Is that any way to use WPS to repackage MSI's created by Installshield? Or is it some way to create a transfer for Installshield MSI's using WPS?

Regards
Me Happy
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
Why would you want to? One should avoid re-packaging MSIs whenever possible.

I'm guessing that you want to avoid having to install the IS engine/driver alongside the MSI for some reason?
Answered 04/04/2008 by: VBScab
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Thanks for quick respons, VBScab :-)
I'm trying to create a new MSI-package to do an silent installation of QuarkXPress to the clients. The biggest challenge is to include "VALIDATIONCODE", "LICENSESERVERIP" and "LICENSESERVERPORT" in package and force it to install silently. The traditional way to repackage, (take a snapshot, install application and take a new snapshot and compile result) doesn't work. Neither creating a transfer file (MST) cause it is not a "basic MSI-file" and many of source paths are not retained during SetupCapture. I've tried several ways to repackage QuarkXPress, but none of them worked!

Is that any way to workaround this issue?
Answered 04/04/2008 by: mehappy
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
You should be able to open up any MSI (although there is a problem with citrix ICE client) using WPS.
But as this is a InstallShield MSI I would use ORCA instead to create the transform as WPS adds extra wise related tables not suitable in the IS MSI.

Isn't "VALIDATIONCODE", "LICENSESERVERIP" and "LICENSESERVERPORT" just properties?
Answered 04/04/2008 by: AngelD
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: AngelD
But as this is a InstallShield MSI I would use ORCA instead to create the transform as WPS adds extra wise related tables not suitable in the IS MSI.
...not if you change the MSI's file attribute to read-only it doesn't :)

ORIGINAL: mehappy
The biggest challenge is to include "VALIDATIONCODE", "LICENSESERVERIP" and "LICENSESERVERPORT"
As Kim says, these are just properties so why not just set them in a transform and apply that transform via the command line?


Lastly, as ever, although you don't say which version of Quark you're playing with, there are notes here http://www.appdeploy.com/packages/detail.asp?id=1010 that might help.
Answered 04/04/2008 by: VBScab
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Hi Kim!
I will try ORCA.

Actually is only "VALIDATIONCODE" in properties. One of dialogboxes that apear during installation ask for fil inn licenseserver IP and licenseserver port. I thought it must be found in properties, but it doesn't! The only place that I can find something like that is in a ini-file called "Binary.ISConfig.INI" and this is bind to "Binary.ISScriptBridge.dll". Call to this DLL are defind in Custom Actions. There are lot of functions in this ini-file and 2 of them are "Function=ValidateServerIP" and "Function=ValidatePort". I have no idea how can I put the lisenceserver IP and port in this file!
Answered 04/04/2008 by: mehappy
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
You are right, VBScab! I forgot to mention which version of Quark I'm working on. It is version 6.1. Actually this is the first step! I have to install version 6.1, and update it to 6.5 and finaly to 6.5.2. There is no complete installer for version 6.5.2!
Answered 04/04/2008 by: mehappy
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: mehappy
Actually is only "VALIDATIONCODE" in properties. One of dialogboxes that apear during installation ask for fil inn licenseserver IP and licenseserver port. I thought it must be found in properties, but it doesn't!
They're still properties, but they're "behind" the controls in the dialog and won't therefore appear in the Properties table. There's no reason why you can't add them to the Property table, though, or specify them on the command line.
Answered 04/04/2008 by: VBScab
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
There are several Custom Actions "Call DLL From Installation Function fxx" in this MSI. Every function is defind in a ini-file. By removing these Custom Actions, do I need to edit and remove function in the ini-file too?
Answered 04/04/2008 by: mehappy
Orange Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: AngelD
But as this is a InstallShield MSI I would use ORCA instead to create the transform as WPS adds extra wise related tables not suitable in the IS MSI.

Ian,

I was of course refering to the transform and not the MSI but yes you're correct :D
Answered 04/04/2008 by: AngelD
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: mehappy

There are several Custom Actions "Call DLL From Installation Function fxx" in this MSI. Every function is defind in a ini-file. By removing these Custom Actions, do I need to edit and remove function in the ini-file too?
Why do you want to remove them? If they're the nuisance InstallShield ones (e.g. ISSetAllUsers) then fair enough but they may well be controlling the entire installation: it wouldn't be the first time I've seen that.
Answered 04/04/2008 by: VBScab
Red Belt

Please log in to comment
0
ORIGINAL: VBScab

ORIGINAL: mehappy

There are several Custom Actions "Call DLL From Installation Function fxx" in this MSI. Every function is defind in a ini-file. By removing these Custom Actions, do I need to edit and remove function in the ini-file too?
Why do you want to remove them? If they're the nuisance InstallShield ones (e.g. ISSetAllUsers) then fair enough but they may well be controlling the entire installation: it wouldn't be the first time I've seen that.


Yup, had one just like that recently. It had all sorts of vendor custom actions, many of which controlled various aspects of the installation, configuration, converting legacy settings, etc. It would have been folly to try to remove them all. The advantage of really knowing the Windows installer database is that you start to get an understanding of some of this stuff, and can be confident of what to leave out. A light touch is best when dealing with installshield installations. They may not be "pure" msi installs, but presumably the vendors have done their QA, come up with a stable installation with its own checks and utilities. Best to leverage that or leave it alone, if possible.
Answered 04/08/2008 by: aogilmor
Ninth Degree Black Belt

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