Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ASCOM] dll hell - framework hell

Expand Messages
  • waelchlih
    Thanks again for your support. I actually had 3.5 - but not the sp - installed. And if you re somewhere remote having big hopes making a new system and you
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 24, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks again for your support. I actually had 3.5 - but not the sp - installed. And if you're somewhere remote having big hopes making a new system and you have to give up just because a missing sp... :-|

      You know....

      Cheers
      Hansjoerg

      --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Jared Wellman <jared@...> wrote:
      >
      > 4.0 does not contain anything other than 4.0. 3.5 contains all lower
      > frameworks. I'm not entirely sure why Microsoft took this approach but
      > ASCOM was complaining because it needs 3.5 and it didn't exist as its not
      > included in 4.0.
      >
      > Good luck!
      > Jared
      >
      > Typed on a phone with fat thumbs.
      > On Mar 23, 2013 5:11 PM, "waelchlih" <astrowah@...> wrote:
      >
      > > **
      > >
      > >
      > > Hey - Thanks for your reply to my groaning post ;-)
      > >
      > > I actually am / was running xp/sp3 with .NET 4.0 installed.
      > > There is a bit of uncertainity about which .NET version is really
      > > contained in which higher numbered version. Why did the ascom platform
      > > setup complain about missing sp's even tough a higher framework was
      > > installed...? I fear that - in a couple of years - we will end up with a
      > > real hell of framework- and framework-sp- versions. Don't forget about the
      > > "client profile" and "full" version of .net 4.0 and higher frameworks. To
      > > be clear - this - of course - is not an issue caused by ascom.
      > >
      > > Have a good day.
      > >
      > > Cheers
      > > Hansjörg
      > >
      > > --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Rick Burke <astroman133@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Jared is correct, the ASCOM Platform only needs .NET Framework 3.5 SP1,
      > > > which includes the 3.0 and 2.0 frameworks. .NET 3.5 contains the
      > > > enhancements for LINQ, and .NET 3.0 contains enhancements for Windows
      > > > Presentation Foundation. Both of these are additions to 2.0, not
      > > > replacements for it.
      > > >
      > > > However, if your PC is running Windows 7, you already have the necessary
      > > > frameworks installed. Microsoft, in their apparent wisdom chose to
      > > > install the frameworks below 4.0 with Windows 7, but did not activate
      > > > them. If your PC is running Windows 7 you can activate the 3.5
      > > > Framework from the Programs and Features applet in the Control Panel.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Rick Burke
      > > >
      > > > On 3/23/2013 1:47 PM, Jared Wellman wrote:
      > > > > Last I checked the 3.5 package contained all frameworks down to 2.0.
      > > > >
      > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=21
      > > > >
      > > > > You should only need to install 3.5SP1 and everything should be taken
      > > > > care of.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > */Jared Wellman/*
      > > > > Co-Founder and Developer
      > > > > www.mainsequencesoftware.com <http://www.mainsequencesoftware.com/>
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM, waelchlih <astrowah@
      > > > > <mailto:astrowah@>> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > In the good old days of windows native programming there was the
      > > > > so called dll hell which caused users (as well as developers) to
      > > > > ged mad and loose weight due to stress in overnight work.
      > > > >
      > > > > Now we have been given microsoft's .net framework - including a
      > > > > version management system. Unfortunately there seems to arise a
      > > > > new hell - the framework-hell.
      > > > >
      > > > > I have been in our club's obs today trying to install a new pc for
      > > > > controlling our 90cm cass. I brought a lot of frameworks with me
      > > > > as this was 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and installed them thinking
      > > > > nothing bad. What a horror when I run the ascom platform 6.0 sp1
      > > > > setup. I was informed that I am missing 2.0 sp1, 3.0 sp1, 3.5
      > > > > sp1.... So I had to give up.
      > > > >
      > > > > Should it not be a main goal to have as little as possible
      > > > > different frameworks requird? Why not go for - let's say - 4.0 for
      > > > > the new planned version and everyone targets this one?
      > > > >
      > > > > A am myself a developer but when out in the wild installing what
      > > > > we develop in our warm chambers one realises what often gets
      > > > > forgotten.
      > > > >
      > > > > Cheers
      > > > > Hansjoerg Waelchli
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
    • Bob Denny
      Thanks to all who helped Hansjoerg -- Just for reference, we TRY to prevent this. On the ASCOM Web Site , in the box for the
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 25, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks to all who helped Hansjoerg -- Just for reference, we TRY to prevent this. On the ASCOM Web Site, in the box for the Platform, there is the following:
        "Required for all drivers (see notes for Windows 7 and Windows XP!). "
        Note the hyperlinks, which are present on that web page. So if you decide to "see notes" for Windows XP(!), you are taken to this page and it says, among other things
        2. Install ONLY the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1. This includes everything you need for the ASCOM Platform. See http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=22
        I'm not sure how we could have made things any clearer and/ore easier than that. It's right there within 2cm of the big download button. Perhaps you got the platform installer somewhere else? If so, could you pass that along so we can discourage them from mirroring it?

