Updated version of the .NET Framework verification tool now available

I have posted an updated version of the .NET Framework setup verification tool this weekend.  It contains the following changes:

  1. Some false positives were being reported when verifying the .NET Framework 1.1 on Windows Vista.  Previously, the tool would report that 12 files with incorrect version information and the overall verification process would state that it failed.  I investigated these issues on a couple of Windows Vista systems and found that they were not valid failures, so I updated the data file for the .NET Framework 1.1 so the verification tool will check the file versions for these 12 files but will no longer verify the exact checksums.
  2. I fixed a couple of bugs that prevented the tool from working correctly in a couple of silent install scenarios.  As a reminder, the supported silent install switches are described in this blog post.
  3. I updated the tool so that it will return error codes indicating failure instead of a return code of 0 (which typically indicates success) if an invalid combination of command line parameters is passed in.  Previously, passing in an invalid product name or invalid language when running the tool in silent mode would cause it to incorrectly return 0.

The .NET Framework setup verification tool has been updated at the same location it has previously been available at.  You can download an updated version from http://astebner.sts.winisp.net/Tools/netfx_setupverifier.zip.

Comments (6)

  1. Is there any plan to extend the verifier to 3.0?

  2. Hi Christopher_G_Lewis – No, there are not currently any plans to do that.  The issues that I’ve seen that the verification tool is useful in identifying have nearly all been related to the common language runtime (CLR), and there is not an updated version of the CLR in the .NET Framework 3.0 or 3.5.  Please let me know if you have seen any specific issues where you have found that a verification tool like this would have been useful in identifying them and I can investigate the possibility of adding to this tool.

Skip to main content