|
|
Spam ?
We can’t stop here, this is bat country - Hunter S Thompson RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Yup 
|
|
|
|
|
but, I thought it would be for torturing prisoners during water-boarding breaks, I never thought it would be for ... laughs [^] 
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
That was torture just listening to it!
Got my site back up after my time in the woods!
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
That's an awful din isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Once in a while we start having a discussion on how to improve our workflow when creating installers for our software (large, but non complex installer)
We are using InstallShield; it is a beast, it works, but hard to use and integrate into our Continuous Integration tools; but it has all the features we need (EXE, redistributables, chained MSI...)
Someone always ask if there is something better that we can use; so I go on the internets and look around and go to this Wikipedia page.
I'm always surprised at how few installer software there are. I'm surprised that even Microsoft does not offer a good packaging tool.
What are you using to package your software? Are we stuck on what we have right now ?
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
I use Inno Setup which is quite easy to use. Not sure how well it would integrate into an automated process.
|
|
|
|
|
I second the motion for InnoSetup!
I would recommend it over any of the other tools because it is a lot easier to use.
I've used InstallShield, InsallShieldLE, and the old (VStudio 2008 and before) built-in package creator (whatever that thing was) and InnoSetup is consistently the best, easiest and most reliable.
You can learn it quickly and it consistently works.
However, the one issue is that InnoSetup cannot generate an MSI.
Sometimes that is a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: Someone always ask if there is something better
Sure -- create a Docker container of everything pre-installed. 
Latest Article - Slack-Chatting with you rPi
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
The GitHub "Clone or download" button is my installer! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
InnoSetup has all of these advantages and you can write custom install steps (in Pascal, but still, it's doable). In addition, there are multiple ways to interact with the file, from plain-old-text editor to the Inno editor, to a wizard & something with property panes and all that if you're not a coder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We use WIX[^]. Albeit it could be tedious to write the xml installer creation scripts by hand, it fits better in an automated workflow where the said scripts are generated by higher level software ...
Haven't tried to use it in the more complex scenarios (like the ones mentioned in OP) though ...
|
|
|
|
|
Yep.
Creating the first iteration of the installation project is hard, in our case, for over 23,000 files it is a burden.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
I found WIX to be a major PITA to set up an install and slow as hell when running the install. InnoSetup was easy, fast to install, free, etc, etc, <insert all="" praises="" here=""> (: If you can move away from WIX, I highly suggest InnoSetup
|
|
|
|
|
Davyd McColl wrote: InnoSetup was easy, fast to install, free, etc, etc,
Maybe that is true.
However we do not use an UI to build installers, it's part of an automated process that is controlled by other "scripts". The advantage of such a process is that one can consistently inject/replace publication information into various components (exe, dll, msi ...) of the final product (like version number, file version, copy right, URLs, target market, configuration, etc ...) and had the generating "scripts" under version control ... The WIX's xml files are intermediate targets, it's eassier for us to produce ...
=== edit ===
OK, innoSetup is also script based. In fact I used Pascal for quite a while in the early days. I will have a closer look at it later
modified 15-Feb-19 12:29pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes! I encourage looking a little deeper.
Look, if WIX does all that you want and makes you happy, then cool. I'm just saying that I spent a lot of time in "installer space" (because it was part of my primary job function at two places of work, so that's work over >5 years, with a gap in the middle) and WIX and InstallShield were a mission where InnoSetup wasn't.
InnoSetup also has tooling which targets a few different user groups, from text manipulation masters to competent programmers to people who just want to click their way through making an installer. Which is great, because sometimes I'm all three (:
And it's free.
And the resultant installers are fast and have the compression that you choose, so can be quite small.
Just give it a go, and if it doesn't deliver ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'm still happy to choose it whenever I want an installer system.
|
|
|
|
|
I second WIX, it is a bit tedious. It works on a small install don't know about a complex one.
Got my site back up after my time in the woods!
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
I looked at WiX;
It might work for a simple installation, but for a large installation (23,000 files) it will be hard to maintain; at least create the first iteration, adding add the components/features/files.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Kinda thought that would be the case.
Got my site back up after my time in the woods!
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
I've not used them myself, but WiX includes command line tools to "harvest" the details of the files to be included, that can be built into your workflow.
|
|
|
|
|
We use PARAFFIN to generate WiX source code for thousands of files. It can even be used to add files later without disturbing the existing WiX code.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif)
