WinSxS, functional under 2k ?

S

Steph

Using windows 2000 Pro SP4. After a reinstall and some cleaning, I
noticed I "caught" a winsxs folder, which some research shows to be for
use with Windows XP and later side-by-side DLL storage.

Was this function somehow retro-fit to Windows 2000 by a Windows update
(which I doubt... but safer to ask the experts) ?

Am I free to simply delete the contents of the winsxs folder ?

Regards
 
J

John John (MVP)

It was probably put there when you installed one of your applications.
The applications won't use the folder unless you upgrade the Windows
2000 installation to a version that supports SxS. The files in the SxS
folder are also present in the System32 folder, Windows 2000 does not
use the files in the SxS floder, it uses the files in the System32
folder. You can rename the folder or move it to a temporary location
and if you want and if you see no problems after a week or so you can
remove the folder.

On versions of Windows that do not support deployment of shared
side-by-side assemblies, such as Windows 98 and Windows 2000 Server, the
Visual C++ libraries are installed in the System32 folder and WinSxS
folder under the operating system root directory. This setup enables
running Visual C++ applications on these operating system versions
because they do not support manifest-based binding of applications to
dependent DLLs. On these operating systems, when an application is
loaded, the corresponding manifest file is ignored and the operating
systems searches for dependent DLLs using paths set in the current
running environment. However, on upgrading the operating system to a
version that support manifest-based binding, such as Windows XP, Windows
Server 2003, or Windows Vista, applications built with manifests start
using the DLLs installed in the WinSxS folder.

[end quote]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235624(VS.80).aspx


John
 
S

Steph

"John John" (MVP) wrote :
... You can rename the folder
or move it to a temporary location and if you want and if you see
no problems after a week or so you can remove the folder.


OK, done, and will watch periodically for this folder to point its ugly
head again. Thanks !
 
S

Steph

"John John" (MVP) wrote :
... You can rename the folder
or move it to a temporary location and if you want and if you see
no problems after a week or so you can remove the folder.


OK, done, and will watch periodically for this folder to point its ugly
head again. Thanks !
 
J

John John (MVP)

Steph said:
"John John" (MVP) wrote :





OK, done, and will watch periodically for this folder to point its ugly
head again. Thanks !

You're welcome.

John
 
S

someone watching

Steph, I know in XP if MS .NET framework is installed and you change the
WinSxS name, delete it etc. any time .NET goes to start it will throw an
error message and fail to start. I do not have .NET installed in W2K so
don't know if the same holds true for that OS but would imaging so!

In other words, if you have programs dependant on .NET, changing the
WinSxS folder may cause it to fail.
___
 
J

John John (MVP)

someone said:
Steph, I know in XP if MS .NET framework is installed and you change the
WinSxS name, delete it etc. any time .NET goes to start it will throw an
error message and fail to start. I do not have .NET installed in W2K so
don't know if the same holds true for that OS but would imaging so!

No, not at all. The new Side-by-Side Assemblies require XP or better to
work, Windows 2000 does not support this. Deployments on Windows 2000
only include this folder from upgrade purposes.

In other words, if you have programs dependant on .NET, changing the
WinSxS folder may cause it to fail.

Not at all. Windows 2000 does not load *any* files from the
Side-by-Side assembly cache, Windows 2000 does not recognize WinSxS.
Deployments on Windows 2000 require that the files be placed in the
%systemroot%\system32 folder or in the program's folder.

John
 
S

someone watching

Hi John

Thanks for the useful information. Curious, what exactly is the purpose
of the WinSxS (side by side?) implementation for? Is it redundancy? I
noticed numerous DLL's in there are also in system32 (or elsewhere) but
are sometimes even different versions!

I found (in XP) .NET didn't work after deleting some DLL's in WinSxS
even though they were in system32. A registry check showed pointers for
those specific DLL's to WinSxS... (and these were common shared DLL's)

Well everything is restored once again but beets me why yet another
directory with seemingly duplicated files!
__
 
J

John John (MVP)

Do you recall the term "DLL Hell"? The new(er) Side-by-Side Assembly
technology was introduced with Windows XP to help reduce or eliminate
DLL Hell. In short, Side-by-Side Assemblies permit the use of different
versions of the same shared system DLLs.

If you recall earlier Windows versions, like Windows 95, when you
installed an application you were (usually) warned if the installer
tried to replace a DLL from the system folder with an older version and
you were asked if you wanted to accept the change. Those with enough
Windows experience knew of the consequences of replacing DLLs in the
system folder with older ones, those who didn't have enough experience
quickly learned of the consequences of replacing DLLs with older versions!

With private DLLs there are few or no problems with DLL versioning as
private DLLs are placed in the program's folder. If you have different
versions or releases of the same program simply installing the different
versioned programs in different folder eliminates private DLL version
conflicts. Until Windows XP it wasn't so easy to use different versions
of shared system DLLs, that is what the new Side-by-Side assemblies
attempts to resolve.

