As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
I'm not the best programmer so I found it was much easier to write a program as several separate executables, which occasionally call each other. But now I need an easy way to actually run them without writing detailed instructions like Run file one, wait until its completed and no longer in process manager before running file two, file three can be executed 15 seconds after file two has been created. Then Add a key to your registry. Etc. I figure there must be a good software out there where I can just drop all my exes in, tell it when to run them, and output one file for my clients to run. Any ideas?
Inno Setup is easy to use, free, open source and scriptable if you need it.
I've always had a good experience with NSIS
It's open source
It has a big community (and hence lots of plugins)
For simple things, its script-based approach is nice and easy
It's lightweight and fast
On the downside, if you want to do something more sophisticated, you need to use something that looks a bit like assembly language - very odd, and not particularly pleasant. Thanks for the comments about that - I'd forgotten all about it!
Inno Setup is simple, light-weight and covers a lot of ground. I've used it for 5-6 apps over the last 5 years and it never let me down. Highly recommended!
Before that I used InstallShield, which is one of these systems that are so complicated that they "offer" you to "utilize" their "professional services" to create your installations. In other words it's kind of a hack that only managed to build a customer base in the childhood of Windows because there was no competition. It's a bit like a 747 that runs like a Trabant.
The worst, by far, installer product I've worked with is "WISE for Windows Installer". This had me literally smash my mouse in the office floor in frustration. It is (or at least was, 4 years ago) utter crap and should be avoided at all costs. This is exactly the kind of software that those pesky license agreements are there for, else the publisher would be sued into oblivion...
Yes, two ideas:
If you're looking for a way to statically put files, registry keys, start menu shortcuts, et cetera on your customer's systems, you should be looking for an installer solution. Many of these exist, and choosing the best one mostly comes down to features and pricing. I happen to like Caphyon's Advanced Installer, and it does have a freeware version that looks like it might meet your needs, except for the ability to run executables at scheduled times (which would require the Windows Task Scheduler support only found in the Enterprise edition, which is in the ultra-expensive price range, comparable to InstallShield...)
If controlling the flow of events on your customer's systems is more important than getting the executables on the system, you may want to look into Automise, which is basically an ultra-friendly UI for creating scripts, which makes things like scheduling tasks quite easy.
Anyway, you can download trial editions of both pieces of software, to see which one (or possibly both) will allow you to do what you want in the easiest way, or at least give you some ideas on how to best serve your customers. It may turn out that simply adding a new, 'supervisor' executable to take care of registry keys, scheduling, etc. could solve the problem without any third-party add-ons...
WixEdit is an open source (install shield like) authoring tool that uses the Wix Runtime from Microsoft.
Wix Tutorials
If you don't have any specific requirements apart from being able to install a few executables, then basically anyone will do. I'd recommend NSIS, not because it is particularly easy to work with (it has a cumbersome assembly-like language which isn't to practical to do more complex things in), but because it is free, has a large and active community, and it generates fast installers with very low overhead. As an extra bonus, you can run the compiler (i.e. the tool which generates the installer) on Linux.
Edit: ...and whatever you do, do NOT use InstallShield.
The ones I've worked with are:
InstallShield
NSIS
INNO Setup
Custom created installer
My preference is INNO Setup. It's free, it's easy.
I heart wix, MSFT's open source, declarative (XML) based toolkit for building MSIs.
It's ace.
If you want to install binaries, add reg keys and even run "custom actions" (have your own code execure during install) you should have a look at it. Then you'll have a one-click (msi) solution. Good eh?
Definately Wix. :)
Wix allows you to do the most things with ease and the difficult things without hacks, it's free and open-source.
You can use Wix within Visual Studio (using Votive) or you can use it using the .Net SDK, MSBuild and your favorite XML editor. Wix supports creating MSI installers, MSP patches, MSM Merge modules, Wix libraries and much more.
You should take a look at InstallJammer. Not only is it free, it's cross-platform and very easy to use. Most common actions don't require any scripting at all, but with a powerful scripting language underneath the hood, you can make an install do just about anything you want.
If all you want is a basic installer to install your application, you can have it built in a matter of minutes from the first time you start it up. If you want something more powerful, the capabilities and documentation are excellent.
If you're not after an installer (which is doesn't sound like you are) Why not just write a program to do what you need?
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 13 years ago.
Poll: What is the best and easy to use installer to use with .NET 3.5 SP1 windows applications?
