An issue with WinSxS deep cleaning

[garlin]

Yeah

Given that what he desires is incongruous with the reality of things, and the fact wim size is his focus, he is either going to have to create various images for his specific purposes, or create an image with all features installed and then disabling services or such relating to these for his particular usage scenarios.

What size difference(s) would we be talking about in that all-feature-enabled image (meaning in the NTLite'd multi-image scenario)... If negligible, that could be a consideration. Or perhaps he should run one image with all features installed (and disabling certain services or tasks etc for his specific purposes/installs, as mentioned). I don't have the energy to try any of that out, but if I were in his (self-imposed) predicament, I'd experiment along these lines.

There is no real installed Windows size difference with Features enabled or disabled.

Windows Features can exist in several forms:
- pre-installed FOD (integrated in the image), but marked enabled
- pre-installed FOD , but marked disabled
- not installed, but available for online download, or image integration if added as an FOD update package

Pre-installed FOD's exist as WinSxS components. When a Feature is enabled, DISM hard links a copy of the component files to the destination folders (no additional disk space is consumed), and creates the expected reg keys. Disabling a Feature unlinks the deployed folder copies (no additional disk space is reclaimed), and removes the matching reg keys.

This is designed so you can alternate between a Feature being enabled or disabled, over and over. The only difference is the presence or absence of extra hard links in the target folders, and the reg keys to support it.

Removing the components to a Feature will make the image smaller, but now you can't enable it again without performing a Host refresh.

In reality, 95% of installed users never have to decide to switch Features back and forth, except for users who later want Hyper-V support to run VM's or WSL. They're a primitive (and safe) form of Windows "lite-ing" that MS provides to IT admins.

 

[Mr. Yu]

iso/wim sizes should only be an issue with fat32 partitions and single layer dvds 4.3gb usable once formatted(nero9), anything else is just a pi--ing contest. windows installs as it wants to and i dont give a rats jacksy how long it takes, its how it runs once you have fully set it up.

You may be able to customize and add installation tools yourself using Windows PE in ntfs format.

in all my years of using windows(xp sp1 and upwards) the only Feature i have ever enabled(or installed) is net 3.5 and 4.8.

In reality, 95% of installed users never have to decide to switch Features back and forth, except for users who later want Hyper-V support to run VM's or WSL.

That 5% of users are often in complex work environments. I often need niche windows features, I don't want certain processes to show up when I don't need it, so I need to turn Windows features on or off frequently.
This is a question of weighing the pros and cons. We need to find a way to coordinate as much as possible, as I said, to keep only the WinSxS files required for Windows functionality and discard Windows updates.

 

[Pater]

Since what you want to achieve does not appear to be possible: perhaps rather than asking yourself "at which point will I need to install a feature in a VM" you may have to ask yourself: "what does it hurt to have all the features installed in those VMs"?

 

[Clang2]

let him get on with it.

 

[garlin]

Other than Hyper-V, Media Pack, OneSync, Mixed Reality and RDP, most of the other FOD’s contribute no idle overhead. Nobody uses OneSync or Mixed Reality (now deprecated). RDP has moved to an optional MSI install.

At this point, this topic is just an intellectual exercise.

 

[Clang2]

shame we havnt got an Ignore opton for threads.

 

[Mr. Yu]

This topic itself is very simple. But different regions lead to different opinions on the size of Wim, and different requirements for Windows functionality. The forums in my region have been discussing this topic all along. And it has not been resolved yet.
I think NTlite forum users have higher computer skills and are more professional, and it's normal if not. Because the people here do not have these needs.
If someone finds a similar solution, can share it. Other discussions should be ignored.

 

[Taosd]

This topic itself is very simple. But different regions lead to different opinions on the size of Wim, and different requirements for Windows functionality. The forums in my region have been discussing this topic all along. And it has not been resolved yet.
I think NTlite forums will have solutions to such problems, and it's normal if not.Because the people here do not have these needs.
If someone finds a similar solution, can share it. Other discussions should be ignored.

What happens here is, people discuss and help each other out in streamlining their windows, removing things they don't want, for a more easier to use, and better experience. NO-ONE here is whining about WIM size because to the majority of people, having a windows that isn't cluttered with pap they don't want is more important.

here is a hint tho, instead of wim, try ESD . that will shrink it down, if it bothers you so much.

 

[Mr. Yu]

here is a hint tho, instead of wim, try ESD . that will shrink it down, if it bothers you so much.

yes sir. This topic is very niche.
The size of wim has nothing to do with running speed, people here just want a fast and stable windows system. And will not deploy the system often. As I said, the needs are different.
I tried esd and it doesn't speed up the install. Simply reducing the size doesn't make any sense.Thank you for your method.

 

[Pater]

So test install times of .wim vs .esd -- see if it's worth it to you.

So test whether including all features in your .wim hurts your intended purpose in any way whatsoever.

So test whether or not "waiting longer" for an image to install is worth it (time) vs investing in faster hardware (money). (Not forgetting that in most instances: time=money.)

 

[Mr. Yu]

So test install times of .wim vs .esd -- see if it's worth it to you.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.
I tested it and esd will definitely not speed up the install. I will only use he network transfer because it is 500MB smaller than wim. it is like zip and 7z.
Turning on all features won't hurt me, but I'm more concerned about the process. As I said before, I never remove WinSxS on new hardware because of the complexity of my work environment. On non-mobile (desktop) and older configurations I would remove WinSxS because I wouldn't be using most of the windows features as well as updates. For example the home computer will only print and play videos for my kids and needs fewer processes faster startup.
If anyone in the ntlite forum gets a similar solution they can share it, other topics seem pointless at the moment. I'll continue the discussion in the forums in my area as the ntlite forum users don't care about it.
Thanks for your suggestions.

