I'm using WiX's admin-image-style patch creation, but the resulting patch contains extra files that I don't want to include. My understanding of WiX patching is that it is "inclusive" by default -- that is, that you choose what to include, rather than exclude. I found this comment by Peter Marcu indicating that admin patching is the way to go if you want to exclude specific files. I have a couple of questions:
He mentions that when you do an admin install each component is put into its own fragment -- how does this work?
He also says you have to use patch families (note the plural) -- what is the accepted practice for this? Do I need a ComponentRef for every component I'm including, given that they are all in individual fragments, as in (1)?
The default behavior is to include all differences. If you don't want all, then you need to specify them individually. When you're using admin image patching, WiX creates fragments as granular as possible, so yes, you need individual ComponentRefs, BinaryRefs, etc.
Related
Considering all freedom that yocto gives to the developer, I have a question.
I would like to make this my_file.inc available only for recipes in one particular meta-layer. I know, that, for instance, using INHERIT keyword inside the local.conf will make my_class.bbclass file available globally for each recipe.
Is it a good practice to add this:
require my_file.inc
inside layer.conf? Or should I change my_file.inc to the my_file.bbclass, and, add INHERIT = "my_file.bbclass" to the layer.conf?
Any other possibilities?
Even if it seems to work, neither of your approaches is technically completely correct. The key point is that all .conf files are parsed first and everything they contain is globally visible throughout the whole build process. So if you add something through the layer.conf file, itis not being pulled in through an unexpected place, it also is not being limited that layer only and might therefore cause breakage at other places.
While I do not have a really good and clean solution, maybe the following can help you:
You can make your custom recipes react on certain keywords in DISTRO_FEATURES or MACHINE_FEATURES. Then you can create a two-staged approach:
Add the desired keyword in local.conf (or your MACHINE, or DISTRO, or whatever configuration)
Make the recipes react to it. If you need the mechanism in several places, then it might be useful to pour it into a .bbclass that your layer brings along and that you pull in for the respective recipes.
This way the effect is properly contained.
Maybe part 5.1.3.2 from the Yocto Project answers your question:
Avoid duplicating include files. Use append files (.bbappend) for each recipe that uses an include file. Or, if you are introducing a new recipe that requires the included file, use the path relative to the original layer directory to refer to the file. For example, use require recipes-core/package/file.inc instead of require file.inc. If you're finding you have to overlay the include file, it could indicate a deficiency in the include file in the layer to which it originally belongs. If this is the case, you should try to address that deficiency instead of overlaying the include file. For example, you could address this by getting the maintainer of the include file to add a variable or variables to make it easy to override the parts needing to be overridden.
So to avoid duplicate inclusion later, it would be better not to include your .inc file(s) this way.
I've googled a lot, but there's little information about my question.
The question for short is "Suppose you have the target image(.msi), the list of changed binaries, but you don't have the upgrade image. How to make a patch based on those inputs?".
The detailed description is:
Currently, We use TFS as the source control. And each time when making a new MSI, we will increment the AssemblyFileVersion of all projects whether the project is really changed or not firstly. This is fine when there's no requirement to make a patch.But, actually, we DO have the requirement to make a patch now. I have tried to create a patch using Purely WiX or Patch Creation Properties, but almost all projects will be considered as changed when we use these MSIs directly.So if I have three inputs:
Target Image(.msi)
A list of really changed binaries
Upgrade Image(all binaries' file version is incremented) <--- this input may be useless
How Can I make use of above inputs to create a patch?
Thanks in advance.
Alternative to Phils answer, you could add an ignore switch for the only incremented files in your Patch Creative Properties File.
<UpgradeFile File="YourFileID" Ignore="yes" />
see
http://wixtoolset.org/documentation/manual/v3/xsd/wix/upgradefile.html
Depending on how many files there are to ignore might make Phils method easier. Although if you get the file table id list (export the table in orca and edit in excel, copy A3 down) and remove all the ids from you're really changed list, then add the xml around each id..it shouldn't take long.
You can still use the upgraded MSI build when you make a patch. I don't know all the WiX things you may need to do, but I've done exactly what you want to do by setting IgnoreMissingSrcFiles in the TargetImages table:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa372066(v=vs.85).aspx
and just delete all the files you don't want to be patched. You use admin images anyway to create the patch, so all you'll have are two admin images wiyth MSI files and only the files you want to patch.
I have an .ini file with configuration. I need to check if it exists in new installation to avoid creating it again. Besides if the new .ini have new fields add to the existing file.
Don't install an ini file as a file, but convert the entries into IniFile Table entries. This allows all ini file changes to be treated as "atomic change units" that allows proper merging and rollback via built-in MSI mechanism. You avoid all custom action complexity.
As Chris points out in his major upgrade comment: do things the right way in Wix / MSI and you avoid a lot of problems that start to pop up when requirements change or updates get complicated. IniFile updates implemented the right way are robust and simple to deal with.
In Wix you use the IniFile Element to achieve this. All merge capabilities, rollback support and advanced ini file handling comes along for free. All you need to do is to define what needs to be added or modified in the ini file during your installation. It will also be created if it is not there in the first place.
