we have an application(beaufort) that gets at least one update per month. This appliation also installs a second application (impromptu). When working in beaufort there is a option to go to the second app, impromptu.
When installing the application i have 2 exe files for the 2 apps.

Should i
* make 1 msi that hold both apps and when a update is needed deploy the app again
* make 2 msi files
* only deploy the updates

Any help is welkom
0 Comments   [ + ] Show Comments

Comments

Please log in to comment

Rating comments in this legacy AppDeploy message board thread won't reorder them,
so that the conversation will remain readable.

Answers

0
Can I phone a friend?[:D]
Answered 08/17/2005 by: WiseUser
Fourth Degree Brown Belt

Please log in to comment
0
sorry....i dont get it
Answered 08/17/2005 by: sejacru
Second Degree Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Never mind... I need to get out more!!
Answered 08/17/2005 by: WiseUser
Fourth Degree Brown Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ok, i only have 30 seconds... but i'd say the answer is B... but don't ask the audience.

I'd say you deploy only the updates when it becomes available. This will save time and bandwidth.

Usually i make a patch for the changes and deploy that, and create a new .msi containing the newest changes, for any new installs.

And unless impromptu is getting updated as well, i don't think you would need to change anything with that.
Answered 08/17/2005 by: potatoes
Senior Yellow Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Depending on the file types that would be updated you could leave them "installed" on a network resource and only have to update them on that location.
Answered 08/17/2005 by: AngelD
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
sejacru:

Don't make 1 msi for both apps. That will reduce your options.
Make 1 for beaufort, one for impromptu. Define the dependencies between the two in your distribution system.
As for the updates, that's up to you as to what's easier for you. You can either repackage beaufort each month and deploy it as a "major upgrade", which would be remove beaufort Aug05 and install beaufort Sep05. Or you could install Beaufort2005 and deploy MSP "minor upgrade" patches for Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr... etc. Either way, make sure you understand how Windows Installer works with versioning, product codes and upgrade codes. If that gets mixed up it will really complicate your upgrades.

Either way it looks like you're not touching Impromptu so leave that as a separate package, defined as being co-dependent on beaufort in your distribution system.

WiseUser:

Didn't that TV show go off the air like... 5 years ago?
Take the 50-50.
That leaves "Go On Vacation" and "Hide Under Rock"

What's your final answer???
Answered 08/18/2005 by: VikingLoki
Second Degree Brown Belt

Please log in to comment
0
thanxs for your reply....

thats why i don't get it...its a tv show!!
They don't broadcast that in the netherlands...
Answered 08/18/2005 by: sejacru
Second Degree Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: sejacru

thanxs for your reply....

thats why i don't get it...its a tv show!!
They don't broadcast that in the netherlands...


Don't tell me you've never heard of "De Zwakste Schakel"???!!!

http://users.skynet.be/nino1960/Paysbas.htm

You don't know what you're missing![:D]
Answered 08/18/2005 by: WiseUser
Fourth Degree Brown Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Hello wiseuser,

De zwakste schakel ...offcourse.
hate that show..hahahahaha
Answered 08/18/2005 by: sejacru
Second Degree Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Uff Da!!!!

You didn't make a reference to "The Weakest Link", Wise! Try "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire"!!!

You should have called in sick today. Better go home early before things get any worse! [:D]
Answered 08/18/2005 by: VikingLoki
Second Degree Brown Belt

Please log in to comment
0
yes i know that program........
that is a nice show...
i thought i had it wrong but it was wiseuser that brough me on the wrong track...[:D]

btw.. i called the vendor of beaufort en impromptu if they thought of making a msi package but the answer was negative....[:'(] so i have to make one my self.....
Answered 08/18/2005 by: sejacru
Second Degree Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Yeah, a lot of developers are clueless when it comes to corporate packaging & distribution. They know we install their software on thousands of machines over a weekend, but it never occurrs to them that it would take hundreds of IT techs to install it the way they think it gets installed.

