>I just don't want to add to my problems unless I understand what they are.
>That is why I am concerned about Crystals requirements, along with the fact that I am still not quite sure where it hooks and why. I can use the dependency checker on some of the DLLs, but I am still trying to figure out the ramifications and recipes that won't cause constant problems for not only my application, but my clients other applications as well.
>
Seagate is quite explicit in documenting their precise requirements for installation; Craig has much greater experience than I do with Crystal, and wrt specific issues for Crystal, he's an infinitely better resource than I am. OTOH, a large part of my consulting is engineering installation, upgrade and product update engines; several of my clients hire me to design and implement their application installation products, or more often, complete product life-cycle engines which manages initial installations, product updates and upgrade, and fully reversable component deployment - if we replace a system component or registry segment, the original values and files are restored if possible.
>Ed, no one solution is ever right in all situations, and with each new release of an operating system we have a multitude of issues to deal with. I simply pointed out that Crystal's requirements dramatically raised the bar in our situation, and people need to see the positives and the negatives in order to make the right decisions for their environments. We have not decided 100% against Crystal, as it does offer greater backend support. Crystal, like VFP, is a tool, and as you add tools, you add complexity. Some are acceptable, some are not.
>
>If you did not intend to insult, I can accept that (even though that is not what you said). I just wanted to point out to you that implying someone is not intelligent because they raise an issue or concern doesn't help anyone, and it was probably out-of-character for you. If that is the case, I hope that we can be mature and continue the spirit of these forums.
YMMV, but Crystal, while it requires that you read some detailed documentation, simply is not difficult to deploy, as long as you use tools capable of using the Win32 system's Setup services, or that duplicate these services independently. Most people are not willing to devote the time needed to understand what is needed to properly install an app, and my general experience is that people who write their own installers are (1) either extremely competent and have not found an install tool that's flexible enough to manage the entire install process, (2) may not be willing to invest the time into a lifecycle management strategy which deploys with the initial app, or (3) can't understand why there's more to installation than copy a few files and maybe register some of them. I've spent a lot of time learning about deployment, and know it's not trivial; deployment and system requirements need to be studied while specification of the development tools and runtime platform. An unfortunate reality is that most developers usually don't think about deployment until the app is finished, and fail to plan update and upgrade tools until typing up the instructions for loading up the changed stuff.
If you're offended by my attitude that not working with a tool that will handle normal issues of installation, and who're upset that their custom class that copies and registers files doesn't handle all situations, be offended. I have spent enough time to realize that my investment in InstallShield Pro was a good decision for me given the kind of installations I do. Ensuring that I always install the WSH also works for me, and it's very likely that I'll extend that to include ADSI and WMI as well. That works for me - the overall approach I use for app deployment - use of a launcher app that references a component repository to determine what if any updated components are needed, relying of WSH-based scripting for implementing maintenance tasks, mailbox-based application configuration. This is a whole app strategy, which evolved over a long period of time, andtook a long time to fully develop. It's not a write an app, build an .EXE, stick a few files in a directory and run a Wizard to deploy the system and it's loaded up. There's much more work to describe the individual files, the initial install is more complex as I need to install several products using their own install services (I'm not about to write my own WSH install, for example) and as a result have to handle possible split installs (an install which might force a reboot in the middle of the overall install process.) It took a lot of time to develop; now that the tools are done, I can use the framework over and over, but I still need to know more about individual files and the details of delivering it.
Your objection to the issues of updating DLLs which currently are in use can be addressed easily using the Windows Installer (Visual Studio Installer, which can be downloaded from the msdn.microsoft.com/vfoxpro site) to handleadding the files. I had no intention of insulting you; avoiding possible misunderstandings of my obnoxious message style is easy. I'll stay out of your threads, and as a PUTM, you can add my user ID (017964) to your twit list, which will filter out my messages from the messages displayed by UT. EOT.
