Letter page size in Writer sidebar

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
54 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Pedro Lino-3
Hi Peter, all

> On February 23, 2020 1:01 PM Peter Kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>  
> We are discussing from time to time, that it might be worth to remove the packaging to the exe completely.
>
> To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could not doubleclick msi files.
> But Microsoft had fixed this for quite some time and there is no real reason to keep the exe packaging.
>
> So any objections?

None at all!

This would solve the confusing message on the installer, the messy temporary folder on desktop and the msi files are more secure than exe files, plus it would require signing only one less binary per language (as Andrea mentioned)

If voting is needed, +1

Kind regards,
Pedro

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Matthias Seidel
In reply to this post by Andrea Pescetti-2
Hi Andrea,

Am 23.02.20 um 22:59 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:

> Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could
>> not doubleclick msi files.
>> But Microsoft had fixed this for quite some time and there is no real
>> reason to keep the exe packaging.
>> So any objections?
>
> No objections at all on my side, provided we continue to offer the
> same user experience to Windows users who start the installation.
>
> As discussed at FOSDEM, this has the additional advantage that, if one
> wants to sign binaries and installation files, there is one less file
> to sign.
That said, I am the only one from our project with access to the Code
Signing Service (Jims account is still pending).
But I see that you have an inactive account. Would you still be interested?

Regards,

   Matthias

> Of course, as usual someone has to do the work and time is scarce...
>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Brian Barker-2
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
At 14:01 23/02/2020 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>We are discussing from time to time, that it might be worth to
>remove the packaging to the exe completely.
>
>To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could
>not doubleclick msi files. But Microsoft had fixed this for quite
>some time and there is no real reason to keep the exe packaging.
>
>So any objections?

I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the .msi file is a
database, required just as much during removal of any product as
during installation. My impression is that products such as Microsoft
Office quietly salt away a copy of the .msi file (or as much as is
needed) and Windows uses this when the product is removed. Failing
that, Windows remembers where the .msi file was during installation
and seeks it out, asking for it if necessary. And all this applies
when removal is effected by installing a later version, doesn't it?

Now the user may have thought (or even been told) that, once the
product is installed, the downloaded files are no longer needed and
may have deleted them. This used to result in a steady stream of
requests to the Users list, asking how the new version can be
installed when the process stalls at this point. Indeed, as recently
as ten days ago, a user trying to install a current version reported
to the Users list "Every time I try I get a message to insert the
Open Office.org 3.2 disk". He must have installed the older version
from a CD - which he may well no longer have.

Will distributing .msi files result in the same problem to occur
again? Or is OpenOffice now prepared similarly to salt away the
necessary parts of the installation database? If not, what was (and
is) the cause of the problem, please?

Brian Barker  


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Peter Kovacs-3
I m not an expert but maybe the installer on a bought OpenOffice 3.2 CD from 3rd party distributors is the cause for this.

I think this is a different, unrelated issue towards the exe file or the translation.
I am not sure if we can tweak our installer to be able to handle these cases.


Am 24. Februar 2020 05:56:13 MEZ schrieb Brian Barker <[hidden email]>:

>At 14:01 23/02/2020 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>We are discussing from time to time, that it might be worth to
>>remove the packaging to the exe completely.
>>
>>To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could
>>not doubleclick msi files. But Microsoft had fixed this for quite
>>some time and there is no real reason to keep the exe packaging.
>>
>>So any objections?
>
>I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the .msi file is a
>database, required just as much during removal of any product as
>during installation. My impression is that products such as Microsoft
>Office quietly salt away a copy of the .msi file (or as much as is
>needed) and Windows uses this when the product is removed. Failing
>that, Windows remembers where the .msi file was during installation
>and seeks it out, asking for it if necessary. And all this applies
>when removal is effected by installing a later version, doesn't it?
>
>Now the user may have thought (or even been told) that, once the
>product is installed, the downloaded files are no longer needed and
>may have deleted them. This used to result in a steady stream of
>requests to the Users list, asking how the new version can be
>installed when the process stalls at this point. Indeed, as recently
>as ten days ago, a user trying to install a current version reported
>to the Users list "Every time I try I get a message to insert the
>Open Office.org 3.2 disk". He must have installed the older version
>from a CD - which he may well no longer have.
>
>Will distributing .msi files result in the same problem to occur
>again? Or is OpenOffice now prepared similarly to salt away the
>necessary parts of the installation database? If not, what was (and
>is) the cause of the problem, please?
>
>Brian Barker  
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Andrea Pescetti-2
In reply to this post by Matthias Seidel
Matthias Seidel wrote:
> That said, I am the only one from our project with access to the Code
> Signing Service (Jims account is still pending).
> But I see that you have an inactive account. Would you still be interested?

