site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev@lists.apple.com On Sep 8, 2008, at 5:59 PM, David Watson wrote: test/ - contains my files to install scripts/ - contains my scripts resources/ - contains License.rtf Distribution (an installer-script XML file) Resources, containing my License.rtf test.pkg, containing what I'd expect No, there isn't. No. But you can figure it out using the Flat Package Editor. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.a... I've just started wading into the world of PackageMaker - I've been doing Mac development for a while, but just now started working on packaging. I've been trying to reconcile the Software Delivery Guide with the current reality, since it appears the guide has not been updated for about 2 years. What I've determined is that if I target my packages for 10.4, everything seems to work as I would expect, but when targeted for 10.5, things go a bit off the rails. I understand the different is the new flat package format, which behaves rather differently from bundle-based packages. The PackageMaker GUI seems to be horrendously broken as of version 3.0.2, and I prefer to script my builds, so I've been using the command-line. It appears that if you build a flat package from the command line, it implicitly creates a distribution package, completely with distribution script. I haven't figured out how to convince it to use my Welcome and License files, so I'm wondering if there is some additional magic. Here's my structure: If I run: /Developer/Applications/Utilities/PackageMaker.app/ Contents/MacOS/PackageMaker -v --root test/ --id com.example.testpkg --version 1 -s scripts/ -e resources/ --out test.pkg This produces a bundle-style package, working as I would expect. If I add --target 10.5, however, that's where things go weird. When I run this, it ignores my License.rtf, although I can see it is included in the package. Running pkgutil --expand shows me that the test.pkg actually contains: Is there any way, when targeting 10.5, to have it *not* create a distribution metapackage? This is because FLAT packages can't include Welcome, ReadMe or License files. So as soon as you specify a Welcome file, PackageMaker will build a "metapackage". Also, is there any documentation on the PackageInfo file? Alternatively, is there a way to build a pmdoc that simply references packages that I've built separately? It looks like there should be, in theory, by using "Add Package Reference", but that just seems to be horribly busted. Drag & Drop? I don't remember if it always work, never or just sometimes. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com