Freigeben über

.NET 3.5 SP1 and Family Update Information

  • Artikel

Hi WSUS Admins:

 

We’ve noticed some confusion about the recently released updates for Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 SP1. So, let’s see if we can help clarify the differences in the packages. These updates apply to x86 and x64 computers. The detailed update descriptions describe both the platform and OS architecture that apply for each of the updates. You’re also likely wondering about the differences in the update titles. Here are the differences:

1. The update titled “Microsoft .NET framework 3.5 Family Update (KB959209)” updates computers already running .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 with the latest compatibility fixes. So, if you only want to update existing .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 computers with the latest fixes, then approve these packages.

2. The update titled “Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 and .NET Framework 3.5 Family Update (KB951847)” will upgrade computers with .NET Framework 2.0, 3.0, 3.5 to the latest version of the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1, and will also apply KB959209 (#1 above). If you want to upgrade/update all of your computers to the latest version of the .NET Framework and apply the latest compatibility fixes, then approve these packages.

If you know you only need the latest compatibility fixes for 3.5 SP1, then we recommend you only approve the Microsoft .NET framework 3.5 Family Update (KB959209). Otherwise, we recommend that you approve the second update.

 

 

Thanks,

 

The WSUS team

Comments

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Having the same issues as well applying the update.  We just recently got our infastructure in place to start utilizing WSUS, a quarter of our network has "checked in and started dl/install updates", and I am getting a 5% fail rate on .net 3.5 SP1 updates.  Still poking around trying to figure out why I am getting roadblocked on this update.

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    @MikeF You're referring to the Windows XP edition of KB951847, right? Yes, it's indeed a shame that Microsoft seems to be unable to release an streamlined update including only the files needed for x86 systems. Since January 27th, KB951847 for Windows XP systems consits of the WHOLE REDISTRIBUTABLE PACKAGE of .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 plus the Language Pack files on non-english Windows XP systems, resulting in a up to 280 MB download for these systems in case at least .NET Framwork 2.0 is installed on Windows XP pushed via Auto Update and on Windows Update. This fact has been and is still UNACCEPTABLE! Surprisingly http://support.microsoft.com/kb/894199/en-us on April 23th once announced an updated version of KB951847 "Updated the packages to make them architecture specific and smaller in size" to be released on April 28th. All of the sudden, this announcement vanished on April 28th and (of course) the revised version of KB951847 has not been released...

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Looks like over on the WSUS product team blog they’ve addressed some of the more common questions we

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    See my comment on http://blogs.technet.com/mu/archive/2009/02/26/net-framework-3-5-sp1-package-clarifications.aspx#3207654 please and change the distribution of KB951847 for Windows XP systems ASAP! Bye, Freudi

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    thank you

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    thank you

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    thank you

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    I've just come away from a first site visit to a potential customer, looking really stupid, because I was unable to successfully apply .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 on all his machines. One took three attempts, one took 40 minutes and a third wouldn't install at all...

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    thank you

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    However, I can't understand  <a href="http://www.clubturknet2seoyarismasi.info/" title="Clubturk.net-2. Seo Yarismasi - Kahrolsun Israil zulmu"target="_top">Clubturk.net-2. Seo Yarismasi - Kahrolsun Israil zulmu</a> why WSUS doesn't push the Windows Installer 3.1 first, when it is <a href="http://www.lightme.biz/" title="lida diyet zayıflama r10seoogle" target="_top">"lida diyet zayıflama r10seoogle"</a> approved from long ago!

  • Anonymous
    March 02, 2009
    Very strange... This Family update must be very poorly designed, for it failed to install on 10% of our computers with 0x80070643.

  • Anonymous
    March 14, 2009
    I wish they would put on here what system these updates are for.  I just got a vista system and don't know if any of these updates are for this system

  • Anonymous
    March 14, 2009
    Not related, but I don't know where to post this... Is there any way to make WSUS automatically approve "needed" updates, and only those ? Even when you tell it to only pick up select classifications and languages, WSUS always end-up downloading gigabytes of useless stuff (Itanic or Sharepoint updates, languages you've never heard of, etc).

  • Anonymous
    March 16, 2009
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    March 16, 2009
    I too have had mixed luck installing this update using WSUS. Were you or anyone able to resolve the problem?

  • Anonymous
    March 17, 2009
    I've noticed that it failed on the XP computers that never had any version of .NET installed. It simply just has nothing to update... Why WSUS offers it at all?

  • Anonymous
    March 18, 2009
    Besides, I've got it failed on those computers that have Windows XP SP2 and Windows Installer 3.0. I found multiple: "EEHndlr FATAL: MSI DLL version is 3.0. Version 3.1 is required" inside WindowsUpdate.log of theirs. However, I can't understand why WSUS doesn't push the Windows Installer 3.1 first, when it is approved from long ago! It's like a closed loop now: .NET Family Update is not installing because there's no Windows Installer 3.1, and Windows Installer 3.1 doesn't install because .NET Family Update fails first. Moreover, Service Pack 3 doesn't show up on those computers, because it wants to be the only one needed.

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2009
    I have two instances of KB951847 listed on my WSUS server,  both are for X86.  The only difference I can tell from the two updates is that one has just .NET 2.0 and 3.0 listed as superceded updates, and the other one has a much longer list of superceded updates. What's the deal? I also agree with the previous comment about how there should be a way to have a separate classification for x64 and Itanium updates.  They're nothing but wasted space for most people

  • Anonymous
    March 23, 2009
    I also have the same issue.  Please add a check that Windows Installer 3.1 must be installed before KB951847 will in stall

Besides, I've got it failed on those computers that have Windows XP SP2 and Windows Installer 3.0. I found multiple: "EEHndlr FATAL: MSI DLL version is 3.0. Version 3.1 is required" inside WindowsUpdate.log of theirs. However, I can't understand why WSUS doesn't push the Windows Installer 3.1 first, when it is approved from long ago! It's like a closed loop now: .NET Family Update is not installing because there's no Windows Installer 3.1, and Windows Installer 3.1 doesn't install because .NET Family Update fails first. Moreover, Service Pack 3 doesn't show up on those computers, because it wants to be the only one needed.

