site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev@lists.apple.com The documentation is lacking a bunch of '.' to end sentences. Thanks for the note, I'll pass it on. Fixed exactly 2345 bugs? ;-) I'm not sure where you mean for this... -pmb _______________________________________________ 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... At 8:16 AM +0200 4/30/05, Stéphane Sudre wrote: * It looks like that since Apple added some HD movies to the QuickTime Trailers, they are also trying to reduce the size of other parts of their web site (or may the . key is broken on someone's keyboard): Ex: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/SoftwareD... CFBundleIdentifier requireddata type: stringdefault value: noneexample: "com.mycompany.mygreatapplication"A unique identifier string for the bundle. It should be in the form of a Java-style package name. For more information, see "Property List Key Reference" in Runtime Configuration. * I don't understand when and why the IFMajorVersion and IFMinorVersion keys are not used anymore. This is becoming a bit messy: In the 10.1 format, the Version field of the .info was just there to take some real estate apparently. In the 10.2 format on 10.2, it was still not used AFAIK and the IFMajorVersion and IFMinorVersion were introduced. Additionally, a package_version file was stealthily introduced later. And now, these flags are not used anymore as I suspect this is the new version field which is to be used. What was wrong with the IFMajorVersion and IFMinorVersion keys? Is there a version mechanism that is working from 10.0 to 10.4? The version number situation is muddled indeed. Suffice it to say that there's an important package somewhere out there necessitating each and every oddity. Each time we "finalize" a versioning mechanism, someone abuses it in a way that requires us to maintain the oddities. * It's somehow funny to spend time adding a warning to state that $2, $3 and $4 are not to be trusted in InstallationCheck and one line after to define $RECEIPT_PATH which is probably not going to be part of InstallationCheck for obvious reason. Going forward, we expect most installer packages to use distribution scripts, which simplifies VolumeCheck and InstallationCheck significantly. * "Fixed a number of bugs". Could it be possible to detail this a bit more. Without documenting every single change, we've tried to document the things developers will be most affected by. Notable undocumented changes include the substantial performance improvements we've made, as well as trivial things like spelling or aesthetic changes. Why is there a link to the release note, in the cell after this one and not in this one? This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com