Greetings,
I'm trying to figure out how to pull off the following scenario with MSBuild and Visual Studio 2010.
I have a set of three services that I would like to install. The default installation directory should vary with the build (qa, uat, and production).
To add another fun wrinkle to this whole thing, sometimes the uat environment can be pressed into service when we are at peak load, so each build of the service will need to have a different name. It doesn't happen frequently, but it is on the list. How can I configure the service installers to alter the service name dynamically?
I want to be able to create MSI installers for the services (for whatever the current build is). I have an existing and extensive MSBuild script for the various websites I'm working with already, but I'm a little unsure how to proceed with making the services work.
Obviously, the configuration files for each service build will be different.
I've added installer classes for each of the services.
I guess I'm a little confused with how to start this, so any help I can get would be awesome. I had considered simply hardcoding the different service names and using conditional compilation statements to set them, but I don't think doing so is a particularly clear way to go about it all. Any thoughts?
It might be simpler to just zip up the service bits during the build and deploy with MSBuild using or MSBuild Extension tasks. You would put your environment specific configuration data in an msbuild .properties file (mylocal.service.properites, qp.service.properties, uat.service.properties, etc.). This is the way I deploy services.
note: the property file would contain things like your db connection string, TargetDir, ServiceName, etc.
Service names are specified at install time see 'sc', 'installutil' or the WindowsService msbuild extensions pack task snippet below. This means you can copy the same service bits everal directories and install each with a unique name (e.g. QAService, UATService, PRODService).
note: I want to reinforce that the service name is a deploy-time consideration, not a build-time consideration.
<WindowsService TaskAction="Install"
ServiceName="$(ServiceName)"
MachineName="$(TargetServer)"
ServicePath="$(FullServicePath)"
User="$(User)" />
The approach is similar for MSI installers. I assume your installers prompt for all necessary environment specific configuration data... All [decent] installers have a way to provide answers from a file versus using the installer interactively. So, as above, you create one answer file per environment and feed it to the installer on the command-line.
You do not want to do this at build time... and thereby have a separate installer per platform. Was forced to do this with an ancient version of the wyse installer. Made me sad. You want a single MSI installer that can be run in every environment (given the environment specific answer file).
Details of the MSI command-line and answer file format will vary by product. What installer package are you using?
Cheers,
/jhd
Related
We have a couple of dlls we like to install using an msi.
In our test environment, we are using regasm -codebase to register the dlls.
As I understand from googling, this is accompliched in an msi project by setting the register property to vsdraCOM.
The problem is that when we run the installer and checks the registry, the codebase path is set to the path the file were in when building the msi.
I'm going to expand on Hans' answer and that link info, and it may be more than a comment can hold.
That reg file will contain the path to the file and the link article recommends using [TARGETDIR], which is basically wrong if the file is not being installed to the application folder. The path to your file should be written as [#file-key] in the reg file that you import. In a VS setup project the file-key will be (just an example) something like _B049230C37DE4B6787C578DCEE30252A. Open your MSI file with Orca, go to the File Table and use the file key in the File column that corresponds to your file name.
That comes from here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa368609%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
the 7th bullet point. It resolves to the file path wherever it is installed to.
The other thing that can be done is to let Visual Studio do its incorrect thing, then go to the Registry table with Orca, find the path and put that [#file key] in it such as [#_B049230C37DE4B6787C578DCEE30252A] and people sometimes do those kinds of updates with a post build script to update the MSI.
None of these are great, but they should work and get you out of using the GAC. VS setup projects really should be using that [#file key] syntax, and it's just a silly bug I assume.
Speaking as someone who's made a full time living writing installs for 18 years, my first suggestion would be to switch to Windows Installer XML. If you insist on using .VDPROJ, I would suggest reading: Redemption of Visual Studio Deployment Projects.
