354 replies to this topic

[DesertJerry]

Sorry I jumped the gun here - I did not notice they were beta/RC releases till after I posted the question. Oh well.

[Cristiano]

that happens, don't worry. but it's interesting to see that the size has decreased a lot. sadly, .net 4 doesn't include .net 3.5 (at least, yet)

[]s

[_def_x_]

@Cristiano

The link you gave was for .Net Framework 4 Beta 2 dated 10/17/2009, the link Here! is .Net Framework 4 RC dated 2/10/2010.

I noticed that the download size as of the new RC release is slightly smaller than Beta 2
...dotNetFx40_Full_x86.exe.........................35.3 MB.....................................37.7 MB
...dotNetFx40_Full_x86_x64.exe...................48.0 MB.....................................54.6 MB

[Cristiano]

oops

[]s

[DesertJerry]

.NET Framework 2.0 and 3.0 SP2 updates:

.NET Framework 2.0 SP2 Update for XP and XP x64
NDP20SP2-KB976569-x86.exe
NDP20SP2-KB976569-x64.exe

.NET Framework 3.0 SP2 for XP and XP x64
NDP30SP2-KB976570-x64.exe
NDP30SP2-KB976570-x86.exe


This ADO item was updated too but I'm not sure where it goes:
ADONETDataServices_SL3_Update_CTP3.EXE

[Cristiano]

great. that will be checked and added into the script. by now, the .net package doesn't include x64 updates, so i don't know what do to with those and i'm also sure that more x64 updates must be missing due that.

[]s

[DesertJerry]

I listed the XP x64 updates because I believe you had mentioned someone was working XP x64 for AutoPatcher.

[_def_x_]

module edit needed...

KB976570 is .Net Framework 3.0 SP2 -> NDP30SP2-KB976570-x86.exe
not -> Title=.NET Framework 2.0 Service Pack 2...

You might want to fix this as well -> WebPage=WebPage=http://support.microsoft.com/kb/976570

[Cristiano]

ok. i will fix this sunday

[]s

[Cristiano]

done. issue fixed

[]s

[Black Ghost]

Looks like Net 4.0 has gone final.

[_def_x_]

Black Ghost said:

Looks like Net 4.0 has gone final.

This will be added shortly - we have been discussing this...

...if interested - read here

[DesertJerry]

Be advised that DotNetFramework 4.0 will not install as a standalone program. Indications are it requires 2.0, 3.0, and 3.5 to be already installed - I fould this being discussed at: http://www.ryanvm.ne...opic.php?t=8292

Edited by DesertJerry, 15 April 2010 - 08:02 PM.

[Cristiano]

hum... if this one requires 2.0, 3.0, and 3.5, set 3.5 as prereq should be enough? this one already deploys all those

by the way: due the size of the .net package, we will do a few changes in this one. by instance, there will be an x64 version of the script and also an win2k version. so, will take a few days to complete the changes and testing

[]s

[_def_x_]

This issue of "is .Net 3.5 SP1 a system software requirement for .Net 4.0" has got me pulling my hair out. The confusion goes
back and forth between 'application' issues and 4.0 'installation' issues. All the points made make sense - .Net 3.5 SP1 is in
fact a 'requirement' - I just have yet to see it stated as such. Here is the .Net 4.0 System Requirement page along with a link
to the latest .Net 4.0 'readme' - it will download and open in your browser. I will give anyone a nickle if you can point out that
something more than IE 6 or later and Windows Installer 3.1 or later is required in the software department.

....NET Framework System Requirements
...For the most current version of the 4.0 Readme, click here.

One thing seems accurate, you want to install 3.5 SP1 first and then 4.0, remove any beta versions first, this is all I can glean.

[JRosenfeld]

I suspect that it will in any case be some time before apps are made available that require .NET 4. It does not replace earlier versions. I would not install it until it was needed by some app that I wanted to use. So I see no hurry in adding it to Autopatcher.

[Cristiano]

ok, the module for .net 4 is ready, but i'm holding it doing one issue: KB974417. i've noticed that this one has an routine built-in that check for certain prereqs. if they don't math, then the update isn't applied. but this also drives crazy those that think that this is an issue. i didn't found any prereq for this one, so i can't restrict this one to not be showed if the issue isn't present.

also, an question for yours: right now, none of the .net updates are tagged as critical nor recommended, but they already are at WU. this is the short description for each setting:
Critical=True means that the modules will be checked by default (and only that)
Recommended=True means that if the user runs autopatcher with an /recommended, then all the modules tagged as Recommended=True will be selected by default. in regular autopatcher usage, this doesn't change nothing

basically, we are setting as Recommended=True all the non-critical updates that are required to match WU. the .nets are in WU. do yours think that it's better let this one as they already are or change the .net modules that aren't critical to be Recommended=True?

thanks for any advise

[]s

[gondwana]

 Cristiano, on 28 March 2010 - 09:08 PM, said:

done. issue fixed

[]s

I have just run ap and the latest is still called .Net sp2, I may have downloaded it before you fixed it.
and .Net sp2 CLR is always selected even after loading.

Windows threw up an error report after the restart (see the screen shot)

Attached Files

•  capture_18042010_111335.jpg   93.85K   9 downloads

[Cristiano]

the issue is related to the KB974417 update. when the user don't have the prerequisite to apply this update, this can happen. toke a while to notice this because certain machines require it and some don't. to fix this issue, i need find the prereq and so far i didn't found nothing. i will search a little bit more and, if not possible, then this update at least will not be auto-selected anymore

thanks

[]s

[Cristiano]

ok, i didn't found an way to make KB974417 don't load when not required. so, this one will not be checked by default anymore

also, the .net 4 was added, in x86 and x64 version

also the .net package has reached 400MB plus, we will start to split this release, making versions for 2k, xp, vista and seven. if i'm not mistaken, most of xp, vista and seven updates are the same, but i'm not 100% sure of it. so, basically win2k will have his own script. also, we will start an x64 version of this script, but this may take some time to complete

[]s