Say you are upgrading existing installation and you want to leave the
value as it is. Like, user selected yes for some option. Otherwise it is
a fresh install and you want default initial value of 'no'.
-Original Message-
From: Bob Arnson [mailto:b...@joyofsetup.com]
Sent: Monday, Februar
: Re: [WiX-users] Registry Manipulation
If you condition out a Component then nothing in that Component should
be installed/uninstalled/repaired.
-Original Message-----
From: Tony Juricic [mailto:tjuri...@tradestation.com]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 08:36
To: General discussion f
I know that Jason sometimes reads this forum but otherwise I am not sure
this is the right place to report the following:
I was using version 3.0 of Microsoft.Deployment.Compression.Zip in an
attempt to extract MSI from self-extracting executable.
In particular I used the class ZipInfo, IsValid
Is there anybody who had a chance to try the above, as per link:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa367575(VS.85).aspx
I was just unpleasantly surprised that it appears not to work for my
MSIs.
For example, I had version 5.0.0.12 of one DLL installed. After issuing
command line as per lin
It is possible to put a file into a Component containing only that file,
make it volatile and change the condition for installing the component
from 1 to 0.
-Original Message-
From: Brian Rogers [mailto:rogers.br...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:43 PM
To: General discussio
: [WiX-users] Execute action during path installation
Yes. That's a fairly common way of making sure that a file doesn't get
installed on the system without breaking the component rules during
patching. That's a transitive component.
Phil Wilson
-Original Message-
Fro
The uninstallable patch is looking for the original MSI that was
extracted from Setup.exe chainer into temporary folder and is since long
gone.
I re-read the docs but I am still clueless as to what caused it.
Naturally, I want to uninstall the patch without requiring the access to
the origina
olset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Patch uninstall requires the original base MSI
andI don't know why
Tony Juricic wrote:
> The uninstallable patch is looking for the original MSI that was
> extracted from Setup.exe chainer into temporary folder and is since
long
> gone.
>
> I re-rea
equires the original base MSI
andIdon't know why
Tony Juricic wrote:
> DLL is supposed to always increase in version so it can be patched up
> but it should never revert to previous version during patch uninstall.
Whether that's true depends on your original product's REINSTALLM
iring-products-after-patches-advertised-features.aspxfor
some suggestions of how to do that.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 1:33 AM, Tony Juricic wrote:
> It just goes to show how easy it is to commit gross component rules
> violations even after months of reading articles and blogs on component
> rule
g the same problem with recent builds? A month or two ago
changes were made to fix a couple of issues with delta patching.
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 5:57 AM, Tony Juricic wrote:
> Ok, that makes sense. However, I can't get it to work either way. The
> problem is not in changing just the 4th
In particular, can I somehow get MediaSrcPropName value, from *.pcp
ImageFamilies table, using DTF on my patch *.msp file?
I suspect that answer is, most probably and unfortunately, no, but just
in case... thanks!
TradeStation Group, Inc. is a publicly-traded holding company (NASDAQ GS: TRAD)
cp database makes it into
msp?
Tony Juricic wrote:
> In particular, can I somehow get MediaSrcPropName value, from *.pcp
> ImageFamilies table, using DTF on my patch *.msp file?
>
The doc says:
The value entered into the Source field of the new Media table entry of
the upgraded image.
h families.
}
}
}
-Original Message-----
From: Tony Juricic [mailto:tjuri...@tradestation.com]
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 12:39 PM
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] How much of patch pcp database makes it into
msp?
Thanks Bob but this, unfortunately, does not
In a C++ DLL custom action I have the following code:
::WcaLog(LOGMSG_VERBOSE, "%s", "My log text");
MSI install is started with the following log options:
msiexec /i myinstall.msi /lv*x .\install.log
However, log file doesn't contain the text as could be expected. In
contrast, LOGMSG_STANDARD
Same problem here so I second a plea for help and more info
-Original Message-
From: Neil Enns [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:06 AM
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Where does FilesInUse dialog get its names
fr
y kill even the apps
that have a window.
-Original Message-
From: Neil Enns [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:37 PM
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Where does FilesInUse dialog get its names
from?
Solved!
Tony, if yo
During installation I create some per-user folders in
Users\username\AppData\Roaming. Thus I get hit by ICE30 error.
I don't really understand why would creating folders under CU profile
cause problems for component un/installation in this particular case.