The concept is you use Windows Installer XML to create a merge module and then consume that merge module with .VDPROJ. In Wix, you use Heat to harvest the DLL. It will extract the COM / Regasm metadata and author it as Registry table entries. This provides a nice clean encapsulation using authoring best practices and avoids the need to do any post build hacking of the built MSI database.
I have an Asp.NET MVC site that I manage multiple instances of. Each instance uses it's own database but the code base is all the same. To facilitate this I have several build configurations with matching web.config transforms, so that when I publish it doesn't use my development database but instead uses the specific database for that site instance.
The problem with this came today when I went to publish an update to one of the sites. I forgot to change the build configuration, so my publish to site A was using a web.config transform that was meant for site B, and mayhem and confusion ensued.
Is there any way to to specify that a specific publish target will ONLY be used with a specific build configuration?
Or is there a better way to handle this situation than juggling build configurations?
One way to deal with this sort of thing, and I'm not certain it's the best, but it is a way, is to set certain configuration values in a higher level web.config or machine.config file that always resides on the machine in question.
Then just make sure that your project files don't override those configuration values.
Here are some considerations if you do this.
If you want to source control these values, it can be more difficult
this way (this could be a pro or a con depending on your
environment).
If other virtual sites are on the same machine and use the same
configuration values, this could affect them all, and if multiple
sites do use that same configuration value, changing it at the
source will change them all (again, could be a pro or a con
depending).
If something is wrong with the value, it can be harder to
determine where the problem is or what is causing it.
Getting to machine.config may be difficult in your organization
or with your hosting provider depending on your access/security
privileges, and it's not always possible to put a web.config at a
higher level than your application.
Obviously the good thing here is that you can have a different value configured on each machine and as long as these values are not also set in your web.config (which would probably result in an error), you won't have to worry about compiling different versions.
I believe that Visual Studio 2010 has a way for setting different config files for different build types, but that sounds pretty much like what you are already doing, so forgetting to build the right way can still end up with similar results.
You could attempt to set up continuous integration with something like TFS Build if that is available to you, in which case what gets built for prod could be set up to always work a certain way and always pull from the correct build type.
Hope something here helps.
Maybe you could go a solution where you don't rely on the 'Publish' dialog of the web application that requires you to make the right setting every time, but instead use a automated command-line like solution (batch file, your own msbuild target, or a build server like CStroliaDavis suggested [cruisecontrol, tfs, teamcity]).
You can just call the 'package' target from command line which creates a package:
msbuild MyWebProject.csproj /t:Package /P:Configuration=Release;DeployIisAppPath="Default Web Site/Main/MyWebProject";PackageLocation="F:\MyWebProjectDeploy.zip"
This also creates a *.cmd file so you can deploy it like this:
F:\MyWebProjectDeploy.deploy.cmd /Y -allowUntrusted /M:http://webserver/MSDeployAgentService /U:Administrator /P:"Secret"
You can add a custom *.msbuild file to your solution that performs these actions, or maybe it's easiest to just add a command to Tools -> External tools.
With kwateeSDCM you can not just deploy apps and web applications but you can also manage instance-by-instance parameters or file overrides. I've only used it with tomcat wars but it's not tied to a language or a platform so I suppose it should be straightforward to configure it to work with ASP.NET as well.
I would like to know how can I detect if help file is contained in setup file for windows platform application (msi or exe). Is there any method to get this information without installing the software first ?
Of course setup file can be created by many setup makers like innosetup, installshield and so on. So I wonder if there is some universal method to solve this.
For an MSI based install it would be very easy. For example you can use the Microsoft.Deployment.WindowsInstaller interop via C# to open the MSI as an InstallPackageClass then access it's Files collection to see if it contains the file you care about.
For a Non-MSI based install, there is no universal way and in most cases, no way period. See, that's kind of the point of MSI: to have a standards based package rich in meta data to be able to see what it's doing. When you do some proprietary script driven installer you lose that openness.
If it's a MSI file, open it up using Orca, and you can view file names.
