[Kiki Burgh]

glentium, on Jun 14 2006, 10:31 AM, said:

salamat kabayan!

don't mention it ... just trying to give it back to the others who might have the same issues like mine ... besides, everybody here is so helpful that i'd love to be 1 too in my own little ways

glentium .. it is great to have a "Pinoy" too here in HFSLIP ... though i know that you've been here quite longer than i have been but perhaps you opted to just be silent ... as for me, i've been bugging these guys for quite sometime now ... my apologies

i understand the concept better now ... i remember reading in the instructions before that only i386 directory is a must for HFSLIPping ... although w/ this RC request i placed forward to the accomodating moderators would require WINNTUPG dir to work ... and yes ... clarifying the said issue via "Special Features" link would truly be enlightening (especially to those who miss out on going through the entire thread )

awaiting for the new final ... test release or final ... heck, doesn't matter to me ... been using whichever is available anyway
as for any volunteer ... i've been raising my arm here for XP SP2 ... well, testing that is ... as i've said i'll be glad to be of little assistance ... as for dotnet2, it shouldn't pose any headache for us anymore ...

thanks!

This post has been edited by Kiki Burgh: 14 June 2006 - 09:00 PM

[zartrix]

I try the HFSLIP_60614b.CMD version and i have problems integrating .NET 2.0 and .NET 1.1

I need a little help!! Read my post with the explanation of the problems here:
Install Problem with Net Framework v2 and Language Pack

I´m using XP Professional + SP2 in Spanish.

Thanks in advance.
zartrix

[Camarade_Tux]

Tomcat76, on Jun 15 2006, 12:43 AM, said:

A new final is in the works. At this point, I don't intend to add more functionality except maybe a [FileFlags] section for Windows 2000.

To be checked:
- all new hotfixes should be supported on Win2K SP4, WinXP SP1, WinXP SP2 and Win2K3 SP1
- KB911562 for MDAC 2.8 SP1
- Win2K .ART extension support
- USP5
- .NET 2.0 on WinXP and Win2K3

Any volunteers?

Just a few hours left : biology and german. And also post-exams+end-of-the-year "meal" : ice cream, ice cream, macarons, macarons, sweets, ice cream.

[NtegrA]

Tomcat76, on Jun 14 2006, 05:43 PM, said:

A new final is in the works. At this point, I don't intend to add more functionality except maybe a [FileFlags] section for Windows 2000.

To be checked:
- all new hotfixes should be supported on Win2K SP4, WinXP SP1, WinXP SP2 and Win2K3 SP1
- KB911562 for MDAC 2.8 SP1
- Win2K .ART extension support
- USP5
- .NET 2.0 on WinXP and Win2K3

Any volunteers?

All HFs good (except kb887472 STILL [no biggie]), no more file copy errors in XP. I will be attempting slipping .net 2 on XP momentarily. Is there some kind of test for 1.1 and 2.0 to validate functionality?

[Kiki Burgh]

NtegrA, on Jun 16 2006, 01:40 AM, said:

[All HFs good (except kb887472 STILL [no biggie]), no more file copy errors in XP. I will be attempting slipping .net 2 on XP momentarily. Is there some kind of test for 1.1 and 2.0 to validate functionality?

hi NtegrA!
the simplest would probably be to check their presence via Add/Remove programs ... those 2 should be there ...
further you may try to use some .msis & .exes to see if they do not prompt for the dotnets ...

This post has been edited by Kiki Burgh: 15 June 2006 - 12:08 PM

[NtegrA]

Kiki Burgh, on Jun 15 2006, 01:07 PM, said:

quote]hi NtegrA!
the simplest would probably be to check their presence via Add/Remove programs ... those 2 should be there ...
further you may try to use some .msis & .exes to see if they do not prompt for the dotnets ...

OK so...

using both RyanVM supplied .nets (2.0[dotnet2.exe] in HF, 1.1[netfxsp1.exe] in HFSVPK). in Add/Remove I see 2.0 but not 1.1. MSBSA does not complain about missing hotfixes (any that matter). I can't get to WU cuz I can't activate my build in VM (OEM source).

Is there certain naming convention for 1.1 executable?
Anything out there that I can test against both(known progs that will complain)?

EDIT: OOOPS, reading other post noticed that I am using wrong folder for 1.1 Sorry, ignore this post until I try again.

This post has been edited by NtegrA: 15 June 2006 - 02:16 PM

[Tomcat76]

The name doesn't matter. I use RVM's installer renamed to DNF11.exe.

[Kiki Burgh]

he! he!
HFSLIP now allows for dotnet to be placed in HF dir ...
if switchless, still in the HFSVCPACK ...

This post has been edited by Kiki Burgh: 15 June 2006 - 02:49 PM

[Tomcat76]

That was ditched 9 minutes before you wrote your post, I'm afraid.

I might consider putting the functionality back if it's really necessary but only in the HFSPLUG1.CMD file.

[NtegrA]

Tomcat76, on Jun 15 2006, 03:55 PM, said:

That was ditched 9 minutes before you wrote your post, I'm afraid.

I might consider putting the functionality back if it's really necessary but only in the HFSPLUG1.CMD file.

heh. Of course I should have hung out just a BIT longer before starting over as I see you released a new version on me (My build is at the end of course [.net 2.0 just finished])

Also, would you care to explain why I gained 6-10 mins on slipping? Used to take 22-26 mins (60613b), now 15-16 mins(60614d+). (Does it sound like I'm complaining?)

