Re: Do I need all version of .NET Framework?
- From: "VanguardLH" <VanguardLH@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:22:48 -0600
"pjp" wrote in message news:ueQIrDAQIHA.6036@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"VanguardLH" wrote ...
"Michael T." wrote ...
When I go to "Add or Remove Programs" I see the following unfamiliar
programs:
Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1
Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 Hotfix (KB928366)
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Service Pack 1
Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0 Service Pack 1
These runtimes are not cumulative; i.e., a later version does not
encompass everything in a prior version. Since you don't know what
version was used by a developer, install them all. While you don't
develop code, you do run programs that others have written. You don't
need the SDK (software development kit) but you do need the runtimes
to execute those programs.
When developers write code, they use the functions available in
whatever version of the SDK that they are writing against. For some
runtimes, they are cumulative so the same functions are available in a
later version. That's not true of .Net Framework. By having multiple
versions installed and available, the DLL Hell is avoided because the
function called for the specific version will be there and work the
way expected.
Personally I'd like to have backward compatibility in later versions
so that only the latest runtime is required by me to run a program
written by someone else. The problem is not knowing when you no
longer have programs that require some ancient version of the runtime.
We could end up with dozens of versions of .NET over the next decade.
And personally I'd like to see every app "come with" all the files it needs
to run properly, including a self-contained installation procedure. I HATE
runtime requirement, especially when for many apps it's only required
because of the way the app was compiled and linked.
That could be done. Makes the executables quite huge, though. Basically for every application, game, or other software you install, you would be duplicating the runtime API. That is, unless it only makes use of system calls to the Win32 API which I don't think any program rolls up into its executables, DLLs, or other files. Wouldn't be too long after installing new apps before you would realize your really big hard drive is getting quickly eaten up. Also, some "apps" are web-centric in that they are "executed" over the network and, geez, you'd would need to have a fiber transport between every host to get that to work if every API called in the program had to be transferred over the network.
I was arguing that it might help if the .NET versions had rolled up the prior version to be backward compatible (so you could also get rid of the prior version) to reduce disk space consumption. You're arguing for program distros to get bigger and each one to use up more disk space.
.
- References:
- Do I need all version of .NET Framework?
- From: Michael T.
- Re: Do I need all version of .NET Framework?
- From: VanguardLH
- Re: Do I need all version of .NET Framework?
- From: pjp
- Do I need all version of .NET Framework?
- Prev by Date: Re: KB942615 - bad MS Update - help
- Next by Date: Re: Windows NT Missing?
- Previous by thread: Re: Do I need all version of .NET Framework?
- Next by thread: Re: windows xp email login failure
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|