Solved New ADK and Windows PE Are Available

FYI, I started doing some testing, trying to install the Preview build using unattended setup. For some reason it seems to fail on all of my answer files with this error:

Windows installation encountered an unexpected error. Error code: 0x80070490 - 0x4002c

However, I created a brand new answer file using this new version of the ADK and that worked flawlessly.

So, for now it looks like answer files may need to be recreated, but I have not figured out why yet. If I arrive at any further conclusions, I'll post back here.

@hsehestedt

Thanks for this comment, it's interesting.

The release notes indicate no need to patch this new version for BlackLotus ...

Questions, please:

1) After installing this version, have you tested your USB boot disks for possible "impediments" to booting

2) If BlackLotus is now neutralised (according to the release notes), will upgrading to this new release avoid the need for "revocation" later, do you think ? (Unless you've already done that).

ian50 said:

@hsehestedt

Thanks for this comment, it's interesting.

The release notes indicate no need to patch this new version for BlackLotus ...

Questions, please:

1) After installing this version, have you tested your USB boot disks for possible "impediments" to booting

2) If BlackLotus is now neutralised (according to the release notes), will upgrading to this new release avoid the need for "revocation" later, do you think ? (Unless you've already done that).

Click to expand...

I have done some basic testing, but it looks good so far. I have created a couple of bootable drives, and they are all booting just fine so far.

The revocations should still be applied to the system.

I should have maybe been a bit clearer in my comment. What I was attempting to say was that Windows PE itself will no longer need to be patched, but revocations should still be applied to the system.

NOTE: I would suggest a bit of caution with the whole BlackLotus / Secure Boot issue. I'll admit that I have applied the revocations to all of my systems, but I've been cautiously experimenting with this extensively so I'm very comfortable with it. Probably the best suggestion I can give is to FIRST get comfortable with disabling and then re-enabling Secure Boot before applying the revocations. That way, if you ever run into difficulties, you can very simply disable Secure Boot on your system as a workaround. I'm suggesting playing with this first because it's not always very straightforward. The process for disabling / re-enabling Secure Boot varies from system to system and it is definitely a bit on the awkward side on some systems.

Revisiting the error that I noted that I am seeing in post #2 of this thread, I've been testing this all evening and here is what I have thus far:

My autounattend answer files that perform a fully unattended installation are working. However, I have a mini library of answer files that I have created that are "abbreviated". As an example, I have one answer file that does NOT perform a complete unattended installation. All it does is bypass the Windows 11 system requirements and create a local user account. Other than that, the installation is completely manual. Those abbreviated answer files are the ones that are not working with 24H2 for me.

I'm trying to determine precisely what is causing this difficulty, but so far I have no answer. If I figure it out I'll post back here.

@hsehestedt

Thank you for the reply. More information is always better than less.

I'm perhaps more aware than your reply indicates.

you can very simply disable Secure Boot on your system as a workaround ...

Been doing that for ages, of course. My underlying question is whether MS in conjunction with hardware/EUFI BIOS manufacturers, will enforce SB on to stay on, irrespective of any other wish we may have.

As you've applied "revocation" in any case, that consideration is probably irrelevant to you. If I can avoid re-developing my own multi-boot USB disk, I will.