          -- Bob

        Thanks again for your support. I actually had 3.5 - but not the sp - installed. And if you're somewhere remote having big hopes making a new system and you have to give up just because a missing sp... :-|
        
        You know....
        
        Cheers
        Hansjoerg
        
        --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Jared Wellman <jared@...> wrote:
        
        4.0 does not contain anything other than 4.0. 3.5 contains all lower
        frameworks. I'm not entirely sure why Microsoft took this approach but
        ASCOM was complaining because it needs 3.5 and it didn't exist as its not
        included in 4.0.
        
        Good luck!
        Jared
        
        Typed on a phone with fat thumbs.
        On Mar 23, 2013 5:11 PM, "waelchlih" <astrowah@...> wrote:
        
        
        **
        
        
        Hey - Thanks for your reply to my groaning post ;-)
        
        I actually am / was running xp/sp3 with .NET 4.0 installed.
        There is a bit of uncertainity about which .NET version is really
        contained in which higher numbered version. Why did the ascom platform
        setup complain about missing sp's even tough a higher framework was
        installed...? I fear that - in a couple of years - we will end up with a
        real hell of framework- and framework-sp- versions. Don't forget about the
        "client profile" and "full" version of .net 4.0 and higher frameworks. To
        be clear - this - of course - is not an issue caused by ascom.
        
        Have a good day.
        
        Cheers
        Hansjörg
        
        --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Rick Burke <astroman133@> wrote:
        
        Jared is correct, the ASCOM Platform only needs .NET Framework 3.5 SP1,
        which includes the 3.0 and 2.0 frameworks. .NET 3.5 contains the
        enhancements for LINQ, and .NET 3.0 contains enhancements for Windows
        Presentation Foundation. Both of these are additions to 2.0, not
        replacements for it.
        
        However, if your PC is running Windows 7, you already have the necessary
        frameworks installed. Microsoft, in their apparent wisdom chose to
        install the frameworks below 4.0 with Windows 7, but did not activate
        them. If your PC is running Windows 7 you can activate the 3.5
        Framework from the Programs and Features applet in the Control Panel.
        
        
        Rick Burke
        
        On 3/23/2013 1:47 PM, Jared Wellman wrote:
        
        Last I checked the 3.5 package contained all frameworks down to 2.0.
        
        http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=21
        
        You should only need to install 3.5SP1 and everything should be taken
        care of.
        
        
        */Jared Wellman/*
        Co-Founder and Developer
        www.mainsequencesoftware.com <http://www.mainsequencesoftware.com/>
        
        
        On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM, waelchlih <astrowah@
        <mailto:astrowah@>> wrote:
        
        In the good old days of windows native programming there was the
        so called dll hell which caused users (as well as developers) to
        ged mad and loose weight due to stress in overnight work.
        
        Now we have been given microsoft's .net framework - including a
        version management system. Unfortunately there seems to arise a
        new hell - the framework-hell.
        
