Recommended Posts

I get the following message when installing Security Update for .NET Framework 2.0 (KB922481):

According to the KB, Windows Installer v3.1 must be installed, which it is. I even re-installed Windows Installer 3.1 just to make sure and I still get the message. I'm running WinXP Pro SP2.

Windows ? Installer. V 3.01.4000.1823 

msiexec /Option <Required Parameter> [Optional Parameter]

Install Options
	</package | /i> <Product.msi>
		Installs or configures a product
	/a <Product.msi>
		Administrative install - Installs a product on the network
	/j<u|m> <Product.msi> [/t <Transform List>] [/g <Language ID>]
		Advertises a product - m to all users, u to current user
	</uninstall | /x> <Product.msi | ProductCode>
		Uninstalls the product

Display Options
	/quiet
		Quiet mode, no user interaction
	/passive
		Unattended mode - progress bar only
	/q[n|b|r|f]
		Sets user interface level
		n - No UI
		b - Basic UI
		r - Reduced UI
		f - Full UI (default)
	/help
		Help information
Restart Options
	/norestart
		Do not restart after the installation is complete
	/promptrestart
		Prompts the user for restart if necessary
	/forcerestart
		Always restart the computer after installation
Logging Options
	/l[i|w|e|a|r|u|c|m|o|p|v|x|+|!|*] <LogFile>
		i - Status messages
		w - Nonfatal warnings
		e - All error messages
		a - Start up of actions
		r - Action-specific records
		u - User requests
		c - Initial UI parameters
		m - Out-of-memory or fatal exit information
		o - Out-of-disk-space messages
		p - Terminal properties
		v - Verbose output
		x - Extra debugging information
		+ - Append to existing log file
		! - Flush each line to the log
		* - Log all information, except for v and x options
	/log <LogFile>
		Equivalent of /l* <LogFile>
Update Options
	/update <Update1.msp>[;Update2.msp]
		Applies update(s)
	/uninstall <PatchCodeGuid>[;Update2.msp] /package <Product.msi | ProductCode>
		Remove update(s) for a product
Repair Options
	/f[p|e|c|m|s|o|d|a|u|v] <Product.msi | ProductCode>
		Repairs a product
		p - only if file is missing
		o - if file is missing or an older version is installed (default)
		e - if file is missing or an equal or older version is installed
		d - if file is missing or a different version is installed
		c - if file is missing or checksum does not match the calculated value
		a - forces all files to be reinstalled
		u - all required user-specific registry entries (default)
		m - all required computer-specific registry entries (default)
		s - all existing shortcuts (default)
		v - runs from source and recaches local package
Setting Public Properties
	[PROPERTY=PropertyValue]

Consult the Windows ? Installer SDK for additional documentation on the
command line syntax.

Copyright ? Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Portions of this software are based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/480345-error-when-installing-kb922481/
Share on other sites

I second that :blink:

The parameters used are:

/quiet /norestart /overwriteoem

/quiet /norestart /nobackup /overwriteoem

Should just be /q since the exe is not an actual hotfix installer but an actual microsoft installer patch (msp).

  • 3 weeks later...
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Too soon, I'm still not over this death!
    • Normally, I admit when a title is clickbait (unfortunately, it's become somewhat necessary in AI-dominated news sections today), but in this case, all supported versions is implied and doesn't need to be spelled out in the title. Of course, I'm covering a Patch Tuesday update but that is only available to supported Windows SKUs. All our coverage relates to supported Windows software and SKUs only unless we expressly state that it's "unsupported", "unofficial", or "third-party". I'm sorry, but supported/official SKUs don't need to be spelled out as such in every Neowin headline.
    • ALL versions or ALL SUPPORTED versions? Neowin does it again.
    • But the reality is it will work for people's needs, and they don't care about the technology that makes it. Clearly not everyone's needs, but that low end space where personal laptops were only used to type emails, watch content and browse websites, but they didn't want to do that on a small screen device. Heck, writing that out I can now see the connection and reason it'll do so well. Apple is about experience. If the experience is bad, they don't release it. Low end Windows laptop manufacturers up until this point have not taken that into consideration ever before, so slow laggy usage with brittle slimey plastic shells were common. I hope that the low end space at least creates better physical products that last a bit longer, and if Microsoft get their act together, they could also have a solid OS on such low end hardware that would actually make the experience work for what the hardware was intended for. The fact that the CPU is a "cellphone", sorry mobile phone processor is irrelevant. It's about the experience, and so far, that sounds quite solid.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Jordan Smith earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      595
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      186
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      77
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!