RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
At 10:49 2017-08-14, "John Weller" wrote: I have a similar system except that the .exe resides on the workstation and the server. When the app is started it actually runs the loader first which checks the version number of the local exe and the server exe. If the server exe is newer then it copies it across to the workstation which means that it is only copied when necessary instead of every time. Mine works the same way. [snip] Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/a11fd29e273b6bbdf4c057e6cffb2d0f@mtlp85 ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:50 PM, John Weller wrote: >> >> Nihil nove sub sole. >> There is nothing new under the sun. I hired one of my best employees at Blackstone because she had modified an elegant loader, lifted from the pages of FoxPro Advisor, with proper credits in place, in 1997. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACW6n4usk-5sbhKj0dWSDb6+Ea6sRSA_HT2TN+in+AQYC_=e...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
> > Nihil nove sub sole. > ? John Weller 01380 723235 07976 393631 > ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/01d3153f$062705e0$127511a0$@johnweller.co.uk ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
Nihil nove sub sole. On Aug 14, 2017 9:36 PM, wrote: > On 2017-08-14 13:49, John Weller wrote: > >> I have a similar system except that the .exe resides on the workstation >> and >> the server. When the app is started it actually runs the loader first >> which >> checks the version number of the local exe and the server exe. If the >> server exe is newer then it copies it across to the workstation which >> means >> that it is only copied when necessary instead of every time. >> >> John >> >> John Weller >> 01380 723235 >> 07976 393631 >> > > > Yep...that's what I do too. Conditional checking. > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/capqlobzcxkwawx98baiiwkx+wqb_oovmxmzfbrbcaajett_...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
On 2017-08-14 13:49, John Weller wrote: I have a similar system except that the .exe resides on the workstation and the server. When the app is started it actually runs the loader first which checks the version number of the local exe and the server exe. If the server exe is newer then it copies it across to the workstation which means that it is only copied when necessary instead of every time. John John Weller 01380 723235 07976 393631 Yep...that's what I do too. Conditional checking. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/973e9ca758606337a0cfaee0ad2c7...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
I have a similar system except that the .exe resides on the workstation and the server. When the app is started it actually runs the loader first which checks the version number of the local exe and the server exe. If the server exe is newer then it copies it across to the workstation which means that it is only copied when necessary instead of every time. John John Weller 01380 723235 07976 393631 > -Original Message- > From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of > Dave Crozier > Sent: 14 August 2017 15:46 > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix > > I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server > onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means that > updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is never open > by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to unload the local > .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It unloads the local "exe" > and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer updated .exe off the server. > And it has saved hors of trouble finding out who has the application open on > the network. > > Dave > ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/001d01d31525$a8cda8e0$fa68faa0$@johnweller.co.uk ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
On 2017-08-14 11:04, Richard Kaye wrote: Sounds great. I'm pretty sure Michael B posted one here a while back, too. I did, but that one's dated, and although it probably still works, I redid it years ago with the code I just posted. I'll also post that update to the ProFox downloads page; I think it's all there in those 3 routines. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/3c03bb206d051d02f24348b4a3f1f...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
On 2017-08-14 10:59, Richard Kaye wrote:
Having a great deal of respect for your VFP chops, is your loader
something you can share, Dave? I'm always curious about the mechanics
of these types of things.
--
rk
Here's a copy/paste from FabNet, called from my Main.prg:
PROCEDURE CheckForNewerVersion()
LOCAL lcServerVersion as String, lcLocalVersion as String, lcLANFile as
String, loData as _dataVersions OF .\progs\_dataVersions.prg, ;
loShell as _ShellExecute OF HOME()+"ffc\environ.vcx", loRec as
Object, llUpdateLAN as Logical, llMissing as Logical, lcLANVersion as
String
LOCAL ARRAY laInfo[1]
lcLocalVersion = _screen.cversion && SetVersion()
lcLANFile = ReadINI("General","SetupFile",'')
loShell = NEWOBJECT("_ShellExecute", "_environ.vcx")
*** mjb 09/18/2015 - updated for Admin user, plus grabbing EXE from
cloud
*** mjb 02/17/2016 - DEV NOTE: This needs work yet to grab latest
installer from web database and put in lcLANFile location; will finish
later
IF NOT EMPTY(lcLANFile) THEN
WAIT WINDOW NOWAIT "Checking master source for latest update..."
