Hooray, I managed to install VAC 3.6.5
Lars Erdmann
I had a hell of a time installing VAC 3.6.5.
1.) first the install claimed I did not have enough disk space
2.) then it kept trapping right in between/after the netq installation
(which I found later on, but read on ...)
Finally I decided to copy the whole install CD to the disk and then
manipulating some batch/rexx scripts after digging deep into Feature
installer, Response files etc.
And, look there, the installation went through ! It is necessary to
finish, otherwise you are not able to install the Fixpaks because the
fixpaks will query if the "FEATURE" (feature installer slang) is
installed or not.
I could make up a small zip with the fixed files and place it on Hobbes.
Those can then be unzipped over the hard disk copy. You could then even
burn a new installation CD-ROM from it.
I guess when doing so I will also add some installation notes of how I
got the help system working (even with the search feature and using
Mozilla to display help !) after I had a thorough look in the internet
and endless loops of trial,error and reboot.
For those who wish to run the install completely unattended I might even
be able to come up with a clifi (command line interface feature
installer) solution that does a CID installation. At least I could give
some guidance.
Is anyone interested ?
Lars
Paul Ratcliffe
wrote:
Yes. Is it necessary to 'install' it though? I thought about just copying
off the relevant EXEs, DLLs etc.
I'm not that bothered about the crappy help system and I certainly don't
want to foobar my existing 3.08 installation.
Haven't really had time to play yet though.
Ruediger Ihle
Be sure to move the outdated SOM.DLL that comes
with it out of the way.
--
Ruediger "Rudi" Ihle [S&T Systemtechnik GmbH, Germany]
http://www.s-t.de
Please remove all characters left of the "R" in my email address
Michael Greene
> Hello all,
--snip
>
> I could make up a small zip with the fixed files and place it on Hobbes.
> Those can then be unzipped over the hard disk copy. You could then even
> burn a new installation CD-ROM from it.
>
> I guess when doing so I will also add some installation notes of how I
> got the help system working (even with the search feature and using
> Mozilla to display help !) after I had a thorough look in the internet
> and endless loops of trial,error and reboot.
>
> For those who wish to run the install completely unattended I might even
> be able to come up with a clifi (command line interface feature
> installer) solution that does a CID installation. At least I could give
> some guidance.
>
>
> Is anyone interested ?
>
>
> Lars
Lars,
I would like your install setup. Is there a way to insert the fixpack
before buring back to cd?
Michael
Lars Erdmann
>
>
> Yes. Is it necessary to 'install' it though? I thought about just copying
> off the relevant EXEs, DLLs etc.
> I'm not that bothered about the crappy help system and I certainly don't
> want to foobar my existing 3.08 installation.
> Haven't really had time to play yet though.
A "real" install is necessary to subsequently install the FIXPAKs (1 or
2) as those check (via Feature install) if the product is installed (via
feature install).
If you have all time in the world, then of course you can copy
everything and create objects, modify INI files etc. by hand.
I also have 3.08 installed and 3.65 does not interfere (as far as I can
tell).
It doesn't screw up because it does not put everything in
config.sys,especially LIBPATH is only modified to pick up the 365
runtime (but NOT any outdated SOM.DLL). And those files have different
names from any files of 3.08. PATH is not modified.
These are modified in config.sys:
LIBPATH
DPATH
HELP
LOCPATH
NLSPATH
Instead 3.65 creates a batch file which is then run before any tool is
invoked (and uses BEGINLIBPATH to add additional directories to search
for DLLs).
The help system is not all that crappy. In fact, once it is running OK,
it's pretty neat even though it is not that fast.
Lars
Lars Erdmann
>
> Be sure to move the outdated SOM.DLL that comes
> with it out of the way.
>
>
added to LIBPATH. Only added when the batch file is invoked to start
3.65 tools.
Therefore it won't hang your system on boot (as happened with 3.08).
Lars
Lars Erdmann
In theory yes, but it means manual work. Effectively, YOU will have to
copy the files from the FIXPAKs onto the CD contents (OK that is not all
that difficult but watch out for backlevelled files etc.).
And it would need further examination what else is updated in the system
(INI files, config.sys etc.)
Since the update went OK once I had properly installed I thought it was
easier doing it the "regular" way. With the fixes I have now come up
with, the "regular" install hopefully goes OK for everybody.
Lars
Alex Taylor
> 1.) first the install claimed I did not have enough disk space
> 2.) then it kept trapping right in between/after the netq installation
> (which I found later on, but read on ...)
>
> Finally I decided to copy the whole install CD to the disk and then
> manipulating some batch/rexx scripts after digging deep into Feature
> installer, Response files etc.
I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
But it's fairly easy to install VAC 3.65 (and even 4.0) using the native
GUI, instead of Netscape. You just have to get the hang of the process,
which is admittedly kind of weird.
You can even get 3.08, 3.65 and 4.0 coexisting on the same box with no
trouble; I've done that on my main PC.
--
Alex Taylor
http://www.cs-club.org/~alex
Remove hat to reply (reply-to address).
Ken Ames
maybe you could share that artice with us anyway here in the
newsgroup. I for one would like to do away with netscape once and for all.
Ken
Paul Ratcliffe
> I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
> VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
> a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
> know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
> long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
Why not just stick it on your website then?
Lars Erdmann
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:36:13 +0100, Lars Erdmann <lars.e...@arcor.de>
> wrote:
>
>>I had a hell of a time installing VAC 3.6.5.
>>1.) first the install claimed I did not have enough disk space
>>2.) then it kept trapping right in between/after the netq installation
>>(which I found later on, but read on ...)
>>
>>Finally I decided to copy the whole install CD to the disk and then
>>manipulating some batch/rexx scripts after digging deep into Feature
>>installer, Response files etc.
>
>
> I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
> VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
> a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
> know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
> long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
>
> But it's fairly easy to install VAC 3.65 (and even 4.0) using the native
> GUI, instead of Netscape. You just have to get the hang of the process,
> which is admittedly kind of weird.
What is the "native GUI" ? What process ? CLIFI ?
>
> You can even get 3.08, 3.65 and 4.0 coexisting on the same box with no
> trouble; I've done that on my main PC.
>
Good to know.
Lars
Lars Erdmann
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:36:13 +0100, Lars Erdmann <lars.e...@arcor.de>
> wrote:
>
>>I had a hell of a time installing VAC 3.6.5.
>>1.) first the install claimed I did not have enough disk space
>>2.) then it kept trapping right in between/after the netq installation
>>(which I found later on, but read on ...)
>>
>>Finally I decided to copy the whole install CD to the disk and then
>>manipulating some batch/rexx scripts after digging deep into Feature
>>installer, Response files etc.
>
>
> I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
> VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
> a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
> know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
> long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
I guess it's using clifi.exe with a partial response file that overrides
the default values in the response file (source file paths, installation
drive and path, etc.), right ?
Lars
Will Honea
I must be living in a dream world here. I have had 3.0x running under
Warp 4 all the way through 4.52 since it first came out. I added 4.0 and
3.65 about a month after IBM released the CDROMs and all 3 happily
co-exist with only a couple of tweeks to the environment for each. I run
3.08 as the default, the other 2 are launched by batch files which
restructure the environment. The only changes are to PATH, LIBPATH, and
DPATH. I used the native installer with 3.0 and followed the readme to
update it to 3.08 (plus a couple of later patches). 4.0 and 3.65 were
installed using the Netscape frontend for FI.
Did I just luck out or am I hallucinating<g>?
--
Will Honea <who...@yahoo.com>
Steven Levine
at 10:06 AM, Alex Taylor <mai...@reply.to.address> said:
>VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
>a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I
>don't know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
>long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
I'd say it's a good topic for the Netlabs wiki. Perhaps under the
Category InstallingCompilers.
Regards,
Steven
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Levine <ste...@earthlink.bogus.net> MR2/ICE 2.67 #10183
Warp/eCS/DIY/14.103a_W4 www.scoug.com irc.fyrelizard.com #scoug (Wed 7pm PST)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitro
I am interested. I am still running Visualage 3.0. (and IBMC2 a real
antique)
I did pickup a copy of 4.0 but I never moved over to it.
An easy way to update my V3 would be great.
Bart
Will Honea
I doubt you REALLY want to move into VACPP 4. They dropped it before it
got suitably stable and the build environment is a royal PITA - virtually
impossible to run with make files. My experience with the IDE (great
idea, needs a lot of work) was that it was just too unstable and you could
easily lose an entire development if it crapped out in the middle of
something. Promising, but not ready for prime time.
If the copy you got hold of contains the 3.65 compiler, that's worth
having. There were a few bugs and 2 fixpaks for it that took care of most
problems. Mike Kaply also bootlegged a few additional fixes when he was
using it for the IBM version of Mozilla that improved it as well. If you
do decide to go ahead with either one you'll want to apply all the
availble fixes for 3.65 and/or 4.0. If you can't find them, I have them on
a Devcon CD. I use 3.65 almost exclusively now - got the 3.08 Visual
Builder to cooperate finally for GUI stuff - as the the debugger is
noticeably better.
--
Will Honea <who...@yahoo.com>
Bob Plyler
> I doubt you REALLY want to move into VACPP 4. They dropped it before it
> got suitably stable and the build environment is a royal PITA - virtually
> impossible to run with make files. My experience with the IDE (great
> idea, needs a lot of work) was that it was just too unstable and you could
> easily lose an entire development if it crapped out in the middle of
> something. Promising, but not ready for prime time.
I was a beta tester for VACPP 4. It was called Montana. They
received a LOT of feedback that they needed to be able to use/create
makefiles, and a commandline.
They wouldn't listen. They said, "this is SO great that you won't need
Makefiles or command lines". "People will immediately see the advantages."
After it tanked, they came out with 3.6.
Bob Plyler IBM 3890/XP Engineering
(not an official IBM spokesperson).
ML
> I'd say it's a good topic for the Netlabs wiki. Perhaps under
> the Category InstallingCompilers.
And/or edm2.com?
---
Alex Taylor
>> I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
>> VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
>> a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
>> know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
>> long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
>
> Why not just stick it on your website then?
If VOICE decides not to publish it, I guess I'll put it either there or on
NetLabs...
Alex Taylor
>> But it's fairly easy to install VAC 3.65 (and even 4.0) using the native
>> GUI, instead of Netscape. You just have to get the hang of the process,
>> which is admittedly kind of weird.
>
> What is the "native GUI" ? What process ? CLIFI ?
Nope, the WPS interface to FI. (Install Objects.)
Alex Taylor
wrote:
>> I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
>> VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
>> a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
>> know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
>> long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
>
> I guess it's using clifi.exe with a partial response file that overrides
> the default values in the response file (source file paths, installation
> drive and path, etc.), right ?
Not exactly, although that's one way of doing it.
The approach is basically:
- create an Install Object
- load the product definition into the install object
- modify the install variables using a setup string (or a partial
response file)
- use the object properties to run the install.
Steven Levine
>And/or edm2.com?
That would work too. It is a Netlabs site.
http://www.edm2.com/index.php/Languages#C.2FC.2B.2B
might be a good place to anchor the install guide.
Hopefully, the forthcoming Netlabs content mananagement system will help
to make what's available more visible.
Mark Dodel
<mai...@reply.to.address> wrote:
-> On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:53:30 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe <ab...@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
-> >> I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
-> >> VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
-> >> a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
-> >> know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
-> >> long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
-> >
-> > Why not just stick it on your website then?
->
-> If VOICE decides not to publish it, I guess I'll put it either there or on
-> NetLabs...
->
Alex,
Actually your article "OS/2 and Multilingual Character Sets - Part 2"
is set to come out in the next issue, its just been delayed at first
because of a lack of translators for the German issue. Then the
slip caused one of the articles (a preview of WSE) to become
irrelevant, so we had to wait on a review of WSE to replace it. I
think Christian is almost ready to publish the issue if that is the
article you are reffering to. If not it will probably be in the next
issue, but it is getting harder to get people to write articles on
OS/2 and eCS. Not one person has offered to write one on Warpstock in
Windsor. :-(
Mark
--
From the eComStation of Mark Dodel
http://www.os2voice.org
Warpstock 2006, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, Oct 12-15, 2006 -
http://www.warpstock.org
Lars Erdmann
I had created a template FI object and imported the .rsp file in it
(which comes with every product to be installed via FI).
However I didn't know the setup strings to modify the variables, neither
how to run the partial response file against that object.
So I looked at a CID installation alltogether.
The really weird thing is that even the clifi CID installation creates a
FI object which it eventually moves into the "Installed features" folder
after installation is done. Well I guess it's because it then gives you
the chance to uninstall via the FI object.
I would be really interested to hear more about it. Do you also know if
the Install API (in WPINSTAL.DLL) is documented anywhere, especially the
C interface (other then gleaning the REXX interface from REXX scripts of
for example Java 1.1.8 installation and the like) ?
Lars
Lars Erdmann
Ah, I found the setup string variable: MODE=Development
Now I can manipulate everything in the FI object ...
Thanks, that was really enlighting,
Lars
Nitro
>On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:10:40 -0500, Nitro wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:36:13 +0100, Lars Erdmann wrote:
>>
>>>Hello all,
>>>
>
>I doubt you REALLY want to move into VACPP 4. They dropped it before it
>got suitably stable and the build environment is a royal PITA - virtually
>impossible to run with make files. My experience with the IDE (great
>idea, needs a lot of work) was that it was just too unstable and you could
>easily lose an entire development if it crapped out in the middle of
>something. Promising, but not ready for prime time.
>
>If the copy you got hold of contains the 3.65 compiler, that's worth
>having. There were a few bugs and 2 fixpaks for it that took care of most
>problems. Mike Kaply also bootlegged a few additional fixes when he was
>using it for the IBM version of Mozilla that improved it as well. If you
>do decide to go ahead with either one you'll want to apply all the
>availble fixes for 3.65 and/or 4.0. If you can't find them, I have them on
>a Devcon CD. I use 3.65 almost exclusively now - got the 3.08 Visual
>Builder to cooperate finally for GUI stuff - as the the debugger is
>noticeably better.
>
>--
>Will Honea <who...@yahoo.com>
I checked and my V4 does have the 3.6.5 compillier included (both OS2 and
NT).
I did archive the updates for 3.65 from the OS2WEB Mozilla build site quite a
while ago and I am sure they are safe somewhere here in the pile. (Which box
do I look in first...) I know I have a pile of DevCon CD's so I should be
covered.
Thanks for the pointers,
Bart
Alex Taylor
wrote:
>> The approach is basically:
>> - create an Install Object
>> - load the product definition into the install object
>> - modify the install variables using a setup string (or a partial
>> response file)
>> - use the object properties to run the install.
>>
> (which comes with every product to be installed via FI).
> However I didn't know the setup strings to modify the variables, neither
> how to run the partial response file against that object.
The cool thing about Install Objects is that any variable defined in the
response file can be used as a setup string.
> I would be really interested to hear more about it. Do you also know if
> the Install API (in WPINSTAL.DLL) is documented anywhere, especially the
> C interface (other then gleaning the REXX interface from REXX scripts of
> for example Java 1.1.8 installation and the like) ?
No, the actual API is one of the few aspects I've never looked at. I'm
not sure if it's documented in the help files; you might poke around in
WPINSDEV.HLP(?) and see if there's anything useful in there.
Alex Taylor
> -> >> I wrote an article a couple of years ago which describes how to install
> -> >> VAC 3.65 (and other FI products) without using Netscape. I sat on it for
> -> >> a couple of years before sending it to VOICE a few months ago; but I don't
> -> >> know if they will consider it suitable for publication (it's a bit
> -> >> long-winded and, frankly, the subject matter is rather obscure).
>
> is set to come out in the next issue, its just been delayed at first
> because of a lack of translators for the German issue. Then the
> slip caused one of the articles (a preview of WSE) to become
> irrelevant, so we had to wait on a review of WSE to replace it. I
> think Christian is almost ready to publish the issue if that is the
> article you are reffering to.
No, it's the other ones I sent him last summer, about Feature Install. I
qualified it by saying I didn't know if it was too obtuse and technical
for VOICE, so I left it to his (and your) judgement.
> If not it will probably be in the next issue, but it is getting harder
> to get people to write articles on OS/2 and eCS. Not one person has
> offered to write one on Warpstock in Windsor. :-(
I can't really offer, since I spent almost of all of Warpstock doing
presentations myself... so I didn't get to see all that much else. :)
As for the delay between issues, it gives me more time to work on Part 3
(which is going rather slowly). :)
Lars Erdmann
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:41:14 +0100, Lars Erdmann <lars.e...@arcor.de>
> wrote:
>
>>>The approach is basically:
>>> - create an Install Object
>>> - load the product definition into the install object
>>> - modify the install variables using a setup string (or a partial
>>> response file)
>>> - use the object properties to run the install.
>>>
>>
>>I had created a template FI object and imported the .rsp file in it
>>(which comes with every product to be installed via FI).
>>However I didn't know the setup strings to modify the variables, neither
>>how to run the partial response file against that object.
>
>
> The cool thing about Install Objects is that any variable defined in the
> response file can be used as a setup string.
The drawback of Install Objects seems to be that they imply that the
directory structure of the source files that go into the packaging
process and the directory structure of the source files on the delivered
packaged installation media is always identical (in other words, during
packaging and installation, it expects to find a source file at the same
relative path).
This is not necessarily the case (even though it makes sense).
In some way, the Netscape driven installation compensates for that
difference (obviously, it does not use the source path statements in the
.RSP file or it knows how to modify them).
I had to fix the file paths in the .RSP file for VAC 3.6.5. It was about
8000 files but fortunately there where some commonalities that allowed
search and replace in the .RSP file.
Lars
Alex Taylor
wrote:
> The drawback of Install Objects seems to be that they imply that the
> directory structure of the source files that go into the packaging
> process and the directory structure of the source files on the delivered
> packaged installation media is always identical (in other words, during
> packaging and installation, it expects to find a source file at the same
> relative path).
> This is not necessarily the case (even though it makes sense).
Why wouldn't it be? FI creates the "packaged" tree, so it naturally
conforms to what's been defined.
> In some way, the Netscape driven installation compensates for that
> difference (obviously, it does not use the source path statements in the
> .RSP file or it knows how to modify them).
Not sure what you mean... all Netscape can do is modify the variables,
same as any other front-end.
If you have eCS, you can see the FI installer I created for the IBM
Toolkit; it doesn't use Netscape but rather a simple front-end I knocked
up in VX-REXX to drive CLIFI. But you can of course install it using an
Install Object as well...
> I had to fix the file paths in the .RSP file for VAC 3.6.5. It was about
> 8000 files but fortunately there where some commonalities that allowed
> search and replace in the .RSP file.
I confess I don't really follow your difficulty with the VAC 3.65
installation; I've never had any trouble installing it, using either
Netscape -or- Install Objects. On a variety of systems...
Lars Erdmann
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 03:01:05 +0100, Lars Erdmann <lars.e...@arcor.de>
> wrote:
>
>>The drawback of Install Objects seems to be that they imply that the
>>directory structure of the source files that go into the packaging
>>process and the directory structure of the source files on the delivered
>>packaged installation media is always identical (in other words, during
>>packaging and installation, it expects to find a source file at the same
>>relative path).
>>This is not necessarily the case (even though it makes sense).
>
>
> Why wouldn't it be? FI creates the "packaged" tree, so it naturally
> conforms to what's been defined.
Obviously they packaged the files from some directory structure but put
in on CD-ROM with a different directory structure. That is: on packaging
they chose DIFFERENT directory structures for the MediaPath than for the
SourcePath. Unfortunately on installation of files, FI will take the
Source / SourcePath+SourceFileName variables to find the files on the
MEDIA (most likely that's a bug in FI).
>
>>In some way, the Netscape driven installation compensates for that
>>difference (obviously, it does not use the source path statements in the
>>.RSP file or it knows how to modify them).
>
>
> Not sure what you mean... all Netscape can do is modify the variables,
> same as any other front-end.
