This is on a second desktop updating from 22621.160, here it did not show as optional, it just started downloading without giving any choice. 🤷♂️
Beta Build 22621.290 & 22622.290 Read the blog!!!!!!!
CrazyKats
19,680
Reputation points
Volunteer Moderator
Windows Insider program | Program announcements and registration | Communications and announcements
Locked Question. This question was migrated from the Microsoft Support Community. You can vote on whether it's helpful, but you can't add comments or replies or follow the question.
72 answers
Sort by: Most helpful
-
![](data:image/svg+xml, %3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' height='64' class='font-weight-bold' style='font: 600 30.11764705882353px "SegoeUI", Arial' width='64'%3E%3Ccircle fill='hsl(128, 8%, 22%)' cx='32' cy='32' r='32' /%3E%3Ctext x='50%25' y='55%25' dominant-baseline='middle' text-anchor='middle' fill='%23FFF' %3EA%3C/text%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Anonymous2022-07-06T15:43:56+00:00 -
Anonymous
2022-07-06T15:09:54+00:00 sfc/scannow found and repaired corrupt files!
Same files here:
And the same on a second machine:
-
Anonymous
2022-07-06T14:58:08+00:00 sfc/scannow found and repaired corrupt files!
-
Anonymous
2022-07-06T14:43:49+00:00 "Getting even weirder, checked again few minutes ago on the same machine and it now shows correctly 22622. Must be another A/B testing B.S"
Perhaps CMD is updated in some background process when main installation is completed?
Possible.
But I had rebooted already more than once after the update and when I submitted the FBH report earlier I did it with recording, so that they can see that I had 22621 in CMD prompt and 22622 in Winver.exe and system info.
Go figure?
-
![](data:image/svg+xml, %3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' height='64' class='font-weight-bold' style='font: 600 30.11764705882353px "SegoeUI", Arial' width='64'%3E%3Ccircle fill='hsl(198.4, 2%, 29%)' cx='32' cy='32' r='32' /%3E%3Ctext x='50%25' y='55%25' dominant-baseline='middle' text-anchor='middle' fill='%23FFF' %3EPO%3C/text%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Pauli O 16,380 Reputation points Volunteer Moderator2022-07-06T14:36:25+00:00 "Getting even weirder, checked again few minutes ago on the same machine and it now shows correctly 22622. Must be another A/B testing B.S"
Perhaps CMD is updated in some background process when main installation is completed?
@Silverpulser
>"DISM shows the tool version as 22621.1 and the image version as 22622.290"
That's normal, as shown in Johnny's screenshot of 19041/19044. DISM show original version and it doesn't change when build number is increased by Enablement package. Original 'problem' is why winver and CMD show different build numbers.