loData = NEWOBJECT("_dataVersions",".\progs\_dataVersions.prg")
*** mjb 02/17/2016 - moved this next IF block outside the next IF
block after that so as to get lcLANVersion for the 3rd IF block
IF FILE(lcLANFile) THEN && see if LAN version is the
cLatestVersion
lcLANVersion = GetVersion(lcLANFile)
CopyInstallerLocally(lcLANFile,ALLTRIM(lcLANVersion))
&& mjb 05-11-16
llUpdateLAN = loData.ConvertVersionToNumber(lcLANVersion) <>
loData.ConvertVersionToNumber(oUtils.oClient.cLatestVersion)
ELSE && update LAN with latest from web database
llMissing = .T.
llUpdateLAN = .T.
ENDIF
*** mjb 02/17/2016 - added iNetwork = 1 to only run this IF block for
MBSS Cloud clients
IF oUtils.iNetwork = 1 AND
loData.ConvertVersionToNumber(lcLocalVersion) <
loData.ConvertVersionToNumber(oUtils.oClient.cLatestVersion) THEN &&
verify update exe's version is as expected
*** mjb 12/28/2015 - added check to only run this for
PRODUCTION run
IF oUtils.oConnection.Descript = "Production" AND
llUpdateLAN THEN
*** mjb 12/18/2015 - for now, just alert them
IF llMissing THEN
MESSAGEBOX(oUtils.Get_Translation("Your network installation file
appears to be missing. This is not critical; this just allows you to
have your computers update from a common spot on your network rather
than the internet. Contact MBSS if you need
assistance."),16,oUtils.Get_Translation("Update file missing"))
ELSE
MESSAGEBOX(oUtils.Get_Translation("Your network installation file
(" + ALLTRIM(lcLANFile) + ") appears to be outdated (version " +
ALLTRIM(lcLANVersion) + "). Contact MBSS if you need
assistance."),48,oUtils.Get_Translation("Update file out of date"))
ENDIF && llMissing
ENDIF && llUpdateLAN
ENDIF && loData.ConvertVersionToNumber(lcLocalVersion) <
loData.ConvertVersionToNumber(oUtils.oClient.cLatestVersion)
IF FILE(lcLANFile) THEN
lcServerVersion = GetVersion(lcLANFile)
IF NOT EMPTY(lcServerVersion) THEN
IF lcServerVersion > lcLocalVersion THEN
IF MESSAGEBOX(oUtils.Get_Translation("An update is available for
this application (version") + " " + lcServerVersion + "). " +
oUtils.Get_Translation("Do you want to
upgrade?"),4+32+0,oUtils.Get_Translation("Upgrade available.")) = 6 THEN
&& launch setup from server and quit this app
*** mjb 02/17/2016 - changed next line to lcLANFile instead of
lcFile
loShell.ShellExecute(FULLPATH(lcLANFile))
RELEASE loShell
oUtils.Shutdown_System() && mjb
05-13-16 was QUIT
ENDIF && msgbox = 6
ENDIF && lcServerVersion > lcLocalVersion
ELSE
SET STEP ON
ENDIF && NOT EMPTY(lcServerVersion)
ENDIF && FILE(lcLANFile)
ENDIF && NOT EMPTY(lcLANFile)
ENDPROC && CheckForNewerVersion()
FUNCTION GetVersion(tcFile as String) as String
*** mjb 09/24/2015 - created to quickly check version # on files
LOCAL ARRAY laInfo[1]
LOCAL lcVersion as String, loException as Exception
TRY
lcVersion = ''
IF FILE(tcFile) THEN
AGETFILEVERSION(laInfo,tcFile)
lcVersion = laInfo[4]
ENDIF
CATCH TO l
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
+1 Paul -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Richard Kaye Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 9:59 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix Having a great deal of respect for your VFP chops, is your loader something you can share, Dave? I'm always curious about the mechanics of these types of things. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Dave Crozier Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:46 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means that updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is never open by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to unload the local .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It unloads the local "exe" and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer updated .exe off the server. And it has saved hors of trouble finding out who has the application open on the network. Dave [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1e6201d31522$94e3e130$beaba390$@tpcqpc.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
On 2017-08-14 10:46, Dave Crozier wrote: I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means that updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is never open by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to unload the local .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It unloads the local "exe" and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer updated .exe off the server. And it has saved hors of trouble finding out who has the application open on the network. Yeah, I put something similar in place years ago. The local EXE basically looks at the server setup/update file and compares its AGETFILEVERSION to the local EXE's version and if newer, does a ShellExecute to run the _update.exe (Inno setup) and the next line quits the current app so no conflict. Been working great; administrator never has to visit any workstations again. And I haven't used DBFs since 2004 (excep for classic FabMate, which my pioneer/original client still loves today). ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/423a0027e943aa789a34366ed91be...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
