Asynchronous logon script environment

If synchronous logon scripts run before environment variables are set,
asynchronous logon scripts aren't guaranteed to run after the environment
is set up either, right? So it would seem that a script should loop until
it sees values applied to the required variables. I don't think I've seen
this done though. Is it good practice?


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add
1 more underscore and remove the last word.

"Tom Del Rosso" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> If synchronous logon scripts run before environment variables are set,
> asynchronous logon scripts aren't guaranteed to run after the environment
> is set up either, right? So it would seem that a script should loop until
> it sees values applied to the required variables. I don't think I've seen
> this done though. Is it good practice?
>
>
> --
>
> Reply in group, but if emailing add
> 1 more underscore and remove the last word.
>
>

I would think that environmental variables are set up a long,
long time before the logon script runs, synchronous or
otherwise. If you want the script to loop then you have to code
this yourself, e.g. like so:

:Loop
if not defined username goto Loop

"Pegasus (MVP)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> I would think that environmental variables are set up a long,
> long time before the logon script runs, synchronous or
> otherwise. If you want the script to loop then you have to code
> this yourself, e.g. like so:
>
> :Loop
> if not defined username goto Loop

Then is this incorrect or did I misunderstand it? (From the very bottom of
this page

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/win20...pter/ch08.html

"4. You can't run a logon script synchronously if it needs to interact with
the user's environment. Synchronous logon scripts will always finish prior
to environment variables being set and prior to the user's profile being
loaded."


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add
1 more underscore and remove the last word.

"Tom Del Rosso" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Pegasus (MVP)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> > I would think that environmental variables are set up a long,
> > long time before the logon script runs, synchronous or
> > otherwise. If you want the script to loop then you have to code
> > this yourself, e.g. like so:
> >
> > :Loop
> > if not defined username goto Loop
>
> Then is this incorrect or did I misunderstand it? (From the very bottom
of
> this page
>
> http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/win20...pter/ch08.html
>
> "4. You can't run a logon script synchronously if it needs to interact
with
> the user's environment. Synchronous logon scripts will always finish prior
> to environment variables being set and prior to the user's profile being
> loaded."

This site is a well-respected site. However, I would like to see this
with my own eyes before I believe it, because it just does not
sound right. The phrase "finish prior" is certainly wrong: A script
can run for quite some time, and since it runs synchronously with
other things, it may finish well after the environmental variables
have been set.

"Pegasus (MVP)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:OSi$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> This site is a well-respected site. However, I would like to see this
> with my own eyes before I believe it, because it just does not
> sound right. The phrase "finish prior" is certainly wrong: A script
> can run for quite some time, and since it runs synchronously with
> other things, it may finish well after the environmental variables
> have been set.

Then what can be said of the execution sequence when it's synchronous, or
not? Is it correct that 2k and XP have opposite defaults on this?


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add another
underscore and remove the last word.

"Tom Del Rosso" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Pegasus (MVP)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:OSi$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> > This site is a well-respected site. However, I would like to see this
> > with my own eyes before I believe it, because it just does not
> > sound right. The phrase "finish prior" is certainly wrong: A script
> > can run for quite some time, and since it runs synchronously with
> > other things, it may finish well after the environmental variables
> > have been set.
>
> Then what can be said of the execution sequence when it's synchronous, or
> not? Is it correct that 2k and XP have opposite defaults on this?

The essence of synchronous vs. sequential execution is that with
sequential execution, the desktop becomes available only AFTER
the logon script has finished. With synchronous execution it
becomes available WHILE the logon script executes. The following
KB article gives you some information about the respective
defaults: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q305293/

"Pegasus (MVP)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> The essence of synchronous vs. sequential execution is that with
> sequential execution, the desktop becomes available only AFTER
> the logon script has finished. With synchronous execution it
> becomes available WHILE the logon script executes. The following
> KB article gives you some information about the respective
> defaults: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q305293/

Aha, then by "synchronous" they mean concurrent or simultaneous. That's
very different from what I thought, because of the choice of words. To me,
"synchronous" implies that execution occurs in a controlled sequence based
on dependencies. Thank you.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add another
underscore and remove the last word.