This is more of a general theory question as I'm stuck on how to proceed since this is my first time developing an application...
I'm developing a reporting application in VS 2015 that requires two types of functionality. It needs to have a GUI so that users can interact with and create reports and those reports need to be scheduled via Windows Task Scheduler. I'm planning on using a Console Application for the scheduling portion. My question is, what would be the best way to implement this? As of right now I have two separate Projects in a single Solution. Is this the best route to take considering my needs or is there a better option that I'm not aware of? I've done some searching online but have not been able to find a valid solution. It's especially difficult since the scheduling portion needs to pull the application settings from the Windows Form Application.
Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!
The only reason you would need a console application would be if you actually needed a console interface. It doesn't sound like that's the case—the interface will be written in WinForms. Therefore, you don't actually need two separate applications. You can combine all the necessary functionality in a single executable.
The way to do this is by checking for command-line parameters that indicate whether the app should run interactively or headless. Probably, what you'll want to do is make the app run interactively when no command-line parameters are passed. This would be the normal case, the situation the user gets into when they double-click your app to launch it from Explorer.
When it comes time to schedule your app to run a task in the background (with Task Scheduler or anything else), you signal this by passing a special command-line parameter to your app. You can decide what this is, and you may need several of them if your app can do multiple things in the background. If configuration information/parameters need to (or can) be passed to the app to configure how it should perform the background task, you can pass these on the command line, too. Or, as you mention in the question, you could pull these settings from whatever was set/saved by the user the last time they ran the interactive version of the app.
The trick is just checking for these command-line parameters in your application's Main method. In the design I proposed, if there are no command-line parameters specified, then you just go ahead and create the main form like you normally would. If there are command-line parameters, then you need to parse them to see what action is being requested. Once you've parsed them and determined which background task should be run, you just run that background task—without ever creating/showing a form.
There are lots of different solutions for parsing command-line parameters. Using a library would probably be the easiest way, and also give you the most features. But if you just needed something really simple, like a /background mode, then you could easily write the code for this yourself, without taking a dependency on a library or needing to learn how to use it.
So you could do all of this with a single project in a single solution if you wanted to. Or, you could split different aspects of the functionality out into different projects that compile to libraries (e.g., DLLs), but still have only a single executable for simplicity.
( Hi, everyone. I'm very new to Windows programming, so I apologize in advance if this has already been asked and I just didn't know what to search for, but this problem has been driving me crazy and I know someone could probably answer this really easily. )
My company has an application that runs as a service in Windows 7. I have been tasked with writing code to change display settings, but I apparently cannot do this from a system service. I created a small executable that changes the color depth to 8bpp in about 5-10 lines of code, but when I place this code in my application, it returns success yet does not actually succeed (nothing changes).
Without a commanding knowledge of how Windows programming works, I have managed to try a MILLION different things to get it to work but with no avail. Can somebody PLEASE help me find what I need to do to make this code function?
On Vista and upwards services run in a different session (session 0) and are isolated from the interactive desktop(s). This means that code that you run from the service is simply unable to make the changes you want. The obvious conclusion is that you need to run code in the interactive desktop.
Now you can do this, but it's not exactly easy to achieve. What you will need to do is arrange for your service to launch an process that runs on the interactive desktop: Launching an interactive process from Windows Service in Windows Vista and later. That process, rather than the service, is what will have to make the changes.
Whilst it is possible to achieve what you want, I think you should regard the difficulties involved as a signal to review whether or not your proposed approach is the best solution to whatever your underlying problem is.
I am a newbie and not familiar with the setup environments and stuck at some point. I am developing a very simple database application using visual studio 2010. I want to release a demo program and want the demo setup to be executed just one time for a specific computer hardware. For example when one user downloads the demo and installs the setup, the demo setup content, a simple configuration file embedded in the setup or "what so ever I do not know" should be changed, so that setup (when coppied to another computer) could not be used in other computer hardwares.
The sollutions or design ideas for this specific problem should not include any online services checking that the user executes that install or not. All the problem should be solved locally if possible :) and be as generic as possible.
Any design ideas or a starting point
will be very appreciated.
