You would be better off using burn to do the install of SQL and then launch
your MSI (if you search for wix burn sql express you should find a few
examples).
Neil
-Original Message-
From: Ravishankar [mailto:ravishankar.krishnasw...@idsnext.com]
Sent: 19 April 2013 06:10
To:
anyone has another idea ? I still have the problem with two entries in the
ARP or the uninstall of the version.
Like I said after installing the new bundle version the old one got
uninstalled and that uninstallation removes all files.
--
View this message in context:
Classification: Public
Hi Ravi,
This is how I am installing SQL Server Express 2012 in Burn/Bootstrapper:
ExePackage Id=SQLExpressx64
DisplayName=Microsoft® SQL Server® 2012 - Express Edition
x64
SourceFile=..\PreReqs\SQLEXPR_x64_ENU.exe
Hi All,
Using Wix toolset 3.7 or 4.0.12, I have created a really simple bundle
application using the WixStandardBootsrapper and am getting a stack trace error
because of FIPS.
Here is what the bundle looks like :
Wix xmlns=http://wixtoolset.org/schemas/v4/wxs;
Bundle Name=Bootstrap
(Cross posting:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16108405/wix-bundle-balcondition-utilregi
strysearch-variable-always-false)
I want my install to fail if a third party software element is not
installed. I added a `Fragment` with a `util:RegistrySearch` and a
`bal:Condition` to the `Bundle`,
Hi,
I've got a bundle that requires a reboot flagged by installing .NET 4.0.
The user is on a domain and is a standard user on the machine.
Initially, the UAC prompt appears asking for admin credentials.
After the reboot, the bundle doesn't restart to install more MSI's.
If the user (local or
Does FIPS require SHA2 now? Burn currently expects SHA1 hashes.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Jonathan Racine jonathan.rac...@hybris.com
wrote:
Hi All,
Using Wix toolset 3.7 or 4.0.12, I have created a really simple bundle
application using the WixStandardBootsrapper and am getting a
Rob,
For your review:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3351222/which-net-sha1-class-is-fips-comp
liant
Regards,
Chris
From: Rob Mensching r...@robmensching.com
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 12:31 PM
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML
FIPS 180-1 indicates SHA-1
FIPS 180-2 indicates SHA-2
FIPS 180-4 makes this statement:
This Standard specifies secure hash algorithms -SHA-1, SHA-224, SHA-256,
SHA-384, SHA-512, SHA-512/224 and SHA-512/256 -for computing a condensed
representation of electronic data (message). When a message of
I have made a Burn setup, when it start it ask to elevate the privileges, so I
would expect that on the setup there was the UAC shield, but there was no.Is
there a property to set to make the system recognize that the setup need to
elevate privileges, or is it a bug?
I'm using last version of
That's pretty surprising. This is how our installer requests admin privileges:
Condition Message=This installer requires administrator privileges to run.
Privileged
/Condition
Alain
-Original Message-
From: Marco Tognacci [mailto:mark...@live.it]
Sent: April 19, 2013 13:49
To:
Burn should only elevate once, and only when it needs to. Since Burn can
install per-user, it won't elevate on initial start of the exe. Your BA should
elevate automatically when *apply* (I believe) happens. The
install/modify/remove button inside your BA should be the ones to have a Shield.
From what I can get out of the Domain Policies, only the SHA-2 algorithms were
enabled. Official reason given is for PCI-Compliance. At this point would
that become a feature request in order to make the brun behave correctly using
SHA1 or SHA2 ?
Jonathan Racine
Global Network Specialist
My Burn installed works well, but I'm asking if it could have the UAC shield on
the big icon when it appear in a folder with large image size like desktop, I
have seen that other installers have this UAC shield on the setup.exe icon
From: jacob.hoo...@greenheck.com
To: afor...@cmu.edu;
Oh whoops, I'm not using burn (only using candle and light), so my
previously-posted code might not be useful (because I don't know a thing about
burn).
Sorry for the possible confusion.
-Original Message-
From: Marco Tognacci [mailto:mark...@live.it]
Sent: April 19, 2013 15:15
To:
So your resulting file is a MSI? In which case, there is no way of putting a
manifest in it or changing its icon.
If your file is an exe, then you are using some other tool to bundle the MSI
into an exe.
-Original Message-
From: Alain Forget [mailto:afor...@cmu.edu]
Sent: Friday,
Yeah, I get an MSI. Oh wow, I just released that I completely misunderstood the
original post. I thought he wasn't getting a UAC prompt at all, not that he
wanted the UAC shield icon to be displayed. My bad, sorry.
-Original Message-
From: Hoover, Jacob
The Burn setup is an exe file, I think that could be a built in way to make the
UAC appear on the setup.exe icon.I have read that to make the Shield appear is
necessary to add it to the manifest, could be this automated using Wix Burn?
From: jacob.hoo...@greenheck.com
To: afor...@cmu.edu;
The Shield icon on the EXE is caused by a manifest change enforcing
that the EXE always runs as admin. There might also be something hokey if it's
named Setup, but I wouldn't expect that to live forever. The reason some
other installer have the shield icon is they took the lazy way out
What you are seeing is the recommended best practices for Windows. Don't
elevate until necessary. Only put the shield on the button that causes
elevation. Burn does all that, except you have to put the shield on the
Install button because your BA shows that. smile/
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:03
In my view, SHA2 is a better algorithm, and I would expect that if the
requirement was for SHA1, that you would still be OK if you were using a SHA2
based algorithm that has been certified (I think Christopher Painter replied
with a link that described some of the certified implementations).
+1 for using SHA2 instead of SHA1
-Original Message-
From: John H Bergman (XPedient) [mailto:john.berg...@xpdnt.com]
Sent: April 19, 2013 16:53
To: General discussion for Windows Installer XML toolset.
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Bundle creation error using FIPS
In my view, SHA2 is a
On 19-Apr-13 16:03, Hoover, Jacob wrote:
There might also be something hokey if it's named Setup, but I wouldn't
expect that to live forever.
That kicks in only if you don't have a manifest. Burn does, so that
heuristic doesn't kick in.
--
sig://boB
http://joyofsetup.com/
n 19-Apr-13 15:13, Jonathan Racine wrote:
From what I can get out of the Domain Policies, only the SHA-2 algorithms
were enabled. Official reason given is for PCI-Compliance. At this point
would that become a feature request in order to make the brun behave
correctly using SHA1 or SHA2 ?
24 matches
Mail list logo
