October 2006 - Installer-dev

Re: failed to create BOM
by Philip Wasson 26 Oct '06

26 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Oct 26, 2006, at 13:54, Handloser, Fred (LightScribe) wrote: what do you see if you issue the command: Thanks for the pointer to lsbom. Here's my build transcript: [build /Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Mac/ Installers/Scripts/Scripts.pmproj => /Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/ Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Built_Installers/IPSScripts.pkg]: [build started 2006-10-26 13:26:06 -0400]: Creating Package Shell Scanning Package Root Scanning Package Root Creating BOM file Error: Could not create BOM file from "/Volumes/Home/pwasson/ Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Mac/Installers/Scripts/InstallItems" to "/Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Built_Installers/ IPSScripts.pkg/Contents/Archive.bom". Completed Install Size KB: 244 Total Size KB: 184 [build finished 2006-10-26 13:26:09 -0400] Can anyone suggest why this might be failing? Philip Wasson Software Engineer MANAGING EDITOR INC. 610 Old York Road, Suite 250 | Jenkintown, PA 19046 T: 215.886.5662 x.260 | F: 215.886.5681 E: pwasson(a)maned.com | AIM: pwasson(a)mac.com http://www.maned.com Philip Wasson Software Engineer MANAGING EDITOR INC. 610 Old York Road, Suite 250 | Jenkintown, PA 19046 T: 215.886.5662 x.260 | F: 215.886.5681 E: pwasson(a)maned.com | AIM: pwasson(a)mac.com http://www.maned.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… lsbom -p- MUGsf <your_bom_file> What I saw, after removing the second dash from the command which I assume was a typo, was the expected info for a subdirectory of my install items directory. I looked at the Install Items directory itself and found that all its contents, which are .scptd script bundles, had had their execute bits turned off. Probably this meant that PackageMaker could not read the contents and that's why it failed. Those flags had been turned off by PackageMaker itself when I used the "Apply Recommendations" button in its "File Permissions..." dialog. So I think that's a bug. rdar://4804961 -----Original Message----- From: installer-dev-bounces+fred.handloser=hp.com(a)lists.apple.com [mailto:installer-dev-bounces +fred.handloser=hp.com(a)lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of Philip D. Wasson Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 10:41 AM To: Installer Dev Subject: failed to create BOM I'm using PackageMaker version 2.1.1 (123) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 on a PPC G4. It says it can't create the BOM file, but doesn't give any indication of why. There IS a BOM file created, but Installer.app says "Open Failed" when I try to open the pkg. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/fred.handloser% 40hp .com This email sent to fred.handloser(a)hp.com This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

RE: failed to create BOM
by Handloser, Fred (LightScribe) 26 Oct '06

26 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Thread-index: Acb5Je2sYK9IzaRNRfGvLT0E73uZUQAAbllw Thread-topic: failed to create BOM what do you see if you issue the command: lsbom -p- MUGsf <your_bom_file> -----Original Message----- From: installer-dev-bounces+fred.handloser=hp.com(a)lists.apple.com [mailto:installer-dev-bounces+fred.handloser=hp.com@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of Philip D. Wasson Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 10:41 AM To: Installer Dev Subject: failed to create BOM Here's my build transcript: [build /Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Mac/ Installers/Scripts/Scripts.pmproj => /Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/ Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Built_Installers/IPSScripts.pkg]: [build started 2006-10-26 13:26:06 -0400]: Creating Package Shell Scanning Package Root Scanning Package Root Creating BOM file Error: Could not create BOM file from "/Volumes/Home/pwasson/ Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Mac/Installers/Scripts/InstallItems" to "/Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Built_Installers/ IPSScripts.pkg/Contents/Archive.bom". Completed Install Size KB: 244 Total Size KB: 184 [build finished 2006-10-26 13:26:09 -0400] I'm using PackageMaker version 2.1.1 (123) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 on a PPC G4. It says it can't create the BOM file, but doesn't give any indication of why. There IS a BOM file created, but Installer.app says "Open Failed" when I try to open the pkg. Can anyone suggest why this might be failing? Philip Wasson Software Engineer MANAGING EDITOR INC. 610 Old York Road, Suite 250 | Jenkintown, PA 19046 T: 215.886.5662 x.260 | F: 215.886.5681 E: pwasson(a)maned.com | AIM: pwasson(a)mac.com http://www.maned.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/fred.handloser%40hp .com This email sent to fred.handloser(a)hp.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

failed to create BOM
by Philip D. Wasson 26 Oct '06

26 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Here's my build transcript: Install Size KB: 244 Total Size KB: 184 [build finished 2006-10-26 13:26:09 -0400] Can anyone suggest why this might be failing? Philip Wasson Software Engineer MANAGING EDITOR INC. 610 Old York Road, Suite 250 | Jenkintown, PA 19046 T: 215.886.5662 x.260 | F: 215.886.5681 E: pwasson(a)maned.com | AIM: pwasson(a)mac.com http://www.maned.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… [build /Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Mac/ Installers/Scripts/Scripts.pmproj => /Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/ Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Built_Installers/IPSScripts.pkg]: [build started 2006-10-26 13:26:06 -0400]: Creating Package Shell Scanning Package Root Scanning Package Root Creating BOM file Error: Could not create BOM file from "/Volumes/Home/pwasson/ Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Mac/Installers/Scripts/InstallItems" to "/Volumes/Home/pwasson/Documents/Projects/cvsRH/HEAD/Built_Installers/ IPSScripts.pkg/Contents/Archive.bom". Completed I'm using PackageMaker version 2.1.1 (123) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 on a PPC G4. It says it can't create the BOM file, but doesn't give any indication of why. There IS a BOM file created, but Installer.app says "Open Failed" when I try to open the pkg. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: MetaPackage, with SubPackages of size 0 bytes
by Peter Bierman 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com -pmb _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… At 7:16 PM -0700 10/24/06, Alex Sheh wrote: Hi All, I've created a MetaPackage using command-line packagemaker, .pmproj files, and a script to manually copy SubPackages into the MetaPackage. The MetaPackage installs fine, except that the SubPackages are listed as 0 bytes in the GUI. I'm not sure what the cause is - does anyone know how I can fix this? It could be one of two things. Either the distribution script in your metapackage doesn't have size information for the pkg-refs, or your packages are performing an "upgrade" because they've been installed previously, and the installer is subtracting the size of the existing packages. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

MetaPackage, with SubPackages of size 0 bytes
by Alex Sheh 25 Oct '06

25 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Thread-index: Acb324oIaboMFw7ZTe+cRb8YiGZuwA== Thread-topic: MetaPackage, with SubPackages of size 0 bytes _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Can "optimization/pre-binding" be bypassed in 10.3.9 ?
by Steven Lobo 24 Oct '06

24 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Thread-index: Acb3o48mzcFWAmOWEdutRgANk6659g== Thread-topic: Can "optimization/pre-binding" be bypassed in 10.3.9 ? User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620 Thanks for confirming. Since I control the launching of packages from my application, I figured that I can workaround this issue in 10.3.9 by launching the next package as soon as the current package being run starts it's prebinding process. My UI progress would thereafter track the progress of the newly launched package while the previously run package would proceed with it's prebinding without any UI support in my application. Launching a package when another one is running might slow down the Mac slightly (not noticeably), but would still maintain a shorter overall install time than with not doing so. I currently monitor the "PHASE" and "STATUS" strings from the installer tool to update my UI. I observed that I do get similar status strings even for the prebinding process for a package and am wondering if this might be a good/safe trigger to pursue the approach I mentioned above. Could you pls. confirm if this is a safe method to rely on ? I would not like to go down this path if there are known issues/shortcomings with this approach. Steven On 10/24/06 11:21 AM, "Peter Bierman" <bierman(a)apple.com> wrote: > Your analysis is correct. The additional time needed in 10.3.x is due > to update_prebinding. Unfortunately, there is no way to skip or > coalesce this step in 10.3.x. Improving this was one of the major > features of the 10.4 installer. > > -pmb > > > At 9:42 AM -0700 10/24/06, Steven Lobo wrote: >> Hi: >> >> I have a software updater application that downloads Packagemaker packages >> from a server and launches these one after the other using the commandline >> "installer" tool. I asynchronously monitor the status of the package >> installation in my application and update a progress bar in the UI to >> indicate install status. This application has to work in 10.3.9 and 10.4.8. >> >> Issue: >> ====== >> I am observing that the install time in 10.3.9 for my updater application is >> significantly longer than than the time it takes for the same operation to >> occur with the same packages in 10.4.x. On further investigation, I >> discovered that the additional time is being taken by the optimization >> process (I guess pre-binding). It appears that this process is occurring for >> each package run by the "installer" tool. This does not occur in 10.4.x and >> later. In scenarios where there are a bunch of packages to run, the >> additional time taken for this process is noticeably significant. Sometimes, >> the optimization process takes more time to execute than the install process >> itself! This time is unacceptable in 10.3.9 when the user has to download >> and install the whole software suite (I also support reinstall from the >> updater) that consists of at least 15-20 packages. >> >> Is this a known issue/observation ? What I would like to do is bypass having >> each package installation execute this optimization process. I can perform >> this separately from my code after all packages are installed. Are there any >> realistic ways to resolve/workaround this issue ? >> >> Steven ----------------------------------------------- Robosoft Technologies - Come home to Technology _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Can "optimization/pre-binding" be bypassed in 10.3.9 ?
by Peter Bierman 24 Oct '06