We don't have to wipe our apps every night either. On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Kevin J Cully wrote: > One of the benefits of VFP is that you might be able to run the > application from a central server. Nothing to be installed on the > workstation itself? Might be worth testing. > > Another approach is to have the workstations run a "stub" that creates a > directory on the workstation and copies the VFP runtimes, and EXE locally > with enough to get it running. Tonight the workstation is wiped. Tomorrow > that same stub is run and the VFP app is copied locally again. Again, might > be worth testing out. Nowadays, the VFP runtime files are tiny compared to > the .NET runtimes! :O :D > > Good luck. > > -Original Message- > From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of > mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com > Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 10:02 PM > To: ProFox Email List > Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix > > On 2017-08-11 14:55, Kevin J Cully wrote: > > We used Citrix at a healthcare company I worked at around 2005. > > Basically everyone came in to an office, just to telecommute into our > > hosted servers that was in a city 30 minutes north of our office. It > > was a valid approach to better securing workstations. > > > > I was doing a good bit if VFP9 at that time and there wasn't much (if > > anything) that I had to do to the application. I tended to make the > > buttons bigger because with the remote-aspect of running the app, the > > double+clicks didn't always "take". We called it "having to > > triple+click" ... or ... "click it like you mean it!" It had more to > > do with Windows and the nature of following the mouse movement from > > local to remote. > > > > They had portable profiles however. They didn't wipe the image as > > there were valid reasons that people would have customized desktops > > and customized software installations, even if the Windows was remote. > > > > This approach saved us on PC purchases as well. We could buy pretty > > minimal PCs as the real horsepower was in the Citrix VM'd PCs. > > > > Hth, > > Kevin > > > Thanks for sharing that, Kevin. If you had to design an app for the "wipe > daily" scenario, how would you do it? Personally, I think Andy Kramek's > idea (years ago!) of using meta-data that had code in memo/text fields may > work well for this scenario. Andy's approach may not have been good for > source code control (as per one detractor), but the idea of self-updating > easily was on-point, imo. > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cajidmylek+njsrbxy6yyd930jnfazsjbssceuakjhyd6p6s...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
Sounds great. I'm pretty sure Michael B posted one here a while back, too. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Dave Crozier Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 11:02 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix Richard, No problem It can be set up for any VFP .exe app to use and is driven via a small DBF table which says which app to load, where to put it on the local machine etc... You can run many apps through the loader at once and it also passes parameters onward from your shortcut to the main app. I'll package it up and put it onto Ed's page. Dave -Original Message- From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Richard Kaye Sent: 14 August 2017 15:59 To: profox@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix Having a great deal of respect for your VFP chops, is your loader something you can share, Dave? I'm always curious about the mechanics of these types of things. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Dave Crozier Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:46 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means that updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is never open by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to unload the local .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It unloads the local "exe" and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer updated .exe off the server. And it has saved hors of trouble finding out who has the application open on the network. Dave [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/mwhpr10mb177455c530a12203605afe6ed2...@mwhpr10mb1774.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
Richard, No problem It can be set up for any VFP .exe app to use and is driven via a small DBF table which says which app to load, where to put it on the local machine etc... You can run many apps through the loader at once and it also passes parameters onward from your shortcut to the main app. I'll package it up and put it onto Ed's page. Dave -Original Message- From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Richard Kaye Sent: 14 August 2017 15:59 To: profox@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix Having a great deal of respect for your VFP chops, is your loader something you can share, Dave? I'm always curious about the mechanics of these types of things. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Dave Crozier Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:46 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means that updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is never open by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to unload the local .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It unloads the local "exe" and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer updated .exe off the server. And it has saved hors of trouble finding out who has the application open on the network. Dave [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/18725b8cd2d5d247873a2baf401d4ab2b47ad...@ex2010-a-fpl.fpl.LOCAL ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
