Windows installer (was Re: 1.3b5)

[Paul Sutton <pa...@c2.net>]

On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Randy Terbush wrote:
> > Ben Laurie <be...@algroup.co.uk> writes:
> > > Marc Slemko wrote:
> > > > > Which brings up the question. Where are the InstallShield files?
> > > >
> > > > I think there is something (perhaps old?) on dev.apache.org somewhere, but
> > > > I don't think they are necessarily in a form that can be built as is and
> > > > you need to know what is going on to try to make a better build.
> > >
> > > They are still up-to-date as far as I am concerned. I can probably build
> > > an installer over the w/e, if I have to.
> > 
> > Can someone get to me what needs to be done to create this? I'm getting
> > nailed with "where is the win32 binary" messages.
> 
> Urg. You just build a release, in the usual way, with IS5, then package
> it up with PackageForTheWeb. Of course, you need IS5 and PFTW to do
> this!

... but first you need to change all the paths to the files to the ones on
your local system. Or put the files where IS5 expects them (some on C:,
D: and E:, I think when I tried to do this). 

I think the binary for Win32 is vital, and keep going back to IS5 to
figure out how to do it properly and keep getting totally frustrated with
the program. The US should drop free IS5 packages onto Baghdad if they
want to frighten Saddam.

Anyway, I still think we should move to IS2. It is still an evil program,
but it is less evil because it costs less and stores its configuration in
a single file which we can process through sed to update the paths to
local systems. Also it doesn't use an install script, so is much simpler
to use and doesn't tie our build into the proprietary IS5 script system.
Note the only thing we want the script in IS5 to do is to post-process the
dist config files to expand the @@ServerRoot@@ stuff, which we can do in a
DLL launched from any installer, and I've got a DLL for this which I can
contribute. Finally IS2 builds a proper single-file install program that
behaves just like a disk-based install, without the "Package for the Web"
weird wrapper that IS5 uses.

//pcs

Re: Windows installer (was Re: 1.3b5)

[Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>]

On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> Paul Sutton wrote:
> > 
> > I think the binary for Win32 is vital, and keep going back to IS5 to
> > figure out how to do it properly and keep getting totally frustrated with
> > the program. The US should drop free IS5 packages onto Baghdad if they
> > want to frighten Saddam.
> 
> Thank you!  I needed that laugh, even though the other denizens of my
> home probably could have done without.
> 
> > Note the only thing we want the script in IS5 to do is to post-process the
> > dist config files to expand the @@ServerRoot@@ stuff, which we can do in a
> > DLL launched from any installer, and I've got a DLL for this which I can
> > contribute.
> 
> Well, we also want to be able to distinguish between "minimum" (no src,
> no htdocs), "normal" (htdocs but no src), and "full" (both htdocs and
> src) for the add-ons.  If, as seems to be the simplest method, these
> two add-ons are self-extracting ZIP files, the script needs to be
> able to fire them off.

The current IS5 installer can do this in itself by just adding the docs,
src, etc. trees to it.  It just means you have to drag them in fresh for
each release.

Re: Windows installer (was Re: 1.3b5)

[Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>]

Paul Sutton wrote:
> 
> I think the binary for Win32 is vital, and keep going back to IS5 to
> figure out how to do it properly and keep getting totally frustrated with
> the program. The US should drop free IS5 packages onto Baghdad if they
> want to frighten Saddam.

Thank you!  I needed that laugh, even though the other denizens of my
home probably could have done without.

> Note the only thing we want the script in IS5 to do is to post-process the
> dist config files to expand the @@ServerRoot@@ stuff, which we can do in a
> DLL launched from any installer, and I've got a DLL for this which I can
> contribute.

Well, we also want to be able to distinguish between "minimum" (no src,
no htdocs), "normal" (htdocs but no src), and "full" (both htdocs and
src) for the add-ons.  If, as seems to be the simplest method, these
two add-ons are self-extracting ZIP files, the script needs to be
able to fire them off.

#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar                    <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Group member         <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://WWW.Dummies.Com/

Re: Windows installer (was Re: 1.3b5)

[Randy Terbush <ra...@Covalent.NET>]

This all makes sense Paul. What do we need to do to get IS2?

Paul Sutton <pa...@c2.net> writes:
> On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > Randy Terbush wrote:
> > > Ben Laurie <be...@algroup.co.uk> writes:
> > > > Marc Slemko wrote:
> > > > > > Which brings up the question. Where are the InstallShield files?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think there is something (perhaps old?) on dev.apache.org somewhere, but
> > > > > I don't think they are necessarily in a form that can be built as is and
> > > > > you need to know what is going on to try to make a better build.
> > > >
> > > > They are still up-to-date as far as I am concerned. I can probably build
> > > > an installer over the w/e, if I have to.
> > > 
> > > Can someone get to me what needs to be done to create this? I'm getting
> > > nailed with "where is the win32 binary" messages.
> > 
> > Urg. You just build a release, in the usual way, with IS5, then package
> > it up with PackageForTheWeb. Of course, you need IS5 and PFTW to do
> > this!
> 
> ... but first you need to change all the paths to the files to the ones on
> your local system. Or put the files where IS5 expects them (some on C:,
> D: and E:, I think when I tried to do this). 
> 
> I think the binary for Win32 is vital, and keep going back to IS5 to
> figure out how to do it properly and keep getting totally frustrated with
> the program. The US should drop free IS5 packages onto Baghdad if they
> want to frighten Saddam.
> 
> Anyway, I still think we should move to IS2. It is still an evil program,
> but it is less evil because it costs less and stores its configuration in
> a single file which we can process through sed to update the paths to
> local systems. Also it doesn't use an install script, so is much simpler
> to use and doesn't tie our build into the proprietary IS5 script system.
> Note the only thing we want the script in IS5 to do is to post-process the
> dist config files to expand the @@ServerRoot@@ stuff, which we can do in a
> DLL launched from any installer, and I've got a DLL for this which I can
> contribute. Finally IS2 builds a proper single-file install program that
> behaves just like a disk-based install, without the "Package for the Web"
> weird wrapper that IS5 uses.
> 
> //pcs