|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: hjacobsonhjacobson Date: Jun 30, 2008 08:35
Summary:
Trying to get Microsoft Installer and Microsoft Update to recognise
symbolic links that redirect
C:\WINDOWS\Installer --> D:\WINDOWS\Installer
C:\MSOCache --> D:\MSOCache
The Installer and Update in XP with SP3 removes the symbolic link,
replacing with a folder which is then populated with the current
install
or update.
Detail:
With the advent of "netbooks" a.k.a. ultralow-cost PCs, Microsoft
committed to support XP on these machines through January 2010
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jun08/06-03ComputexPR.mspx.
The first popular netbook, the ASUS eeePC's have small solid state
disk (SSD) drives 4 - 8 GB in size and an SD card slot
|
| Show full article (3.24Kb) |
|
| | 4 Comments |
|
|
Author: PA Bear [MS MVP]PA Bear [MS MVP] Date: Jun 30, 2008 15:13
> I slimmed down, that is, removed extraneous functions from XP with
> SP3 using nlite http://www.nliteos.com/.
Patient (demonstrating): "Doctor, it hurts when I do this!"
Doctor: "Don't do that."
Don't do that.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Desktop Experience - since 2002
AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
DTS-L http://dts-l.net/
hjacobson wrote: > Summary:
>
> Trying to get Microsoft Installer and Microsoft Update to recognise
> symbolic links that redirect
> C:\WINDOWS\Installer --> D:\WINDOWS\Installer
> C:\MSOCache --> D:\MSOCache...
|
| Show full article (3.79Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Harry Johnston [MVP]Harry Johnston [MVP] Date: Jun 30, 2008 16:54
hjacobson wrote:
> Trying to get Microsoft Installer and Microsoft Update to recognise
> symbolic links that redirect
> C:\WINDOWS\Installer --> D:\WINDOWS\Installer
> C:\MSOCache --> D:\MSOCache
> The Installer and Update in XP with SP3 removes the symbolic link,
> replacing with a folder which is then populated with the current
> install or update.
In that case, there is unlikely to be any way to get this to work. It wouldn't
be reliable anyway.
> For that reason I am experimenting with an
> ASUS eeePC 701. This eeePC has a 4 GB SSD and an 8 GB SDHC card
> configured as the 2nd fixed disk drive.
I'm not sure it will be practical to run Windows XP on a 4GB system drive. I
don't suppose you can boot to the SDHC card instead?
> I slimmed down, that is, removed extraneous functions from XP with
> SP3 using nlite http://www.nliteos.com/.
|
| Show full article (1.68Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: hjacobsonhjacobson Date: Jul 7, 2008 22:07
On Jun 30, 7:54 pm, "Harry Johnston [MVP]" scms.waikato.ac.nz>
wrote:> hjacobson wrote:
>> Trying to get Microsoft Installer and Microsoft Update to recognise
>> symbolic links that redirect
>> C:\WINDOWS\Installer --> D:\WINDOWS\Installer
>> C:\MSOCache --> D:\MSOCache
>> The Installer and Update in XP with SP3 removes the symbolic link,
>> replacing with a folder which is then populated with the current
>> install or update.
>
> In that case, there is unlikely to be any way to get this to work. It wouldn't
> be reliable anyway.
>
That's too bad. I hoped someone familiar with the internals of MS
Installer and Update would jump in here to explain their behavior of
not respecting NTFS symbolic links. Curious, as Installer and Update
appear to respect more traditional user folder re-direction.
|
| Show full article (3.53Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Harry Johnston [MVP]Harry Johnston [MVP] Date: Jul 9, 2008 21:07
hjacobson wrote:
>>> I slimmed down, that is, removed extraneous functions from XP with
>>> SP3 using nlite http://www.nliteos.com/. >> Don't do that. You can remove some system components using the Add/Remove
>> control panel, but pulling things out by their hair is going to leave you with
>> an unreliable system.
>
> Please don't make it sound so coarse. There is standard procedure for
> removal and testing to obtain stable configuration.
Well, it's your funeral. :-)
Seriously, though, you may have a temporarily stable configuration, but it isn't
one the operating system was designed to be in. Every time something changes,
e.g., the installation of a security update, the system might break. Even in
the absence of an externally introduced change like an update there's always a
chance of an unexpected problem in an unanticipated (and therefore untested)
situation.
Personally I wouldn't care to take the risk. Windows is far too fragile already.
Harry.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