For both of them, you should be able to do an administrative install, which would extract the files, but not register anything. Depending on where the exe came from, doing an administrative install changes, since each vendor(installshield, innosetup, etc) has their own way to run an administrative install.
for a MSI it's simply
msiexec /a <msi_filename>
For an exe you'll have to look up how to pass the /a argument.
Due to severe limitations of the Microsoft Windows Installer (MSI) system it is required to create a bootstrapper in order to install multiple MSI files (due to pre/post-requisites). However, this introduces an distribution problem because you now have multiple files that need to be included with the distribution. There are of course multiple ways to distribute this as a single file.
1: An archive
You can put all the files into a single archive that users download. The obvious choice for MS Windows is of course a PK-ZIP archive. But this is not very user friendly. Users will first have to extract the archive, and then run the bootstrapper (which would be called setup.exe).
2: A SFX archive
Instead of distributing an plain archive file you could wrap it into a self extracting archive. Executing this SFX archive would prompt the user to extract and/or run the contents. But this adds yet another prompt to the whole installation process (#1: SFX prompt, #2: bootstrapper prompt, #3: main installer prompt). This is also not very user friendly, as it increase annoyance due to multiple prompts.
3: Single file bootstrapper
Of course there is the option to embed all the extract files into the bootstrapper. This is probably the most user friendly for a normal end-user. However, this is less friendly for system administrators, because usually bootstrappers are less manageable than the MSI files. An admin would rig the system so that all requisites are also installed when the main MSI is installed, thus the bootstrapper would not be needed.
4: Other?
An other unlisted method?
So what do you think is the best way to distribute a installer for MS Windows software that requires a bootstrapper?
We provide a single file bootstrapper for retail distribution and all single-user installations.
Volume licensing customers (e.g. 10+ seats) receive one (or more) MSI files along with instructions and a list of prerequsites that must be installed before our application will run (which slightly differ between XP, Vista and Win2k). The EXE blocks installation if the prerequisites are not installed, the MSI will permit installation under the assumption that the sysadmin knows what they're doing and might be installing the prereq's at the same time, before the next reboot.
Basically the single bootstrapper is for non-sysadmins, people who want a single click solution. System administrators and corporate IT support who prefer more fine grained control over their installation are happy for multiple files, even if it means more work for them. The single EXE file is available publicly, the instructions + multiple files are only available by contacting our sales team.
This method gives us the best of both worlds, as well as the ability to provide different default configurations for home and corporate customers - hints, tips, splash screens, auto-updates and welcome dialogs are all disabled by default for corporate installations but enabled for "single" users.
We use Wix to create MSI files which is hugely flexible and can easily be automated with build scripts.
To chain multiple MSI/EXE files together for distribution via single bootstrapper I would highly recommend DotNetInstaller. I'm in no way connected or affiliated with this product, but it has been a lifesaver on projects for generating highly configurable bootstrappers in unmanaged code.
I wrote up my recent experiences in developing a multi-language MSI and bootstrapper using these technologies here. This talks through the process from start to finish. Using DotNetInstaller you can download and install dependencies from a URL on demand, or embed them directly within the bootstrapper with ease. I did also consider WIX's own SETUPBLD bootstrapper generator and the GenerateBootStrapper MSBuild task but they are pretty basic. That said WIX 3.5 Burn utility is currently in the pipeline and could be a pretty decent alternative once it's released.
Regarding: 1: An archive: 2: A SFX archive
You could use a self-extracting .ZIP that automatically launches a Setup.exe. WinZip offers this support inexpensively. That way, it would be more customer-friendly. It can be configured to launch the bootstrapper without a prompt.