Did you loudly complain that they did not have an MSI package? I always do. I end up backing them into a corner with the math. Oh, you say your install process only takes someone 4 minutes to complete? To do the 4000 machines with the install procedure you supplied, that would take 267 man-hours. I only have a 48 hour window to get this done, and a staff of 5. Are you going to cover the cost of the 29 consultants I'll have to bring on to get this done? That'll be about $10-15,000. Well, it's either that or you give me an MSI to deploy which my staff of 5 can support.
Answered 08/18/2005 by: VikingLoki
Second Degree Brown Belt

Please log in to comment
0
hehe nice one VikingLoki

I'll have that in mind next time i call, you think they'll pay? ;)
Answered 08/18/2005 by: AngelD
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
You are correct vikingloki....

If we purchase custom made software we explicity tell the vendor to bring the software in msi format or else we go to the next vendor!!!!!. Just play it hard. In this case we already had the softwareware and you can play hard but its not always wright. The vendor also knows that you purchase licenses, maybe a dedicated server etc... So calling of a vendor is not a easy as you say it is.
Answered 08/18/2005 by: sejacru
Second Degree Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
I've found that my complaints rarely brings immediate results. They get concerned when they hear how much mony their install can cost on a corporate level, but their view of the world . Funny thing is that 6 or more months down the line, suddenly there is an MSI install. Of course, since only 2% or so actually contact me to learn about my needs, it's usually a @&$#^$ bootstrapped InstallShield Script install. But hey, that's halfway there.
Answered 08/19/2005 by: VikingLoki
Second Degree Brown Belt

Please log in to comment
0
in my opinion any company who uses installshield script based MSI-crap !%¤"#¤!#% should be shot at sight!
Answered 12/22/2005 by: mgroover
Senior Yellow Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: sejacru

You are correct vikingloki....

If we purchase custom made software we explicity tell the vendor to bring the software in msi format or else we go to the next vendor!!!!!. Just play it hard. In this case we already had the softwareware and you can play hard but its not always wright. The vendor also knows that you purchase licenses, maybe a dedicated server etc... So calling of a vendor is not a easy as you say it is.


Well... I'd rather have a normal setup than a rotten InstallShield MSI from a half-wit vendor.
The days I've spent on packaging Adobe Photoshop Elements 3! It still won't install right.
And it seems nobody here is able to help me since I got 0 replies.

Usually a SetupCapture is done in a jiffy if your preparations were good.
Answered 12/29/2005 by: ZhuBaJie
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
I would actually use an exe in this instance to perform the updates instead of MSI's. When you have updates every month your time to do packaging and QA is limited. In my experience MSI updates are harder to create than a simple exe scripted installation because they require you to change keys\guids and enter in all of the possible previous msi's that may be installed in order to recognize and update them.

Exe's on the other hand can be a simple file copy and your done. Usually change a few reg keys as well to update the version but that's it. You'll probably want to convert over the main installation to an exe as well to avoid the MSI trying to repair itself.

Some companies have policies restricting the use of scripted installations but personally I like them better. We originally went the MSI route as well but found packaging scripted installations allowed much more flexibility and a straightforward installation than MSI's and were especially useful when performing updates regularly.
Answered 01/02/2006 by: yarborg
Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
If it were me I'd have an install package for each app then an update package.

Make sure the base install is always patched up to the current level so any new installs don't need the patches run right after, leaving you to jsut send otu the patches to existing installs.

Or leave the base installer as it is and set the updates to always run after the main installer(s) has finished.

How are you deploying these btw, sms or AD? I've only got experiance with SMS where this kind of thing is easy as, also doesn't matter too much what needs to be done at install time (as long as you can reduce user interaction to a minumum) as the SMS install script lets you do pretty much everything.
Answered 01/04/2006 by: swwdesktops
Senior Yellow Belt

Please log in to comment
Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity