also forced to upgrade.

    Now with the new policy, if I understand you right Tim, you would suggest to use the "oldest supported" HLK (now 1809 for the next 18 month) for signatures until Microsoft is ending the support and forcing the upgrade and the switching to 1903 for the next 18 months and so on?

  • RourkeRourke Member Posts: 36

    @Peter_Viscarola_(OSR) said:
    Sure... we all still have to support Windows 7. Given.

    And yet Windows 7 was dropped from the HLK and omitted from attestation. Having either or both of these capabilities would have made a huge difference to development in terms of understanding what needs done and the actual doing it. I can't imagine adding a checkbox to attestation was a difficultly so perhaps it was a political decision. I find the VHLK is a welcome evolution of the HLK, but as it marches on without win 7 it's just a real shame what could have been.

  • Tim_RobertsTim_Roberts Member - All Emails Posts: 13,033

    I can't imagine adding a checkbox to attestation was a difficulty so perhaps it was a political decision.

    Of course it was. Attestation ONLY supports Windows 10, because they want you to go through the testing process with HCK and HLK.

    Tim Roberts, [email protected]
    Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

  • RourkeRourke Member Posts: 36

    @Tim_Roberts said:
    Attestation ONLY supports Windows 10, because they want you to go through the testing process with HCK and HLK.

    The HCK/HLK is intended to raise the quality bar where attestation is just a rubber stamp. So what you say doesn't sound right because as of now it means they want windows 7 drivers to get well tested, but it's up to you whether you test your windows 10 driver or not because you can choose to just slap an attestation signature on it. If it was the other way around what you said would be logical.

  • Tim_RobertsTim_Roberts Member - All Emails Posts: 13,033

    You're just being contrary. They're assuming most people want one driver package for all of the systems. Attestation simply does not allow that; you are required to have multiple packages. THAT'S the incentive.

    Tim Roberts, [email protected]
    Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

  • RourkeRourke Member Posts: 36

    Not being contrary at all. If you had mentioned single package in your previous post it would have made sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Upcoming OSR Seminars
Developing Minifilters 29 July 2019 OSR Seminar Space
Writing WDF Drivers 23 Sept 2019 OSR Seminar Space
Kernel Debugging 21 Oct 2019 OSR Seminar Space
Internals & Software Drivers 18 Nov 2019 Dulles, VA