Regarding: 3: Single file bootstrapper
At the risk of sounding like an InstallShield salesman, InstallShield 2009 will take care of everything you're asking about -- it smooths over the MSI shortcoming of needing a bootstrapper. You could use the Release Wizard to create a single-.EXE all-in-one bootstrapper. Or you could create a web-deploy setup that is very small and then downloads the payload from a web site. Or you could put different features in separate .CAB files, and the user only needs to deploy those CAB files corresponding to the features he wants to install. InstallShield comes bundled with dozens of prerequisites ready to add to your Setup.
Depending on your siutation, MSI v4.5 and 5.0 might help you -- they have native support for multi-package transaction chaining. Of course, depending on what OSes you support, you may still need a bootstrapper to make sure the right level of MSI support is present.
I had a similar problem where I needed to distribute some optional support software, MSI installer, and another file just incase the MSI file needed it. I basically created a native application to handle the whole process. I wrote a blog about it here (http://blog.foldertrack.com/?p=45)
I have set up cruisecontrol.net cs for my project that has a number of modules and components that get build and get stored in folder by date on the build machine.The thing is that I need to make setup for the application(wpf non web) and the thing is that since there are a number of module and different solutions that build and finally make the product (dlls) etc.Any suggestion on comming up with a setup strategy that will create a nightly setup and also what setup package to use (something simpler or according to you that would take less time) I was planning to install something on the build machine that would pick up the files from the folder (what folder?) and make the setup...
A link to illustrate the point is Firefox's nightly build.
Any advice guys
Thanks in advance.
I am finding that this system is working pretty well for me. I assume VS 2005/2008 and C#, but the same principle works for other compilers and languages just substitute your own flavoring.
Using CC.NET
Check out all source with scheduleTrigger, if multiple locations use
Use MSBuild to build each solution that is required (assuming VS 2005/2008), or nant, or whatever build tool works best for compiling your component projects
Use MSBuild to create WIX installers, though I have also used MSBuild to create InnoSetup and Wise Installation Studio installations
Use MSBuild to update the AssemblyInfo.cs files for any projects that you want the build script to control
Use your source control command line to check-in updated AssemblyInfo.ca files
Finally use MSBuild to copy your output installer to a new folder in your drop server. I use the time stamp from the primary product executable to make a timestamp along with the generated version number to name the folder (../Builds/Product/v.M.m.r.p - DATE TIME/)
I also like to generate a build notice email at the end.
As for installer recommendations, there is a trade-off.
For fast generation, use a script installer like NSIS or Inno Setup. The drawback is not being Windows Installer compatible.
For Windows Installer products, using Wise or InstallShield are faster to generate the first time, but expensive tools and I find the maintenance on my installation scripts is high. Using WIX tends to be much more expensive the first time (learning curve + angle bracket-tax), but then easier to maintain as it is all XML and the command line tools are easy to use.
I have had some success with installation bundling with Inno Setup as Windows Installer bundling and chaining (at least for Windows XP) is a real pain.
We used Visual Build and Wise for our installer creation and find that highly intuitive and easy to create the set ups with. The actual CC.NET project does a few things, first thing is it checks to make sure all of the needed parts have been built successfully since the last time we created an installer (we allow installers on demand as well as scheduled every night) if they haven't been build successfully we rebuild all the componenets, once they have been (or if they already were) built successfully we then call VisualBUildPro and let it create the installer. Visual Build Pro, handles all the copying and the calling of Wise for the actual installer. Once the installer is created we publish it out to the destination where everyone expects it to be. We also have modified the XSL for the email publisher on the builds server, so everyone gets a link to the newest installer once it is published.
A few things about the nightly builds if you can you should try setting up a symbol server and have every installer upload symbols with source code information up to them. This is also a good point to have any documentation (D'Oxygen; SandCastle) Create and the time to run your FULL suite of testing that you have available.
Take a look at WiX. This toolset allows the setup project to be defined in XML form, and then generates the msi from this XML. The fact that the project is defined in XML gives you alot of flexibility to modify this XML on the fly during the build (if needed).
It integrates with MSBuild - see this article, and also works well with NAnt - see this article.