At 7/16/2001 06:08 PM (Monday), Lester Caine wrote:

> > I'm confused (probably by not having had to conform to ISO9002 standards).
> > In what way is using the Version Info resources on a setup.exe not
> > acceptable for determining what exe you are dealing with?
>
>The problem is in a number of cases now I have downloaded library updates
>that have
>the same file name as the one already in the download directory, and you
>can not
>see the Version Info until the file has been downloaded. When it is a 20Mb
>Netscape
>file, it is nice to know it is version 4.77 and you have 4.76 already in the
>directory.

I agree. It is a pain to download unnecessarily. However, that is a whole
different question than the one you have posed which is that not knowing
the precise version of the candidate file before you download it somehow
violates an ISO9002 rule. Sounds to me like you have been mixing your
arguments.

> > I thought the ISO standards were pretty fair about defining only the
> > functional nature of a requirement and allowing you some flexibility in how
> > you meet that requirement. The real sticking points are often whether you
> > have that process well documented and whether you follow it in your
> > business practices.
>
>Having been hit with problems such as the non-functional gds32.dll with
>Interbase
>5.5 and 5.6, and having to use the copy from 5.1, you soon realise that
>unless you
>can keep track of which version is actually in use ( and Windows does not
>necessarily keep the date the same ! ), then you have a problem actually
>verifying
>that an installation meets the documented setup. Especially when Microsoft
>have
>just overritten one of their libraries with a copy that is now
>incompatible with
>Interbase 5.1 ( I forget which one that was now but it took three days to
>track
>down! ).

I think in each case looking at the Version Info would have solved the
problem. A tool such as SysInfo or a similar function available from the
Norton Utilities which documents all system DLLs is really what you need.
After all, even if the "Setup_ProductXYZ_Version123.exe" file says it is
version 1.23 it still is not guaranteed to be unless you look inside what
it actually installed. I remain unconvinced that using Version Info data
does not solve any ISO9002 problem.