        I have been in our club's obs today trying to install a new pc for
        controlling our 90cm cass. I brought a lot of frameworks with me
        as this was 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and installed them thinking
        nothing bad. What a horror when I run the ascom platform 6.0 sp1
        setup. I was informed that I am missing 2.0 sp1, 3.0 sp1, 3.5
        sp1.... So I had to give up.
        
        Should it not be a main goal to have as little as possible
        different frameworks requird? Why not go for - let's say - 4.0 for
        the new planned version and everyone targets this one?
        
        A am myself a developer but when out in the wild installing what
        we develop in our warm chambers one realises what often gets
        forgotten.
        
        Cheers
        Hansjoerg Waelchli
        
        
        
        
         
        
        
        
        
        ------------------------------------
        
        For more information see http://ASCOM-Standards.org/.
        
        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email FROM THE ACCOUNT YOU USED TO SUBSCRIBE(!) to:
        ASCOM-Talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        
        Yahoo! Groups Links
        
        <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ASCOM-Talk/
        
        <*> Your email settings:
            Individual Email | Traditional
        
        <*> To change settings online go to:
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ASCOM-Talk/join
            (Yahoo! ID required)
        
        <*> To change settings via email:
            ASCOM-Talk-digest@yahoogroups.com 
            ASCOM-Talk-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
        
        <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            ASCOM-Talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        
        <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        
        
        

      • Tim Long
        The reason for the different approach is because of the CLR version (CLR being the Common Language Runtime). The CLR is the runtime engine and includes things
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 26, 2013
        • 0 Attachment

          The reason for the different approach is because of the CLR version (CLR being the Common Language Runtime). The CLR is the runtime engine and includes things like the Common Type System, the JIT compiler and “Fusion”, the assembly probing and loading mechanisms. Frameworks 2.0 to 3.5 SP1 use CLR 2.0, whereas frameworks 4.0 and 4.5 use CLR 4.0. Microsoft only bundles frameworks that share the same version of the CLR. This is also why it’s not currently particularly easy to have ASCOM using .NET 4.0 or 4.5, because inevitable you’d end up with multiple CLR instances running. It’s supposed to work but the devil is always in the details.

           

          With regards what frameworks are needed to install ASCOM, please see also:

          http://www.tigranetworks.co.uk/blogs/electricdreams/the-definitive-guide-to-installing-ascom-platform-6-0-service-pack-1/

           

           

          Best regards,

          Tim Long

           

          From: ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jared Wellman
          Sent: 23 March 2013 22:20
          To: ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [ASCOM] dll hell - framework hell

           




          4.0 does not contain anything other than 4.0. 3.5 contains all lower frameworks. I'm not entirely sure why Microsoft took this approach but ASCOM was complaining because it needs 3.5 and it didn't exist as its not included in 4.0.

          Good luck!
          Jared

          Typed on a phone with fat thumbs.

          On Mar 23, 2013 5:11 PM, "waelchlih" <astrowah@...> wrote:

           

          Hey - Thanks for your reply to my groaning post ;-)

          I actually am / was running xp/sp3 with .NET 4.0 installed.
          There is a bit of uncertainity about which .NET version is really contained in which higher numbered version. Why did the ascom platform setup complain about missing sp's even tough a higher framework was installed...? I fear that - in a couple of years - we will end up with a real hell of framework- and framework-sp- versions. Don't forget about the "client profile" and "full" version of .net 4.0 and higher frameworks. To be clear - this - of course - is not an issue caused by ascom.

          Have a good day.