Honestly I'm not interested, as Windows is not definitely the platform I
am most familiar with.

My account was created back at the time because they were creating one
account per project and assigning it to the Chair (who happened to be me
at the time).

Regards,
   Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Matthias Seidel
Hi Andrea,

Am 24.02.20 um 18:26 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> That said, I am the only one from our project with access to the Code
>> Signing Service (Jims account is still pending).
>> But I see that you have an inactive account. Would you still be
>> interested?
>
> Honestly I'm not interested, as Windows is not definitely the platform
> I am most familiar with.

OK, but we must remember that the project should never rely on a single
person. We should always have a "fallback".
Anyway, I asked several times now, nobody was interested...

>
> My account was created back at the time because they were creating one
> account per project and assigning it to the Chair (who happened to be
> me at the time).

Yes, that's what I see...

Regards,

   Matthias

>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Peter Kovacs-3
For me it does not make sense atm. But as soon as I have a working
building environment I volunteer.

Need some time thought.


Am 24.02.20 um 18:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:

> Hi Andrea,
>
> Am 24.02.20 um 18:26 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> That said, I am the only one from our project with access to the Code
>>> Signing Service (Jims account is still pending).
>>> But I see that you have an inactive account. Would you still be
>>> interested?
>> Honestly I'm not interested, as Windows is not definitely the platform
>> I am most familiar with.
> OK, but we must remember that the project should never rely on a single
> person. We should always have a "fallback".
> Anyway, I asked several times now, nobody was interested...
>
>> My account was created back at the time because they were creating one
>> account per project and assigning it to the Chair (who happened to be
>> me at the time).
> Yes, that's what I see...
>
> Regards,
>
>     Matthias
>
>> Regards,
>>    Andrea.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Matthias Seidel
Am 24.02.20 um 18:51 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> For me it does not make sense atm. But as soon as I have a working
> building environment I volunteer.

I am not sure if people really know what we are talking about:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/Using+the+Digicert+code+signing+service

All I am asking for is a second person that can access this service. No
need to have a building environment.

>
> Need some time thought.
>
>
> Am 24.02.20 um 18:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi Andrea,
>>
>> Am 24.02.20 um 18:26 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>> That said, I am the only one from our project with access to the Code
>>>> Signing Service (Jims account is still pending).
>>>> But I see that you have an inactive account. Would you still be
>>>> interested?
>>> Honestly I'm not interested, as Windows is not definitely the platform
>>> I am most familiar with.
>> OK, but we must remember that the project should never rely on a single
>> person. We should always have a "fallback".
>> Anyway, I asked several times now, nobody was interested...
>>
>>> My account was created back at the time because they were creating one
>>> account per project and assigning it to the Chair (who happened to be
>>> me at the time).
>> Yes, that's what I see...
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>     Matthias
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>    Andrea.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Peter Kovacs-3
I thought from a usage perspective.

But if your concern is only from Admin side, well then lets go for it.

Can you send an invite to my apache address?


Am 24.02.20 um 18:55 schrieb Matthias Seidel:

> Am 24.02.20 um 18:51 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> For me it does not make sense atm. But as soon as I have a working
>> building environment I volunteer.
> I am not sure if people really know what we are talking about:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/Using+the+Digicert+code+signing+service
>
> All I am asking for is a second person that can access this service. No
> need to have a building environment.
>
>> Need some time thought.
>>
>>
>> Am 24.02.20 um 18:34 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>
>>> Am 24.02.20 um 18:26 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>> That said, I am the only one from our project with access to the Code
>>>>> Signing Service (Jims account is still pending).
>>>>> But I see that you have an inactive account. Would you still be
>>>>> interested?
>>>> Honestly I'm not interested, as Windows is not definitely the platform
>>>> I am most familiar with.
>>> OK, but we must remember that the project should never rely on a single
>>> person. We should always have a "fallback".
>>> Anyway, I asked several times now, nobody was interested...
>>>
>>>> My account was created back at the time because they were creating one
>>>> account per project and assigning it to the Chair (who happened to be
>>>> me at the time).
>>> Yes, that's what I see...
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>      Matthias
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>     Andrea.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Pedro Lino-3
In reply to this post by Brian Barker-2
Hi Brian, all

(Brian is included in BCC)

> On February 24, 2020 4:56 AM Brian Barker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>  
> At 14:01 23/02/2020 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> >
> >To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could
> >not double-click msi files. But Microsoft had fixed this for quite
> >some time and there is no real reason to keep the exe packaging.

Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a intermediate folder is really unnecessary.

> I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the .msi file is a
> database, required just as much during removal of any product as
> during installation. My impression is that products such as Microsoft
> Office quietly salt away a copy of the .msi file (or as much as is
> needed) and Windows uses this when the product is removed. Failing
> that, Windows remembers where the .msi file was during installation
> and seeks it out, asking for it if necessary. And all this applies
> when removal is effected by installing a later version, doesn't it?

That is correct. At installation time Windows (at least since Windows XP) stores a copy of the installer in C:\Windows\Installer, renames the file to a 6 or 7 character name (e.g. 2dfbe4.msi, possibly to simplify information storage in the registry) and it is this file that is executed when you uninstall a program.
Therefore keeping the installer on the desktop (or on the same folder where it was installed from) is no longer needed. When updating the new installer will look for the version number of the same product and will install if the version is newer and remove the older version.

> Now the user may have thought (or even been told) that, once the
> product is installed, the downloaded files are no longer needed and
> may have deleted them. This used to result in a steady stream of
> requests to the Users list, asking how the new version can be
> installed when the process stalls at this point. Indeed, as recently
> as ten days ago, a user trying to install a current version reported
> to the Users list "Every time I try I get a message to insert the
> Open Office.org 3.2 disk". He must have installed the older version
> from a CD - which he may well no longer have.

I just read the thread. When the installer mentions Disk it just means that it is looking for the installer file in the same drive/path where it was installed from (originally this actually meant a CD or even a Floppy disk)
Maybe this user who is sticking to 3.2 (the last Sun branded release from back in 2010!) is still using Windows 98 or 95?
Nevertheless in some cases (especially when using registry cleaners) the reference to the installer is lost. I believe the only option is to reinstall the broken version and uninstall before installing a new version
https://www.openoffice.org/download/archive.html

Hope this helps
Pedro

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Matthias Seidel
Hi Pedro,

Am 25.02.20 um 11:57 schrieb Pedro Lino:

> Hi Brian, all
>
> (Brian is included in BCC)
>
>> On February 24, 2020 4:56 AM Brian Barker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>  
>> At 14:01 23/02/2020 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>> To my knowledge in the past we did create an exe because you could
>>> not double-click msi files. But Microsoft had fixed this for quite
>>> some time and there is no real reason to keep the exe packaging.
> Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a intermediate folder is really unnecessary.
We still include MSVC runtimes (both 32-bit and 64-bit are needed) and
MSVCR100.DLL.

Regards,

   Matthias

>
>> I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the .msi file is a
>> database, required just as much during removal of any product as
>> during installation. My impression is that products such as Microsoft
>> Office quietly salt away a copy of the .msi file (or as much as is
>> needed) and Windows uses this when the product is removed. Failing
>> that, Windows remembers where the .msi file was during installation
>> and seeks it out, asking for it if necessary. And all this applies
>> when removal is effected by installing a later version, doesn't it?
> That is correct. At installation time Windows (at least since Windows XP) stores a copy of the installer in C:\Windows\Installer, renames the file to a 6 or 7 character name (e.g. 2dfbe4.msi, possibly to simplify information storage in the registry) and it is this file that is executed when you uninstall a program.
> Therefore keeping the installer on the desktop (or on the same folder where it was installed from) is no longer needed. When updating the new installer will look for the version number of the same product and will install if the version is newer and remove the older version.
>
>> Now the user may have thought (or even been told) that, once the
>> product is installed, the downloaded files are no longer needed and
>> may have deleted them. This used to result in a steady stream of
>> requests to the Users list, asking how the new version can be
>> installed when the process stalls at this point. Indeed, as recently
>> as ten days ago, a user trying to install a current version reported
>> to the Users list "Every time I try I get a message to insert the
>> Open Office.org 3.2 disk". He must have installed the older version
>> from a CD - which he may well no longer have.
> I just read the thread. When the installer mentions Disk it just means that it is looking for the installer file in the same drive/path where it was installed from (originally this actually meant a CD or even a Floppy disk)
> Maybe this user who is sticking to 3.2 (the last Sun branded release from back in 2010!) is still using Windows 98 or 95?
> Nevertheless in some cases (especially when using registry cleaners) the reference to the installer is lost. I believe the only option is to reinstall the broken version and uninstall before installing a new version
> https://www.openoffice.org/download/archive.html
>
> Hope this helps
> Pedro
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Pedro Lino-3
Hi Matthias