 

[Pater]

So in the newer hardware scenario, you said you won't remove WinSxS. But then newer hardware would install the .wim faster, meaning it would matter less if the .wim is bigger. And you'd retain ability to install features post-install.

With older hardware you like removing WinSxS; plus you said enabling all features won't hurt your use. From that would follow that you would probably, with those type of images, be best off enabling all features, capture that image as master, then NTLite it and remove WinSxS. If there are processes or whatever running that you don't want running, you could probably makes some scripts to disable/enable these.

It would seem that covers what you would need. However, if this is about one-image-that-does-it-all -- from work environment to your kids' computers -- then it begins to sound a lot like an exercise in futility.

 

[Annie Ng]

I do not understand the rationale behind "Removing WinSxS improves performance". Existence of WinSxS does not affect "running speed". It only affects the time it takes to extract WIM. Windows does not load unnecessary items even if they exist in your computer. On the other hand, if Windows needs something but could not find them, it will throw mysterious errors.

Instead, Windows performance is highly affected by the type of your storage. Get a decently fast SSD, and everything else performance-wise is negligible.

As I see, "Fish-Meet-Sea" just wants a fast install instead of a smooth-running, trouble-free system.

 

[Mr. Yu]

The purpose of this topic itself is to explore; How to keep only the files required for "Windows functionality on or off" and delete other WinSxS files. No one is "enthusiastic" about deleting WinSxS. The topic itself is very simple. I didn't expect a small topics to generate so many smaller topics.
Russian lopatkin's streamlined system replaces files in WinSxS with hard links. I just want to find the same or similar solution.
I mentioned in # 4：My original intention for streamlining is rapid deployment, extremely low memory, simplified installation steps, and extremely high stability.
So, all statements like ”I like deleting WinSxS“ "removing WinSxS can improve performance" "I don't need a stable system" are baseless. I mentioned and repeatedly opposed it in my previous comments.
So, if anyone has any similar solutions, can share them. If I have discussed the results in our regional forum, I will share them on the ntlite forum as soon as possible.
Stop topics unrelated to "How to keep only the files required for Windows functionality on or off and delete other WinSxS files." I am too tired to reply to every comment. Thank you.

 

[Annie Ng]

If I have discussed the results in our regional forum, I will share them on the ntlite forum as soon as possible.

Feel free to PM me with the link to the forum. I read both Traditional and Simplied Chinese, and a regular lurker of CSDN Forum and Baidu Tieba. I should have no problems reading the forum.

 

[Mr. Yu]

Feel free to PM me with the link to the forum.

Go to the Yuanjing forum and Aihao forum, you may have the answers you want.
You have restricted private messages, and I am unable to send forum links.

 

[Taosd]

This discussion is pretty much pointless in my opinion because no matter how much you 'try' to speed a windows installation up, it isn't a case of ' what's been removed and what hasn't ' it seems more focussed on hardware requirements.

Older computers and install media matter. A disc will always take longer than a USB. A mechanical drive will pretty much be slower than a ssd or nvme.

This topic has gone from saying about ' a WinSxs issue ' to something completely different.

 

[AeonX]

With 64GB DDR5 RAM installed, I will probably never understand the hassle.

Good for you, but many still use hard disk and 2 or 4 GB of RAM and don't need more than that, they just want to run the program they need and unfortunately Linux is still a long way from having the amount of programs and compatibility with peripherals that Windows has.

I know someone who needs to run a very simple program to configure an intercom that requires no more than 2 GB of RAM and Windows 7 32 bits, as well as other very simple programs and the device driver and software only work on Windows, is he going to change his laptop just because it's old? Just out of pure consumerism?

 

[Annie Ng]

is he going to change his laptop just because it's old? Just out of pure consumerism?

If he is going to connect the laptop to internet or use for commercial, yes he should buy a new computer. Or he just risks with his laptop being hacked and be part of botnet completely without his knowledge.

Regarding Linux, I think you should try before reaching conclusions. I have recently discovered that Debian can run Windows server applications with GUI on X with Bottles and Wine, and it only occupies 1GB RAM total.

 

[Clang2]

people are struggling to afford to keep up with consumerism.
a part that is affordable here in GB may not be affordable in a South American country.

my pentium g5420 has HT disabled and runs perfectly well on 2 cores(2c/2c). not everyone wants to run skynet.

i remember a user that could only install from an optical drive.
decent quality branded run of the mill dvd drives can be found new for about 20GBP(£) and when using good branded media is a reliable backup. i recently invested in 2 new pioneer blu-ray drives(1 internal 1usb) and i use verbatim discs and have 2 older(5-6 years old ish) in storage. i like to have an ms iso burned to dvd and have an iso backup on blu-ray data disc.

so what it takes time to install from optical, plan accordingly - get setup going, sort disc layout and partitions then let windows do its thing while you make tea or coffee, food or toilet break then come back when you have the oobe screen or the desktop.

not everyone wants to learn linux but having a linux live(i use debian)(or a win pe disc) is good enough for basic internet duties when you dont have an os installed or are up crap creek seemingly without a paddle.

i tried rendering an audio file in REAPER with the cpu reduced by 100mhz increments from its base clock of 4.1ghz(amd a10 7890k) down to 3.1ghz(a8 7600 base clock) and the difference in seconds was so minimal you would only notice it when reaper gave the completion times. it proved that a 60 to 70gbp cpu was good enough and it wasnt worth spending on a cpu at double the price(a10 7890k) and that a few seconds faster makes very little difference.