Feature Requests item #1894297, was opened at 2008-02-15 09:50
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by kmierzejewski
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=642717&aid=1894297&group_id=105970

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: patching
Group: None
Status: Open
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: kamol (kmierzejewski)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Pyro should check media sequence for overlaping

Initial Comment:
If the [EMAIL PROTECTED] attribute of a patch package is lower than the highest 
File Sequence number in the patched package an error may occur while applying 
patch.

Pyro should validate the [EMAIL PROTECTED] attribute against this issue or even 
make it optional and generate it automatically if needed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: kamol (kmierzejewski)
Date: 2008-02-15 10:21

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1961683
Originator: YES

There is an other problem with the [EMAIL PROTECTED] value which can't be fixed 
by
a simple check against the patched package. It occurs when one tries to
build patches between a few versions of a product. Example:

In our automated build system we build a setup package every day, we set
the revision number in ProductVersion property to reflect the revision
number of our repository when the setup is built. We also build a patch
between these versions:
Day 1: ProductVersion 1.0.1
 last File Sequence is 10.
Day 2: ProductVersion 1.0.2 and patch 1.0.1->1.0.2
 lets assume that Media/@Id (and LastSequence value of Media table) is
generated automatically and equals 11.
 3 files change so Media LastSequence for this patch is 14, because Patch
table also counts.
Day 3: ProductVersion 1.0.3 and patch 1.0.2->1.0.3
 auto-generated LastSequence is also 11.
 1 file is added so Media LastSequence for this patch is 12.

Such a build system is unaware that package version 1.0.2 can be a patched
1.0.1 package so it can't assure that the Media/@Id attribute of the
consecutive patches don't overlap. It would create the same LastSequence
value for both patches and cause them to put the package in an invalid
state when applied consecutively.

The conclusion is that the Media/@Id attribute can't be validated without
the knowledge of the previous patch.
Some might say that the build system is invalid though...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=642717&aid=1894297&group_id=105970

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
WiX-devs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-devs

Reply via email to