Using the IniFile element may look harder than it is. Here is a sample. You can also have a look at the well known Wix tutorial here.
All MSI-experts keep repeating this advice: never use a custom action to change a system if there are equivalent built-in MSI constructs.
Set NeverOverwrite="yes" on the .ini file's component and then handle the update via a custom action.
Edit: Generally it is much better to use the IniFile table as explained in my answer since you get rollback and merge capabilities. However, some people prefer the INI file installed as a file to allow easy modification of the file from outside the MSI file. Though not preferred, this does allow people to "hotfix" the INI file directly on the installation media location. Teams can use this to have the installer pick up the latest INI from development. There are technical problems with this that can be handled via a custom action (most significantly file replacement issues on install). It is also possible that an INI file can feature non-standard elements and formatting that doesn't fit in the IniFile table (rare, but possible - people with sense then use a different file extension than ini). As already explained, I would strongly advice against updating INI files via your own custom action, unless you are doing something very special - that's actually needed. It is complicated to implement and to get right.
I would suggest having 2 INI files. One that the installer owns and one that the application / user owns. The installer can always overwrite it's INI file and never worry about stomping on user data.
I am someone with little to no experience with wix and I am trying to support Windows also for the component I am responsible for. I am trying to create merge module for a set of files that my product generates. These files exist in numerous sub directories. I was wondering how I can create a single component ID for all the files in the entire tree. I am not worried about minor upgrades as that is something I am not going to be doing. I am trying to avoid generating numerous GUIDs for each of the file.
Also is there any way I can change the name of the root directory I want the files to be installed. Currently, in our build system the files I want to install end up in a directory name "install". In the wxs file generated by heat it comes up as install. I was wondering if I could change it to the actual product name instead of "install".
Use one file per component - this avoids all sorts of problems (except .NET assemblies spanning multiple files). See the following thread: One file per component or several files per component?
Wix is a great framework for creating installers, but it has a steep learning curve. I strongly recommend you read a few sections of this great, online tutorial: https://www.firegiant.com/wix/tutorial/
If you are a "sample based tinkerer", you can find an even quicker, sample based tour in this article: http://www.codeproject.com/Tips/105638/A-quick-introduction-Create-an-MSI-installer-with
Wix is hands-on. Just focus on the samples, and focus on getting the components created and a major upgrade set up:
How to implement WiX installer upgrade? (modern, convenience way)
How to get WiX major upgrade working? (legacy way - more flexible, less convenient)
http://wixtoolset.org/documentation/manual/v3/howtos/updates/major_upgrade.html
Once you got that running the rest of the details fall into place by reading the documentation for whatever feature you need. Using Visual Studio / Votive with intellisense ensures that you can learn as you go with features such as shortcuts, ini files, xml files, dialogs, etc...
Another top tip is to use dark.exe (part of the Wix toolkit) to decompile existing MSI files. This yields Wix XML with code you can copy and paste into your own Wix files. I use other MSI tools to compile such MSI files, and then copy the sections I need into my Wix file - just to speed up the process of creating the Wix XML. Studying the decompiled XML is very educational - a real time saver.
UPDATE, May 2021: Some more links:
WiX Quick Start - Very long version
WiX Quick Start - Short version
If all the files are going to the same destination folder, then you can create one single COMPONENT with all the FILE within it. There is nothing stopping you to do that. You can then just create one GUID for that component. Also read these answers which talks about the advantages vs disadvantages of one component vs multiple components before you implement it: Answer1 Answer2. To Summarize:
You will have trouble with minor upgrades/repairs. If a component is
being updated, only the file designated as the KEYPATH is checked to see if
it is out of date: if it is up to date, all the others are ignored.
You'll also have difficulty if you want to add or remove files from each
component. Once released, a component is immutable (in terms of what files
are in it). The only way to update it without breaking component rules would
be to effectively remove and install the a new version of the MSI.
Understanding the component rules is key in Windows Installer and one file
per component makes the component rules easier to work with, which is why it
is the recommendation of many people here.
LINK
The root directory name can be changed by modifying the "Name" property for the DIRECTORY element.
Supposing I have a merge module that installs a file "MyFile.txt" to a certain location, and that I wish to use that merge module, however I want to supply a different copy of "MyFile.txt" from the one supplied with the merge module.
Is it possible to do this? (And for bonus points how can I do this using Wix)
Update: Roughly speaking MyFile.txt is part of a package up component of installable items that we provide to others, they then comine these components with their own to produce an installer.
In the ideal world they would only need to add new files to the output, however this is a replacement for an existing system where they currently have the ability to modify or even replace items (suce as MyFile.txt) in the end installer, and so without the ability to do the same with the merge module the migration path will be difficult.
The packaged up component doesn't need to be a merge module if there is a better solution, however merge modules seemed like the sensible choice and in all other respects provide a very nice re-usable package of installer logic.
It's possible but every technique that I know is a bit of a hack and doesn't scale very well. Can you tell me more about what type of file MyFile.txt is and what the intent of the different flavors of the file? Usually my goal is to never have the same filename twice ( darn component rules ) and then design variation points to support the needs. Sometimes upstream changes to the application are required to do this correctly.