When installing a specific software (cheops) via SCCM to german PC's we are facing an issue with the language of the operating system.
It seems that the installpackage is searching for a map which is named "Program Files".
On German staged pc's where the operating system is most of the time in German, the map is called "programme"
Is it possible that this might cause a problem?
How can we fix this?
A couple of ideas:
Complain to the software vendor. They should be using environment variables rather than a hard-coded path. Sigh... I suspect, though, that you don't have much control over that.
Many setup programs allow parameters to be passed via the command line. Perhaps you could pass a German-specific path for those users. See this example or here.
Related
Many questions on SO say "Windows developer guidelines" or "windows design guidelines" say that you shouldn't write temporary or program data to the Program Files area, but as far as I can tell none of them actually link to a piece of documentation that says as much. Searching the MSDN has yielded me no results. Windows will make the area read-only, so it can be enforced by the OS, but that doesn't mean developers didn't try to write there anyway (e.g., when porting older, XP and earlier based programs forward.)
I realize that it seems odd to ask about it this late into Windows development (since, as a commenter below pointed out, has been enforced by the OS for more than a decade), but a document that says so is sometimes necessary to satisfy people.
With that in mind, Does Microsoft have a document published stating we shouldn't write application data to the Program Files area, and if so, where is it?
From Technical requirements for the Windows 7 Client Software Logo Program:
Install to the correct folders by default
Users should have a consistent and secure experience with the default
installation location of files, while maintaining the option to
install an application to the location they choose. It is also
necessary to store application data in the correct location to allow
several people to use the same computer without corrupting or
overwriting each other's data and settings.
Windows provides specific locations in the file system to store
programs and software components, shared application data, and
application data specific to a user:
Applications should be installed to the Program Files folder by default. User data or application data must never be stored in this
location because of the security permissions configured for this
folder (emphasis added)
All application data that must be shared among users on the computer should be stored within ProgramData
All application data exclusive to a specific user and not to be shared with other users of the computer must be stored in
Users\<username>\AppData
Never write directly to the "Windows" directory and or subdirectories. Use the correct methods for installing files, such as
fonts or drivers
In “per-machine” installations, user data must be written at first run and not during the installation. This is because there is no
correct user location to store data at time of installation. Attempts
by an application to modify default association behaviors at a machine
level after installation will be unsuccessful. Instead, defaults must
be claimed on a per-user level, which prevents multiple users from
overwriting each other's defaults.
And I'm quite sure that there's similar stuff for every Windows version of the NT family going back to Windows NT 4 or even earlier.
See also this question.
Edit: the original link in this post to the Windows 7 Logo program exists no more. Here you find the current link to the Certification requirements for Windows Desktop Apps. See Section 10, Apps must install to the correct folders by default
In later versions of windows (Vista, 7 and of course server versions) access permission are restricted for "special folders" including "Program Files". Even if your program is elevated to have sufficient privileges to write to this folder it is still a bad idea.
I don't know of any guidelines that state this but there is a list of special folders and what they are meant for. The fact that there is a special folder for nearly all types of data I can image means there is no need to use the program files folder.
so for my internship I need to make a piece of software suitable for processing on the GPU. As long as my pc at my 'work' isnt set up, Im using LogMeIn to access my pc at home, with an ATI HD6850. I installed Visual Studio 2008 professional, and the OpenCL SDK. When I load the first program found at http://developer.amd.com/sdks/AMDAPPSDK/documentation/ImageConvolutionOpenCL/Pages/ImageConvolutionUsingOpenCL.aspx and build it, it says that it can't find the following environment variables: $(atistreamsdkroot). But ATI stream has already for some time been APP isn't it?
Now the question: how do I solve this? I've looked through stackoverflow and other forums, but I couldn't really find something... Im I just the only one experiencing this, or is it just that simple to solve?
Thanks in advance
It is probably looking for header or library files in a location on your disk that is relative to the atistreamsdkroot environment variable. My guess is that you don't have this environment variable set on your system. You can either change the path to these resources from using that environment variable to a hard-coded path, or you can define the environment variable on your system.
I'm not sure what operating system you have, but a simple search of the web should show you the steps to create a new environment variable. The value of that environment variable should be the path to where you installed the sdk to on your system.
On a separate note, once you do build successfully, you may not be able to run this code on the GPU because you are using LogMeIn. I'm not positive about this, but I think that software drivers are used to render remote machine screens via LogMeIn. As a result, when the program tries to look for OpenCl-compatible platforms/devices, it will probably not find any.
I am having issues with finding all of the necessary files to actually install Cygwin correctly when not using the premade setup utility. The reason behind this is the fact that my company computer blocks the usage of the .exe, and won't give me clearance to install it, (they say it isn't needed for the job) but expects me to perform certain tasks that Cygwin would make much simpler.
So my question is thus; is there somewhere/someone that would have a list of packages that I would need to manually install from one of the mirrors to make Cygwin run correctly?
Well,
This is a new answer to an old question, but it might be helpful for someone...