24 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com -pmb Hi: I have a software updater application that downloads Packagemaker packages from a server and launches these one after the other using the commandline "installer" tool. I asynchronously monitor the status of the package installation in my application and update a progress bar in the UI to indicate install status. This application has to work in 10.3.9 and 10.4.8. Issue: ====== I am observing that the install time in 10.3.9 for my updater application is significantly longer than than the time it takes for the same operation to occur with the same packages in 10.4.x. On further investigation, I discovered that the additional time is being taken by the optimization process (I guess pre-binding). It appears that this process is occurring for each package run by the "installer" tool. This does not occur in 10.4.x and later. In scenarios where there are a bunch of packages to run, the additional time taken for this process is noticeably significant. Sometimes, the optimization process takes more time to execute than the install process itself! This time is unacceptable in 10.3.9 when the user has to download and install the whole software suite (I also support reinstall from the updater) that consists of at least 15-20 packages. Is this a known issue/observation ? What I would like to do is bypass having each package installation execute this optimization process. I can perform this separately from my code after all packages are installed. Are there any realistic ways to resolve/workaround this issue ? _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… Your analysis is correct. The additional time needed in 10.3.x is due to update_prebinding. Unfortunately, there is no way to skip or coalesce this step in 10.3.x. Improving this was one of the major features of the 10.4 installer. At 9:42 AM -0700 10/24/06, Steven Lobo wrote: Steven This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Can "optimization/pre-binding" be bypassed for package execution in 10.3.9 ?
by Steven Lobo 24 Oct '06

24 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Thread-index: Acb3i3J9sM6xkWN+EdutKQANk6659g== Thread-topic: Can "optimization/pre-binding" be bypassed for package execution in 10.3.9 ? User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620 Hi: I have a software updater application that downloads Packagemaker packages from a server and launches these one after the other using the commandline "installer" tool. I asynchronously monitor the status of the package installation in my application and update a progress bar in the UI to indicate install status. This application has to work in 10.3.9 and 10.4.8. Issue: ====== I am observing that the install time in 10.3.9 for my updater application is significantly longer than than the time it takes for the same operation to occur with the same packages in 10.4.x. On further investigation, I discovered that the additional time is being taken by the optimization process (I guess pre-binding). It appears that this process is occurring for each package run by the "installer" tool. This does not occur in 10.4.x and later. In scenarios where there are a bunch of packages to run, the additional time taken for this process is noticeably significant. Sometimes, the optimization process takes more time to execute than the install process itself! This time is unacceptable in 10.3.9 when the user has to download and install the whole software suite (I also support reinstall from the updater) that consists of at least 15-20 packages. Is this a known issue/observation ? What I would like to do is bypass having each package installation execute this optimization process. I can perform this separately from my code after all packages are installed. Are there any realistic ways to resolve/workaround this issue ? Steven ----------------------------------------------- Robosoft Technologies - Come home to Technology _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Command line build of a distribution
by Luke Bellandi 23 Oct '06

