[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: Re: Painfull TortoiseSVN reinstall

From: Tomasz Trejderowski <tomasz_at_trejderowski.pl>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:19:13 -0800 (PST)

> Is any of those a shell extension? I don't mean whether it uses the
> shell but whether it's an actual shell extension. And also not just a
> context menu handler but a copy-hook-handler, icon overlay handler?

Yes! As for copy-hook -- 7-Zip or WinRAR. As for icon overlay --. It's Dropbox. I have never had even 10% of troubles TSVN causes, when I was updating Dropbox. Actually, it is one of the most silent, and not obtrusive installers / updaters I've ever met. I can say same about 7-Zip or WinRAR.

> We did force a full reboot before, but users complained that it's not
> really necessary and they prefer having to shut down the affected
> processes instead.

After getting all the responses here I'm ready to admin, that I was wrong and took off to early conclusions about shell restart process itself.

But the whole TSVN updating idea wouldn't be so trouble to me, if TSVN could restart after that anything it shut down.

For this purpose I can't understand, why you don't use simple ShellExecute plus remembered list of apps and do the restart manually? Instead, you're talking about some restarting functionality, that should be embedded into applications being restarted. Is this another problem that comes out from MSI installer? Maybe considering some other solutions (InstallShield, Nullsoft) would be an option to solve this?

> No, you're not using hard words. You ignore anything we tell and explain
> to you and then indicate that we're too stupid to do things the way you
> think is right.
> And that is insulting.

If so, then sorry.

> Every shell extension that uses msi.

No, I'm not getting this at all. If others shell extensions (like mentioned one: Dropbox, packers plus many more) can update DLLs and themselves without making such mess, then it lead us to the conclusion, that not shell update itself is a problem, but MSI installer. Why then don't get rid of them and try to use something else? Something that other shell extensions are using to carry their system-level updates?



To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2012-11-19 22:19:18 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the TortoiseSVN Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.