Blogs / when setup isn't just xcopy / 71 blog reactions

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms164294.aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa302186.aspx http://geekswithblogs.net/vagmi.mudumbai/archive/2004/11/23/15669.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/robmen/archive/2003/10/18/56497.aspx Assumption 1) The reader is somewhat familiar with MSBuild 1) The reader is somewhat familiar with Wix About the project 1) MSBuild script generic.wixproj will be responsible executing Wix scripts which will create MSI packages.

They also added a custom action: ActionRemoveDataFiles. Nothing to get too worked up about, but it’s like they tried to cram into one CA all the possible wrong things you can do with CAs: It’s VBScript. Evil. One day after release, a user started a thread on the VirtualBox support forum about getting a 2738 error on Windows Vista. It’s an immediate CA that modifies machine state. As an immediate CA, it runs impersonating the installing user, so attempts

when setup isn't just xcopy : My philsophical musings about building setup for software. Old but good: "Setup authoring is a part of the development process. Every team I have interacted with (the grand majority of Microsoft and some smaller companies), the developers on the team are expected to add their source files to the makefile befor

I see, Setup Development isn't Development! You shouldn't have to actually learn anything, it just be super easy. OK fine...he's got a little bit of a clue here, that sure would be great... but it's still SETUP DEVELOPMENT. Oh but VDPROJ works better (not). Then there's the less obvious stuff: No Framework accessibility, needing to deal with handles and memory pointers (Unsafe code; oh noes!), and no try/catch/finally block equivalent. This thing is just a big

I see, Setup Development isn't Development! You shouldn't have to actually learn anything, it just be super easy. OK fine...he's got a little bit of a clue here, that sure would be great... but it's still SETUP DEVELOPMENT. Oh but VDPROJ works better (not). Then there's the less obvious stuff: No Framework accessibility, needing to deal with handles and memory pointers (Unsafe code; oh noes!), and no try/catch/finally block equivalent. This thing is just a big

Blam! Right out of the gate I knew I was looking at a package built by WiX.  How?  Look at the red. All the other installation vendors out there like blue. As Bob noted, it looks like Google even used the latest weekly release for WiX v3. Now, unlike Google's previous attempt at using the WiX toolset, this looks like a pretty clean package. There is only one ICE message, a warning: C:\Users\robmen\Downloads\GoogleAppEngine.msi : warning SMOK1076 : ICE47: Feature 'ProductFeature' has 940 components. This could cause problems on Win9X systems. You

distilled the vision of the WiX toolset into a single sentence.  "The WiX toolset enables all developers to create high quality Windows installation packages by providing tools that integrate seamlessly into the development process." I described the philosophy underlying that vision about a month after the WiX toolset's public release. There are three parts. First, the developer that wrote the feature knows best what needs to be authored into setup. Second, setup authoring is a part of the development process. Third, text files

Clemens Vasters Duncan Mackenzie Eric J. Smith Ingo Rammer Jeff Sandquist John Lam Luke Hutteman Lutz Roeder Mike Gunderloy Paul Vick Rob Mensching Robert Scoble Sascha P. Corti Seth Godin

Clemens Vasters Duncan Mackenzie Eric J. Smith Ingo Rammer Jeff Sandquist John Lam Luke Hutteman Lutz Roeder Mike Gunderloy Paul Vick Rob Mensching Robert Scoble Sascha P. Corti Seth Godin

Clemens Vasters Duncan Mackenzie Eric J. Smith Ingo Rammer Jeff Sandquist John Lam Luke Hutteman Lutz Roeder Mike Gunderloy Paul Vick Rob Mensching Robert Scoble Sascha P. Corti Seth Godin