I'm not too much more experienced with this, either. But that's the same conclusion I came to. We go as far as to include it in a tools dir, but that's about the extent of it. I reason, it's the type thing that ought not change all that frequently so we're not versioning 75 MB at a time (in this case).
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Katherine Moss <[email protected]>wrote: > Now I'm very new at this, so excuse my stupidity if it comes off that way, > but why would you have MSI files in your build process? I always thought > that installation was a separate project altogether. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Brad Stiles > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 4:34 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ccnet-user] Re: Chicken and egg build dependency > > Well, if you really need to install the applications, and it's installed > via an MSI, there is a command line for MSIEXEC, the MSI installer program. > Of course, the problem with having the setup as part of your build is, if > you can't figure a way to automatically detect the presence, that you either > need the uninistall as part of it also, and/or deal with the cruft that > MSIExec often leaves behind. > > If you determine that the applications actually need to be on the server, > then the one time upfront installation is probably the best way to go, and > then have that be a standard part of your build server build up. > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Michael Powell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > That's another school of thought, yes. I'll visit with our 3D guy to > > determine whether that isn't easier. Otherwise, I'm just treating the > > dependency like a monolithic install. Its setup handles the hookups > > with the (also installed) Visual Studio 2008 development environment. > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Brad Stiles > > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> Do you actuall need those things on the build server, or do you just > >> need the libraries they install? If the latter, it might be easier > >> to include those libraries in your source control, so that no matter > >> who checks them out, they can build. > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Michael Powell > >> <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > For now, we'll just eat the "one off" administrative "cost" and > >> > install it apart from the CI configuration. > >> > > >> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Michael Powell > >> > <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I have a feeling I know the answer, but I'll posit it anyway... > >> >> > >> >> We've got a build dependency in our VS2008 solution that I would > >> >> like to automate if at all possible. Our solution depends on not > >> >> only VS2008 being installed, but also XNA Game Studio 3.1, which > >> >> we have included in a generic way in a tools\XNAGS\setup.exe file > >> >> from our solution. > >> >> > >> >> I'd like to detect if this has been installed and install it as > >> >> needs be. > >> >> What makes it a bit trickier is that the XNA installer asks > >> >> questions; in other words, it is interactive. Not sure if there's > >> >> a simple way to bypass the interactive installer... > >> >> > >> >> It's a chicken and egg type situation. Worst case we simply > >> >> install XNA GS sans the CC.NET build configuration and call it > >> >> done. > >> >> > >> >> Regards, > >> >> > >> >> Michael > >> > > >> > > > > > >