23 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Hi Ryan, On Oct 22, 2006, at 8:50 PM, Ryan Cuprak wrote: At compile time I also get: "The package was completed with the following non-fatal errors: Missing identifier field for "WebPortal.pkg". Missing identifier field for "StartupItems.pkg". Missing identifier field for "Database.pkg". Missing size field for "WebPortal.pkg". Missing size field for "StartupItems.pkg". Missing size field for "Database.pkg"." No, Apple only makes the binary available to developers. To help us help you debug your problem, a few questions: What version of PackageMaker are you running? Can you please send us a copy of your .pmproj file? - Luke Thanks, -Ryan On Oct 20, 2006, at 7:47 AM, John McAleely wrote: Change: % /Developer/Tools/packagemaker -build -proj Untitled.pmproj -p Untitled.mpkg to: and your project should build. -------- Hello, I am trying to do a command line build of a distribution: packagemaker -build -proj "/Users/rcuprak/Projects/Test/ Distribution.pmproj" -p "./build/Distribution.pkg" -v to which I get: packagemaker[423] *** Uncaught exception: <NSInvalidArgumentException> *** -[NSPlaceholderMutableString initWithString:]: nil argument Does this work? My distribution builds just fine if I kick it off from the gui. Thanks, -Ryan _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/luke%40apple.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… Hello, Thanks, that indeed did get it to compile. However, when I go to run the distribution I am getting: Oct 22 23:39:33 ryan-cupraks-computer : Failed to locate package at path /Users/rcuprak/Projects/Installers/Mac/build/Test.pkg/Contents/ Packages/(null) Is the source code available for this utility? Another list contributer suggested switching from the command line alias to fix this problem. I've not tried it yet: --------- I've seen the same problem and filed a bug a while back (#4652659). The problem occurs only when using the symlink at /Developer/Tools/packagemaker to invoke the build. % /Developer/Applications/Utilities/PackageMaker.app/Contents/MacOS/ PackageMaker -build -proj Untitled.pmproj -p Untitled.mpkg This email sent to luke(a)apple.com This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Admin Authorization vs non-admin accounts
by Luke Bellandi 23 Oct '06

23 Oct '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Hi Mark, On Oct 22, 2006, at 10:47 AM, Mark Krenek wrote: The dilemma this introduces for non-admin accounts is two-fold: Thanks, Luke Mark Krenek Development Manager Aspyr Media _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/luke%40apple.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… I am writing an installer that patches an existing game of ours. Our software was originally drag-installed by the user. I don't know if the user was an admin account or not. I don't know where they installed the software. What that means is that they could have installed it in a location requiring admin privileges, like / Applications. Therefore, it seems that I must set my package up to require Admin Authorization. Otherwise it will fail if the software is currently installed in an admin location and the installer is being run by a non-admin user. (1) If a non-admin user originally installed the software in a non- admin location, like his home folder, then our installer still asks him to type in an admin password. The user didn't need an admin password to drag-install the original game, but now they do for the patch! (2) The installer sets the ownership of all the files installed by the patch to the admin account, not the user account. That means that the files that were part of the original drag-install have owner set to the non-admin user but new files installed by the patch have the owner set to the admin account. Is there any way around this? To recap, this is only a problem when the installer package is set up to require Admin Authorization. This was done because there's a chance the original installation occurred in an admin location. One way to solve this problem using the tools at hand is to make a distribution that has 2 choices: One with a package that requires admin authorization and one that doesn't. You can use locator & other Javascript logic to determine the ownership of the directory in which the game was drag-installed, and then set up your choices to install the appropriate package. The downsides are that this will only work for 10.4 and later, and that you will ship twice the bits, since it will require 2 copies of the update package to be shipped. Hopefully it's a small patch. This is a case the Installer team should investigate going forward. Can you please file an enhancement request for better support of cases like this? (http://bugreporter.apple.com) This email sent to luke(a)apple.com This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0