  • Anonymous
    March 25, 2009
    I get a 0x80070645 error and it tells me to try again. I fixed the version back to origional with the troubleshooter, but it won't update. I will keep on trrying and probably keeep failing.

  • Anonymous
    April 20, 2009
    I can't even import 951847 - I get the following notice: "This update cannot be imported into Windows Server Update Services, because it does not have the required applicability information." What gives?

  • Anonymous
    April 21, 2009
    Okay, the explanation was clear enough. KB959209 will update pcs with net 3.5sp1 already installed. KB951847 will update pcs only with or without net 3.5. However, please explain why I have kb951847 showing up twice and kb959209 not even showing up. Both kb951847 listed twice are identical. Same files inside, same revision. However about 80% of my pcs say they need 1 of them. The other say they need the other. Any help?

  • Anonymous
    April 27, 2009
    My question is why do these updates weigh in at a hefty ~250 megs when the framework itself and even together with SP1 is a much smaller package?  How could the mysterious post-SP1 "updates" be roughly 10x the standalone framework?  

  • Anonymous
    May 06, 2009
    Hello, any news for the "Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Service Pack 2" ? It has been released on the 16 genuary 2009, but there's still anything on our wsus... Thanks,

  • Anonymous
    May 07, 2009
    So tell me does that mean if my computers are all updated to a certain point then KB951847 is going to faill on all of them?

  • Anonymous
    May 22, 2009
    showing up twice and kb959209 not even showing up. Both kb951847 listed twice are identical. Same files inside, same revision. However about 80% of my pcs say they need 1 of them. The other say they need the other. Any help?

  • Anonymous
    May 22, 2009
    thanks for sharing <a href="http://www.puredissertation.com/topic-oriented/nursing.asp">Nursing Dissertation</a>

  • Anonymous
    May 28, 2009
    Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 and .NET Framework 3.5 Family Update (KB951847) x64 Download size: 25.7 MB - 82.7 MB Windows update always says I need this update when I run it. I can download it but, the stupid thing will not install. I have tried many times. Anyone know why???  Is this common?

  • Anonymous
    June 17, 2009
    This update was showing up as a needed update for about 100 systems in my network till last week but now it's showing as not required for all of them. Even if I try to approve the updates it says this update has expired and can not be approved for installation.

  • Anonymous
    June 17, 2009
    I wish they would put on here what system these updates are for. I'm currently on Vista.

  • Anonymous
    July 15, 2009
    Thanks for putting up the information. <a href="http://www.guvenliksistemleri.info" title="güvenlik sistemleri" target=_blank>güvenlik sistemleri</a>

  • Anonymous
    July 31, 2009
    2009 http://www.kodes.com Hiphop, Rap, Ceza, sagopa, Kolera http://www.gekkog.com Hiphop, Rap, Gekko G http://www.maskanimasyon.com Animasyon

  • Anonymous
    August 06, 2009
    SP1 for 3.5 makes so many programs work better for me. It can be hard to keep track of patches but this one was a great release.

  • Anonymous
    August 17, 2009
    I also get this notice "This update cannot be imported into Windows Server Update Services, because it does not have the required applicability information."

  • Anonymous
    August 24, 2009
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    August 30, 2009
    I find this very unstable any ideas on how to improve it?

  • Anonymous
    September 12, 2009
    Thanks for sharing your views on the topic. It makes one think and look the other side of the story. <a href="http://www.writingservicescompany.com">College Papers</a>

  • Anonymous
    October 22, 2009
    Hi, we have got problems rollout out .Net Framework 3.5 on Vista clients. Vista SP1 and SP2 are hit. The Framework is downloading to 80 % and stops. There is enough space on the partition and no errors are visible. Reboot doesnt help. It all starts over and over again. I wonder whats is going wrong?

  • Anonymous
    October 31, 2009
    Hi, we have got problems rollout out .Net Framework 3.5 on Vista clients. Vista SP1 and SP2 are hit. The Framework is downloading to 80 % and stops. There is enough space on the partition and no errors are visible. Reboot doesnt help. It all starts over and over again.

  • Anonymous
    November 05, 2009
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    November 05, 2009
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    November 18, 2009
    I've noticed that it failed on the XP computers that never had any version of .NET installed. It simply just has nothing to update

  • Anonymous
    February 13, 2010
    This update is listed as a required update for about 100 systems on my network until last week but now is proving to be no need for them. Even if I try to approve the updates it says this update has expired and can not be approved for installation.

  • Anonymous
    February 22, 2010
    interesting information thank you.

  • Anonymous
    April 01, 2010
    thank you ver much.. very nice adminler

  • Anonymous
    April 20, 2010
    This is some very valuable information about .NET 3.5 SP1 and Family Update Information, thank you very much.

  • Anonymous
    May 09, 2010
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    August 18, 2010
    http://www.kodes.com  Türkiyenin ilk Hiphop, Rap sitesi http://www.gekkog.com Hiphop, Rap, Gekko G http://www.maskanimasyon.com Animasyon

  • Anonymous
    October 11, 2011
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    October 22, 2012
    http://www.npbattery.com best battery online store