(Brian in BCC again)

> On February 25, 2020 11:02 AM Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Am 25.02.20 um 11:57 schrieb Pedro Lino:

> > Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a intermediate folder is really unnecessary.
>
> We still include MSVC runtimes (both 32-bit and 64-bit are needed) and
> MSVCR100.DLL.

You are right, my bad! They are indeed contained in the redist folder. It has been so long that I have seen the MSVC launched that I assumed that it is no longer used.

If Windows 10 does not include the needed MSVC libraries (can anyone confirm?) then unfortunately AOO still needs the initial unpack folder (although it could be unpacked to a temp folder and deleted after install, as you mention in
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127628#c2 )

Since the temp folder is only needed for first install (all msi files are backed up by Windows) would it be possible to change the default command to POSTREMOVE=ON ?

Regards,
Pedro

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Installer translation

Matthias Seidel
Hi Pedro,

Am 25.02.20 um 13:10 schrieb Pedro Lino:

> Hi Matthias
>
> (Brian in BCC again)
>
>> On February 25, 2020 11:02 AM Matthias Seidel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Am 25.02.20 um 11:57 schrieb Pedro Lino:
>>> Not exactly. The exe file was needed because it self unpacked to a folder containing a MSVC++ Runtime installer the OpenOffice installer and in some cases even a Java Runtime installer and then would execute these installers sequentially. Since AOO is no longer including runtimes, creating a intermediate folder is really unnecessary.
>> We still include MSVC runtimes (both 32-bit and 64-bit are needed) and
>> MSVCR100.DLL.
> You are right, my bad! They are indeed contained in the redist folder. It has been so long that I have seen the MSVC launched that I assumed that it is no longer used.
Once these runtimes are installed you will not see them launched again.
And msvcr100.dll is copied silently.
>
> If Windows 10 does not include the needed MSVC libraries (can anyone confirm?) then unfortunately AOO still needs the initial unpack folder (although it could be unpacked to a temp folder and deleted after install, as you mention in
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127628#c2 )

Windows 10 does not have these runtimes included. But it remains to be
investigated if they can somehow be packed into an MSI?

> Since the temp folder is only needed for first install (all msi files are backed up by Windows) would it be possible to change the default command to POSTREMOVE=ON ?

I can have a look into it. In principle the setup.exe is launched by
NSIS, so the command should be somewhere to find.

Regards,

   Matthias

>
> Regards,
> Pedro
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Updated 4.2.0 build?

Matthias Seidel
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
Hi Jim,

As Peter already wrote, it would be great if you could provide test
builds of AOO 4.1.8 for macOS and try to notarize them.
Apple has tightened the prerequisites since mid January [1], we should
be prepared for the next release.

Regards,

   Matthias

[1]
https://www.iclarified.com/72271/apple-eases-macos-notarization-prerequisites-until-january-2020


Am 19.02.20 um 15:24 schrieb Peter Kovacs:

> Jim,
>
>
> can you please build a mac build and do a test signing?
>
> Apple has changed their Rules I think. (If you have done one build and
> test sign after 24th Jan I am sorry, I missed that.
>
>
> All the Best
>
> Peter
>
> Am 19.02.20 um 15:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> FTR, let me know when/if "official" dev builds for Linux and/or macOS
>> are needed.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
123