Alec S. wrote:
>> Using self registration is 'strongly discouraged' by Microsoft and
>> should be avoided at all costs.http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa371608.aspx
>> (if that isn't enough for you, you can easily find thousands of pages
>> complaining about failing COM-Installations simply because the
>> installer/uninstaller messed up by using self-registration).
> That's good reading and there's some valid points, but then why is it
> that most extensions do it that way? I haven't had any trouble with
The reason is simple: it *was* the recommended way back with Win3.11 and
even some time when Win95 was around. Until people discovered what's now
well known as the "dll hell".
> any yet. The problem is that the "preferred way" forces the use of an
> installer which is not desirable in some circumstances. Many apps come
I can't see any reason why msi is not desirable. It's the only way to
install applications and avoid the dll-hell. Yes, there are other
installers around which are easier to get started with. But *all* of
those *will* lead to the dll-hell, unless they could also be run without
any installation at all. If you think that's not true, just wait a while
- the dll-hell doesn't happen immediately. And maybe most of the time it
happens on only a few machines, which isn't a problem if you don't have
a big userbase.
> with installers, but also in the form of simple ZIPs. That way newbies
> can get the easy one-click install method, and advanced user get the
> convenience of installing manually, using simple file copying to
> install the files, self-registration to register extensions, the
> service controller to create services, and the device manager API to
> install devices.
Why would someone want to do all the registering manually? That's like
copying a picture by drawing it again instead of using a copy machine.
>>> What I am trying to do is to avoid using the installer, and manually
>>> install the required files and registry entries. I have done it this
>> Good luck. Do me one favour: *never*, *ever* (!) release your custom
>> stuff. If you do, I'll redirect every user complaining about a failed or
>> messed up TSVN installation to you personally.
> Woah there Nelly, take it easy. Release? What are you talking about? I
> just want to manually install certain apps. I want to control where
> they go and what they put on my system. That way I can avoid having
> them tied to a specific installation or system, sort of like U3.
If you want to know what the TSVN installer does, check the source. The
WiX files are in our source tree for everybody to inspect.
> I really don't see why TortoiseSVN is so uptight in its installation.
Because *we* have to deal with all the issues users get if the
installation goes wrong.
> I have manually installed Apache, PHP, MySQL, numerous dev languages,
> media players, shell extensions, monitoring apps, screensavers,
> searchers, spellcheckers, and other servers. Surely TortoiseSVN is not
> more complex than some of the servers. If they can be manually
> installed (copy files, set registry settings, install services), then
> why can't TSVN?
Because we want to do it right. It's that simple.
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
Received on 2008-03-17 17:37:22 CET