          Cheers
          Hansjörg

          --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Rick Burke <astroman133@...> wrote:
          >
          > Jared is correct, the ASCOM Platform only needs .NET Framework 3.5 SP1,
          > which includes the 3.0 and 2.0 frameworks. .NET 3.5 contains the
          > enhancements for LINQ, and .NET 3.0 contains enhancements for Windows
          > Presentation Foundation. Both of these are additions to 2.0, not
          > replacements for it.
          >
          > However, if your PC is running Windows 7, you already have the necessary
          > frameworks installed. Microsoft, in their apparent wisdom chose to
          > install the frameworks below 4.0 with Windows 7, but did not activate
          > them. If your PC is running Windows 7 you can activate the 3.5
          > Framework from the Programs and Features applet in the Control Panel.
          >
          >
          > Rick Burke
          >
          > On 3/23/2013 1:47 PM, Jared Wellman wrote:
          > > Last I checked the 3.5 package contained all frameworks down to 2.0.
          > >
          > > http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=21
          > >
          > > You should only need to install 3.5SP1 and everything should be taken
          > > care of.
          > >
          > >
          > > */Jared Wellman/*
          > > Co-Founder and Developer
          > > www.mainsequencesoftware.com <http://www.mainsequencesoftware.com/>
          > >
          > >
          > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM, waelchlih <astrowah@...
          > > <mailto:astrowah@...>> wrote:
          > >
          > > In the good old days of windows native programming there was the
          > > so called dll hell which caused users (as well as developers) to
          > > ged mad and loose weight due to stress in overnight work.
          > >
          > > Now we have been given microsoft's .net framework - including a
          > > version management system. Unfortunately there seems to arise a
          > > new hell - the framework-hell.
          > >
          > > I have been in our club's obs today trying to install a new pc for
          > > controlling our 90cm cass. I brought a lot of frameworks with me
          > > as this was 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and installed them thinking
          > > nothing bad. What a horror when I run the ascom platform 6.0 sp1
          > > setup. I was informed that I am missing 2.0 sp1, 3.0 sp1, 3.5
          > > sp1.... So I had to give up.
          > >
          > > Should it not be a main goal to have as little as possible
          > > different frameworks requird? Why not go for - let's say - 4.0 for
          > > the new planned version and everyone targets this one?
          > >
          > > A am myself a developer but when out in the wild installing what
          > > we develop in our warm chambers one realises what often gets
          > > forgotten.
          > >
          > > Cheers
          > > Hansjoerg Waelchli
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >





          TiGra MailDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity
          Complete email hygiene and business continuity solution available from TiGra Networks
          Before replying, please review our email policy



        • waelchlih
          Bob, Just fell on this - my - old post when glancing through the forum. As I tried to point out in my last comment it was never my intention to blame
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 4 5:56 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Bob,

            Just "fell" on this - my - old post when glancing through the forum.

            As I tried to point out in my last comment it was never my intention to blame someone. And - of course - _you_ guys developing ASCOM can do nothing against the framework hell except - maybe - taking care not to have to many components referencing different framework versions (basing on different CLRs).

            I know the problem from my everyday live (.NET developer myself) but as I pointed out it's a different thing when sitting somewhere remote having great hopes ... and again ... MS concepts knock you out.

            I hope that with this post I am not "triggering" someone else to invest time to answer to that. All is said and clear (at least to me).

            Thank you for your great work.

            Clear skies

            Hansjörg

            --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Bob Denny <rdenny@...> wrote:
            >
            > Thanks to all who helped Hansjoerg -- Just for reference, we TRY to prevent
            > this. On the ASCOM Web Site <http://ascom-standards.org/>, in the box for the
            > Platform, there is the following:
            >
            > "Required for all drivers (see notes for Windows 7
            > <http://ascom-standards.org/FAQs/Plat6OnW7.htm> and Windows XP
            > <http://ascom-standards.org/FAQs/Plat6OnXP.htm>!). "
            >
            > Note the hyperlinks, which are present on that web page. So if you decide to
            > "see notes" for Windows XP(!), you are taken to this page
            > <http://ascom-standards.org/FAQs/Plat6OnXP.htm> and it says, among other things
            >
            > 2. Install ONLY the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1. This includes everything you
            > need for the ASCOM Platform. See
            > http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=22
            >
            > I'm not sure how we could have made things any clearer and/ore easier than that.
            > It's right there within 2cm of the big download button. Perhaps you got the
            > platform installer somewhere else? If so, could you pass that along so we can
            > discourage them from mirroring it?
            >
            > -- Bob
            >
            > > Thanks again for your support. I actually had 3.5 - but not the sp - installed. And if you're somewhere remote having big hopes making a new system and you have to give up just because a missing sp... :-|
            > >
            > > You know....
            > >
            > > Cheers
            > > Hansjoerg
            > >
            > > --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Jared Wellman <jared@> wrote:
            > >> 4.0 does not contain anything other than 4.0. 3.5 contains all lower
            > >> frameworks. I'm not entirely sure why Microsoft took this approach but
            > >> ASCOM was complaining because it needs 3.5 and it didn't exist as its not
            > >> included in 4.0.
            > >>
            > >> Good luck!
            > >> Jared
            > >>
            > >> Typed on a phone with fat thumbs.
            > >> On Mar 23, 2013 5:11 PM, "waelchlih" <astrowah@> wrote:
            > >>
            > >>> **
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>> Hey - Thanks for your reply to my groaning post ;-)
            > >>>
            > >>> I actually am / was running xp/sp3 with .NET 4.0 installed.
            > >>> There is a bit of uncertainity about which .NET version is really
            > >>> contained in which higher numbered version. Why did the ascom platform
            > >>> setup complain about missing sp's even tough a higher framework was
            > >>> installed...? I fear that - in a couple of years - we will end up with a
            > >>> real hell of framework- and framework-sp- versions. Don't forget about the
            > >>> "client profile" and "full" version of .net 4.0 and higher frameworks. To
            > >>> be clear - this - of course - is not an issue caused by ascom.
            > >>>
            > >>> Have a good day.
            > >>>
            > >>> Cheers
            > >>> Hansjörg
            > >>>
            > >>> --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Rick Burke <astroman133@> wrote:
            > >>>> Jared is correct, the ASCOM Platform only needs .NET Framework 3.5 SP1,
            > >>>> which includes the 3.0 and 2.0 frameworks. .NET 3.5 contains the
            > >>>> enhancements for LINQ, and .NET 3.0 contains enhancements for Windows
            > >>>> Presentation Foundation. Both of these are additions to 2.0, not
            > >>>> replacements for it.
            > >>>>
            > >>>> However, if your PC is running Windows 7, you already have the necessary
            > >>>> frameworks installed. Microsoft, in their apparent wisdom chose to
            > >>>> install the frameworks below 4.0 with Windows 7, but did not activate
            > >>>> them. If your PC is running Windows 7 you can activate the 3.5
            > >>>> Framework from the Programs and Features applet in the Control Panel.
            > >>>>
            > >>>>
            > >>>> Rick Burke
            > >>>>
            > >>>> On 3/23/2013 1:47 PM, Jared Wellman wrote:
            > >>>>> Last I checked the 3.5 package contained all frameworks down to 2.0.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=21
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> You should only need to install 3.5SP1 and everything should be taken
            > >>>>> care of.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> */Jared Wellman/*
            > >>>>> Co-Founder and Developer
            > >>>>> www.mainsequencesoftware.com <http://www.mainsequencesoftware.com/>
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM, waelchlih <astrowah@
            > >>>>> <mailto:astrowah@>> wrote:
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> In the good old days of windows native programming there was the
            > >>>>> so called dll hell which caused users (as well as developers) to
            > >>>>> ged mad and loose weight due to stress in overnight work.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> Now we have been given microsoft's .net framework - including a
            > >>>>> version management system. Unfortunately there seems to arise a
            > >>>>> new hell - the framework-hell.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> I have been in our club's obs today trying to install a new pc for
            > >>>>> controlling our 90cm cass. I brought a lot of frameworks with me
            > >>>>> as this was 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and installed them thinking
            > >>>>> nothing bad. What a horror when I run the ascom platform 6.0 sp1
            > >>>>> setup. I was informed that I am missing 2.0 sp1, 3.0 sp1, 3.5
            > >>>>> sp1.... So I had to give up.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> Should it not be a main goal to have as little as possible
            > >>>>> different frameworks requird? Why not go for - let's say - 4.0 for
            > >>>>> the new planned version and everyone targets this one?
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> A am myself a developer but when out in the wild installing what
            > >>>>> we develop in our warm chambers one realises what often gets
            > >>>>> forgotten.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> Cheers
            > >>>>> Hansjoerg Waelchli
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >
            > >
            > > ------------------------------------
            > >
            > > For more information see http://ASCOM-Standards.org/.
            > >
            > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email FROM THE ACCOUNT YOU USED TO SUBSCRIBE(!) to:
            > > ASCOM-Talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
          • Chris
            As far as I know all the ASCOM components reference .NET version 3.5 so it s not clear to me where the requirement for earlier versions comes from. I doubt we
            Message 5 of 11 , Apr 4 7:19 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              As far as I know all the ASCOM components reference .NET version 3.5 so it's not clear to me where the requirement for earlier versions comes from.

