×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you a
Computer / IT professional?
Join Tek-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Tek-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

(OP)
In the constant struggle to keep all of my company's Micro$oft products patched with the latest security updates I prefer to silent deployments. Usually I will extract the updates so that I can determine the command-line switches to use to accomplish this (e.g. - /q:a /r:n for some updates, -q -u -z for others).

The need for silent installs (or at least installs that don't require mandatory reboots) becomes apparent since I deploy these updates via logon scripts. At the rate that security updates are released I would have my user community constantly rebooting their respective systems when they first log onto the network if it weren't for command-line switches like I've mentioned.

All that being said my issue is with the DirectX 9.0b install. Everything I've seen points to the fact that there aren't command-line switches, other than a Managed DirectX installation option. The dxsetup.exe appears to force the user to acknowledge the EULA and force them to reboot. This is extremely irritating.

It's one thing that that Microsoft packages these security updates where some platforms follow the hotfix.exe model and others don't. It's another that some packages are freely available for download for some platforms, whereas others require a call to tech support or require mandatory visits to the Windows Update site.

Not I am reading that most recent versions of DirectX can't be forced into silent installations. Is this true? Have any of y'all been able to work around this to create a silent installation that doesn't require a reboot?  

RE: DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

(OP)
I will post an answer to my own question What I did was download the DirectX 8.1 Redistribution package. From there I extracted the dxsetup.exe file that kicks off the installation process. Replacing the existing executable in the the DirectX 9.0b extraction with the older executable now gives me the /silent and /install command-line switches again.

Testing this out I have upgraded both Windows 98 SE and Windows 2000 Professional clients. It doesn't support the managed installation option, but then again I'm not in a hurry to roll out hundreds of megs of .NET framework installs to all of my clients anyway

Try at your own risk.

RE: DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

After swearing a lot at MS for removing the command line options to automate DX 9.0b set-up, I found this . . .

http://www.msfn.org/unattended/xp/directx.htm

They have a 'tweaked' version of v9.0 dxsetup.exe: You can now automate the install of DX v9.0b with "dxsetup.exe /windowsupdate", so your users see progress, but cannot fiddle.

But! I am not sure about the legality of this 'hack', as MS removed the command line to force folks to acknowledge the EULA.

RE: DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

(OP)
I found this as well, but for larger-scale deployments it seemed to inconsistently connect to the Windows Update website. About 40% of the time it timed out. We didn't have any Internet connectivity issues around that time either. I liked having the installs draw from local CAB's since I have more control of the process.

Good tweak though. Checking the MSDN newsgroups there were a lot of folks disgusted with removal of the command-line options. I don't think it was as much a purposeful tactic on Microsoft's part as much as someone being lazy or forgetful. Using their installation executable there isn't even an uninstall option! That points to someone asleep at the (mouse) wheel IMHO

RE: DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

Gregarican:

For what it's worth--the consistent inconsitency of the MS WindowsUpdate site is what drove me "underground" to start learning the ways of the "silent install from local batch files" in the first place.  We would experience such horrendous difficulty utilizing the WindowsUpdate site--not to mention the arduous task of educating users to do this on their own--that we started pulling them down locally and automating our own installs.  We're a small office (150 desktops) with a full T1--we would experience the unexplainable problems (as you did) at times when we had complete and full connectivity.

I must assume that the "/windowsupdate" switch redirects the setup file to pull the software components from MS's official Dx file site (which may be on the same servers or a sister site to WindowsUpdate?)...so it may only be as reliable as the site is...which is not really very reliable at all.  Still, progress bars are pretty...so you've got to weigh the good with the bad, I guess :)

Main point:  the problem is not in your connection or the DxSetup.exe file (at least according to my theory); the problem is with the reliability of the throughput and connectivity of the HEAVILY TAXED WindowsUpdate site's file serving capacity.

Dallas S. Kelsey, III
DKelsey@CHGLaw.com
Cox, Hodgman, & Giarmarco, P.C.
Troy MI 48084

RE: DirecttX 9.0b Redistribution --- Silent Install??

(OP)
All very true. I downloaded a freeware install packager called Little Setup Builder. Whenever Microsoft releases patches and updates I extract them to a temp folder and repackage them with LSB for silent installation. Using other freeware tools like KixTart I then in turn can deploy them through the network logon script.

Beats the hell out of paying high prices for Microsoft SMS or expecting endusers to visit the WindowsUpdate site on a regular basis. Not very good version control using the former method

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Tek-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Tek-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Tek-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Tek-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login

Close Box

Join Tek-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical computer professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Tek-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close