Aspen Technology Icarus 2004
Anybody that has worked with Aspen Engineering Suite knows that these products are very odd to deploy. I have found a rather wierd situation while packaging Icarus 2004. I got the silent installation to work however there is a MSP giving me grief. Patch 1 and 2 will install silently but patch 3 will not install if the user interface is suppressed in any way.
Has anybody seen a situation like this? As far as I knew supressing the user interface should have no effect on the installation of a MSP. Any suggestions are welcome.
Has anybody seen a situation like this? As far as I knew supressing the user interface should have no effect on the installation of a MSP. Any suggestions are welcome.
0 Comments
[ + ] Show comments
Answers (7)
Please log in to answer
Posted by:
kkaminsk
18 years ago
I did find that the MSP issues several 2769 errors but when I look around for a solution I find an array of frustrated InstallShield developers. Any ideas as to what this might be would be helpful.
Posted by:
kkaminsk
18 years ago
For some reason installing Windows Installer 3.1 fixes this but my environment is at 2.0. Now the real fun begins.
Posted by:
sini
18 years ago
I too have to package aspen tech manufacturing suite. In particular aspen process explorer and event.21. Do you have any ideas or tips on how to approach this package?
As far as I know there is this weird ATRunUnattended.exe which gets the setup info from a .xml File. But you have to change the paths from absolute to relative in the .xml or else it won't install when connecting to the package in any other way(obviously)!
As far as I know there is this weird ATRunUnattended.exe which gets the setup info from a .xml File. But you have to change the paths from absolute to relative in the .xml or else it won't install when connecting to the package in any other way(obviously)!
Posted by:
kkaminsk
18 years ago
ATRununattended and manually editing the product's MSI is the only way I have had success in implementing their inflexible installer. Aspen Technology is a lesser known vendor that should join the ranks of Adobe for making tough to customize installers.
Posted by:
kkaminsk
18 years ago
I should add that if you install InstallShield Script 9 then run the Icarus 2004.msi you probably could make a working transform with InstallShield Adminstudio. I am trying to stick to the vendor solution as ugly as it is.
Posted by:
sini
18 years ago
You're damn right its horrible. I tried to repackage it the last 2 days but I would need weeks to validate it and to get it correctly running time I don't have!
Posted by:
kkaminsk
18 years ago
My pain right now is that I need to have all the cab files signed and that has been painful because of all the cab files it has. I would kill to have the option make an administrative install.
At the very least you can get rid of ATRUNUnattended.exe by installing ISScript9.msi and making a transform with InstallShield on the specific product MSI not the AspenEgineeringSuite2004.msi. The ATRUNUnattended seems of overide the MSI logging I set in the registry so I had to get rid of ATRUNUnattended in order to see what my real failures were with the installation. I love trying to implement MSIs in highly secure environments considering the added pain that comes with it.
At the very least you can get rid of ATRUNUnattended.exe by installing ISScript9.msi and making a transform with InstallShield on the specific product MSI not the AspenEgineeringSuite2004.msi. The ATRUNUnattended seems of overide the MSI logging I set in the registry so I had to get rid of ATRUNUnattended in order to see what my real failures were with the installation. I love trying to implement MSIs in highly secure environments considering the added pain that comes with it.
Rating comments in this legacy AppDeploy message board thread won't reorder them,so that the conversation will remain readable.