Anyhow, I solved the problem with a tric
e profiles after the installation occurs (using self healing).
im not sure if this answers all your question or not, let me know if you
need more input.
Tony Juricic wrote:
>
> During installation I create some per-user folders in
> Users\username\AppData\Roaming. Thus I get hit by ICE3
I was under the impression that runtime requires this dialog to have
exactly FilesInUse name since it is invoked by installer, not by user.
IOW, its name cannot be customized.
-Original Message-
From: Neil Enns [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 5:03 PM
To: General dis
Disregard my previous comment. It is dialog ID which must remain
"FilesInUse", of course, everything else can be customized.
In my case which requires a lot of customization I have pulled in the
entire WixUI_en-us.wxl and renamed it into CustomWixUI_en-us.wxl
-Original Message-
From: Nei
1) I don't understand how do wixpdb ouputs deal with binary delta
patches? Looking at example commands it appears as if MSI (or binary
files compressed inside MSI cab) are not needed, as if all relevant info
is contained in wixpdb.
Or is it that torch, while working on the differences between 2 w
As Bob, of Joy of Setup fame, explained here once, there is no way to
change the level used by ARP and UILevel is read-only during uninstall.
However, you can add Change ARP option which would launch your authored
Change dialog from which you can proceed to a full UI uninstall (or
repair or the rea
I assumed you are talking about uninstalling via ARP. Otherwise the
batch file with the following content works just fine in my daily
testing:
msiexec /x myproduct.msi /qf /lv*x .\install.log
qf is for full UI and you can put product code instead of msi filename
since you are not supposed to know
Or am I, for the time being, still better off with the old-style
administrative installs and PatchCreation?
In my case binary delta is the requirement.
Thanks
-Original Message-
From: Tony Juricic
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 2:08 PM
To: wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [WiX
Examples:
MyProperty=0
Not Installed
-Original Message-
From: jmcfadyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 3:45 AM
To: wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [WiX-users] Setting standard action conditions
How can I set a condition on a standard action.
I have Progress with disabled Close button so it prevents me from
cancelling the installation while it is displayed.
Yet, I have done nothing (that I am aware of) to cause that. Progress
dialog is declared like this:
controls with progress bar etc.
I know that there is a MSI message
I have MSI file on my desktop that I just used to perform the install.
When I click on MSI Change welcome dialog, authored by me, is shown -
all is fine.
When I click on ARP entry and select Change menu item some Installer
message box appears and goes away so fast that I cannot read it, but I
don
This has nothing to do with WiX since I have just found out that not a
single product that offers Change option in my ARP list would work.
A brief flash of some message box is all I see.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Juricic
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 3:50 PM
To: wix-users
... and the solution is ... reboot!
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to
1
.
.
.
This?
Tony Juricic wrote:
>
> I have Progress with disabled Close button so it prevents me from
> cancelling the installation while it is displayed.
>
> Yet, I have done nothing (that I am aware of) to cause that. Progress
> dialog is declared li
admin install. However, binary wixpdb is much easier and less error
prone approach than that.
Now, if I only knew how #2 works ...
Tony
-Original Message-
From: Blair Murri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 2:45 AM
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset
1) new patch project template
2) 2 new output types, binary and non-binary wixpdb
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win
Non-binary ones are just XML so I use XML Notepad to look at them. For
MSI's I use Orca. Is it that a tool for previewing binary WiXpdbs has
yet to be written ?
Thanks,
Tony
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the M
Giving command:
"%WIX%bin\torch.exe" -xi rtm\Product.wixpdb upd1\Product.wixpdb -out
Patch\Diff.Wixmst
I get the following error:
error TRCH0048 : The document element name 'wixOutput' is invalid. A WiX
pdb file must use 'wixPdb' as the document element name.
Clearly torch doesn't like somethin
With just -bf and -xo as additional linker options Votive creates this
command line:
C:\Program Files\Windows Installer XML v3\bin\Light.exe
-loc CustomWixUI_en-us.wxl
-out C:\path\Product.msi
-pdbout C:\path\Product.wixpdb -bf -xo
obj\Debug\BrowseDlg.wixobj
... dialog and other wixobjs ...
Ok, so renaming my wixpdb files, produced as described above, to wixout
extension solved the problem for torch input and it produced wixmst
output file. Thus, apparently, wixpdb can exist only in XML format,
while wixout is binary.
Based on Peter Marcu's blog I understood that wixpdb substitutes
I have 120 MB large Wixmst created by Torch and when I pass it to Pyro
it comes back with the message PYRO1079 saying that patch cabinet
contains no files.
My DLLs in RTM and Update respectively differ in the last, 4-th version
number, plus the binaries themselves are different. Using SDK tool
version
number?
There is a share proderrors or something
Pete Yates
Senior Systems Developer
DDC - Distributed & Components Team
HBOS I&I IT
B/1/C/243
(7725) 34383 / (0117) 376 4383
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Beha
aller.aspx
.
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Tony Juricic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Are you saying that there is some way to get better error diagnostics
> from Torch?
> I added -v option for verbosity but it has no effect.
>
> In fact, I can't even figure out how do valid
If Pyro is not ignoring 4th version number then it must be that I am breaking
some component rules?!
I haven't added or removed or renamed any component file or guid but I have
changed the target install directory name from MyProduct to MyProductV1 (to be
created under Program Files folder).
Co
version
number?
Tony Juricic wrote:
> If Pyro is not ignoring 4th version number then it must be that I am
breaking some component rules?!
> I haven't added or removed or renamed any component file or guid but I
have changed the target install directory name from MyProduct to
MyProd
neral discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Does Pyro (or Torch) ignore 4-th version
number?
Tony Juricic wrote:
> but reading the install.log I cannot find anything a bit more explicit
> about this violation. It is certainly not saying something like "you
>
Just to make my life easier, now that I corrected the mistake and
double-checked that I haven't committed component violation again, I am
back to having exactly the same problem.
Pyro doesn't find anything to put in a patch cab and running verbose log
doesn't reveal anything.
Even a nice tool like
I can confirm this now that I produced two MSIs that don't have any
component rules problems. Some history of this problem can be found in
posts titled 'Does Pyro (or Torch) ignore 4-th version number?'.
I have 2 MSIs and 2 corresponding binary wixout files. Using new
patching with wixout input pr
riginal Message-
From: Bob Arnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 12:04 AM
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] New wix binary delta patching doesn't work
Tony Juricic wrote:
> I have 2 MSIs and 2 corresponding binary
I use one of my main installed folders and go back one level to get the
root. All installed folders become public properties (property name the
same as folder Id) available also during the uninstall if not in
deferred CA.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I use one of my main installed folders and go back one level to get the
root. All installed folders become public properties (property name the
same as folder Id) available also during the uninstall if not in
deferred CA.
-Original Message-
From: Dmitry Berkovich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am using condition "NOT PATCH" to change the text in UI to say "Patch"
instead of "Repair" when patch is applied. That works just fine.
Now I want to avoid installing one Registry component during patch
application but not during the repair. I used the same condition (i.e.
NOT PATCH rather than
I tried adding Transitive attribute to the registry component and that
deleted the component when patch was applied. Thus 'NOT PATCH' is a
correct condition since transitive components are removed when condition
changes from true to false.
However, for some reason that I would really love explaine
You can always use custom action to write that part of the Registry.
However that would not be politically correct. I mean, using CA when MSI
database solution is available. Unfortunately sometimes it appears as if MSI
people do everything they can to force us to use CAs even in cases which look
It is a good advice, thanks!
Since I can have patching options configurable via REINSTALLMODE, I see
no good reason to hard-code "PATCH" property conditioning inside wxs, as
I did for registry writing action.
However, just as I accepted thinking in terms of resources inside
components, abstracti
Even if I add comments attribute to PatchInformation element, the
resulting MSP Patch Summary Information Comments editbox is empty when
viewed in Orca. It is also unclear if and how can one set up Title,
Author and Subject parts of Summary Information via WiX.
Have you had any success in somehow using that bootstrapper with WiX
generated MSI?
Can you share some insights/experiences?
For me installing SP1 turned out into a "progress bar sits there not
moving anywhere for hours" experience so the whole idea of a smaller
"Client Profile" footprint turned
I've got one working version and it turned out to be very quick and
easy. I tested it on one pristine XP SP2 installed in Virtual PC and it
works like a charm. Quite a relief after waiting one hour for SP1
install to tell me that I need to close WiX.chm HTML Help file.
