Dot net clarification

Jimbo Mahoney · 29 Aug 2008 at 22:03

Did a search, but didn't really find the answer.

Could someone explain which .net frameworks I need to install, as logic would dictate that you only install the highest number :rolleyes:

but that doesn't seem to work.

MarcLister · 29 Aug 2008 at 22:10

I have .net 1.1, .net 2, .net3 and .net 3.5 SP1 installed. No problems with .net stuff for me.

And yes I agree about the logic. It would have been nice to be able to install the latest .net version and leave it at that. Not every flipping version to keep your PC happy.

Conrad11 · 29 Aug 2008 at 22:55

You need to install them all - they all have different functionality.

BigBoy · 30 Aug 2008 at 00:15

.net 3.5 contains .net 2 3 and 3.5 that is if you get the redist from microsoft. found Here

.net 3.5 readme

LeperousDust · 30 Aug 2008 at 00:28

I would like one version that has them all, as well as separate versions just in case admins on want certain versions. Its an inconvenience when installing...

BigBoy · 30 Aug 2008 at 09:03

If you look at my post above all you would need to install is .net 1.1 and .net 3.5 as 2 and 3 are also included in 3.5 so ints old 2 installs aslong as you use the redist packages.

LeperousDust · 30 Aug 2008 at 13:10

Yeah I saw it, but thats still not ideal as i'd like ONE that icludes them all not two

. It can't be that hard for them surely?

BigBoy · 30 Aug 2008 at 21:02

All the .net 3.5 package is, is a straped package of all three parts. Would be easy to add them all together and use winrar to create an exe that will run the files in order.

LeperousDust · 30 Aug 2008 at 21:20

Exactly, so why isn't it just available anyway? Thats my point.

lumpeh · 30 Aug 2008 at 21:28

the versions are self contained for dependancy sake. Dont want any more dll-hell i guess.

BigBoy · 30 Aug 2008 at 21:46

Microsoft just being Lazy to be honest :cool:

lokkers · 31 Aug 2008 at 13:30

LeperousDust said:
Exactly, so why isn't it just available anyway? Thats my point.

Because if you're only running a .NET 2.0 application (like the one I maintain), then what's the point in downloading the 3.0 and 3.5 frameworks too (given that the 3.5 redist is about 200mb)?

Vista comes with 2.0 and 3.0 anyway, so you only need to 3.5 if necessary. Can't really see the problem myself, it's hardly a chore :confused:

lumpeh said:
the versions are self contained for dependancy sake. Dont want any more dll-hell i guess.

Shouldn't be a problem with the .NET framework as they all end up in different places within the GAC, and are all versioned.