Having a great deal of respect for your VFP chops, is your loader something you can share, Dave? I'm always curious about the mechanics of these types of things. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Dave Crozier Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:46 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means that updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is never open by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to unload the local .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It unloads the local "exe" and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer updated .exe off the server. And it has saved hors of trouble finding out who has the application open on the network. Dave ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/mwhpr10mb1774b3d8fcd5202c5ca6f158d2...@mwhpr10mb1774.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
I did something similar - nothing clever, just a batch file that copied the executable from the server to the work stations Laurie On 14 August 2017 at 15:46, Dave Crozier wrote: > I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server > onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means > that updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is > never open by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to > unload the local .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It > unloads the local "exe" and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer > updated .exe off the server. And it has saved hors of trouble finding out > who has the application open on the network. > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of > mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com > Sent: 12 August 2017 03:02 > To: ProFox Email List > Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix > > On 2017-08-11 14:55, Kevin J Cully wrote: > > We used Citrix at a healthcare company I worked at around 2005. > > Basically everyone came in to an office, just to telecommute into our > > hosted servers that was in a city 30 minutes north of our office. It > > was a valid approach to better securing workstations. > > > > I was doing a good bit if VFP9 at that time and there wasn't much (if > > anything) that I had to do to the application. I tended to make the > > buttons bigger because with the remote-aspect of running the app, the > > double+clicks didn't always "take". We called it "having to > > triple+click" ... or ... "click it like you mean it!" It had more to > > do with Windows and the nature of following the mouse movement from > > local to remote. > > > > They had portable profiles however. They didn't wipe the image as > > there were valid reasons that people would have customized desktops > > and customized software installations, even if the Windows was remote. > > > > This approach saved us on PC purchases as well. We could buy pretty > > minimal PCs as the real horsepower was in the Citrix VM'd PCs. > > > > Hth, > > Kevin > > > Thanks for sharing that, Kevin. If you had to design an app for the "wipe > daily" scenario, how would you do it? Personally, I think Andy Kramek's > idea (years ago!) of using meta-data that had code in memo/text fields may > work well for this scenario. Andy's approach may not have been good for > source code control (as per one detractor), but the idea of self-updating > easily was on-point, imo. > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAMvTR9cu7OUwTf4gS-9+8ei=4herojnswod8sfcdckkucxl...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
I have a general purpose "Loader" app that loads the .exe from the server onto the local workstation in a pre-defined folder and runs it. This means that updating the .exe on the server is simple as you are sure that it is never open by anyone. In addition I can send the loader instructions to unload the local .exe if there is a workstation server update due. It unloads the local "exe" and sits waiting for a signal to upload the newer updated .exe off the server. And it has saved hors of trouble finding out who has the application open on the network. Dave -Original Message- From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com Sent: 12 August 2017 03:02 To: ProFox Email List Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix On 2017-08-11 14:55, Kevin J Cully wrote: > We used Citrix at a healthcare company I worked at around 2005. > Basically everyone came in to an office, just to telecommute