|
There are no .dlls that it needs outside of whats in
systerm32, but I think there are a bunch of .ldf files in \i386 that it
uses.
-gil From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Noah Eiger Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 12:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] ADPrep Version Questions Ok. Promise. Last adprep question: Does
adprep need to be run from an i386 directory or can it be run on its own? Does
it have dependant files within i386 or is it
self-contained? Thanks. From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LOL. It isn't a decimal number though... It
is a series of variable length decimal numbers separated by the period
character... Sort of like an OID 1.2.840.113556.1.4.7000.102.7038 Versioning is a lost art I think though. I
am big on xx.yy.zz.nnnn xx.=major, yy=minor, zz=really minor, nnnn=build.
To me... major rev changes for big changes,
massive updates or rewrites or drammatic functional changes. minor is added
features, bug fixes. really minor is output string changes or remarks in the
code being changed, things that don't change the code flow and don't
require any serious testing (I rarely update this one). And build of course
is how many times the bin has been compiled. G:\>filever
f:\dev\cpp\adfind\adfind.exe The current release version of adfind
for instance has been compiled 785 times. Well actually that is incorrect, it
has compiled 785 times since V01.08.00. There was a little bug in the routine I
had been using to increment the counter and it was resetting on every new minor
version rev. If I follow the average I am probably off by 250-300 compile build
numbers but I expect it is less than that because as the complexity grew in
versions >15 the number of compiles between releases went up due to testing
and bug hunting. From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] It's a common source of
confusion. Ask a user if version 1.4.4 is newer or
older than 1.4.3.4 :) Some say "34>4 therefore the latter is
newer" some say "4>3 therefore the former is newer" neil PS The purist in me would say that without
a leading 0, the 196 below looks like 1 thousand 9 hundred and 60 and
1960>1830. it's all about justification, when dealing with the decimal
notation :) From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of joe Ah don't worry about it, I figured you were
just disconnected there when I saw the first question at all. That is why I
counted it out. :) From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Noah
Eiger Oh (blush) Don’t mind me. I’m just over here
re-learning that whole tens, hundreds, thousands, etc thing.
Ugh! (eyes roll skyward, head
shakes) ;-) Sorry for the wasted
bandwidth. From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
one thousand eight hundred and thirty is
greater than one hundred ninety six. The SP1 version is the most recent and
highest version of adprep. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 ... 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 ... joe From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Noah
Eiger yes From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are you asking if 1830 < 196
? From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Noah
Eiger Hi- I am
preparing to upgrade a W2k domain to W2k3. I want to use the latest version of
ADPrep. I have found the following info and am
confused: For
ADPrep on the following - From
Windows Server 2003 CD:
5.2.3790.0
July 22, 2004, 9:07:08 AM from
WindowsServer2003-KB889101-SP1-x86-ENU.exe:
5.2.3790.1830
November 07, 2005, 5:48:59 PM listed
in MSKB / Hotfix 324392
5.2.3790.196
July 23, 2004, 9:04 Am I
reading that correctly: the one from SP1 is a lower version and later date than
the one in the hotfix? Which one is the “latest”? Thanks. --
nme -- -- -- -- -- PLEASE
READ: The information contained in this email is confidential and
intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not
an intended recipient of this email please notify the sender
immediately and delete your copy
from your system. You must not copy, distribute or take any further
action
in reliance on it. Email is not a secure method of communication and
Nomura
International plc ('NIplc') will not, to the extent permitted by law,
accept
responsibility or liability for (a) the accuracy or completeness of,
or (b)
the presence of any virus, worm or similar malicious or disabling
code
in, this message or any attachment(s) to it. If verification of this
email
is sought then please request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated
this
email: (1) is not, and should not be treated or relied upon as,
investment research; (2) contains views or opinions that
are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of NIplc; (3) is intended
for
informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, solicitation or
offer
to buy or sell securities or related financial instruments. NIplc
does
not provide investment services to private customers. Authorised and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority.
Registered in no.
1550505 VAT No. 447 2492 35. Registered Office: 1 -- -- |
- RE: [ActiveDir] ADPrep Version Questions Gil Kirkpatrick
- Re: [ActiveDir] ADPrep Version Questions Jeremy Olson