Just run the installer with -B switch, for example:
setup-x86_64.exe -B
You should install it then on a path where you have rights.
If you don't need the full POSIX compatibility (which I'm guessing you don't, if the Unix subsystem isn't required for your job), I'd generally suggest you go with Mingw rather than Cygwin.
Sadly, Mingw also has an installer these days. It probably also requires admin (try it and see). However, you can download the individual components you need if you want to do it that way. That shouldn't require admin, so it would probably get you exactly what you want.
Mingw is also more corporate-friendly from a licensing standpoint, as its compiler doesn't render code built with it GPL like Cygwin's does.
Generally the rule is:
If you want to use Unixy tools to help with your native Windows development, you want Mingw.
If want to port a full (POSIX) Unix program to windows, you want Cygwin (and perhaps a support deal with Red Hat to get around the licensing problem).
There's a writeup on getting Cygwin [to work] on portable storage devices.
Boiling it down, you'd have to do this on a machine that does give you .exe/admin access to write to a 'stick, then run from the stick at work.
On the off-chance that super-lockdown-site allows you to run USB devices.
Use the GNUWIN32 utilities instead. http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/
That way you can choose only the .exe installs that you need, and it will be much easier to justify specific utilities than a humongous system install. If you hunt around on the site you can find the files directory where you can download a single utility, and if you get the -bin.zip version, then you can extract just the needed .exe file which would be even easier to justify and would not require your IT people to test an untrusted install package.
Stupid draconian rules or no, I would not recommend trying to thwart your employers rules. Try working to improve the situation or find another one.
But technically speaking if you can get a complete Cygwin install somewhere, you can copy the entire cygwin folder enmasse. There are a few things that you will want to change similarly to how I configured my cygwin installation to run from a thumb drive. I actually installed on my HD, copied it to the thumbdrive and then changed the batch file and a few other things to make it work. Here are the details: http://fadedbluesky.com/2011/portable-cygwin/
You could try installing it on another machine outside of work. After installing, copy the installed product's tree and Registry keys and environment settings to a CD or flash drive. Then you would have a DIY installation that you can copy and import settings manually. The installer doesn't do a whole lot else.
Don't count on job security if you're bypassing IT mandates after being explicitly told no, though. Getting an exception to the rule by submitting proper documentation through the proper process is usually the way to go.
You'll also have to hope that they aren't blocking the Cygwin programs and any Registry edits as well. It's not hard to find this sort of thing on a machine, either.
Some cross-platform packages like Ruby or Qt prefer %HOMEDRIVE% as the default installation path, Google Chrome uses something in %HOMEPATH%. What's the advantage and disadvantage of each choice? What's the best choice for a simple private application (i.e. a game, where the installation should work without administrator rights)? On the other end: What would be the best choice for an industrial application (i.e. a software that controls an industrial device, running on a computer that merely exists for that purpose)?
If you want to ensure your app can be installed without Admin privs, install under %LOCALAPPDATA% - if you want to install system-wide, use %ProgramFiles%. Whatever you do, don't use %ProgramFiles(x86)%.
As a general rule I find it hard to believe that a single installation will work for multiple operating systems. From my understanding it seems that you would need multiple different installation files to handle each of the different file systems (not just installation directory, but the actual file system). This will span not just private, and industrial systems, but all business systems as well. Go to the download page for any software that is available for multiple OS and they will have a link for each one.
I was reading the post Installation file names in Windows Vista when I thought about Installation File Names. I'm a addicted software downloader, and frequently I've got installation names like "setup.exe" or "install.exe", that says nothing about the program to be installed.
I think that an installation file must be like:
Install[ProgramName][ProgramVersion][Platform].[exe|msi|etc]
or
[ProgramName][ProgramVersion][Platform].Setup.[exe|msi|etc]
What your thoughts?
I much prefer descriptive install file names. Sometimes, you want an emergency 'restore' disk to get a machine up and running even without internet connectivity. When all your installs are named "setup.exe", you either have to rename them all, or create a directory with a descriptive name for each one.
An example of where such a disk would have been really handy was when I took my brand new laptop in to work to use while I upgraded my desktop to Vista 64, and then Windows 7. I only have one wired LAN point, so my laptop needed a wireless connection for internet access, to download my installs. I had to download them all on my desktop, and then transfer by flash drive to my laptop. Very inconvenient.
Not sure this is entirely programming-related... but installer files are usually meant to be transient. You download them, run them, and delete them. (Or at least, I think most people do) So it doesn't matter much what the filename is.
I don't think there's any reason not to give the installer a descriptive name... but I certainly wouldn't say it "must" have one.
For CD-Rom based installation, I'd suggest sticking with SETUP.EXE which helps with autorun detecting software to install from the disk.
For downloadable files, just add the appropriate manifest to the EXE and Vista won't have a problem with it. I'd suggest something semi-descriptive, but there's no need to go into great detail unless it's something like hardware drivers that a person may archive off for reuse, otherwise the file name is confusing to non-technical people.