into our > hosted servers that was in a city 30 minutes north of our office. It > was a valid approach to better securing workstations. > > I was doing a good bit if VFP9 at that time and there wasn't much (if > anything) that I had to do to the application. I tended to make the > buttons bigger because with the remote-aspect of running the app, the > double+clicks didn't always "take". We called it "having to > triple+click" ... or ... "click it like you mean it!" It had more to > do with Windows and the nature of following the mouse movement from > local to remote. > > They had portable profiles however. They didn't wipe the image as > there were valid reasons that people would have customized desktops > and customized software installations, even if the Windows was remote. > > This approach saved us on PC purchases as well. We could buy pretty > minimal PCs as the real horsepower was in the Citrix VM'd PCs. > > Hth, > Kevin Thanks for sharing that, Kevin. If you had to design an app for the "wipe daily" scenario, how would you do it? Personally, I think Andy Kramek's idea (years ago!) of using meta-data that had code in memo/text fields may work well for this scenario. Andy's approach may not have been good for source code control (as per one detractor), but the idea of self-updating easily was on-point, imo. [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/18725b8cd2d5d247873a2baf401d4ab2b47ad...@ex2010-a-fpl.fpl.LOCAL ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
One of the benefits of VFP is that you might be able to run the application from a central server. Nothing to be installed on the workstation itself? Might be worth testing. Another approach is to have the workstations run a "stub" that creates a directory on the workstation and copies the VFP runtimes, and EXE locally with enough to get it running. Tonight the workstation is wiped. Tomorrow that same stub is run and the VFP app is copied locally again. Again, might be worth testing out. Nowadays, the VFP runtime files are tiny compared to the .NET runtimes! :O :D Good luck. -Original Message- From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 10:02 PM To: ProFox Email List Subject: RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix On 2017-08-11 14:55, Kevin J Cully wrote: > We used Citrix at a healthcare company I worked at around 2005. > Basically everyone came in to an office, just to telecommute into our > hosted servers that was in a city 30 minutes north of our office. It > was a valid approach to better securing workstations. > > I was doing a good bit if VFP9 at that time and there wasn't much (if > anything) that I had to do to the application. I tended to make the > buttons bigger because with the remote-aspect of running the app, the > double+clicks didn't always "take". We called it "having to > triple+click" ... or ... "click it like you mean it!" It had more to > do with Windows and the nature of following the mouse movement from > local to remote. > > They had portable profiles however. They didn't wipe the image as > there were valid reasons that people would have customized desktops > and customized software installations, even if the Windows was remote. > > This approach saved us on PC purchases as well. We could buy pretty > minimal PCs as the real horsepower was in the Citrix VM'd PCs. > > Hth, > Kevin Thanks for sharing that, Kevin. If you had to design an app for the "wipe daily" scenario, how would you do it? Personally, I think Andy Kramek's idea (years ago!) of using meta-data that had code in memo/text fields may work well for this scenario. Andy's approach may not have been good for source code control (as per one detractor), but the idea of self-updating easily was on-point, imo. [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/f82db4de49440845a14b540f6c2df6a92eea9...@blufitspmbs01.cherokeega.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
Mike, New one on me as well never even noticed it just goes to show! Dave -Original Message- From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com Sent: 12 August 2017 02:59 To: ProFox Email List Subject: Re: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix On 2017-08-11 16:32, Bill Anderson wrote: > Mike > > I think SYS(602) exists because of these types of applications...just > make a note of it. Interesting. My Win7Pro 64-bit laptop returns 256 for OS(10). Didn't think this would be considered having a Terminal Server present? Thanks for the tip. I don't recall ever reading about SYS(602). [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/18725b8cd2d5d247873a2baf401d4ab2b47a8...@ex2010-a-fpl.fpl.LOCAL ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