My vote is for:
Nullsoft Scriptable Install System - it's popular, easy to use and FREE
Nullsoft Scriptable Install System
(NSIS) is a script-driven Windows
installation system with minimal
overhead backed by Nullsoft, the
creators of Winamp. NSIS has risen to
popularity as a widely used
alternative to commercial and
proprietary products like
InstallShield. - Wikipedia
There is rich plugins directory for NSIS, where you can find for example a plugin for installing windows services.
http://nsis.sourceforge.net/Category:Plugins
Commercial alternatives:
InstallShield - probably the most popular one and the most expensive option
Wise - also very popular
Advanced Installer - new and nice, not that popular yet, but trending
Other:
WiX - could be very good if you can spent some time on the learning curve. It is used by many Microsoft products.
Inno Setup
List of Installation Software at Wikipedia
My personal preference is Advanced Installer, it has a nice GUI for creation and editing of projects which are XML files so fits into source control easily.
Innosetup is the fastest one I've used to make setup files quickly and easily (out of Nullsoft and VS), providing you get the designer that is a separate download.
In the past I've used both InstallShield and Wise. I wouldn't say that using either of them is a joy, but they get the job done for large Windows applications.
Of the two, I would generally favour InstallShield.
I very much like WiX, which is said to be the installer used by MS internally for Office.
I used NSIS on my first-and-last Windows project, and was quite happy with it.
You could use ClickOnce deployment, if your environment allows you to do so. (If it's convenient).
Actually any answer could apply to your question here, choosing the "right" installer never possible for "a windows application".
How many different machines are your going to install to?
How large is your application?
Does it have many dependencies? (Databases etc.)
What is the "level" of the users who are going to install your app? Are they system administrators who install apps for a living, or are they joe-random "Hey lets click install because it looks cool" types.
just my 2ct.
The one out of the box from Visual Studio 2008.
Nullsoft Scriptable Install System anytime... simply because of it's ease of use and more than that, it's free!
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
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 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I have been evaluating the wide range of installation and web deployment solutions available for Windows applications. I will just clarify here (without too much detail, these tools have been covered in other questions) my understanding of the options:
NSIS - Free tool that generates setup executables. Small binary. Specialized, sometimes obtuse, scripting language.
Inno Setup - Free tools for setup executables. Various binary compression schemes. Pascal scripting engine.
WIX - Free toolset to generate MSI binaries. XML definitions language.
WIX ClickThrough - Additional tools for packaging, web download and auto update detection (now part of WIX core).
InstallShield - Commercial development environment for installation packaging. Generates MSI binaries. C-like InstallScript language.
Wise - Commercial development environment for installation packaging. Generates MSI binaries.
ClickOnce - Visual Studio supported framework for publishing applications to a webserver, with automatic detection of updates. No support for custom installation requirements (INI files, registry etc ...). Packages setup as an MSI binary.
Install Aware - Commercial development environment for installation. Generates MSI binaries. Automatic Update framework (Web Update).
If I have missed any, please let me know.
And found some useful discussions of these technologies on StackOverflow:
Best Simple Install System
Best choice for Windows installers
Alternatives to ClickOnce
I have worked with a few of these solutions, as well as a handful of proprietary internal installation solutions. They are mostly concerned with packing installations and providing a framework for developers to access the run time environment. With the growing requirement for web deployment and automatic software updates, I expected to find more of a consensus among developers on a framework for web delivery of software and subsequent updates, I haven't really found that consensus. There are certainly solutions available (ClickOnce, ClickThrough, InstallShield Update Service), but they each have considerable limitations (please correct me if I mis-represent any of these). I would be interested in a framework that provided some of the following:
Third party hosting/management of updates.
Access to client environment (INI files, registry, etc..).
User registration/activation.
Feedback/Error reporting
This is leaving me with the strong impression that the best way to approach the web deployment problem is through a custom built proprietary solution (possibly leveraging existing installer packaging). I have seen this sort of solution work well for a number of successful applications:
FileZilla - HTTP request to update.filezilla-project.org to check for updates, downloads an NSIS binary (I think) and then shuts down to run the install.
Automatic updates for Massively Multiplayer games are entirely necessary and universally implemented using proprietary systems.
So, at last, to my questions:
Have I missed a web deployment framework that will provide the functionality I need?
Are my requirements too specific to reasonably expect a third party framework to deliver?
Should I buy or build?
I would urge caution on Installaware. We recently had a shocking experience with their customer support.
We followed one of their sample projects to the letter which failed miserably. Raised a support ticket with customer support and were told it was going to cost us $199 for them to look at fixing their own code.
We then raised the same issue in the user forums and were promptly banned because this constituted cross posting and was not allowed. Even though this is not mentioned in their terms and conditions. In fact, they banned our IP so no one in our company can post to the forums.
A very poor experience and one we wont repeat. We are now looking to replace Installaware as soon as possible.
