cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
redbox
Level 4

Are IS2008 Projects formats same for XP and Vista?

Our source control mechanism doesn't support Vista. So, I develop/debug on Windows Vista and checkin/build on Windows XP. I recently found that our product built from build machine behaviors differently than the one built from my vista machines.

Does anyone know if IS2008 xp and IS2008 vista share identical project formats?
Labels (1)
0 Kudos
8 Replies
Spinky106
Level 5

i don't know

But i develop my setup on XP, and install on XP and Vista
Just some tunning for the setup is ok in both OS
0 Kudos
Not applicable

The formats for all versions to-date of InstallShield are platform agnostic, so that should be no concern at all 🙂
0 Kudos
redbox
Level 4

Finally I decide to compare the two MSI packages built on Vista and XP side by side using Orca (which is not fun).

I built the two kits using exactly same project and source images. Our target machine is Vista.

I found that at least their File Tables and Directory Tables are different. The MSI package built on Vista have an 8.3 equivalent name prefixed to some files and directories.

--------------
Directory Table: (More than one directories are different.)
- built on Vista:
Directory Directory_Parent DefaultDir
ALLUSERPROFILE TARGETDIR .:ALLUSER~1|All Users
...
- built on XP:
Directory Directory_Parent DefaultDir
ALLUSERPROFILE TARGETDIR .:All Users
...
--------------
File Table (More than one file are different.)
- built on Vista:
File Component FileName
MyProduct.dll MyProduct.dll MYPROD~1.DLL|MyProduct.dll
...
- built on XP:
File Component FileName
MyProduct.dll MyProduct.dll MyProduct.dll
...
--------------

My tests show the Vista kit installs correctly while the XP kit SILENTLY skips a deferred execution in system context (calling setupapi to install a driver).

Can somebody explain if the differences above could possibly cause some problems?

And, is there a way that I can force the InstallShield project to prefix 8.3 names File Table Entries and Directories (like the way on Vista)?
Thanks!!!
0 Kudos
Not applicable

The best explination for that behavior, assuming all other things being equal, is that you've disabled 8.3 file name generation on the XP machine.

More information can be found here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/121007
0 Kudos
redbox
Level 4

Thanks for the hint! I tried both disable/enable and there was no effect to the File/Directory tables.

From Orca, the binary table Name entries are identical. To compare the binary Data entries, I converted the msi packages into xml files. The Data entries are different. I'm not sure the differences were introduced because of errors or just the way they should be (since their package code and etc. are different.) I exported the Binary Table of good kit (built from Vista) and imported it into the bad kit (built from XP). The problem I had with XP kit was gone!

So, seems like the InstallShield builds the binary table in a different way than it does on Vista and screwed up the binary table. The specific item in the binary table I'm concerned about is the ISSetup.dll. The InstallScript custom action that was skpped in XP kit install depends on that file. Not sure how can I work around this issue.

bryanwolf wrote:
The best explination for that behavior, assuming all other things being equal, is that you've disabled 8.3 file name generation on the XP machine.

More information can be found here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/121007
0 Kudos
Not applicable

If short file names are not generated then some setting at some point must have disabled its generation (or it was enabled by force on the vista machine). The project file, if identical, cannot be the cause.

However, you may want to validate that you've installed the same updates on the Standalone Build as on the regular IDE's machine. Specifically, this hotfix is quite relevant:
http://knowledge.macrovision.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?cmd=displayKC&docType=kc&externalId=Q113652&sliceId=1&docTypeID=DT_HOTFIX_1_1&dialogID=7516708&stateId=0 0 7514520

I don't think the platform should have any bearing on the data and information built unless you were launching our build without administrative privileges.
0 Kudos
redbox
Level 4

I did quite a few tests with/without the hotfix on XP and Vista machines. It's interesting that only my XP machine requires the hotfix while my vista machine doesn't. Anyway, it fixes my problem!!! Thank you very much!

bryanwolf wrote:
If short file names are not generated then some setting at some point must have disabled its generation (or it was enabled by force on the vista machine). The project file, if identical, cannot be the cause.

However, you may want to validate that you've installed the same updates on the Standalone Build as on the regular IDE's machine. Specifically, this hotfix is quite relevant:
http://knowledge.macrovision.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?cmd=displayKC&docType=kc&externalId=Q113652&sliceId=1&docTypeID=DT_HOTFIX_1_1&dialogID=7516708&stateId=0 0 7514520

I don't think the platform should have any bearing on the data and information built unless you were launching our build without administrative privileges.
0 Kudos
redbox
Level 4

Well, it seems that the hotfix doesn't fix the issue. Interestingly, the problem has something to do with the SAB files' permissions.

For the IS2008 SAB on my local machine, the hotfix works that our kit installs correctly on Vista.
For the IS2008 SAB on my machine under Source Control, the hotfix doesn't work that it skips an InstallScript Custom Action function.

I copied both of the SABs to a temp directory. Same thing, the copy of source-controled SAB built bad kit while the copy of local SAB built good kit.

I removed the read-only attribute from all files of the source-controled SAB, then it can build good kit.

Has anyone got same problem?
0 Kudos