Interesting bug in the LaunchCondition table for .NET Framework 2.0 64-bit setup

re: Interesting bug in the LaunchCondition table for .NET Framework 2.0 64-bit setup

Sven — Sun, 07 Aug 2005 10:24:34 GMT

Is

(Version9X >= 410) OR ((VersionNT = 500) AND (ServicePackLevel >= 3))

really needed for x64 version?

re: Interesting bug in the LaunchCondition table for .NET Framework 2.0 64-bit setup

Stefan Krueger — Sun, 07 Aug 2005 18:26:21 GMT

Usually I also append "Or Installed" to all launch conditions to make sure the product can be uninstalled even if the system requirements are no longer met (e.g. another required application has been uninstalled in the meantime).

re: Interesting bug in the LaunchCondition table for .NET Framework 2.0 64-bit setup

astebner — Mon, 08 Aug 2005 07:52:50 GMT

Sven - you are correct, that extra version info was left over from an old 32-bit launch condition that we recycled when originally authoring this new launch condition. It doesn't hurt anything on x64, but in reality will never end up evaluating to false.

Stefan - great point about appending "Or Installed" to launch conditions. That is a really good idea to leave a fail-safe because having a launch condition fire and block an uninstall is pretty sloppy.

re: Interesting bug in the LaunchCondition table for .NET Framework 2.0 64-bit setup

Alex Feinman — Fri, 09 Sep 2005 10:40:52 GMT

I put together a small hack - a workaround for this: http://blog.opennetcf.org/afeinman/default,date,2005-09-08.aspx