This post has been edited by NtegrA: 15 June 2006 - 03:31 PM

[Tomcat76]

Don't know... You experienced DST or something?


It's probably the Service Pack...

BTW... Did you install that .NET 2.0 build or not?

[Kiki Burgh]

i think this is basically because of the add-ons we are using ... dotnet 1.1 & 2 for instance takes a considerable amount of time ...

mine used to be about 30+ mins ... now i'm going 40+ mins (of course + the add-ons)

[NtegrA]

Kiki Burgh, on Jun 15 2006, 07:02 PM, said:

i think this is basically because of the add-ons we are using ... dotnet 1.1 & 2 for instance takes a considerable amount of time ...

mine used to be about 30+ mins ... now i'm going 40+ mins (of course + the add-ons)

no, my time is going in the other direction. My slipstream process is getting faster not slower. This one clocked in at 14:59 mins. Mind you other than HFs I'm only doing things from Tomcat's list, all apps that I could be slipping (acroreader, java, office, windvd, notes, etc...) I'm installing via batch during first logon from network share.

@Tomcat - SP made no diff in time. 2.0 yes using 060614d. Attempting right now with 060615a. Where I am now is add/remove shows 2.0 but not 1.1. MSBSA2 doesn't complain. Could 1.1 be installed but not listed? Does it matter what order they are installed in? I noticed with 060615a in svcpack.inf order is dotnet2 then netfxsp1. I am going to manually rearrange and try both ways.

[Tomcat76]

I think that might be a problem. But it worked for me on Win2K...

[Kiki Burgh]

ha! ha!
let me recover from this shame very quickly ...
i'm merely sharing that mine has gone up!

[NtegrA]

Tomcat76, on Jun 15 2006, 09:07 PM, said:

I think that might be a problem. But it worked for me on Win2K...

Sorry it took so long. Passed out for a bit there (YAWN)...Anyways, I tried both ways. If dotnet2 is first, 1.1 does not show in Add/Remove. Other way around, everything looks cool. Still is there a way to test for 1.1?

[Tomcat76]

If you go to WINNT\Microsoft.NET\Framework or WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework, do you see a subfolder called v1.1.4322 or just v2.0.50727? Don't mind the folder for 1.0...

I already suspected that the order might be playing a role so removed the extra .NET 2.0 handling from the latest releases again. For that work, HFSLIP would have to take into account the inclusion of .NET 1.1 too which means a heck of a lot more code (to exclude it from being parsed by other sections, etc).

Here's two options for you (all from HFSVCPACK)...

Option 1:

1DOTNET1.EXE (your silent .NET 1.1 installer)
2DOTNET1SP1.EXE (your silent .NET 1.1 SP1 installer)
3DOTNET1up.EXE (your silent KB886903 installer)
4DOTNET1lng.EXE (your silent .NET 1.1 langpack)
5DOTNET2.EXE (Aserone's silent .NET 2.0 installer)
6DOTNET2lng.EXE (your silent .NET 2.0 langpack)

Option 2:

DOTNET11.EXE (silent .NET 1.1 installer including SP1, KB886903 and langpack)
DOTNET20.EXE (silent .NET 2.0 installer including langpack + hack for installation at T-13)

You can make these two installers with the "beta" of MultiCompiler 2. Have you tried it already?

[tommyp]

To all (not Tomcat) - What is the big h@rdon about DOTNETx? I mean, IMHO, it's not really required for the OS. It's a program. Is MS Office a operating system an OS requirement? No. Why not just use your own crafted post-windows installers for installing dotnet (and any other programs you want to install)? My PC runs GREAT without dotnet.

[Super-Magician]

Quote

- [HFANSWER]"MakeNoISO" and "InstallRC" (when used) should now be named "MAKENOISO" and "INSTALLRC"

Um, technically, the actual variable names are not case-sensitive. I tested this the other day.

[NtegrA]

tommyp, on Jun 16 2006, 07:42 AM, said:

To all (not Tomcat) - What is the big h@rdon about DOTNETx? I mean, IMHO, it's not really required for the OS. It's a program. Is MS Office a operating system an OS requirement? No. Why not just use your own crafted post-windows installers for installing dotnet (and any other programs you want to install)? My PC runs GREAT without dotnet.

Not a biggie to me, just figured I'd give it a try. I had always been installing 1.1 after first install along with other base apps. BUT, I kinda consider dotnet a part of the OS as other apps rely on it. Same with say, JAVA (even though I install this at first reboot as well). I only load JAVA because IE requires (kinda) it.

Tomcat76, on Jun 16 2006, 06:36 AM, said:

If you go to WINNT\Microsoft.NET\Framework or WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework, do you see a subfolder called v1.1.4322 or just v2.0.50727? Don't mind the folder for 1.0...

Just compared both runs. They each have both folders populated. Any further test? (I think I need a 1.1 specific app?)

Quote

Here's two options for you (all from HFSVCPACK)...

Is this built into the 060616a?

Quote

You can make these two installers with the "beta" of MultiCompiler 2. Have you tried it already?

No (sorry)

This post has been edited by NtegrA: 16 June 2006 - 08:38 AM