Hello TCM friends,
I have created a MSI installation setup for TCM 7.50a.
You can download the setup here:
>> (svsdownloads . de) -> Downloads => Section Tools & Utilities.
This is a non-profit site, registration and download is free.
As this is not an official installation routine by C. Ghisler you should not bother him with installation issues.
So if you have any problems or question please post to this thread or use the KONTAKT formular on svsdownloads . de.
The package you can download contains a brief documentation about how to prepare the setup for a proper silent installation.
And of course it's not a licenzed version of TCM!
If you have any recommendations or problems feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Hans
TCM 7.50a as MSI setup
Moderators: white, Hacker, petermad, Stefan2
Merry Christmas, Hans.
The official Total Commander package comes with its own setup programme. This can be run by admin users and by normal users as well.
Therefore, I wonder what the advantage might be of getting Total Commander from an inofficial site packaged as an MSI installation package?
Kind regards,
Karl
The official Total Commander package comes with its own setup programme. This can be run by admin users and by normal users as well.
Therefore, I wonder what the advantage might be of getting Total Commander from an inofficial site packaged as an MSI installation package?
Kind regards,
Karl
Yes, that's a good question.Sam_Zen wrote:(hm. shouldn't this be permitted by the Author ?)
...
The advantage - or better: the usage - of a MSI could be that great companies use MSI for their company-wide internal software distribution: silent install, same repair- and deinstall-functions.Sam_Zen wrote:....I wonder too about advantages.
Peter
TC 10.xx / #266191
Win 10 x64
Win 10 x64
Marry Christmas to all!
As Peter already said, almost all companies that deploy TCM (and other applications) in enterprise environments use the MSI technology for a couple of good reasons:
* self repair
If the application is broken because someone deleted files (or files had been overwritten with older files by another installation) the MSI technology is capable of automatically detecting those issues and self repair the application on next application start. This technology is often used to implement Current User registry keys for every user who logs on.
BTW ... self repair even works for none-admin users who normally wouldn't have enough permission for doing a normal installation.
* roll back
If the installation fails for whatever reasons the installation done so far is getting rolled back and the system has the same status as before.
* more or less easy to customize for specific companies requirements
If a vendor already provides a MSI setup it's easy to create a MSI TRANSFORM (e.g. with Microsoft Orca) to customize the setup. E.g. most companies don't want to have applications installing shortcuts on the desktop. You can create a TRANSFORM with Orca that removes those shortcuts. In this case you even don't have to change the vendors original setup, you just modify the installation behavior.
And there are many other advantages of the MSI technology compared to the traditional installation .EXE setups. Just google for MSI technology.
In fact you easily can life with most .exe installations in single machine installation scenarios.
The difference will be more obvious when you have to deploy applications to many, sometimes thousands of users. The installation must run silent, customized AND reliable!
From a technically point of view there is nothing that you can do with traditional .exe setups that can't be done with MSI setups as well.
And if there is something very sophisticated in the installation routine that can't be done directly with MSI tables it still can be done with "custom actions" (little script actions e.g. with VBS or Wise Script, Java, ...).
So I have seen many companies and many packagers repackaging TCM many times to the MSI technology before deploying it. What a waste of time javascript:emoticon(':?')
But MSI is a bit more complicated and sophisticated than traditional setups, or maybe: It’s just different.
So my idea was to provide a MSI setup that basically imitates the original setup behavior.
Understand this as a proof of concept and feel free to use it and improve it (or not).
I definitely appreciate sharing my knowledge and development with Mr. Ghisler (and anyone who is interested in) for free.
My package was done with Wise development tools, so I easily can share the development .wsi and .wse (used for a custom action) files.
Best regards,
Hans
As Peter already said, almost all companies that deploy TCM (and other applications) in enterprise environments use the MSI technology for a couple of good reasons:
* self repair
If the application is broken because someone deleted files (or files had been overwritten with older files by another installation) the MSI technology is capable of automatically detecting those issues and self repair the application on next application start. This technology is often used to implement Current User registry keys for every user who logs on.
BTW ... self repair even works for none-admin users who normally wouldn't have enough permission for doing a normal installation.
* roll back
If the installation fails for whatever reasons the installation done so far is getting rolled back and the system has the same status as before.
* more or less easy to customize for specific companies requirements
If a vendor already provides a MSI setup it's easy to create a MSI TRANSFORM (e.g. with Microsoft Orca) to customize the setup. E.g. most companies don't want to have applications installing shortcuts on the desktop. You can create a TRANSFORM with Orca that removes those shortcuts. In this case you even don't have to change the vendors original setup, you just modify the installation behavior.
And there are many other advantages of the MSI technology compared to the traditional installation .EXE setups. Just google for MSI technology.
In fact you easily can life with most .exe installations in single machine installation scenarios.
The difference will be more obvious when you have to deploy applications to many, sometimes thousands of users. The installation must run silent, customized AND reliable!
From a technically point of view there is nothing that you can do with traditional .exe setups that can't be done with MSI setups as well.
And if there is something very sophisticated in the installation routine that can't be done directly with MSI tables it still can be done with "custom actions" (little script actions e.g. with VBS or Wise Script, Java, ...).
So I have seen many companies and many packagers repackaging TCM many times to the MSI technology before deploying it. What a waste of time javascript:emoticon(':?')
But MSI is a bit more complicated and sophisticated than traditional setups, or maybe: It’s just different.
So my idea was to provide a MSI setup that basically imitates the original setup behavior.
Understand this as a proof of concept and feel free to use it and improve it (or not).
I definitely appreciate sharing my knowledge and development with Mr. Ghisler (and anyone who is interested in) for free.
My package was done with Wise development tools, so I easily can share the development .wsi and .wse (used for a custom action) files.
Best regards,
Hans
Prior---
2habi
Hello !
• That's is clearly stated in the Help, 2.- c. :
KR
Claude
Clo
Hello !• That's is clearly stated in the Help, 2.- c. :
- So, you might have done this prior……Please contact me if you want for distribute the program with a different installation program, changed files etc.
KRClaude
Clo
#31505 Traducteur Français de T•C French translator Aide en Français Tutoriels Français English Tutorials
@Claude
There is an already long thread about the same issue on the German forum. You might try to translate via Google.
It's OK with Mr. Ghisler that I can can publish the MSI Setup I developed!
@Sam_Zen
To make this clear: MSI does not necessarily mean no interfaces while manual installation! What I've done was just mimic the installation behaviour of the original .exe setup - with all options and interfaces, only slightly different as MSI works a bit different.
One of things with MSI setups is that it's easier to customize installations, in parcticular when running silent setups.
But again, there ARE interfaces while installation.
Regards,
Hans
There is an already long thread about the same issue on the German forum. You might try to translate via Google.
It's OK with Mr. Ghisler that I can can publish the MSI Setup I developed!
@Sam_Zen
To make this clear: MSI does not necessarily mean no interfaces while manual installation! What I've done was just mimic the installation behaviour of the original .exe setup - with all options and interfaces, only slightly different as MSI works a bit different.
One of things with MSI setups is that it's easier to customize installations, in parcticular when running silent setups.
But again, there ARE interfaces while installation.
That's right. But in the end, who cares? Honestly, the result is what counts most, my opinion. What's so bad with Registry Keys?And I'm afraid, since it's called MSI, that it would be heavy registry oriented, and I don't like that either.
Regards,
Hans