Windows 7 updates

[m00nbl00d]

Moments ago I checked Windows Update for updates, and there were quite a few. Among them, two important updates for .NET framework came deselected?

There were other two updates for .NET framework that came preselected.

I'm wondering if the updates related to .NET framework that got installed were released after the two ones that came deselected, hence they arrive deselected?

:-\

[The Hammer]

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=305123 I sthis what your referring to? See the third post.

[J_L]

They're recommended, and I've installed them.

[Seer]

-{ Quote: "Among them, two important updates for .NET framework came deselected?" }-

It is the matter of order in which things need to be installed, this is common for .NET updates.
I installed as recommended, with the 2 .NET updates deselected, restarted, then those 2 updates were offered again (this time selected by default) and all went well.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "It is the matter of order in which things need to be installed, this is common for .NET updates.
I installed as recommended, with the 2 .NET updates deselected, restarted, then those 2 updates were offered again (this time selected by default) and all went well." }-

I did reboot, because I was asked too. But, even after rebooting, the updates were still deselected.

One of the updates is this one here -http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2468871 (This one seems to be around since July ???)

The other one is - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2533523

Anyway, I did manually select them and installed them. I was just wondering why they would still be deselected after verifying for new updates.

:thumb:

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "It is the matter of order in which things need to be installed, this is common for .NET updates.
I installed as recommended, with the 2 .NET updates deselected, restarted, then those 2 updates were offered again (this time selected by default) and all went well." }-

That went for me as well. It is often a bit confusing though when they do this. I tend to assume MS know what they are doing when they recommend an update. They do know what they're doing ... right? :o

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "... I tend to assume MS know what they are doing ..." }-

One of your better ones ;)

BTW, I hope you guys are okay over there!

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "One of your better ones ;)" }-

I trust them implicitly. ;)

-{ Quote: "BTW, I hope you guys are okay over there!" }-

I live out in the country, the only violence here was when I got buzzed by an angry wasp earlier. He's a bit flat now. No need to call SO19 yet.

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "It is the matter of order in which things need to be installed, this is common for .NET updates.
I installed as recommended, with the 2 .NET updates deselected, restarted, then those 2 updates were offered again (this time selected by default) and all went well." }-

i installed all updates at once (i checked the 2 .NET updates manually) and everything installed fine and works fine. so i dont think thers any harm in just installing it all at once, now why MS decided to de-select them by default, who knows???

[Seer]

While I can't give an example, I had cases where updates for .NET fail when I force-select them, in exact same cases like this one - offered updates for 3.5 (preselected) and 4.0 (deselected). If I force-select updates for 4.0, they fail on bulk install and I have to install them separately. So I always do what MS recommends, even if I don't fully understand why.
I know though that .NET updates need to be compiled after installation, by the mscorswv.exe, a process which always runs after .NET updates and eats a hell of a lot of hardware power. Perhaps updates are done in such a way so our CPUs are spared of compiling more things at once - as stated here (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/davidnotario/archive/2005/04/27/412838.aspx) -

-{ Quote: "Because we don't want to degrade machine performance. The CLR Optimization service tries hard to do work in the background, having 2, 4 or 8 compilations happen at the same time multiplies by 2, 4 or 8 the memory/CPU/I/O resources we would need." }-

I know this is guesswork, but it may well be related.

[J_L]

Installing everything worked fine on physical and virtual machine.

[The Hammer]

Everything fine here also after updates.

[Mr.PC]

All Updates were installed without a problem, too.
I'm still crossing my fingers...:argh: