Re: [WiX-users] To beta or not to beta
No, I meant that the Visual Studio 2010 MSI contains dlls from WIX 3.5 which indicates that the Visual Studio 2010 installer was built with WIX 3.5. If Microsoft uses 3.5 for releasing production code, we can. They haven't integrated it into their runtime of Visual Studio 2010. From: Pally Sandher [pally.sand...@iesve.com] Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 4:04 AM To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset. Subject: Re: [WiX-users] To beta or not to beta WiX v3.5 isn't technically more stable than WiX v3.0 (in development beta code versus released final code) but if you want to use VS2010 you have to use WiX v3.5 as VS 2010 didn't exist when WiX v3.0 was released. Having said that unless you're using the new features in WiX v3.5 such as IIS7 or .NET 4.0 support v3.5 is as stable if not more so than v3.0. There are certainly enough reasons to upgrade to v3.5 beyond the obvious extra pair of eyes testing it. I wasn't aware of WiX v3.5 shipping with Visual Studio 2010. Last I heard Microsoft dropped their plans to integrate WiX into the Visual Studio release to much consternation around these parts (see http://robmensching.com/blog/posts/2009/4/1/Visual-Studio-will-not-ship- the-WiX-toolset-contributes-only). If it's true that's quite a u-turn. Palbinder Sandher Software Deployment & IT Administrator T: +44 (0) 141 945 8500 F: +44 (0) 141 945 8501 http://www.iesve.com **Design, Simulate + Innovate with the ** Integrated Environmental Solutions Limited. Registered in Scotland No. SC151456 Registered Office - Helix Building, West Of Scotland Science Park, Glasgow G20 0SP Email Disclaimer -----Original Message- From: Barneck, Jared [mailto:jared.barn...@landesk.com] Sent: 27 October 2010 21:45 To: wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [WiX-users] To beta or not to beta Hey all, So if I have a new project to do in WIX, and I can use either Visual Studio 2008 or 2010. I know 3.5 says beta. But would you think there are more bugs fixed in 3.5 or 3.0? Which do you really think is more stable? Is anyone already shipping production code with 3.5? Thanks, Jared Never mind. Visual Studio 2010 MSI has the WIX 3.5 dlls in it. So Microsoft is sending out production code. Also, on the main developer's page, he says WIX 3.5 core is more stable than 3.0. So we found our own answer! -- Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users -- Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users -- Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users
Re: [WiX-users] To beta or not to beta
Hey all, So if I have a new project to do in WIX, and I can use either Visual Studio 2008 or 2010. I know 3.5 says beta. But would you think there are more bugs fixed in 3.5 or 3.0? Which do you really think is more stable? Is anyone already shipping production code with 3.5? Thanks, Jared Never mind. Visual Studio 2010 MSI has the WIX 3.5 dlls in it. So Microsoft is sending out production code. Also, on the main developer's page, he says WIX 3.5 core is more stable than 3.0. So we found our own answer! -- Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users
[WiX-users] To beta or not to beta
Hey all, So if I have a new project to do in WIX, and I can use either Visual Studio 2008 or 2010. I know 3.5 says beta. But would you think there are more bugs fixed in 3.5 or 3.0? Which do you really think is more stable? Is anyone already shipping production code with 3.5? Thanks, Jared -- Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users
Re: [WiX-users] Convert AllUsers Install to PerUser
Hah, hah! This is a client relations problem not a WIX problem. QUOTE: ...and the client has decided that this limitation is unacceptable... 1. Make a list of the actions in your MSI that require administrative privileges. 2. Decide if you can do away with them? Yes/No If the answer is no, then it doesn't matter what the client asks for, he doesn't get it. Educate the customer on the reality of the situation. If yes, then since you don't know how to do it, it will be a lot of work (otherwise you wouldn't be posting in this forum) so tell the customer it is a lot of work, give them a pretty high cost and ask them to pay for it. If they pay for it, great. If not, then you don't have to do it. Jared -Original Message- From: Chris Lord [mailto:chris.l...@atterotech.com] Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 1:47 PM To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset. Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Convert AllUsers Install to PerUser John, I don't believe you can do it as an "upgrade" i.e. all in one go. An installer is either per-user or per-machine. You can't upgrade a per-machine install to per-user install or vice-versa. I think your only option is to un-install your previous version and then install the new one as two separate actions. In order to do that, you'll need a bootstrapper. Chris On 10/14/2010 01:32 PM, John Bergman wrote: > Does anyone have any experience as to how to do this? > > Currently, we install as an all-users piece of software; mostly because I > wanted to make the software available to anyone who logs in. We are required > to install without the installer UI, so that seemed like the easiest route to > take. > > The problem we are facing now is that you must be an administrator to > install, and the client has decided that this limitation is unacceptable. > > I would appreciate any pointers to material or ideas as to how to adjust what > I have as far as the WiX Installer Markup; as usual, I am more than happy to > post a description of where I end up so that others can benefit. > > Thanks, > John > -- > Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 > supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2& > L3. > Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating > great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb > ___ > WiX-users mailing list > WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users -- Download new Adobe(R) Flash(R) Builder(TM) 4 The new Adobe(R) Flex(R) 4 and Flash(R) Builder(TM) 4 (formerly Flex(R) Builder(TM)) enable the development of rich applications that run across multiple browsers and platforms. Download your free trials today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/adobe-dev2dev ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users
Re: [WiX-users] How to make the custom action run under LocalSystem account?
Here is something from MS: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/305574 Here is another idea (probably overly complex) 1. install a service to run as local system. 2. Start the service. 3. Have the service do the deletion. 4. Stop the services. 5. Uninstall the service. Here is another thought: If you are pushing the MSI with a Deployment tool such as LANDesk ManagementSuite, then the MSI will be running as Local System and would work when pushed with LANDesk, but not when run manually. -Original Message- From: Elfe Xu [mailto:elf...@microsoft.com] Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 8:31 PM To: wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [WiX-users] How to make the custom action run under LocalSystem account? Hi, I have a custom action that need to delete a remote sub-folder \\servermachine\sharedfolder$\clientID , the sub-folder's CREATOR OWNER is clientMachine$, it's created by a service running on client machine with LocalSystem account, and only the CREATOR OWNER has permission to delete it. Since the Windows Installer is also running under LocalSystem (I checked services.msc and confirmed that), if I make the custom action not impersonating (CustomAction/@Impersonate=no), shouldn't it using the LocalSystem account? However, I found it is still running as the user's account (clientMachine\Administrator). If I logon as a non-admin user (clientMachine\testUser), when doing the uninstall, it requires me to provide admin credential (I use clientMachine\Administrator), then I found the custom action is using the administrator's account. Is there any method to make the CA running under LocalSystem account? (My CA type is 3072, i.e. msidbCustomActionTypeDll + msidbCustomActionTypeBinaryData + msidbCustomActionTypeInScript + msidbCustomActionTypeNoImpersonate) Thanks, -Elfe -- Sell apps to millions through the Intel(R) Atom(Tm) Developer Program Be part of this innovative community and reach millions of netbook users worldwide. Take advantage of special opportunities to increase revenue and speed time-to-market. Join now, and jumpstart your future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-atom-d2d ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users -- Sell apps to millions through the Intel(R) Atom(Tm) Developer Program Be part of this innovative community and reach millions of netbook users worldwide. Take advantage of special opportunities to increase revenue and speed time-to-market. Join now, and jumpstart your future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-atom-d2d ___ WiX-users mailing list WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users
Re: [WiX-users] Does the msi-filename matter?
If this is a blocking issue that is preventing everyone from using an MSI feature, then this sounds like a BUG in the MSI design that should be reported to Microsoft with high priority and fixed in the next version of Windows Installer. -Original Message- From: Lukas Haase [mailto:lukasha...@gmx.at] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 1:37 PM To: wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Does the msi-filename matter? Thank you everybody for the discussion! The result is clear to me: I won't use minor- and small updates. One question concerning "Best practice" left for the deployment. In fact my application consists of: - "Viewer" (EXE, DLL, CHM) - "Database" (dat-file (80MB), bunch of PDFs) - License1.RTF, License2.RTF Now I ship my program in various flavours: 1.) Corporate edition with License1.RTF 2.) Private edition: Everything the same except License2.RTF 3.) (private) Network edition: Same as (2) except the name 4.) Demo version: Modified Database (30MB instead of 80MB) And finally each (1)-(3) get updates every few months. At first I thought with WiX it would be possible to just create one installer for all of those. But according to the discussions so far, am I right to just generate separate projects (wxs files) for each of the cases above? And according to the updates: Each of the (1), (2), (3), (4) shares the same UpgradeCode, doesn't it? Regards, Luke Am 22.07.2010 05:28, schrieb Christopher Painter: > I wrote thatI had read several blog posts over the years and cited one > of them as Vagmi and couldn't recall who the others were. I didn't > say any of them were from you. In fact, I recall you writing a post > about why WiX uses Major Upgrades and I referred to that as > vindication; evidence that we have shared beliefs. > > BTW, I could ask you the same question considering your still unapologetic > personal attack on me several years ago. I still believe that if we ever > met > in real life we'd hit it really well. I for one sure wish you could > spend some time in Austin seeing the work I've done combining WiX with > InstallShield. > > Christopher Painter, Author of Deployment Engineering Blog Have a hot > tip, know a secret or read a really good thread that deserves > attention? E-Mail Me > > > > - Original Message > From: Rob Mensching > To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset. > > Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 10:10:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Does the msi-filename matter? > > I think you have me confused with someone else. I've always had the stance: > "If you can use a Major Upgrade do so. Life is too short to deal with > the difficulties otherwise." > > What else have you told people I believe? > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Christopher Painter< > chr...@deploymentengineering.com> wrote: > >> Rob- I seem to recall several blog articles years ago talking about >> how major upgrades are "ugly". One was from an active blogger at the >> time ( Vagmi >> ) but >> I don't remember the others. >> >> http://geekswithblogs.net/Vagmi.Mudumbai/archive/2006/06/11/81426.asp >> x >> >> Blair- My MSI mojo is good, but what development throws over the >> wall to me frequently will not end well with anything other then a >> major upgrade with respect to msi servicing patterns and rules. I'm >> sure you've seen that also. >> >> Chris >> >> >> >> - Original Message >> From: Rob Mensching >> To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset. >> >> Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 9:33:40 PM >> Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Does the msi-filename matter? >> >> Uhh, I personally always recommend Major Upgrades over all the other >> options. IMHO, the other options (minor updates and small updates) >> add pain that is rarely worth it (i.e. you have to be really big with >> lots of customers to bother with .msp's). >> >> I'd be curious to see who actually recommends anything but Major >> Upgrades for the general case. >> >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Christopher Painter< >> chr...@deploymentengineering.com> wrote: >> >>> Same here. I've heard people post for years about how Major >>> Upgrades are >> a >>> pain >>> and you better follow the component rules to a letter if you want >>> minor upgrades, small updates and patching to work. I've choosen to >>> only support Major Upgrades and it's a bit of a vindication to now >>> see the likes of >> Rob >>> talk >>> about why WiX's own installer only does Major Upgrades. >>> >>> Christopher Painter, Author of Deployment Engineering Blog Have a >>> hot tip, know a secret or read a really good thread that deserves >>> attention? E-Mail Me >>> >>> >>> >>> - Original Message >>> From: Neil Sleightholm >>> To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset. >>> >>> Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 5:58:54 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Does the msi-filename matter? >>> >>> But a key point is that this is only a possible** problem for minor
