he decision to cut backwards
> compatibility to only supported Windows OS's.
>
> Next version will be even more interesting since last I checked VS11 CRT
> only supports Win7+ (which I believe cuts support for WinXP SP3 and
> Vista before they are out of service).
>
>
&
I remain confused how this problem has arisen in the first place. WiX
was (obviously) being compiled with versions of VS that support Win2K,
Win XP. So what's changed?
Windows XP hasn't changed under our feet. So that leaves WiX. What
features of the newer versions of Windows and/or VS are so
y popular... but it too is going
> out of support very soon.
>
> These are never easy decisions.
>
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Lamaison wrote:
>
>> 'Out of support' is just a marketing term. It doesn't mean it
>> magically stops working.
bly is not feasible.
>> Burn is in wix\src\burn (burn.build) and as Bob noted if you want wixstdba
>> then you'll need to build wix\src\ext\BalExtension\wixsdtba.
>>
>> Both are in WiX so that will require breaking your vow.
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Alexa
On 28 April 2012 21:18, Bob Arnson wrote:
> On 28-Apr-12 08:08, Alexander Lamaison wrote:
>> Is there a way round this? Can I easily compile the bootstrapper
>> application myself with VS 2005?
> You'd have to do the same thing to all of Burn too.
Is this feasible? I
On 28 April 2012 21:18, Bob Arnson wrote:
> On 28-Apr-12 16:07, Alexander Lamaison wrote:
>> I'm trying to create a custom no-UI bootstrap application by
>> subclassing CBalBaseBootstrapperApplication. It gets as far as my
>> OnStartup method but then hangs.
>
>
Also, the boostrapper .exe seems to spawn another instance of itself
and it is that instance that is waiting on NtReadFile. Why would it
do this?
On 28 April 2012 21:07, Alexander Lamaison wrote:
> I'm trying to create a custom no-UI bootstrap application by
>
I'm trying to create a custom no-UI bootstrap application by
subclassing CBalBaseBootstrapperApplication. It gets as far as my
OnStartup method but then hangs. According to the debugger it's
waiting on NtReadFile but I'm not sure how reliable that is.
This is the (very short) log file I get:
[0
That's just stopped me in my tracks. I've been converting our
dotnetinstaller bootstrapper to use Burn but had no idea that would
kill our Win2k support. Seriously not good.
Is there a way round this? Can I easily compile the bootstrapper
application myself with VS 2005?
Thanks,
Alex
On 28
My burn bootstrapper/bundle/thingiemagig is just a wrapper around my
MSI installer; it chooses between an x86 and an x64 version but will
only ever install one. So I just want one entry for my program in
Add/Remove programs.
I seem to have achieved this by removing the Name attribute from the
Bun
On 31 January 2012 15:07, jhennessey wrote:
> Looks like you need to write your own BA:
> http://windows-installer-xml-wix-toolset.687559.n2.nabble.com/Burn-bootstrap-a-single-MSI-not-showing-BA-UI-at-all-td6926187.html
Is this hard to do? Can it be done in C++ or must I use .net? Can
you point
Is it possible to have a bootstrapper made with burn that doesn't show any UI?
All I want my bootstrapper to do is decide what platform it's running
on (x86 or x64), extract the appropriate MSI installer from within
itself and run it. At the moment, the Burn UI takes over. Is there a
no-UI optio
12 matches
Mail list logo
