Software Deployment

Have you read this from the SDK?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/msi/setup/windows_file_protection_on_windows_2000_and_windows_xp.asp

I would reconsider repackaging Direct X. For me personally it would be a no no - justification along these lines

http://itninja.com/question/what-applications-should-not-be-repackaged?

A silent deployment may not be easy, but depending on version possible -

http://itninja.com/link/download-the-directx-9.0-redistributable-setup-here

Do you need to replace the WFP file or can you yank it from the package and just use what's there?

Even if your package is updatin some WPS protected files , as long as Windows knows path to I386 directory it will replace files updated by your package from the I386 folder .

So even if you do not remove these files from your package they will anyway be replaced by windows . However if windows doesnot knows path to I386 , it will pop up a message box asking for I386 folder or Windows XP sp2 cd and will stop your installation , failing to provide I386 folder location will rollback your installtion .

I had faced this issue while packaging Lotus Notes 6.5 .

Cheers ,
V

Are you sure they aren't replaced from the "%SystemRoot%\System32\Dllcache" folder?

ORIGINAL: strakm

Do you need to replace the WFP file or can you yank it from the package and just use what's there?


You should be safe enough to remove it from the package.

In most cases your application will work with what's already there. Make a note of what you remove though (in your documentation), just in case you experience problems later on.

I am pretty sure that it requires I386 folder as in caseof lotus notes 6.5 I got WFPS prompt during installation which I could finally resolve by adding path to I386 folder in Sourcepath and ServicePackPath reg keys .
However I am not sure if Windows uses DLL cache folder also along with I386 to complete this process .

Hope this helps.
Cheers ,
V

Hi V.

I wouldn't like to comment on your Notes experience, but here's some info about WFP and the cache folder:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wfp/setup/protected_file_list.asp

There's probably some better reference material somewhere, but that's the best I can do right now (too busy).

I'm pretty sure SKJ isn't experiencing the same issue as you are with notes. He'll probably get away with removing the file from his package (as well as any references to it elsewhere in the DB).

Hi ,

Thanks for providing the link .
I went through it , the last paragraph of it says this :
When an application attempts to replace a protected file that is not in the cache, WFP attempts to restore the original file from the installation source, prompting the user if necessary.

which means that WFP uses I386 / source CD to replace WFP files if it is unavailable incache , I think my case is the same , at the time of installtion probably the file to be replaced was unavailable in the cache folder hence i recieved a prompt for installation source .

Please feel free to correct me if my understansing is wrong .

Cheers ,
V

No, you've understood correctly - the cache can be repaired if it becomes corrupted. Otherwise you'd have no way of repairing it if you did something silly.[:D] You can easily reproduce this scenario by deleting a file from both it's normal location and from the cache - I've done it many times before, but never by accident.

What does surprise me is that the installation of your Notes package makes this happen. I can't remember seeing that happen during an MSI installation. Btw, which file was affected?

Be sure to let us know if you ever figure it out.