May 2008 - Installer-dev - lists.apple.com

Re: Forcing order of packages in a metapackage
by Bryan S. Lee 30 May '08

30 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Thread-index: AcjBoSWFBd5rBh9LTsCyctEwemnP8wAXFb/Q Thread-topic: Forcing order of packages in a metapackage User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.10.0.080409 _______________________________________________ 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: incorrect packagemaker group
by Dominic Feira 29 May '08

29 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com This doesn't appear to documented anywhere that I've looked. Dominic Feira / Code Monkey / Ambrosia Software, Inc. -- http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com On May 29, 2008, at 4:53 PM, Stéphane Sudre wrote: Hello, I'm creating a package to install a component at: /Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/Components/MyComponent.component o Is it the ownership in the pax/bom or after installation? _______________________________________________ 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.… It was incorrect in both locations. I did manage to figure out what was wrong. I already had the component installed "incorrectly". During development I lazily just drag the component into /Library/ Audio/Plug-Ins. It turns out that packagemaker's "apply recommendations" simply copies permissions for any paths that it can match already on the system. Since it was able to match "MyComponent.component" it use the user/ group that already existed on the system. Once I removed the plug-in and then created the installer again everything was fine. On May 29, 2008, at 2:13 AM, Dominic Feira wrote: I have setup a pmdoc and run it via the command-line. The installer runs fine except that the permissions on the component are incorrect. Here is a dump of the ownership for the the resulting package. Library - root admin Audio - root admin Plug-Ins - root admin Components - root 501 (should be root admin) MyComponent.component - root 501 (should be root admin) This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: incorrect packagemaker group
by Stéphane Sudre 29 May '08

29 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Hello, I'm creating a package to install a component at: /Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/Components/MyComponent.component o Is it the ownership in the pax/bom or after installation? _______________________________________________ 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.… On May 29, 2008, at 2:13 AM, Dominic Feira wrote: I have setup a pmdoc and run it via the command-line. The installer runs fine except that the permissions on the component are incorrect. Here is a dump of the ownership for the the resulting package. Library - root admin Audio - root admin Plug-Ins - root admin Components - root 501 (should be root admin) MyComponent.component - root 501 (should be root admin) This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Forcing order of packages in a metapackage
by Taylor Armstrong 29 May '08

29 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) Testing something the other day and realized some odd behavior. Remove Acrobat 6 Pro Remove Acrobat 7 Reader Remove Acrobat 7 Pro Remove Acrobat 8 Reader Install Acrobat 8 Pro. thanks, Taylor -- _______________________________________________ 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.… Building a package for Acrobat 8 Pro. I have the Acrobat 8 install .pkg built, and it seems to work well. My next task was to un-install previous versions of Acrobat reader and Acrobat pro. Using InstallEase, I created an un-install .pkg for each version I need to remove. Tested each, all appears well. I then built a metapackage using Iceberg, with the packages in the following order: I'm pushing the package out via ARD, but noticed somthing when testing it... the packages are not always deployed in that order. In at least a couple of cases, I've seen it run one or two "remove" packages, install Acrobat 8 Pro, and then remove a couple of others. I'm just worried about a "remove" package accidentally deleting some resource that may be used by 8 Pro. For now, I'm avoiding the situation by separating out the "remove" pacakges, running them first, and then only running the Install package by itself after confirming the earlier package, but is there a good, reliable way to set the order and create dependencies that the prior package completed successfully? I'm a relative newbie to packaging, but am definitely trying to make sure I learn the "right way" before I get into too many bad habits. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W. Taylor Armstrong Taylor.Armstrong(a)noaa.gov National Ocean Service IT Support 1305 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 Phone (301) 713-2644 http://nos.noaa.gov/ IT Support Request Email: nos.helpdesk(a)noaa.gov ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

incorrect packagemaker group
by Dominic Feira 29 May '08

29 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Hello, I'm creating a package to install a component at: /Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/Components/MyComponent.component The component to be installed is at: staging/Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/Components/MyComponent.component The package is setup like: Install: staging/ Destination: / packagemaker --doc Installer.pmdoc --target 10.4 -o MyComponent.pkg Dominic Feira / Code Monkey / Ambrosia Software, Inc. -- http://www.AmbrosiaSW.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 have setup a pmdoc and run it via the command-line. The installer runs fine except that the permissions on the component are incorrect. Here is a dump of the ownership for the the resulting package. Library - root admin Audio - root admin Plug-Ins - root admin Components - root 501 (should be root admin) MyComponent.component - root 501 (should be root admin) Now for the bizarre part. It works fine on my co-workers machine. We haven't been able to figure out what could be different between our setups that could cause this. Does any body have any ideas? This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Symbolic Links
by henri 28 May '08

28 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Hi, I am running PackageMaker 3.0.1 on Mac OS 10.5.2. I believe this issue is related to two possible situations. Thanks. _______________________________________________ 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 have noticed that sometimes when building a package with this version of Package Maker, which has a script directory specified, an error meassage about coping scripts will be displayed. (1) If a symbolic link points to a file or directory which is not found. (2) If a symbolic link points to a file which is referenced by ../../ file_name ( this is not a problem if we reference a folder rather than a file) If this is an issue which other people have seen. Then would you let me know so I am able to report this as a bug? If there is a reason for not copying such links and displaying this error, would someone kindly explain the logic behind this design decision. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: odd upgrade behaviour on 10.5
by henri 28 May '08

