A company I work with have an issue where a zipped .app file is resolving into its bundled folders once unzipped.
What is the best way to compress an .app so that it can be decompressed without that it resolves into folders, that is the want it to remain a single .app file?
Use another format than zip? Compress it in binary?
Thanks in advance
You shouldn't be having any problems with this. As I'L'I points out, an application on the Mac is a bundle of folders. It's just that the Finder presents it to the user as a single entity.
Zipping and unzipping the bundle won't change this. The Finder recognises the .app extension and acts accordingly. It is not necessary to set what used to be called the 'bundle' bit on the top-level folder. That would get lost by round-tripping the app through a .zip file, but that's not important anymore.
So the real question is, how are you inspecting the unzipped copy of your app? If it's via the command line, or some other tool that doesn't know (or care) that apps are really bundles then you will indeed get the behaviour you describe, even with the original.
I couldn't find any way to break the Finder's 'single entity' view of an app, even if I deliberately damaged it but maybe you have found a way. If so, I'd be interested to know how you did it.
Related
We market an application that runs on multiple platforms, including Macintosh. On the Macintosh the software gets packaged into a .dmg file, and when installed everything goes into the /Applications hierarchy.
Some of the files in our application's hierarchy are samples that users are supposed to be able to modify in place or copy to different files in the same directory. The problem is the permissions that seem to get applied within the /Applications hierarchy prevent our application from doing such operations.
So I either need to change the install so the directories and files in question within /Applications allow modification, or I need to segregate the sample files to a different location on the disk where they can be modified.
I've tried making sure the permissions on the files allow writing at the time the .dmg file is pulled together, but then when the product is installed the permissions get changed to more restrictive ones that don't allow file modification or copying.
I've been able to modify the packaging so the sample files get installed to a different location, but so far I haven't been able to find a suitable area on the Macintosh disk to put them so modification is allowed. I haven't been able to figure out how to tell the packaging that these sample files should be installed into the installer's home directory.
Anyone have any suggestions? I'm afraid I'm a bit of an Apple novice. The procedure to build the .dmg file employs a Makefile that invokes commands like pkgbuild and productbuild. The productbuild command uses a --distribution qualifier that references a .xml file. There don't seem to be any scripts invoked.
I have a folder which contains an executable file (Exec.exe) and a lot of files that Exec.exe needs to run. Currently, it's pretty ugly having all of those files there when I only need to run the one executable. Is there any way to bundle them all into another executable that runs Exec.exe and also contains all of the files Exec.exe needs to run? Thanks for any help!
Yes, but I would recommend you only do it if you need to.
You can achieve this by adding your files as resources in your exe project, so they are added into the exe's binary at compile time. You can then access the files directly from your exe at runtime by using LoadResource and related functions. I'd recommend reading up on the Portable Executable (PE) file format if you're considering this route.
This is the way to do it if you, and again I stress, need to have only a single binary where you can still access your files. There are obvious downsides to doing this, such as it's much more coding to access the data as it's embedded in your application binary, and you can't easily update the files (check out resource hacker tool) without re-compiling your binary to include the new data.
If the only reason you want to do this is because it's "pretty ugly" seeing the additional files in the same directory as your exe, consider moving them into another directory, for example,
from:
MyExeDir
--myExe.exe
--myFile1.txt
--myFile2.dll
--myFile3.dat
to:
MyExeDir
--myExe.exe
--dat
----myFile1.txt
----myFile2.png
----myFile3.dat
or:
MyExeDir
--bin
----myExe.exe
--dat
----myFile1.txt
----myFile2.png
----myFile3.dat
So all the "ugly" looking files are out of the way.
Why don't you create a shortcut of "Exec.exe" and keep it somewhere handy ? If whats that you want ?
Or if you want to distribute your app, you can use Winrar/Winzip (winrar is the best) to create a compressed .exe of your entire folder, making "Exec.exe" as your startup app. Use the SFX option in winrar.
For an application I would like to store a collection of files together, and have them appear in the filesystem as a single file so its easy to manage. I am currently storing everything in a folder.
I would like to keep things accessible so you can manually edit the inside contents if neccesary.
One way to do this would be to create a zip archive and give it a custom extension other then .zip. Then it appears as a filetype and if needed you can unpack and access the content, but for normal use keep it hidden.
I can't seem to find a convenient way to do this. Boost and zlib can do the compression but don't work with archives. I found libzip but I have a hard time understanding how to use it and to me it seems that it only reads/writes zip archives without doing the actual compression.
Is there a more convenient way to tackle this?
Can you call system functions for creating an archive on OSX from c++ / Carbon?
Is there another way to make a folder appear as a single file?
In OSX, you can create Document Packages (similar to application bundles) which are treated as a single file in the Finder, but are really just directories with some internal structure.
Apple does not zip these packages, but they do provide the functionality you describe and they can be created and accessed through CoreFoundation by using CFBundleRef .
From the documentation:
... The important thing to remember about creating a document package is that it is just a directory. As long as the type of the document package is registered (as described in “Registering Your Document Type”), all you have to do is create a directory with the appropriate filename extension. (The Finder uses the filename extension as its cue to treat the directory as a package.) You can create the directory (and create any files you want to put inside that directory) using the standard BSD file system routines ...
As 1st step, simple rename the folder and add the extension .bundle, e.g. Myappdir.bundle
That's will show the whole folder as one file with a lego-like bundle icon.
The next step is you must create one Info.plist file inside.
What I need is a directory which the user can handle as a single file in the Windows explorer. Does something like this exist? If not, what comes closest?
The closest thing is probably Alternate Data Streams, although those are more akin to MacOS Named Forks than Bundles.
There are also some special cases, for example if you save a website with Internet Explorer you get an HTML file and a folder which are linked together.
Depends on your particular needs. As mentioned above, named streams are possible (on NTFS), however you should notice that not all applications copy files with named streams correctly. In some scenarios regular ZIP archives can work (Explorer shows them as folders). If you are doing software development, there exist libraries that let you store many files in one container file (eg. SolFS).
I think you can create a folder with an extension, e.g. Myfolder.bundle, then you can associate that extension with a custom icon. So it looks like a bundle as far as the end user is concerned.
i have an executable for my cocoa application as xyz.app file. But when i copy this on windows, it is showing this as a directory with all the resource files and stuff. Is there any way to create a single file executable on mac also (like .exe file on windows) so as to disable the user from seeing the resource files and other files?
Thanks
You talking about a Bundle, which is a folder that is given an extension and the OS treats it as if it is a single file, while in reality it is a folder with resources in it. The NIB files are stored in this bundle as well as your executable and the info.plist file. This is just the way apps work in Cocoa.
The only way around it would be to write your app in a different language, but i'm not sure which, if any, will give you a single file executable.
What are you storing in your app directory that you don't want people to have access to?
There are ridiculously complicated ways to do that, sure. For example, you could gzip all your resource files and decompress them at runtime. But there's no good reason to do so — all it does is make more work for you, introduce additional complexity and make your app slow. Adobe doesn't do this, Microsoft doesn't do this, micro-ISVs don't do this — it's just not advisable.