On 2017-08-11 14:55, Kevin J Cully wrote: We used Citrix at a healthcare company I worked at around 2005. Basically everyone came in to an office, just to telecommute into our hosted servers that was in a city 30 minutes north of our office. It was a valid approach to better securing workstations. I was doing a good bit if VFP9 at that time and there wasn't much (if anything) that I had to do to the application. I tended to make the buttons bigger because with the remote-aspect of running the app, the double+clicks didn't always "take". We called it "having to triple+click" ... or ... "click it like you mean it!" It had more to do with Windows and the nature of following the mouse movement from local to remote. They had portable profiles however. They didn't wipe the image as there were valid reasons that people would have customized desktops and customized software installations, even if the Windows was remote. This approach saved us on PC purchases as well. We could buy pretty minimal PCs as the real horsepower was in the Citrix VM'd PCs. Hth, Kevin Thanks for sharing that, Kevin. If you had to design an app for the "wipe daily" scenario, how would you do it? Personally, I think Andy Kramek's idea (years ago!) of using meta-data that had code in memo/text fields may work well for this scenario. Andy's approach may not have been good for source code control (as per one detractor), but the idea of self-updating easily was on-point, imo. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/e92440a0af832b72145442114edcb...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
On 2017-08-11 16:32, Bill Anderson wrote: Mike I think SYS(602) exists because of these types of applications...just make a note of it. Interesting. My Win7Pro 64-bit laptop returns 256 for OS(10). Didn't think this would be considered having a Terminal Server present? Thanks for the tip. I don't recall ever reading about SYS(602). ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/62caad39ed0cd839c83db78569763...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
Citrix started as Terminal Services with knobs on. These days what they mainly do is desktop virtualisation. -- Alan Bourke alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm On Fri, 11 Aug 2017, at 05:58 PM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote: > Anyone have VFP apps running on Citrix? Any special configurations that > have to be done? Any gotchas? > > A potential client of mine uses Citrix and is very happy with it. He > said they basically wipe/replace the image daily. I guess that way they > don't have to worry about viruses? If I were to develop a desktop app > for them, I'd have to consider how to upgrade it easily. He said > updating/creating the image is usually painful and takes a long time. > > tia, > --Mike > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1502485625.2739565.1070797408.1b19f...@webmail.messagingengine.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
Mike I think SYS(602) exists because of these types of applications...just make a note of it. Bill Anderson On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:58 AM, < mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com> wrote: > Anyone have VFP apps running on Citrix? Any special configurations that > have to be done? Any gotchas? > > A potential client of mine uses Citrix and is very happy with it. He said > they basically wipe/replace the image daily. I guess that way they don't > have to worry about viruses? If I were to develop a desktop app for them, > I'd have to consider how to upgrade it easily. He said updating/creating > the image is usually painful and takes a long time. > > tia, > --Mike > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CA+O1enGCAwty=vat6w+_djwxq2_ifhnkrjaqpj1agocsfzc...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix
We used Citrix at a healthcare company I worked at around 2005. Basically everyone came in to an office, just to telecommute into our hosted servers that was in a city 30 minutes north of our office. It was a valid approach to better securing workstations. I was doing a good bit if VFP9 at that time and there wasn't much (if anything) that I had to do to the application. I tended to make the buttons bigger because with the remote-aspect of running the app, the double+clicks didn't always "take". We called it "having to triple+click" ... or ... "click it like you mean it!" It had more to do with Windows and the nature of following the mouse movement from local to remote. They had portable profiles however. They didn't wipe the image as there were valid reasons that people would have customized desktops and customized software installations, even if the Windows was remote. This approach saved us on PC purchases as well. We could buy pretty minimal PCs as the real horsepower was in the Citrix VM'd PCs. Hth, Kevin -Original Message- From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 12:58 PM To: ProFox Subject: VFP9SP2 apps on Citrix Anyone have VFP apps running on Citrix? Any special configurations that have to be done? Any gotchas? A potential client of mine uses Citrix and is very happy with it. He said they basically wipe/replace the image daily. I guess that way they don't have to worry about viruses? If I were to develop a desktop app for them, I'd have to consider how to upgrade it easily. He said updating/creating the image is usually painful and takes a long time. tia, --Mike [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/f82db4de49440845a14b540f6c2df6a92eea8...@blufitspmbs01.cherokeega.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