This business of applications replacing system DLLs wily-nilly and the
DLL Hell that ensued was somewhat fixed with the Windows File Protection
feature (WFP) introduced with Windows 2000 but the shared DLL versioning
problem was not really fixed or properly addressed. Considering WFP and
the fact that WinSxS is a protected folder I am somewhat surprised that
you could "delete" this folder or manually delete/replace files in the
folder, on Windows XP and later WFP does not easily permit this.


Wikipedia's concise explanation of SxS is one of the better one:

"A common issue in previous versions of Windows was that users
frequently suffered from DLL hell, where more than one version of the
same Dynamically Linked Library (DLL) was installed on the computer. As
software relies on DLLs, using the wrong version could result in
non-functional applications, or worse. Windows XP solved this problem by
introducing side-by-side assemblies. The technology keeps multiple
versions of a DLL in the WinSxS folder and runs them on demand to the
appropriate application keeping applications isolated from each other
and not using common dependencies."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Featur...ication_isolation_.26_side-by-side_assemblies


The rest of this post consists of excerpts and explanations from
Microsoft articles:

Side-by-Side Sharing

The workings of the new (XP) UI rely on a side-by-side sharing
requirements structure. As a solution for versioning problems and DLL
Hell, Microsoft strongly suggests that applications adopt a side-by-side
versioning strategy. As seen in the implementation of ComCtl version 6,
side-by-side components are the future of Windows development. This
section gives you an overview about what's new for side-by-side sharing
for Windows XP. For an in-depth look into this topic, see How To Build
and Service Isolated Applications and Side-by-Side Assemblies for
Windows XP. For background on side-by-side component sharing issues and
DLL redirection, see Implementing Side-by-Side Component Sharing in
Applications (Expanded).

With side-by-side components, multiple versions of a component are
installed simultaneously. An application is bound to the version of the
component with which it was designed and tested.

With Windows XP, there's an infrastructure to support assemblies and
isolated applications (both COM+ and Win32). A code change should not be
required to get at side-by-side assemblies from Win32 applications.
Applications can use the latest system assemblies without global impact.

In short, isolated applications are valuable because they are more
reliable. They are built and shipped with all needed components and are
not affected by changes that other applications make. Isolated
applications use a manifest, which is an XML file containing information
that self-describes an assembly or an application. All binding and
activation metadata, such as COM classes, interfaces, and type
libraries, is now stored in the manifest, rather than the registry.
There are two types of manifest files: applications manifests, which
describe isolated applications, and assembly manifests, which describe
individual assemblies.

An isolated application may use side-by-side assemblies. Assemblies are
the fundamental units of naming, binding, versioning, deployment, and
configuration. They come in two varieties, shared and private. A shared
assembly is available for use by multiple applications on the computer,
installed in the WinSxS folder in the Windows directory. A private
assembly is only visible to that application and is deployed within the
directory structure of the application.

There's another benefit for application developers in using side-by-side
sharing; your schedule can be much clearer. Your development schedules
are not affected by the release schedules of the components you use.

[end quote]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms997638.aspx


Windows 2000 doesn't understand diddly squat of these new Side-by-Side
Assemblies, here are more passages from Microsoft articles:

"If you install your application on a computer that is running Microsoft
Windows 2000 or earlier versions of Windows, do not ship the
side-by-side assembly in your application folder to those operating
systems. Instead, the side-by side assemblies should be used from the
system folder. If you install a shared component to the system folder as
part of your setup, make sure that you are not downgrading the version
if one is previously present."

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms997620.aspx

and:

"On versions of Windows that do not support deployment of shared
side-by-side assemblies, such as Windows 98 and Windows 2000 Server, the
Visual C++ libraries are installed in the System32 folder and WinSxS
folder under the operating system root directory. This setup enables
running Visual C++ applications on these operating system versions
because they do not support manifest-based binding of applications to
dependent DLLs. On these operating systems, when an application is
loaded, the corresponding manifest file is ignored and the operating
systems searches for dependent DLLs using paths set in the current
running environment. However, on upgrading the operating system to a
version that support manifest-based binding, such as Windows XP, Windows
Server 2003, or Windows Vista, applications built with manifests start
using the DLLs installed in the WinSxS folder."

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235624(VS.80).aspx

John
 
S

Steph

:

....
"On versions of Windows that do not support deployment of shared
side-by-side assemblies, such as Windows 98 and Windows 2000
Server, the Visual C++ libraries are installed in the System32
folder and WinSxS folder under the operating system root
directory. This setup enables running Visual C++ applications on
these operating system versions because they do not support
manifest-based binding of applications to dependent DLLs. On these
operating systems, when an application is loaded, the
corresponding manifest file is ignored and the operating systems
searches for dependent DLLs using paths set in the current running
environment. However, on upgrading the operating system to a
version that support manifest-based binding, such as Windows XP,
Windows Server 2003, or Windows Vista, applications built with
manifests start using the DLLs installed in the WinSxS folder."

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235624(VS.80).aspx


Good catch! And so, since I am sure I shall never want to "upgrade"
to Windows XP, I now know I can and should sweep those useless DLLs
from the WinSxS folder periodically (maybe, after checking that the
versions in System or the path are the same or newer.

Thanks to all responders !
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top