              I doubt we will do a new Platform release just to change to a new .NET version. AIUI a change could mean that we will have to abandon people using XP and I don't think it's time to do that.

              There's nothing to stop people using .NET 4.0 or 4.5 for developing applications using ASCOM. They integrate well.
              4.5 is nice because it has the dynamic type and this makes connecting to COM components easier.

              Chris

              --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, "waelchlih" <astrowah@...> wrote:
              >
              > Bob,
              >
              > Just "fell" on this - my - old post when glancing through the forum.
              >
              > As I tried to point out in my last comment it was never my intention to blame someone. And - of course - _you_ guys developing ASCOM can do nothing against the framework hell except - maybe - taking care not to have to many components referencing different framework versions (basing on different CLRs).
              >
              > I know the problem from my everyday live (.NET developer myself) but as I pointed out it's a different thing when sitting somewhere remote having great hopes ... and again ... MS concepts knock you out.
              >
              > I hope that with this post I am not "triggering" someone else to invest time to answer to that. All is said and clear (at least to me).
              >
              > Thank you for your great work.
              >
              > Clear skies
              >
              > Hansjörg
              >
              > --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Bob Denny <rdenny@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Thanks to all who helped Hansjoerg -- Just for reference, we TRY to prevent
              > > this. On the ASCOM Web Site <http://ascom-standards.org/>, in the box for the
              > > Platform, there is the following:
              > >
              > > "Required for all drivers (see notes for Windows 7
              > > <http://ascom-standards.org/FAQs/Plat6OnW7.htm> and Windows XP
              > > <http://ascom-standards.org/FAQs/Plat6OnXP.htm>!). "
              > >
              > > Note the hyperlinks, which are present on that web page. So if you decide to
              > > "see notes" for Windows XP(!), you are taken to this page
              > > <http://ascom-standards.org/FAQs/Plat6OnXP.htm> and it says, among other things
              > >
              > > 2. Install ONLY the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1. This includes everything you
              > > need for the ASCOM Platform. See
              > > http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=22
              > >
              > > I'm not sure how we could have made things any clearer and/ore easier than that.
              > > It's right there within 2cm of the big download button. Perhaps you got the
              > > platform installer somewhere else? If so, could you pass that along so we can
              > > discourage them from mirroring it?
              > >
              > > -- Bob
              > >
              > > > Thanks again for your support. I actually had 3.5 - but not the sp - installed. And if you're somewhere remote having big hopes making a new system and you have to give up just because a missing sp... :-|
              > > >
              > > > You know....
              > > >
              > > > Cheers
              > > > Hansjoerg
              > > >
              > > > --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Jared Wellman <jared@> wrote:
              > > >> 4.0 does not contain anything other than 4.0. 3.5 contains all lower
              > > >> frameworks. I'm not entirely sure why Microsoft took this approach but
              > > >> ASCOM was complaining because it needs 3.5 and it didn't exist as its not
              > > >> included in 4.0.
              > > >>
              > > >> Good luck!
              > > >> Jared
              > > >>
              > > >> Typed on a phone with fat thumbs.
              > > >> On Mar 23, 2013 5:11 PM, "waelchlih" <astrowah@> wrote:
              > > >>
              > > >>> **
              > > >>>
              > > >>>
              > > >>> Hey - Thanks for your reply to my groaning post ;-)
              > > >>>
              > > >>> I actually am / was running xp/sp3 with .NET 4.0 installed.
              > > >>> There is a bit of uncertainity about which .NET version is really
              > > >>> contained in which higher numbered version. Why did the ascom platform
              > > >>> setup complain about missing sp's even tough a higher framework was