Thanks in advance
This is not possible of course. Whatever breadcrumb you leave to record that the program was ran has to be left on the same machine. Leaving any user with sufficient skills or good enough tools (like SysInternals' ProcMon) to find out where you dropped it and remove it again. Assuming they care enough about making the effort.
The simple solution is to intentionally cripple your demo so that an important feature is missing that would make it useful. Like File + Save. Not just disabled, completely missing in the code as well so hacking the demo program doesn't work either. Easy to do with an #if directive in your source code.
We create a lot of internal tools in order to work with the data we use. Occasionally we'll run into a problem with one of those tools on a designer or artists computer and will need to spend considerable time on there computer to try and diagnose where the problem may be coming from.
This creates problems because while a programmer is trying to diagnose an issue on the user's computer the user is unable to continue with their work. What we'd like to be able to do instead is run an app that will generate a report that a programmer can look at on their own machine in order to at least rule out some of the more common and obvious problems.
Example information we'd need would be all the environment variables, registry info and installed applications. Is there a decent existing tool that will accomplish this or would it be better to just roll our own?
Start > All Programs > Accessories > System Tools > System Information
or
Start > Run "msinfo32"
Then,
File > Export
and you can take the file back to your desk.
Using Windows Powershell setting up a script that can provide the needed information should be relatively easy. The script center is a great starting place to learn Powershell. If you like to listen to podcasts I would recommend The Powerscripting podcast.
This probably should be on ServerFault.com, since it deals with an end user's configuration and is not necessarily a programming issue.
That said, I would think that you should be able to write a WMI script to cover this.
You'd want to start here
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa394585(VS.85).aspx
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I recently had to struggle with one installation project (which uses most popular product for creating installations: InstallShield) to make it work for product upgrades (migrating from one version to another). In the end it turned out that I needed to use one long package code but was using some other. It wasted my 8 hours (testing and debugging installers is a pain).
Now if I think about it, once you are done all the hard part of coding, all you want to is that correct applications, libraries are copied to target computer and user just runs it. Period. This apparently simple task normally turns out to be a tricky one and "being closed to finish date" makes in even harder.
Don't you think deploying a product is made damn difficult on windows which should have been simpler? (or installer really deserves that much attention and I am just being crazy about it?)
Have you ever used simpler deployment schemes such as "copy the folder to wherever you like and run the exe. When you want to remove it, just delete the folder!"? Was it effective and made things simpler?
Painful as it is you need to wrestle with the windows installer for the benefit of your customers. Otherwise you will need to do a lot more work to
Handle situations where for some reason an error occurs during the installation. What do you do next?
Handle issues like security. What if the installing user does not have rights to particular folders/registry keys?
Correctly cleanup after installation
Patching and patch management
Performing additional tasks -- registering COM objects, creating databases, creating shortcuts, creating an un-installation shotcut and so on
Installing prerequisites
Letting users choose which features to install
Your own custom scripts to solve all these problems eventually become a bigger problem than the installation itself!
I recommend that you check out Wix. It's not exactly child's play but it gets the job done. If you install Votive as a visual studio add in you get intellisense to help you strucutre the tags correctly. With the help file you can create pretty functional flexible installations
I don't think you'll see too many disagreements here, especially regarding MSI. I think one thing to keep in mind is to watch the way many programs are using MSI files these days. Displaying UI dialogs and making complex configuration choices with an MSI is very weak simply due to the way Windows Installer was designed, so I've noticed a lot of programs being split into a bunch of baby MSIs that are installed with the minimal UI by a parent setup program. The SQL Server 2008 setup wizard does this. UPS WorldShip does this. And Paint.NET does this, too--the wizard you see is a Windows Forms app, and it launches msiexec itself (you can see the minimal UI of the Windows Installer pop up on top of the white wizard window), passing any configuration parameters as property arguments to msiexec.
A common scenario where this comes up is where someone is tasked with building an installer for an application that has both server and client counterparts. If the user chooses the server option, then they may or may not want a new database to be installed, which means installing SQL Server. But you can't just install SQL Server while you're in the middle of your own installation because Windows Installer won't let you do that. So a frequent solution is to write an app that displays a wizard that allows the user to configure all of the setup options, and then your app launches the MSI files as needed for SQL Server, your server application, and your client application in the minimal UI mode; basically, eschewing the "features" aspect of Windows Installer entirely and moving it up to the MSI level. 4.5's multiple-package installations seems to be a step further in this direction. This format is also especially useful if you also need to loop in non-MSI installers from third parties as part of your installation process, like installing a printer driver for some bizarre point of sale printer.
