 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
.NET Forum / Visual Studio.NET / Setup / February 2007BSOD with Visual Studio 2005 SP1 for Vista
I have been trying to install the recently released Vista SP1 for Visual Studio 2005 but I have had no success. Visual Studio 2005 and its SP1 have installed on my Vista x64 system running on a dual core AMD64 without any problems But SP1 for Vista runs until it starts collecting installation information and then faults with a bugcheck as follows: The computer has rebooted from a bugcheck. The bugcheck was: 0x0000007e (0xffffffffc0000005, 0xfffff80001c879c7, 0xfffff9800080da28, 0xfffff9800080d400 ). I have tried this 3 times and its behaviour is the same every time. Any advice on how to overcome this problem would be much appreciated. Brian Gladman No advice, but to clarify: You're using the *beta* vista sp1? I didn't find any (final) released Vista SP1 for vs 2005, except the non-vista sp1. >I have been trying to install the recently released Vista SP1 for Visual >Studio 2005 but I have had no success. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Brian Gladman > No advice, but to clarify: You're using the *beta* vista sp1? I didn't > find any (final) released Vista SP1 for vs 2005, except the non-vista sp1. I was indeed trying to use what is called "Visual Studio 2005 SP1 Update for Windows Vista Beta". It hadn't occurred to me that MS would offer a service pack for a beta when the product in question (Vista) was already a fully released product. Thanks for noticing this. Brian Gladman It's not a service pack for a beta, but rather, the service pack itself is a beta. (i.e. the final version of the service pack has not been released yet). >> No advice, but to clarify: You're using the *beta* vista sp1? I didn't >> find any (final) released Vista SP1 for vs 2005, except the non-vista [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Brian Gladman >>> No advice, but to clarify: You're using the *beta* vista sp1? I didn't >>> find any (final) released Vista SP1 for vs 2005, except the non-vista [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > a beta. (i.e. the final version of the service pack has not been released > yet). Its a pity it didn't say this clearly since its name is ambiguous in that it can be parsed as either a beta of "Visual Studio 2005 SP1 Update for Windows Vista" or "Visual Studio 2005 SP1 Update" for "Windows Vista Beta". If you are right that this is a beta of the sevice pack then my original problem remains in that it did not work for me. Brian Gladman Well, programmers are not known for good English. Did you run the vista sp1 patch as administrator? Report the bug, if it stands after doing the usual things to test bugs (update 64-bit drivers, especially video; boot in safe mode etc.) There are some known bugs in Vista that might explain it, e.g.: http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=205617 >>>> No advice, but to clarify: You're using the *beta* vista sp1? I >>>> didn't find any (final) released Vista SP1 for vs 2005, except the [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Brian Gladman [snip] >>> It's not a service pack for a beta, but rather, the service pack itself >>> is a beta. (i.e. the final version of the service pack has not been [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> If you are right that this is a beta of the sevice pack then my original >> problem remains in that it did not work for me. > Well, programmers are not known for good English. You may be right but I don't think this is a very good excuse for the risible description of this particular item. > Did you run the vista sp1 patch as administrator? Report the bug, if it > stands after doing the usual things to test bugs (update 64-bit drivers, > especially video; boot in safe mode etc.) > > There are some known bugs in Vista that might explain it, e.g.: > http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=205617 Yes, I did run it as an Admin and I did check all the drivers etc. I have not yet reported it as a bug since I wanted to find out if others were having similar problems before doing this as the failure could be the result of something I am doing wrong. Thanks for the additional information, which aligns with my own research. I have now analysed the memory dump using WinDbg and this suggests that the fault is caused by some sort of low level I/O issue. But I will now await the full release as I am far from alone in seeing BSOD's from Vista SP1 so I am sure Microsoft is very aware of the issue. Thanks again for your assistance. Brian Gladman >> Well, programmers are not known for good English. > > You may be right but I don't think this is a very good excuse for the > risible description of this particular item. True, but then is there really a good excuse for being a programmer in the first place. > Thanks for the additional information, which aligns with my own research. > I have now analysed the memory dump using WinDbg and this suggests that > the fault is caused by some sort of low level I/O issue. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. You may be able to able to determine the exact driver (if any) causing the problem from the memory dump, but I have an aversion to analyzing memory dumps: http://blogs.msdn.com/iliast/archive/2006/12/11/crash-dump-analysis.aspx >But I will now await the full release as I am far from alone in seeing >BSOD's from Vista SP1 so I am sure Microsoft is very aware of the issue. I expect the final release should be out soon, since I think the beta is from early Dec. >>> Well, programmers are not known for good English. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > have an aversion to analyzing memory dumps: > http://blogs.msdn.com/iliast/archive/2006/12/11/crash-dump-analysis.aspx Thanks for the further information - I got some way down this path but the blog allowed me to get a bit further. It is a failure in the kernel code caused by a driver: ---------------------------------------------- APC_INDEX_MISMATCH (1) This is a kernel internal error. The most common reason to see this bugcheck is when a filesystem or a driver has a mismatched number of calls to disable and re-enable APCs. The key data item is the Thread->KernelApcDisable field. A negative value indicates that a driver has disabled APC calls without re-enabling them. A positive value indicates that the reverse is true. This check is made on exit from a system call. Arguments: Arg1: 000000007791066a, address of system function (system call) Arg2: 0000000000000000, Thread->ApcStateIndex << 8 | Previous ApcStateIndex Arg3: 000000000000ffff, Thread->KernelApcDisable Arg4: fffff9801b5d9ca0, Previous KernelApcDisable ---------------------------------------------- but it doesn't say (or I couldn't find) which driver was involved, only that it died while in werfault.exe (Windows Error Reporting). Brian Gladman Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.