              > > >>> installed...? I fear that - in a couple of years - we will end up with a
              > > >>> real hell of framework- and framework-sp- versions. Don't forget about the
              > > >>> "client profile" and "full" version of .net 4.0 and higher frameworks. To
              > > >>> be clear - this - of course - is not an issue caused by ascom.
              > > >>>
              > > >>> Have a good day.
              > > >>>
              > > >>> Cheers
              > > >>> Hansjörg
              > > >>>
              > > >>> --- In ASCOM-Talk@yahoogroups.com, Rick Burke <astroman133@> wrote:
              > > >>>> Jared is correct, the ASCOM Platform only needs .NET Framework 3.5 SP1,
              > > >>>> which includes the 3.0 and 2.0 frameworks. .NET 3.5 contains the
              > > >>>> enhancements for LINQ, and .NET 3.0 contains enhancements for Windows
              > > >>>> Presentation Foundation. Both of these are additions to 2.0, not
              > > >>>> replacements for it.
              > > >>>>
              > > >>>> However, if your PC is running Windows 7, you already have the necessary
              > > >>>> frameworks installed. Microsoft, in their apparent wisdom chose to
              > > >>>> install the frameworks below 4.0 with Windows 7, but did not activate
              > > >>>> them. If your PC is running Windows 7 you can activate the 3.5
              > > >>>> Framework from the Programs and Features applet in the Control Panel.
              > > >>>>
              > > >>>>
              > > >>>> Rick Burke
              > > >>>>
              > > >>>> On 3/23/2013 1:47 PM, Jared Wellman wrote:
              > > >>>>> Last I checked the 3.5 package contained all frameworks down to 2.0.
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=21
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> You should only need to install 3.5SP1 and everything should be taken
              > > >>>>> care of.
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> */Jared Wellman/*
              > > >>>>> Co-Founder and Developer
              > > >>>>> www.mainsequencesoftware.com <http://www.mainsequencesoftware.com/>
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM, waelchlih <astrowah@
              > > >>>>> <mailto:astrowah@>> wrote:
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> In the good old days of windows native programming there was the
              > > >>>>> so called dll hell which caused users (as well as developers) to
              > > >>>>> ged mad and loose weight due to stress in overnight work.
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> Now we have been given microsoft's .net framework - including a
              > > >>>>> version management system. Unfortunately there seems to arise a
              > > >>>>> new hell - the framework-hell.
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> I have been in our club's obs today trying to install a new pc for
              > > >>>>> controlling our 90cm cass. I brought a lot of frameworks with me
              > > >>>>> as this was 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and installed them thinking
              > > >>>>> nothing bad. What a horror when I run the ascom platform 6.0 sp1
              > > >>>>> setup. I was informed that I am missing 2.0 sp1, 3.0 sp1, 3.5
              > > >>>>> sp1.... So I had to give up.
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> Should it not be a main goal to have as little as possible
              > > >>>>> different frameworks requird? Why not go for - let's say - 4.0 for
              > > >>>>> the new planned version and everyone targets this one?
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> A am myself a developer but when out in the wild installing what
              > > >>>>> we develop in our warm chambers one realises what often gets
              > > >>>>> forgotten.
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>> Cheers
              > > >>>>> Hansjoerg Waelchli
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>>>
              > > >>>
              > > >>>
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > ------------------------------------
              > > >
              > > > For more information see http://ASCOM-Standards.org/.
              > > >
              > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email FROM THE ACCOUNT YOU USED TO SUBSCRIBE(!) to:
              > > > ASCOM-Talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              > > >
              > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.