I have a MSI and a MSP. This MSP upgrades some files in the MSI. When installed independently all the files are showing the correct version. But when I merged both using command line option /p the patch is getting merged into msi but after installing the merged MSI the files are of older version. Pl

Please answer ASAP!

9 Comments   [ + ] Show Comments


  • >This MSP upgrades some files in the MSI
    No, it doesn't.

    >the patch is getting merged into msi
    No, it isn't.

    I suggest some reading on MSDN about how patching works, along with some study of Administrative Installation Points.

    Before any of that, though, you might want to learn how to use Internet forums. Almost none involve typing the entire text of your post in the 'Subject' line.
  • ;-)
  • I am a fresher in packaging but, this msp goes for repair and upgrades some files and I think you have no complete knowledge about patches. I already gave a reading all internet forums but nowhere I could find this issue.
  • FYI from MSDN::: @VBScab

    An application that has been installed using the Microsoft Windows Installer can be upgraded by reinstalling an updated installation package (.msi file), or by applying a Windows Installer patch (an .msp file) to the application.

    A Windows Installer patch (.msp file) is a self-contained package that contains the updates to the application and describes which versions of the application can receive the patch
  • ..and where in that text does it say that the "files in the MSI" are upgraded? Or that the patch gets "merged into the MSI"?

    >I think you have no complete knowledge about patches
    Yes, that's right. You got me! I'm clueless about any of this stuff. Lord alone knows how I keep working.

    Moving on...describe for us - exactly - the process you are following to patch the application.
  • Your pasted text doesn't show that VBScab is wrong - actually the opposite and that you don't understand how patching works, even after reading the articles.

    As suggested, read more on MSDN and also about Administrative Installation Points, and the patching of Administrative Installation Points - that will help you work out your issue.

    P.S. - Take a look at VBScab's profile - he does know what he's talking about.
  • i understand that sir, and one more thing my wordings are wrong i guess. Please let me know if something is wrong again,
    After Installing the MSI i have to apply a patch which is the behaviour of source, Similarly In the packaging process i have applied the patch to msi using /p option and i'm confirmed that patch is applies to MSI because the version gets incremented by four extra numbers and so do the files which is very clear in the MSI. But When I install the package and check the files manually version shown is old. How can this be possible?? It is ver clear in the file table which has a version and after installing the version is different for the files??
  • Create an Administrative Installation Point and patch that will the patch file - that is what you're being directed towards.

    As a hint, here's a link on creating and patching AIPs for Adobe Reader: http://community.spiceworks.com/how_to/show/479-creating-an-administrative-install-point-for-adobe-reader-to-deploy-via-gpo

    Do that with your MSI/MSP and then check the flat file structure for the files.
  • @OP: you haven't outlined the steps you've taken but, from what you *have* said, it sounds like you are creating an AIP and patching that, rather than "installing the MSI". I can't see any other way that the MSI would get updated.

    Some points to make:
    - are you using a clean machine - hopefully a VM or similar - every time to test this, rather than relying on unistalling?
    - take a verbose log EVERY TIME. That will tell you EXACTLY what's happening.
    - have you checked that Product Codes etc. in the patch are as they should be? It wouldn't be the first time that a vendor has supplied a "patch" which is nothing of the sort.
Please log in to comment

There are no answers at this time


Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity