Really bad install

2 Aufrufe
Direkt zur ersten ungelesenen Nachricht

Don Burn

ungelesen,
02.02.2006, 19:50:0502.02.06
an
I was unpleasantly surprised when I installed the new windbg and it wiped
out all of the old installations. In the past I found it bad that you
overwrote the last install, but removing the rest without warning is very
poor design. Some of us believe in testing WinDBG extenisons on the
various versions of the debugger, this install policy just makes this
harder, decreasing quality for everyone.


--
Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
Remove StopSpam from the email to reply


Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]

ungelesen,
03.02.2006, 01:34:1403.02.06
an
Hi Don!

> I was unpleasantly surprised when I installed the new windbg and it wiped
> out all of the old installations. In the past I found it bad that you
> overwrote the last install, but removing the rest without warning is very
> poor design. Some of us believe in testing WinDBG extenisons on the
> various versions of the debugger, this install policy just makes this
> harder, decreasing quality for everyone.

Just a note: You installed a *beta* version...

But hopefully this will be fixed in the relase...

--
Greetings
Jochen

My blog about Win32 and .NET
http://blog.kalmbachnet.de/

Skywing

ungelesen,
03.02.2006, 10:47:3003.02.06
an
Beta or not, the removing the existing install has been a behavior that has
existed for several releases now.

One nice solution to this problem would be to offer two downloads, one
packaged as an MSI and one packaged without any installers at all, for xcopy
deployment. That way you don't have to risk blowing away a previous install
on one computer to get the raw files you want for the new release.

"Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]" <nospam-Joch...@holzma.de> wrote in message
news:ObF%23xvIKG...@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Don Burn

ungelesen,
03.02.2006, 10:53:3503.02.06
an
IIRC the previous installs removed the last version you installed, this is
the first time I remember it rumaging around and deleting all the versions
you have on a system. I guess I do not understand the logic here, replacing
the last version may make sense, but I would prefer an option to do a clean
install or an upgrade, which almost all Microsoft products offer. But
removing the older versions makes no sense, the install model is such you
had to do work to get the second version there in the first place, why would
the installer assume that you wanted it removed?


--
Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
Remove StopSpam from the email to reply


"Skywing" <skywing_...@valhallalegends.com> wrote in message
news:ugGYlkNK...@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]

ungelesen,
03.02.2006, 10:55:3103.02.06
an
Hi Skywing!

> Beta or not, the removing the existing install has been a behavior that has
> existed for several releases now.

This is not the problem. This is also "normal"... but the problem is
that the insteller seems to be removing files which was *not* installed
by the previous installer. And this is a bug.

See:


>>> but removing the rest without warning is very
>>> poor design.

--

Allen antworten
Dem Autor antworten
Weiterleiten
0 neue Nachrichten