Purchase Installaware at your own peril.
Absolutely agree with poster who said to stay away from InstallAware. They've had a long history of really absurd ethics problems, and they treat their own customers horribly. They can be downright abusive and insulting.
Beware InstallAware!
I completely agree about InstallAware.
After using WiX, NSIS and InstallAware, I have to humbly admit that they were all overkill for what I really need as a software developer. There are no projects that I've done so far which couldn't be deployed using the Visual Studio deployment project.
Is it limited? Yes.
It is also very simple to learn an use. Moreover, you actually can do really neat things like automatically create patches (.MSP files) by using techniques as described here
I fully understand that you can't do everything inside of a Visual Studio setup project, but it's rather surprising what you can accomplish. It's free, it's easy and, frankly, for general use is a better option than spending endless hours learning WiX's mind-boggling XML (impressive as it is), or InstallAware's verbose scripts...
With VS Setup, it's drag'n'drop & build'n'deploy. Every other solution I've tried had set backs... they can't automatically detect your project output... or need special filters so as not to include unwanted outputs from the build.
My suggestion is thus: If you simply wish to get your project deployed, then learn:
How to build a custom installer class, and
How to author your own pre-requisite packages
These are both reasonably easy skills to master, and satisfy the needs of most developers.
If your specific requirements are core to your business; ie part of your business is to provide a smooth and user-friendly deployment/installation and you feel that none of the available deployment libraries can let you achieve this, then certainly go ahead and build your own.
If your specific requirements would be nice to have but they do not make a significant part of your business; ie the end user will not typically be expecting or needing a smooth installation procedure, or will never need to do that themselves (ie they pass that step onto their IT department), then the need to build your own just for your own specific requirements is likely to be outweighed by the extra effort that would involve.
I think that your impression that you will be needing a custom solution is a sound one; it seems like your requirements are going to be key to the experience of your product, especially if you need really smooth automatic updates and feedback.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I want to implement an "automatic update" system for a windows application.
Right now I'm semi-manually creating an "appcast" which my program checks, and notifies the user that a new version is available. (I'm using
NSIS for my installers).
Is there software that I can use that will handle the "automatic" part of the updates, perhaps similar to Sparkle on the mac? Any issues/pitfalls that I should be aware of?
There's now a Windows port of Sparkle, see http://winsparkle.org.
There is no solution quite as smooth as Sparkle (that I know of).
If you need an easy means of deployment and updating applications, ClickOnce is an option. Unfortunately, it's inflexible (e.g., no per-machine installation instead of per-user), opaque (you have very little influence and clarity and control over how its deployment actually works) and non-standard (the paths it stores the installed app in are unlike anything else on Windows).
Much closer to what you're asking would be ClickThrough, a side project of WiX, but I'm not sure it's still in development (if it is, they should be clearer about that…) — and it would use MSI in any case, not NSIS.
You're likely best off rolling something on your own. I'd love to see a Sparkle-like project for Windows, but nobody seems to have given it a shot thus far.
Google Chrome auto-update is based on Omaha:
http://code.google.com/p/omaha/
Their overview has a great section on why it was needed:
The browser typically prompted the user with a long series of techy, confusing and scary dialogs all trying to convince the user not to install. Then the user was prompted with a wizard filled with choices that they did not need to or know how to decide amongst. These factors combined to form a bad user experience and large drop-off during the app installation process
It's a good idea to use a third-party solution, cause autoupdates can be a pain, especially with Windows Vista/7 (UAC). For what it's worth, the product my company uses is AutoUpdate+ and it seems to work fairly well.
For .NET, a while back Microsoft Patterns + Practices published the Application Updater Block. This was (to my mind) rather overblown and over-engineered, but did the job quite well.
In essence it used a "stub loader" to check a manifest and a Web service to see if a later version of the program than the one installed was available, then used the BITS background downloader technology to download a new version if one was available on the server.
Once the new version was downloaded and installed (with .NET this is as simple as an xcopy to the relevant folder), the application would update the manifest. The next time the program was loaded the new version would be launched.
While the Patterns + Practices code is .NET specific, there's nothing there that couldn't be copied for a non-.NET application, especially if you have the ability to silently run the install process in the background.
If your application is written in .Net, you could try ClickOnce. However, it's difficult to perform administrative or custom actions during install using this approach.
wyUpdate looks really nice. See video here:
http://wyday.com/wybuild/help/automatic-updates/
For .NET applications you might want to have a look at NetSparkle, a Sparkle variant for .NET programs. It is pretty new (from 2011) and developed actively.
