March 2014 - Installer-dev - lists.apple.com

Re: Conditionally destination for package
by Matthias Schroeder 18 Mar '14

18 Mar '14

Hi Edward, On 03/18/2014 06:05 PM, Edward Spiegel wrote: Hi, One of the installers that I have to build installs an app plus a folder of supporting files. There are 3 possible destinations for the folder of supporting files and it is easy for me to detect the correct destination by checking for the location of a couple of folders in well-defined places. Since the payload is pretty large (a few hundred megabytes of audio files), I'd like to have only a single instance of the payload in the installer and to be able to have the installer put it in the right place. What I want to do is test for the presence of target folder A and if it is there deliver the payload there and go on to potential targets B and C if A is not present. Any suggestions about the best way to accomplish this? Hope this helps, Matthias Best, Edward _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/matthias.schroder%40c… This email sent to matthias.schroder(a)cern.ch _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com If you don't have any user-selectable options you can just put your payload somewhere in /tmp, and check in a post-install script whether A, B or C exist. Then you do a command line install of the package in /tmp into A, B or C in that same post-install script. But this does not work if the user is supposed to select or deselect part of the payload. Maybe somebody has a nicer solution that allows true interaction with the user.

1 0

Re: Conditionally destination for package
by Matthias Schroeder 18 Mar '14

18 Mar '14

Hi Edward, On 03/18/2014 06:05 PM, Edward Spiegel wrote: Hi, One of the installers that I have to build installs an app plus a folder of supporting files. There are 3 possible destinations for the folder of supporting files and it is easy for me to detect the correct destination by checking for the location of a couple of folders in well-defined places. Since the payload is pretty large (a few hundred megabytes of audio files), I'd like to have only a single instance of the payload in the installer and to be able to have the installer put it in the right place. What I want to do is test for the presence of target folder A and if it is there deliver the payload there and go on to potential targets B and C if A is not present. Any suggestions about the best way to accomplish this? Matthias Best, Edward _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com What are you building your installer with? I just wanted to give a recipe that would work with Packages.app, but then I noticed that you don't mention what you use to build your package.

1 0

Conditionally destination for package
by Edward Spiegel 18 Mar '14

18 Mar '14

_______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Permissions are driving me crazy!
by Don Montalvo 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

_______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Permissions are driving me crazy!
by Per Olofsson 16 Mar '14

16 Mar '14

15 mar 2014 kl. 19:59 skrev Edward Spiegel <lists(a)edwardspiegel.org>: > In the past, we used FileStorm for our installers (which are quite simple) but are switching to Packages so that we can have GateKeeper-compatible installers. Greg and Conor have you covered, but I just wanted to say *thank you* for switching to a standard package. Non-standard installers are a constant PITA when you have to deploy software in an organization. -- Per Olofsson System Administrator, IT-services, University of Gothenburg _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Permissions are driving me crazy!
by Greg Neagle 16 Mar '14

16 Mar '14

On Mar 15, 2014, at 12:46 PM, Conor Schutzman <conor(a)mac.com> wrote: > > I agree with Greg 1000%. > > But if you ABSOLUTELY must install with the owner as the user running the install, the only real solution is to change permissions in a post install script, where you can grab the currently logged in user (aka the "console" user) and use that variable in the chown commands. ...and then be OK with the fact that large organizations will hate your software because it won't install correctly in many automated workflows in which there _isn't_ a console user at the time of install. -Greg > > >>> On Mar 15, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Greg Neagle <greg.neagle(a)disneyanimation.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 15, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Edward Spiegel <lists(a)edwardspiegel.org> wrote: >>> >>> HI all, >>> >>> I am a Packages newbie. In the past, we used FileStorm for our installers (which are quite simple) but are switching to Packages so that we can have GateKeeper-compatible installers. >>> >>> My installer installs a folder "MyApp Folder" into /Applications. The folder contains the app and a couple of folders of resources. The source files and folders all have permissions set so that myuser (the same as the user building the installer is the owner) has read/write permissions, admin group has read/write permissions and everyone has read-only. >> >> Why? Applications should not store user data in /Applications, and therefore should not need write rights to /Applications or any subfolder thereof. >> >>> With FileStorm, an installer like this would end up creating a folder and contents that had the same permissions as the source files/folders with the owner being whoever ran the installer. >>> >>> If I build the installer with require admin permissions off, the install fails (presumably because a non-admin user doesn't have permission to create a folder in /Applications). >> >> Correct. >> >>> If I build the installer with require admin permissions on, if a non-admin user runs the installer there are two problems: >>> 1) the resulting files/folders don't have read/write permission for the person that installed the software >> >> This is expected and normal. You'll notice that the normal owner is root, the group is admin or wheel, and the mode is 755. >> >>> 2) Admin group does not have permissions. So, not even an Admin user has read/write permission for the contents. >> >> Again, expected and normal. >> >>> Note that in Packages, I set the group to admin with all permissions on for the payload. So, I have no idea why Admin group is being stripped. >> >> Almost certainly Packages is applying the recommended permissions. If you select "Overwrite directory permissions" in the project settings you might get the behavior you want, but at some risk. >> >>> The solution may be obvious to people with more experience. I have tried every combination of settings with no luck building an installer that will work for a non-admin user. >> >> Non-admins cannot install to /Applications. This is normal, expected behavior on OS X. Either install to the user's home folder (in ~/Applications), or require admin to install in /Applications. >> >>> Any help would be much appreciated. Just need to know how to start with a source folder and contents that have the owner with read/write, admin group read/write and everyone read and end up with installed files/folders that have the same permissions. >> >> It's not clear why you need this. This is not standard. When the OS is fighting what you are trying to do, there is often a reason... >> You can almost certainly get the behavior you want, but there are reasons the OS doesn't want to help you with this. >> >>> >>> Thank you for your help, >>> >>> Edward >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: >> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/conor%40mac.com >> >> This email sent to conor(a)mac.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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Permissions are driving me crazy!
by Conor Schutzman 15 Mar '14

15 Mar '14

I agree with Greg 1000%. But if you ABSOLUTELY must install with the owner as the user running the install, the only real solution is to change permissions in a post install script, where you can grab the currently logged in user (aka the "console" user) and use that variable in the chown commands. > On Mar 15, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Greg Neagle <greg.neagle(a)disneyanimation.com> wrote: > >> On Mar 15, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Edward Spiegel <lists(a)edwardspiegel.org> wrote: >> >> HI all, >> >> I am a Packages newbie. In the past, we used FileStorm for our installers (which are quite simple) but are switching to Packages so that we can have GateKeeper-compatible installers. >> >> My installer installs a folder "MyApp Folder" into /Applications. The folder contains the app and a couple of folders of resources. The source files and folders all have permissions set so that myuser (the same as the user building the installer is the owner) has read/write permissions, admin group has read/write permissions and everyone has read-only. > > Why? Applications should not store user data in /Applications, and therefore should not need write rights to /Applications or any subfolder thereof. > >> With FileStorm, an installer like this would end up creating a folder and contents that had the same permissions as the source files/folders with the owner being whoever ran the installer. >> >> If I build the installer with require admin permissions off, the install fails (presumably because a non-admin user doesn't have permission to create a folder in /Applications). > > Correct. > >> If I build the installer with require admin permissions on, if a non-admin user runs the installer there are two problems: >> 1) the resulting files/folders don't have read/write permission for the person that installed the software > > This is expected and normal. You'll notice that the normal owner is root, the group is admin or wheel, and the mode is 755. > >> 2) Admin group does not have permissions. So, not even an Admin user has read/write permission for the contents. > > Again, expected and normal. > >> Note that in Packages, I set the group to admin with all permissions on for the payload. So, I have no idea why Admin group is being stripped. > > Almost certainly Packages is applying the recommended permissions. If you select "Overwrite directory permissions" in the project settings you might get the behavior you want, but at some risk. > >> The solution may be obvious to people with more experience. I have tried every combination of settings with no luck building an installer that will work for a non-admin user. > > Non-admins cannot install to /Applications. This is normal, expected behavior on OS X. Either install to the user's home folder (in ~/Applications), or require admin to install in /Applications. > >> Any help would be much appreciated. Just need to know how to start with a source folder and contents that have the owner with read/write, admin group read/write and everyone read and end up with installed files/folders that have the same permissions. > > It's not clear why you need this. This is not standard. When the OS is fighting what you are trying to do, there is often a reason... > You can almost certainly get the behavior you want, but there are reasons the OS doesn't want to help you with this. > >> >> Thank you for your help, >> >> Edward > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/conor%40mac.com > > This email sent to conor(a)mac.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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Permissions are driving me crazy!
by Greg Neagle 15 Mar '14

15 Mar '14

On Mar 15, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Edward Spiegel <lists(a)edwardspiegel.org> wrote: > HI all, > > I am a Packages newbie. In the past, we used FileStorm for our installers (which are quite simple) but are switching to Packages so that we can have GateKeeper-compatible installers. > > My installer installs a folder "MyApp Folder" into /Applications. The folder contains the app and a couple of folders of resources. The source files and folders all have permissions set so that myuser (the same as the user building the installer is the owner) has read/write permissions, admin group has read/write permissions and everyone has read-only. Why? Applications should not store user data in /Applications, and therefore should not need write rights to /Applications or any subfolder thereof. > With FileStorm, an installer like this would end up creating a folder and contents that had the same permissions as the source files/folders with the owner being whoever ran the installer. > > If I build the installer with require admin permissions off, the install fails (presumably because a non-admin user doesn't have permission to create a folder in /Applications). Correct. > If I build the installer with require admin permissions on, if a non-admin user runs the installer there are two problems: > 1) the resulting files/folders don't have read/write permission for the person that installed the software This is expected and normal. You'll notice that the normal owner is root, the group is admin or wheel, and the mode is 755. > 2) Admin group does not have permissions. So, not even an Admin user has read/write permission for the contents. Again, expected and normal. > Note that in Packages, I set the group to admin with all permissions on for the payload. So, I have no idea why Admin group is being stripped. Almost certainly Packages is applying the recommended permissions. If you select "Overwrite directory permissions" in the project settings you might get the behavior you want, but at some risk. > The solution may be obvious to people with more experience. I have tried every combination of settings with no luck building an installer that will work for a non-admin user. Non-admins cannot install to /Applications. This is normal, expected behavior on OS X. Either install to the user's home folder (in ~/Applications), or require admin to install in /Applications. > Any help would be much appreciated. Just need to know how to start with a source folder and contents that have the owner with read/write, admin group read/write and everyone read and end up with installed files/folders that have the same permissions. It's not clear why you need this. This is not standard. When the OS is fighting what you are trying to do, there is often a reason... You can almost certainly get the behavior you want, but there are reasons the OS doesn't want to help you with this. > > Thank you for your help, > > Edward _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Permissions are driving me crazy!
by Edward Spiegel 15 Mar '14

15 Mar '14

_______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0