I'll also agree that Windows Installer lacks built-in support for common deployment scenarios. It's meant for when setup isn't XCOPY, but they seem to miss the fact that setup usually isn't just "files + shortcuts + registry keys," either. There are no built-in actions for setting up IIS Web sites, registering certificates, creating and updating databases, adding assemblies to the GAC, and so on. I guess they take the opinion that some of this should happen on first run rather than being a transactional part of the install. The freely available tooling and documentation has been awful--flat out awful--for the better part of a decade. Both of these issues are largely addressed by the WiX project and DTF (which lets you finally use managed code custom actions), which is why we're all so grateful to Rob Mensching and others' work on that project.
I've had the same experience. Installation can quickly suck up your time as you go down the rabbit hole of "Oh God, I guess I have to become an expert in this too." I second the idea that's it's best to address it early on in your project and keep it maintained as part of your build process. This way, you can help avoid that scenario of having developed a practically uninstallable product. (Trac was an example of this for a while, requiring to track down specific versions of weird Python libraries.)
(I could go on about how Windows Installer sometimes decides to use my slow, external USB hard drive as a place to decompress its files, how it seems to sit there doing nothing for minutes on end on computers that have had lots of MSI installs on them, and how that progress bar resetting itself a bazillion times during a single install is the most idiotic thing I have ever seen, but I'll save those rants for another day. =)
My two cents; please note that I really just know enough about Windows Installer to do damage, but this is my assessment coming from a small business developer just trying to use it. Good luck!
Well, its a lot easier if you build your installer first, make it part of your build system, and let it grow with your project.
I agree, the windows installer drives me insane. But there are a lot of situations that xcopy just doesn't solve. Sometimes you want to install for multiple users, not just the current user. Sometimes you have to register COM objects. Sometimes you have to make a whole bunch of changes to the system, such as registering services to run at startup, connecting to network servers, etc. Sometimes you have users that can't use a command prompt. And you always want to be able to role the whole thing back when something fails halfway through.
Was the whole MSI database approach the best way of doing it? I'm not sure. Would I rather pound nails into my head than write another line of WiX code? Probably. But you have to admit, it does a good job of doing everything you could ever possibly want. And when it doesn't there is always the CustomAction option.
Really, what I would like to see, is better documentation (really, what is a type 50 action? How about giving it a name?) and a lot more easy-to-usurp templates.
And the WiX users group alias does a good job of answering questions.
You should read RobMen's blog. He does a good job explaining why things are the way they are. He has done a lot of thinking (more than any human should) about the problems of setup.
Have you looked at NSIS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullsoft_Scriptable_Install_System ?
And 1: Yes, 2: No
Personally, I mostly agree with #Conrad and #John Saunders. I wrote about this topic a long time ago on my old blog. I think #jeffamaphone has a point about the Windows Installer complexity (and my over attention to setup, in general ) but I believe the Windows Installer is still the best all round option for installation on Windows.
"Once you have done all the hard part of coding", you haven't done a thing if all your hard work doesn't install. Installers need to be built and tested on every nightly build, every night, almost from day one. You need to test that the installer can be built and run, and you need to verify the installation.
Otherwise, who cares how much hard work you've done coding - nobody will ever see your work if it doesn't install!
Note that this also applies to XCOPY.
Another thing: what is your QA testing if they're not testing what your installer installs? You have to test what the customer will get!
For exactly the reasons you state, we've done internal releases, handled by the dev team by copying the required files, and then done the rest of the setup using scripts and our own utilities.
However, for end users you have to have some kind of hand holding wizard, I've used the MS installer from within VS and found it confusing and clunky. After that experience I've avoided the pain by getting others to do the installation step. Can anyone recommend a good .Net installer?
I use Installshield and if you are not trying to do anything too fancy (I why would you) then it's pretty straighforward - set initial setting, select files, set up shortcuts and create setup.exe.
All future updates I handle inside my code - much more convinient to the user