On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Zero3<[email protected]> wrote: > Juiceman skrev: >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Zero3<[email protected]> wrote: >>> Juiceman skrev: >>>> I'm working on the update.cmd script handling these binaries... it >>>> seems the .sha1 of all of these files is blank on the website. The >>>> wrappers, start.exe, stop.exe and the freenetlauncher.exe. I'll need >>>> that fixed please to continue my work ;-) >>> Cool! Remember to update freenettray.exe as well. >> >> Is that separate from the freenetlauncher.exe? > > Yes. Will be located in the bin folder. The launcher has no user > interface and does nothing but load fproxy in the best available browser > when executed. The tray manager is reponsible for keeping a tray icon > running in the background.
Ah, ok. I will need Toad to push it to the website folder where I can get it. >>> Did you put any thought into how to handle existing installations >>> without the tray manager? The ideal solution (but which requires a bit >>> more work from you) would be to offer to install the tray manager for >>> installations that do not already have it. It's really just a matter of >>> downloading the file and adding it to the "Start" all users program >>> group in the start menu. >> >> Honestly, adding the tray manager would be easy enough for >> installations that have been done with the new wininstaller you >> created, but older installs won't work because they are lacking >> installid.dat (although I could probably create it, hmm...) > > I don't think we should mess around with installations by the old > installer - no. But adding the tray manager to installations made with > the new wininstaller would be cool. We might want to branch the update > script into one version for old installations and one for wininstaller > installations? I will install the tray with a prompt then. Might there be permissions issues? I can do it easy enough with one script. I think I will test for installid.dat and if found ask to install the tray program. >> The other issue I have is adding a prompt will change the default >> function of the script so if someone has a cron job it will hang >> waiting for input. If people don't think that breaking this is a >> problem I will do it. > > Well. Users should *not* run update.cmd on regular basis at all. It's > only meant for crash recovery , updater-over-freenet failure or updating > of helper executables. Agreed, and even if they did, once installed they would not get a prompt any more. > We could also silently install it? But I'd rather ask, to be honest.. > The good old DOS "choice" command (probably not included in XP/Vista, > but can be downloaded from various sites) has a timeout setting, after > which it will continue with a default value (no, in our case) anyway. I thought about the choice command (I have used it before) but you are right in that it is not available on XP and I'd rather not bundle any more files than necessary. >> I see you are now installing via the system account instead of >> creating a user called "freenet", how does this affect my work? > > Yea. You should give access via cacls/icacls to the LocalService user > instead... Though you shouldn't need to do that at all on wininstaller > installations. The installer fixes the access for the main installation > folder with the "inherit" flag active, meaning that any changed/new > files will get the correct access automatically. What happens if I just change it now? Do I need to do them both in case? Maybe I'll just do (on XP) if %VISTA%==0 echo Y| cacls %LOCATION% /E /T /C /G freenet:F /G LocalService:F I changed the . to %LOCATION% that should affect the Freenet installation folder and cause inheritance, right? > I'm not sure if there are anywhere else the script would be affected? > > - Zero3 > _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
