Is that part of a windows printer or his local printer ?
Why would sfc be concerned with his local printer files ?
I can`t get my sfc to go past 9% would a repair install fix it ?
It`s really no big deal as this OS is running perfectly.
I have a new Intel SSD arriving tomorrow and I`m reinstalling on that.
Hey Brian,
Not sure other than SFC couldn't repair that one system file of his.
What happens at 9%? Does it error out, or....? You might see if SFC may be able to finish if ran at boot instead though.
Nice choice of SSD.
Hi Shawn, You're a life saver! A gazillion thanks to you and the System Update Readiness Tool. After it did the scanning, a report named CheckSUR.log was generated and it clearly stated that the 4 errors mentioned in your post were found and fixed. A subsequent SFC scan confirmed that there were no more "integrity violations". A real happy ending! One more thing, does it mean that I'll have to run the System Update Readiness Tool again should I encounter any similar problems in the future? Am I right to think that it just did a scan and repaired the errors and that it didn't actually install any application onto my laptop?
Hi
I have run a sfcscannow and the sfcscannow.txt from the CBS.log shows the following (relevant) entries, which it can't fix:
2014-01-11 18:30:40, Info CSI 0000012c [SR] Cannot repair member file [l:22{11}]"NapiNSP.dll" of Microsoft-Windows-Naming-Provider-Infrastructure, Version = 6.1.7600.16385, pA = PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE_AMD64 (9), Culture neutral, VersionScope = 1 nonSxS, PublicKeyToken = {l:8 b:31bf3856ad364e35}, Type neutral, TypeName neutral, PublicKey neutral in the store, hash mismatch
2014-01-11 18:30:42, Info CSI 0000012e [SR] Cannot repair member file [l:22{11}]"NapiNSP.dll" of Microsoft-Windows-Naming-Provider-Infrastructure, Version = 6.1.7600.16385, pA = PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE_AMD64 (9), Culture neutral, VersionScope = 1 nonSxS, PublicKeyToken = {l:8 b:31bf3856ad364e35}, Type neutral, TypeName neutral, PublicKey neutral in the store, hash mismatch
2014-01-11 18:30:42, Info CSI 0000012f [SR] This component was referenced by [l:202{101}]"Microsoft-Windows-Foundation-Package~31bf3856ad364e35~amd64~~6.1.7601.17514.WindowsFoundationDelivery"
2014-01-11 18:30:42, Info CSI 00000132 [SR] Could not reproject corrupted file [ml:520{260},l:46{23}]"\??\C:\Windows\System32"\[l:22{11}]"NapiNSP.dll"; source file in store is also corrupted
and
2014-01-11 18:33:01, Info CSI 0000016e [SR] Cannot repair member file [l:24{12}]"snmptrap.exe" of Microsoft-Windows-SNMP-Trap-Service, Version = 6.1.7600.16385, pA = PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE_AMD64 (9), Culture neutral, VersionScope = 1 nonSxS, PublicKeyToken = {l:8 b:31bf3856ad364e35}, Type neutral, TypeName neutral, PublicKey neutral in the store, hash mismatch
2014-01-11 18:33:04, Info CSI 00000170 [SR] Cannot repair member file [l:24{12}]"snmptrap.exe" of Microsoft-Windows-SNMP-Trap-Service, Version = 6.1.7600.16385, pA = PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE_AMD64 (9), Culture neutral, VersionScope = 1 nonSxS, PublicKeyToken = {l:8 b:31bf3856ad364e35}, Type neutral, TypeName neutral, PublicKey neutral in the store, hash mismatch
2014-01-11 18:33:04, Info CSI 00000171 [SR] This component was referenced by [l:202{101}]"Microsoft-Windows-Foundation-Package~31bf3856ad364e35~amd64~~6.1.7601.17514.WindowsFoundationDelivery"
2014-01-11 18:33:04, Info CSI 00000174 [SR] Could not reproject corrupted file [ml:520{260},l:46{23}]"\??\C:\Windows\System32"\[l:24{12}]"snmptrap.exe"; source file in store is also corrupted
Please will you let me know which option I should best pursue to fix this?
I should add that these errors do not seem to be causing a problem ...
Thanks in advance ...
Last edited by paulderdash; 12 Jan 2014 at 02:53. Reason: Additional info ...
Hello Paul, and welcome to Seven Forums.
If you haven't already, go ahead and go through the listed items in the blue Note box under step 4 in OPTION TWO to see if SFC may be able to repair the files afterwards. :)
Hi Shawn
I have unsuccessfully tried sfcscannow, and the System Update Readiness Tool, so I will try 'command at boot' option next (hesitantly, as I have no noticeable problems!).
A question: Option 1 specifically mentions Method 2. I am not dual booting so am I OK to do Method 1?
Rgds - Paul
Hello Paul,
The dual boot part doesn't matter for this. It's just that I prefer Method 2 since it includes a check to make sure you are using the correct drive letter to run SFC. Drive letters are not always the same at boot as they are in Windows.
It wouldn't hurt to do a full scan of your system with Windows Defender Offline at boot as well just to be safe.
Ran Windows Defender Offline - no problems.
After discovering that my optical drive was faulty and having it replaced by Dell (within 24 hours in South Africa btw which is not too shabby) I ran Option 1 Method 2 twice (from my Recovery Partition E: to Windows OS C:). Both times got the message 'Windows Resource Protection found corrupt files but was unable to fix some of them'.
Reran sfc /verifyonly and exactly the same problems exist. I suppose I will have to extract files from my OEM re-installation DVD?
So far I haven't experienced any problems (that I know of) due this corrupt .exe and .dll so I wonder if it's worth it ...
If you're not having any issues because of them, then I wouldn't worry about it to much.
If you like, you could download and run the 64-bit (x64) System Update Readiness Tool for your same installed 64-bit Windows 7, restart the PC afterwards, and try the sfc /scannow command again.
Quote