Obviously it does not. Instead of using the Source
/SourcePath+SourceFileName variables (as is normal FI behaviour on
packaging AND installation), they seem to use the MediaPath variables on
every file install (which is a good thing to do).
I guess the Netscape thing queries the variables via the FI API and then
does its own thing, circumventing the normal FI.
And the MediaPath variable can be <> Source / SourcePath+SourceFileName.
Maybe that's the reason why they never build a FI object directly but
always have their own installation proggie (see above).
>
> If you have eCS, you can see the FI installer I created for the IBM
> Toolkit; it doesn't use Netscape but rather a simple front-end I knocked
> up in VX-REXX to drive CLIFI. But you can of course install it using an
> Install Object as well...
I have it but not installed yet.
>
>>I had to fix the file paths in the .RSP file for VAC 3.6.5. It was about
>>8000 files but fortunately there where some commonalities that allowed
>>search and replace in the .RSP file.
>
>
> I confess I don't really follow your difficulty with the VAC 3.65
> installation; I've never had any trouble installing it, using either
> Netscape -or- Install Objects. On a variety of systems...
I would really be happy to know how you managed to get and FI
installation working without changing the .rsp file.
Can you give me instructions ?
Lars
Lars Erdmann
File=(
EAMediaIndex=0
PartCount=1
PartSize=881
MediaIndex=1
Source={PackagedFromPath}\cmp\bin\COPYV3R6.EXE
SourcePath={PackagedFromPath}\cmp\bin
SourceFileName=COPYV3R6.EXE
SourceChecksum=0
SourceEASize=4
CreationDate=10-14-17
CreationTime=18:11:48
LastAccessDate=11-16-18
LastAccessTime=17:8:26
LastWriteDate=10-14-17
LastWriteTime=18:11:48
CBFile=881
CBFileAlloc=1024
AttrFile=32
TargetPath={InstallPath1}\bin
TargetFileName=COPYV3R6.EXE
MediaPath=BIN
MediaFileName=COPYV3R6.EXE
MediaNumber=0
Flags=1
TargetAttrib=0
UpdatePolicy=11
)
On installation, FI will try to copy from
{PackagedFromPath}\cmp\bin\COPYV3R6.EXE
but on the installation media the file is located in
{MediaSet[0].Media[0].MediaPath}\BIN\COPYV3R6.EXE
Regards,
Lars
Lars Erdmann
creation (letting it point to the media base path) when running clifi.exe.
Once I did that, FI uses MediaPath and MediaFileName as source
information. If you do not specify /S: then it uses
SourcePath+SourceFileName.
Yes, your instructions had been very helpful.
Lars
Lars Erdmann schrieb:
Alex Taylor
wrote:
>> Why wouldn't it be? FI creates the "packaged" tree, so it naturally
>> conforms to what's been defined.
>
> Obviously they packaged the files from some directory structure but put
> in on CD-ROM with a different directory structure. That is: on packaging
> they chose DIFFERENT directory structures for the MediaPath than for the
> SourcePath. Unfortunately on installation of files, FI will take the
> Source / SourcePath+SourceFileName variables to find the files on the
> MEDIA (most likely that's a bug in FI).
As you subsequently discovered, it depends on setting the MediaPath
variable. (When using an Install Object, it should prompt you for the
correct value when you hit the Install button.)
>> I confess I don't really follow your difficulty with the VAC 3.65
>> installation; I've never had any trouble installing it, using either
>> Netscape -or- Install Objects. On a variety of systems...
>
> I would really be happy to know how you managed to get and FI
> installation working without changing the .rsp file.
> Can you give me instructions ?
As it happens, the first of my articles uses VAC3.65 as its example to
walk through the install process... I'll see if I can zip it up and send
it to you. Is your email address valid?
Alex Taylor
<ste...@earthlink.bogus.net> wrote:
>> > I'd say it's a good topic for the Netlabs wiki. Perhaps under
>> > the Category InstallingCompilers.
>
>>And/or edm2.com?
>
> That would work too. It is a Netlabs site.
Looks like VOICE is still interested in publishing it, so I'll leave it at
that...