The procedure is the followi
I use PATCH property as a condition to change text from 'Repair' to
'Update'. There is nothing wrong - patch is a sort of repair.
-Original Message-
From: postingbox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 7:14 AM
To: wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [WiX-users] Re
Don't patch the patch!
Always target:
a) only RTM
b) RTM + another (non-patched) full install built after RTM
c) same as b plus you can add all full install MSI targets built after
RTM and preceding your patch build)
I don't know why 'they' (i.e. secretive installer people who reveal
pieces of a
ogs a few times, as well as all the other blogs and any Wix or MSI
documentation I could find. I hadn't come across the white paper yet
though
so I'll be reading through that soon. Thanks for the link.
Unfortunately as Tony mentions the information, if even out there, is
scattered
Ok, that makes sense. However, I can't get it to work either way. The
problem is not in changing just the 4th version number either. I created
a simple C# console executable that has one line of code:
Console.Writeln("This is version 1.0.0.0");
and assembly info AssemblyVersion("1.0.0.0")] and
As
I don't understand why Microsoft expects anybody to bother with .NET
Client Profile?
I am not saying that the idea in itself is bad. It is just too little
too late. In fact so little and so late that I think that it is really
lame, despite the accolades that independent recycling of MS whitepaper
Oops, this was really intended for miscrosoft.public.platformsdk.msi.
I did a test with XP with Framework 2 already installed and then run
Client Profile install. What you get is pretty much the same as if you
had downloaded 3.5 installer from MS site manually and then run it. IOW,
your user will
a1) In theory, using new WiX patching you can simply exclude components
containing binaries that you don't want to patch from the list of
components to patch. This list is child of PatchFamily WiX element. If
using 'old' patchwiz.dll-based patching (i.e. WiX PatchCreation element)
you can use Prote
Regarding programming the Progress Bar
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa367525(VS.85).aspx
and especially
http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/download.sourceforge.net/pub/sourcefo
rge/m/ms/msiprogramming/BillboardsAndProgressBars.pdf
is probably the best documentation that you can find
There is also PatchIgnore attribute that can be set on individual file
element. It's a pity that we can't do it for Registry keys and values
too.
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
I had the same problem and switched to self-registering servers, i.e.
setting SelfRegCost attribute on corresponding file elements.
I know this approach is not officially recommended but it is hard to see
what some third-party COM servers do with the Registry.
-Original Message-
From: Eva
You just invoke custom action before files are removed. I don't backup
files but do some COM unregister before files are removed and there are
no problems doing that.
-Original Message-
From: xiaoli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 1:46 AM
To: wix-users@lists.so
I often encounter problems debugging deferred C++ DLL CAs. Most of the
time DebugBreak() works. Now and then it won't and then I use __asm {
int 3 } which, for some reason, tends to work more often than
DebugBreak.
Then I encounter situations when even int 3 won't work in the sense that
Vista (an
Some patches are un-installable:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa372102(VS.85).aspx
I'm offering to pay and ship few cases of beer and hamburger patties so
that you guys at Microsoft can meet somewhere at campus, relax, hammer
this out and explain all of it (I mean patching business) to
From: Tony Wallulis
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 1:42 PM
To: 'wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net'
Subject: Wix 2.0 issue
Hey I'm using Wix 2.0 to build an MSI that creates a web site and ideally
assigns a custom response header. I have the
Answering my own post - the problem was that Product element must have
compressed="no" attribute set when building MSI with no CAB.
I had this attribute set to "yes".
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move
I am trying to build MSI with no cab and all files uncompressed. I have
the following Media element declaration:
Myproject.wxs(1266): error LGHT0135: The file '_SOMEDATAFILE.TXT' should
be compressed but is not part of a compressed media. Files will be
compressed if either the File/@Compre
I am getting a stack overflow exception when executing deferred custom
action in C++, but I am consuming only a quarter of 1 MB which, I
believe, is the max stack space allowed per process.
Did anybody here have similar things happen to him/her?
I'm wondering if msiexec indeed gives much reduced
ovember 10, 2008 10:57 PM
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Stack available for Custom Actions
What are you doing to run out of stack space? When I get a stack
overflow it has always been a bug in my code.
-Original Message-----
From: Tony Juric
using.
Maybe pick a different 3rd party vendor?
-Original Message-
From: Tony Juricic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 05:50
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Stack available for Custom Actions
I invoke 3rd-part
ckage type rather than being hardcoded
to win32.. going through 500 components copy/pasting "win64" into all of them
is a real drag.
Tony
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net
gt;
I tend to ignore that one. It basically means that the program is installing
under program files but it can't tell whether you're trying to install in 'All
Users' or a local user, so it throws a warning.
For a per-machine install putting a key under
've never managed to author a nontrivial wix file without this ICE, but in
each case I know I'm doing the correct thing.. it's just generated
automatically by any attempt to create a shortcut. That makes the warning
useless.
Tony
Foster, Richard - PAL wrote:
> Tony,
>
> One scenario we have in our systems is that our customers may want
> *some* users to have access to all the components, but other users to
> only have access to certain items.
I guess it's the line where you limit your support - if
27;s a valid one and I shouldn't like to see a
> warning for it.
Not sure it's that unusual. Major upgrades are by far the easiest and most
user friendly way to ship msi files.
Tony
-
Take Surveys. Earn Ca
ng has changed and doesn't install the new ones.
Tony
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & busi
ed to call called InitCommonControlsEx?
Tony
-
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Applicati
of educational software. In that case is it better to place
> libraries to system folder than place them to application's folder?
There's almost never a case to modify the system folder. Device drivers is
about the only one I can think of.
Tony
y) any future OS.
> Or may be there are another ways to interact with windowed appilcations
> from service?
>
The normal way would be a named pipe or a socket. Named pipes are
better since you can put an ACL on them to
/writes from HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE and
stores any data in the All Users data store (and the global Program
Files, etc.)
Tony
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 expr
irectly.
Put the key in HKLM and have your application copy the data it needs to
HKCU when it's run by the user.
Tony
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB
can't see why it wouldn't).
You could probably make something using the wix ini functions as well
but I've not tried that - since the URLs don't change it's just as easy
to have the files there.
Forcing the browser goes beyond unfriendly IMO especi
Robert Randall wrote:
> 2) I’ve never tried to execute msiexec from a script inside of an
> MSI package. There may be some other caveats with this. Perhaps others
> on the list know more.
As far as I know it's impossible, as nested installs don
mutually exclusive conditions separating them.
Validation will complain because it isn't sophisticated enough to know
the two are exclusive, but it is the only way I'm aware of.
Tony
-
This SF.net email is spons
e it gets run on win2k.
Never modify files in the system32 directory - SFP will probably undo
what you're trying to do anyway and if you succeed it'll break other
applications that depend on those files.
Tony
e a required property that you check for in the launch conditions.
The microsoft installers do this - if you click on the msi it complains
at you.
Tony
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express
or GPO compatibility
I've never actually heard of anyone actually using this - it's all about
ticking boxes with them), so whereas we install what we can external
dependencies are listed in the install manual.
Tony
erman copy of XP) that
> "Everyone" doesn't always mean "Everyone". In this German example, the
> Everyone group is actually called Jeder and it is this user group that will
Use the SIDs instead. As you've found names are localised.
Tony
-
Gareth at Serif wrote:
> Hi Tony,
>
> Thanks for your quick response. The reason we use 'Everyone' is merely on
> our registration details - we only want one user (whoever it is) on the
> system to have to register the application for all users to be registered...
>
7;removing' might have no effect anyway because a
parent object has granted the permission.
Tony
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
cont
Windows2000, so is there anyway to fix this?
If Microsoft have said that these modules don't install on Windows 2000
then there's probably a good reason for it. It would probably be better
to re-author your app to
e and how do you change
> the appropriate dataFolder.
Either look in both places or enforce per user or all users in the
installer, depending on the app.
Tony
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2
s anyway if you're using
the registry at all you might as well use that information.
Tony
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of y
s that it changes based on
> the ALLUSERS property, so is it my INSTALLLOCATION causing this, or
> something else (like ICE57 coded incorrectly)?
Sounds like it.
Pick which ICE you're going to ignore basically.. in your
HKLM\Software, so that wouldn't
be useful to you unless you were installing a 64bit binary - and in that
case you would have the Win64="yes" on all components.
Tony
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Expre
ious if there's a way to specify
that a dll with a newer build number (major and minor are the same, only the
QFE is different) OR specify that I want the MSI to always overwrite the
assembly in the gac if it finds one already there. Is this po
201 - 300 of 410 matches
Mail list logo