28 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com There are numerous bugs in PackageMaker 3.0.1 with this feature. It's better to forget about it until the bugs are fixed. _______________________________________________ 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.… Thanks very much for the information. Looking forward to the new version. > Dear Dev List Readers, > > Has anyone had any success using PackageMaker 3.0.1 to create a > distributed package which includes running a script as a requirement? > > When I add a requirement and specify the script (which will check > the requirements), using the browse button everything is fine until > the package is taken to another machine or the the source for this > script is moved. When the script is not found the installation > check fails because the script can not be found from the absolute > path which is used to locate the script. > > I would have guessed that using the browse button would mean that > PackageMaker would find this script and bundle it within the built > package. However, this does not appear to be the case. > > I am guessing there is some trick to getting this script to be > copied into the package and also to referencing this script without > using the browse function. > > I am quite sure it is quite simple, once I know how to do it. > Any help in understanding what I am missing would be welcomed. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: odd upgrade behaviour on 10.5
by Stéphane Sudre 28 May '08

28 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Dear Dev List Readers, I am quite sure it is quite simple, once I know how to do it. Any help in understanding what I am missing would be welcomed. _______________________________________________ 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.… On May 28, 2008, at 5:17 AM, henri wrote: Has anyone had any success using PackageMaker 3.0.1 to create a distributed package which includes running a script as a requirement? When I add a requirement and specify the script (which will check the requirements), using the browse button everything is fine until the package is taken to another machine or the the source for this script is moved. When the script is not found the installation check fails because the script can not be found from the absolute path which is used to locate the script. I would have guessed that using the browse button would mean that PackageMaker would find this script and bundle it within the built package. However, this does not appear to be the case. I am guessing there is some trick to getting this script to be copied into the package and also to referencing this script without using the browse function. There are numerous bugs in PackageMaker 3.0.1 with this feature. It's better to forget about it until the bugs are fixed. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: odd upgrade behaviour on 10.5
by henri 28 May '08

28 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Dear Dev List Readers, I am quite sure it is quite simple, once I know how to do it. Any help in understanding what I am missing would be welcomed. Thanks _______________________________________________ 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.… Has anyone had any success using PackageMaker 3.0.1 to create a distributed package which includes running a script as a requirement? When I add a requirement and specify the script (which will check the requirements), using the browse button everything is fine until the package is taken to another machine or the the source for this script is moved. When the script is not found the installation check fails because the script can not be found from the absolute path which is used to locate the script. I would have guessed that using the browse button would mean that PackageMaker would find this script and bundle it within the built package. However, this does not appear to be the case. I am guessing there is some trick to getting this script to be copied into the package and also to referencing this script without using the browse function. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

odd upgrade behaviour on 10.5
by Lisa Weimer 26 May '08

26 May '08

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Thread-index: Aci+jJ7KEw/I7dDnS9uuikoVU3ZvEwA7gqNA Thread-topic: odd upgrade behaviour on 10.5 Hi everyone! I have two packages that are displaying odd behaviour when determining if to upgrade. It seems to work fine in tiger (10.4) but not in leopard (10.5). (I don't want any downgrading, and have made sure that option is set to No). My problem in a nutshell: When the older version of my software installed over top of the newer version of my software, the older version overwrites the newer version. Here is my situation: Metapackage-A (10.0.58.0) Package-Z: version 10.0.58.0 (older version) Package-Y: version 1.0.1.0 Metapackage-B (1.2.111.0) Package-Z: version 10.0.60.0 (newer version) Package-X: version 1.2.111.0 The packages were built on 10.4 (10.4.11). Metapackage A was created with iceberg, Metapackage B was created with package maker except for the Package-Z component, which was created with iceberg. On 10.5, no matter which order I install the metapackages, Package-Z always overwrites itself. It fails to see if there is a newer version and do nothing. However if I install just package-Z-10.0.58.0 over Package-Z-10.0.60.0, then the installer correctly identifies that there is a newer on package on the system and doesn't try to upgrade package-Z. Everything works correctly in 10.4. (no old packages clobbering newer ones.) The version is 4 digits and is set in the CFBundleShortVersionString in the info.plist for all packages and metapackages. The packages are not using the versions.plist (or bundleVersions.plist ) Questions: 1) Has anyone else seen this behaviour before? 2) Does anyone have ideas why this could be happening? 3) Should I be using versions.plist? 4) I started trying to create the packages on 10.5, but from the documentation and from my first experiments packagemaker doesn't seem to be using versions.plist or bundleVersions.plist anymore. Is it really only determining upgrade behaviour from the package short version number as well as the identifier? Has the 10.4 way, the 5-tuple consisting of cfbundleshortversion, buildversion, and sourceversion been dropped? 5) Should I be using versions.plist in leopard installs? If anyone has ideas I would appreciate hearing them, I am very stuck atm. Thanks, Lisa _______________________________________________ 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