 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|||
|
| Short description |
| MUI Replacement for the Commodore-Installer |
| Proposed name |
| MUInstaller |
| Full description |
| The Commodore installer is a really good program and it makes his job very well. BTW the GUI of the installer is, in my opinion, really horrible... (for example all the requester are in fixed size: think about the TERRIBLE destination drawer requester!) A MUI version of the installer would be really great, but it's a hard work , because you have to write a parser of the (not too easy) 'installer language'. I could design the GUI for it, but I'm not enough good in developing to develop the parser... anyone wants to help me ? |
| Comments |
|
Thanx a lot for soooo much suggestions. I am about to write a fully compatible, but enhanced installer with mui (in this version). since the project comes to the end now i do need lots of testers to discover the errors i shurely made :) please find latest beta-versions at: http://www.inf.tu-dresden.de/~jt18 please send me useful bugreports. this beta-version sends debug- output via KPrintF and please (!) send this output along with your bugreport (use Sushi or related tools). thanx a lot, jens 11/06/1998 Jens Trõger I am wondering what is actually happening with this project. It has been registered for quite some time (almost 7 months) but not one single entry in the development history is made. How come? Did the developer just forget about it? Or, if you don't have time, developer, you could concider dropping the project, so someone else can pick it up. (NOTE FROM WEBMASTER: this is the kind of reactions NATW really needs, I don't have time to mail each developer to check how the development is progressing. I count on you, the users, to help me on this one.) 14/01/1998 Eelke Blok Almost all I wanted to say is already said, except this: 1. Better error handling: Don't abort the installation completely if an error occurs. 2. Automatic installation progress display. 3. Predefined rules for opening requesters to the three kinds of users. E.g. selecting home directory for advanceds and experts, confirming file copying only for experts and so on. 4. For script writing programs: Sum the size of all files to be installed and insert a check into the script if there is enough space for installation. 09/10/1997 Henning Thielemann I would like to have a future version of the Installer made so that one can drop icons into the filerequester, which is very useful when selecting destination drawer. The GUI does not have to be MUI, but it wouldn't hurt. 12/09/1997 Allan Odgaard In my opinion, the Commodore one is a nice initiative, but is not nearly perfect. I myself was planning to write just the proposed program, but then saw the project was already picked up. The MUI-interface is just one of the improvements that could be made. As suggested, a de-installation system is something to be considered. Something else, which I haven't seen here, is the addition of a "Back" button, as the Win95 installer has. I found myself making a mistake in an installation-procedure and having to cancel the installation to correct my mistake. Something that should be kept in mind with this project is that the scripting language should be 100% compatible to the one the original Installer uses. No additions, no "blanks" for commands that aren't used a lot. When additions are introduced to the standard, it may be compatible now, but when AI decides the Installer has to be improved by themselves and introduce other additions to the standard, this Installer won't be compatible anymore. 10/09/1997 Eelke Blok Related: I have just started a discussion on the usefulness of using AREXX as the scripting language in Installer instead or along with the current script-language. The discussion is held in comp.sys.amiga.programmer, but is also available at http://www.crusaders.no/Amiga/installer/ Making a MUI Installer to be distributed with MUI is OK, as long as NO NEW FEATURES are added, and no new bugs are introduced. Still, it can only be used by a subset of the users, and does not add any funtionality. Surely the authors time can be used on better things. Most importantly: The Installer is a key application for the OS. ANY implementation of ANY installer should be coordinated with AI (or ICOA, I'm a bit confused about who runs the show now). 03/09/1997 donV I'd like to see the MUI-installer as compatible with the normal installer as possible. Just with less bugs, and with a forced logging system, which could provide data to a uninstall program. Additionally a visual-install creator would be lovely. On the issue of not having MUI on the standard system, I imagine a solution is to ask SASG to put the MUI installer into the MUI package. 24/07/1997 Gustav Kjeldsen I want to back up what Luciano and Martti said. What is really needed is some sort of de-installer that will allow less capable users to remove programs and associated libraries, etc. But it needs to be intelligent enough to know if another program requires the file (like a library) or just to give the option of not removing it (like InstallShield(TM)). This would also remove some headaches for more advanced users too... 18/07/1997 Matthew Suter I am so incredibly satisfied with the Amiga Installer. The point about the file requester has certain merit, though. I believe that existing developers who pine for something in MUI should consider launching their external MUI stuff from within the Installer. What I really hope people aren't asking for is an easier way to write an installation. The only people who should be writing an installation are those who know what files belong in it, namely the programmers of the product itself. And if those people aren't interested in working with LISP, then, well, what kind of software are they writing in the language they like? If anyone wants a LISP programming book, let me know. There are some advantages to using the right language. 16/07/1997 Joe Solinsky A waste of time and will probably result in two flavors of the Installer language. Besides, MUI-Installer will not work on a vanilla Amiga as does the original version. As far as I am concerned, any installation utility should perform the operation with minimal resource requirements. InstallShield(TM) is pretty, but not even nearly as powerful and productive as Installer. I agree with Luciano about the need to have an un-installer. 14/07/1997 Martti Arttu Kärpinlehto Reinventing the wheel, and for a program just as the installer. What could be useful, is an un-installer, or an installer that can reverse the installing steps as needed. 12/07/1997 Luciano Montanaro To make a MUI version of the installer, would in IMO be a waste of time, just because the GUI sucks a little bit. The installer program has a lot of commands, and would take up precious time. Programmers should concentrate on developing new and unique software, instead of rewriting a great program just to get MUI'ized... 04/06/1997 20:58 Fini Alring |