O.K.; So you can enumerate 2^4 combinations of possible solutions.Good for you. All I want is a tree, a tether, and a tire.
I'm thinking Inno Setup will allow at least a "hello world" to go from the .ijs stage to the install.exe, and thus to the icon on the desktop stage. Goldplating can come later. >: ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram) |/\| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |\ | | The only real problem with APL is that BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time." Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg Natural Born APL'er | Demo website: http://156.34.78.235/ -----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Oleg Kobchenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Programming forum" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 7:22 PM Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Application Delivery? > There are a few things to consider, when it comes > to producing a setup. > - should it be simple or should it have a certain > set of essential features > - is J bundled as runtime or a full distribution > is used for users to benefit from the installation > - should J be used as a platform, like Java, > such that installed once, the applications will > just use it > - regardless of installation builder, what would > be the mechanism of determining what goes into > the installation > > Thinking of install features in order of > importance: > - install files, folders, recognize know lications > like program files, etc. > - create a start and desktop shortcut icons > - offer browse for location to install > - write registry entries > - launch a program at the end of install > - clean uninstall, but leaving new files and > folders intact in the destination tree > - detection of previously installed apps, > version aware to uninstall oldies and > refuse to install same or later versions > - create a compliant entry in Add Remove Programs > - offer feature selection > - repair and reinstall with different features > - license show and accept steps > - conditional steps based on reading registry, etc. > - extensibility to include a DLL to check > product keys etc. > > Because of many of these considerations, a model of > external professional (but possibly free) installation > builder, with possibly a project for it generated by > a J tool which will know where things come from, > such as Project Manager, sounds more compelling than > a quick do-it-all option, which will become very limited > in real-life scenarious. > > A free install builder for Windows, and as powerful > as it can get, because it is made by Microsoft for > Microsoft (Office installs are made with it) is WiX. > And it's released to open source, same as a few other > good tools like WTL. > In my impression, it can all what InstallShield does > or even more with a command-line insterface and > clear declarative XML specification. > > WiX home > http://wix.sourceforge.net/index.html > > WiX tutorial > http://www.tramontana.co.hu/wix/ > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiX > > Using WiX to create Windows Installer Packages > http://msdn.microsoft.com/chats/transcripts/windows/windows_110904a.aspx > > > > > --- Geoff Canyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > For me personally it's about the ease of dealing with a single file. > > The development environment I've used most often in the past few > > years is Revolution: http://www.runrev.com > > > > It is a wonderful environment from the standpoint of assembling an > > application. I used to do a demo for them at trade shows where I > > would build a single-file executable for three platforms (OS X, > > Windows, Linux) while holding my breath. It takes about 1:45 to do. > > In Revolution you pretty much say, "Make me an app," and it says, > > "What platforms?" You check them off and you're done. > > > > So if it's possible to put together a single install that results in > > a single folder that contains <whatever> then I'm pretty much > > covered. A single file isn't really required -- just nice. > > > > regards, > > > > Geoff > > > > On Mar 25, 2007, at 10:03 AM, Devon McCormick wrote: > > > > > Geoff - > > > > > > when we discussed something along these lines at the NYCJUG meeting > > > last > > > month, we concluded that you might as well install the entire J > > > application > > > package; see http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/NYCJUG/2007-02-13 , under > > > "Proceedings", the section "Installing J Applications". > > > > > > This has the advantages of not forgetting anything and allowing on- > > > site > > > debugging. Is there a particular reason you don't want to do this? > > > Obviously > > > this is a shared concern as a number of people have worked on ways > > > to avoid > > > installing the entire J system in order to install their > > > application. I'm > > > just wondering what arguments we may not have considered. > > > > > > Or is this more about the ease of dealing with only a single file? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Devon > > > > > > > > > On 3/24/07, Geoff Canyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > >> Is there a way to bundle a J application into a single-file > > >> executable? If not, how close is it possible to come? > > >> > > >> regards, > > >> > > >> Geoff > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ > Looking for earth-friendly autos? > Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
