Jump to content

/Integrate or Not?


Recommended Posts

What are the advantages to /integrate (svcpack.inf) a patch over launching the installation from cmdline.txt

What is the difference between the installation process at T-13 (svcpack.inf) and T-12 (cmdlines.txt)??

What microsoft recommend to be "lauch" at each time?

There is also an inconsisctency with the installlation of IE7 and its patch...

IE7 cant use the /integrate switch but its patch (KB947864) does

What can happen if i integrate the patch and not IE7? I think the patch must be installed AFTER IE7 and if i integrate it, it will be run after ie7....

Why should i use /integrate, and modify svcpack.inf and dosnet.inf, if i must run the update in an order that can be achieve from cmdline.txt and is easier to implement?

---- EDIT 1 ----

There is advantages to integrate big service pack as SP3, it replace the files from the installation folder and dont execute themselve at setup time

Is this the same thing for the smaler patch?

I dont know why these patch modify the svcpack.inf, just a way to lauch them at install time?

If this is the case, there is no advantage to launch them a t-13 (svcpack.inf) over t-12 (cmdlines.txt)

Thanx for your help

Stéphane

Edited by Stephane32
Link to comment
Share on other sites


When installing updates from either T-12(cmdlines.txt) or T-13(svcpack.inf), then you add additional space and install time overhead, since all the update-installers needs to be present on the CD and since setup is paused during the installs of all the update-installers...

Then there is the '/integrate' switch, which is MS's poor attempt of delevering us an update-slipstreaming solution.

The good thing about the '/integrate' switch, is that the updates are directly integrated(slipstreamed) i.e. the binaries on the install source are directly replaced with the updated binaries from the updates...

This would then normally mean that there weren't any space/install time overhead added, but however, the '/integrate' switch leaves the new updated files uncabbed in I386(the overwritten files are frequently cabbed), and additionally then all the update-installers are copied to 'I386\svcpack\' and are all referenced to be run at T-13 in svcpack.inf. This last step is done so that the needed reg-entries are made and catalog files copied into place and sometimes to run some post-install commands like e.g. registering certain new files added etc.

Personally, then i'm a big fan of the HFSLIP tool, which is a batchfile which directly integrates(slipstreams) the updates into the install source, and in contrary to the '/integrate' switch, then it does it without leaving the update-installers into 'I386\svcpack\', and also cabs the updated binaries if the original replaced files where cabbed... It works for 2K, XP-SP2/SP3 and 2K3(and there's also a version for 64 bits editions of XP and 2K3)...

For your last questions, then no, there isn't really any difference from installing the updates from T-12 or T-13, and yes, you'll need IE7 pre-installed/slipstreamed for being able to install/slipstream IE7 updates...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanx for your answer it confirm what i was thinking

Then there is the '/integrate' switch, which is MS's poor attempt of delevering us an update-slipstreaming solution.

:no::}

as usual...

i will look for hf slip

Thanx again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...