Just came here from an answer to my own question on the same subject - I mention one other updating solution in my question. It uses a stub loader, and an xml file to point to the latest executable.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Heavy emphasis on simple. I've never made an installer and I'd rather not have to learn much. A system that I could hand a pile of files to and it would make some smart guesses about where to put them would be ideal.
Go ahead and answer the general question.
However In my cases I'm stuck with some extra constraints. The program to be installed is written in VB6 (or is it 5?) and a few previous versions of VB, so it's not going to be updated any time soon. I have a running install and will have a Clean VM to play with So I'll be doing a loop of: run the install, find where it's broken, fix it, add that to the installer, revert the VM, try again. If anyone has a better approach I'm open to suggestions.
I MUST get it working on XP and I'd really like to also have something that will work on newer versions of Windows as well.
InnoSetup or NSIS, whichever seems easier to you. ISTool is a nice GUI tool for InnoSetup which makes creating setup scripts even easier.
I've used InnoSetup several years ago, before Vista, and was very happy with it then. I only had a few files to install and a Start menu icon. It worked great, and was easy to learn.
Dependency Walker is super useful for finding out which dll is missing from the installer. Once you know the dll, you can find what merge module it is in using the Merge Module Finder.
I have worked with NSIS and getting past some of its minor complexities its a fantastic system. its free, offers tons of plugin ability and managed to do everything I needed to do.
Creating a full setup package for a program is almost a subject area in itself. There are many factors to consider and most of us aren't running Windows 95 anymore. The world is not as simple as it once was.
There are a lot of things that need to be addressed, and some of these "setup" issues mean changing the program too. For example the "protected folders" concept that seemed to be new to people when Vista UAC came on the scene. I guess they were all running as admin or something? In its simplest form it means you don't put writeable files next to the EXE in Programs (aka "Program Files") anymore.
Another factor is that the way the registry is used has changed. I'm not talking about registry virtualization, though that's part of it as well. But COM registration can be done both per-machine and per-user and even turning UAC off can muck this up. See Per-User COM Registrations and Elevated Processes with UAC on Windows Vista SP1. The result is that a setup package shouldn't be running regsvr32 (or otherwise calling the self-reg entrypoint of a COM library). See "Remarks" at SelfReg Table.
Windows Installer is the way to go forward in most cases. VB6 programmers have Visual Studio Installer 6.0 version 1.1 available as a free download for creating MSI packages. See "COM Servers" at the VFP article Using Microsoft Visual Studio Installer for Distributing Visual FoxPro 6.0 Applications for some valuable information.
This isn't the easiest option but there is a VB Setup Wizard in VSI 1.1 to help get the basics right. Doing advanced things like creating a [CommonAppData] subfolder and setting Everyone rights on it has to be done in a post-build step outside the IDE. That's where 3rd party tools can be useful to give you more control without resorting to Orca or post-build Installer scripts.
Those guys making scripted "legacy" installers try to keep up, but the scripting gets more and more complicated. The results are sometimes iffy. Windows 7 introduces a few new wrinkles of its own.
While ClickOnce isn't really the best option for VB6, nothing says you can't use reg-free COM for XCopy installs of many programs. Reg-free COM can even be a good option for use in an Installer package for that matter.
So in the end the "simplest" way to deploy VB6 programs is probably going to be reg-free COM XCopy packages wrapped in a self-extracting EXE that will fire off a script to create a Start Menu shortcut. If you can live without the shortcut this is even easier: just unzip the package where it needs to go!
See Make My Manifest or alternative tools for reg-free COM packaging.
This requires that the target systems be running XP (preferably SP2) or later. The only possible glitch here is that XP did not include the VB6 SP6 runtimes until XP SP3, so you'll want to test your program against the VB6 SP5 runtimes first. Well one more glitch: you can't use ActiveX EXEs this way, they still require registration.
My advice is this. Try to keep the installer as simple as possible. Windows Installer is a very complicated piece of software and when things don't work right it can be hard to figure out what's going on. I'm sure we have all experienced the endless loop of Windows Installer trying to repair a file that you no longer have the source .msi file for.
Most of the time using Windows Installer is like using a sledge hammer to crack a nut.
I use InnoSetup for my own stuff and InstallShield at work (against my will). Start with a simple script based installer and only use Windows Installer if you have a good reason to.
Note that support for installing assemblies to the GAC may be missing for some non Windows Installer setup tools (such as InnoSetup).
I used to LOVE Inno Setup. Emphasis on "used to".
When you run the single file installer (what you'd typically do), it unpacks the real setup program into a folder under the temp folder and then tries to execute it. The problem is... some anti-virus programs don't allow this.
The author is aware of this and refuses to do anything about it. The folder name is random, so cannot be added to any exemption list your anti-virus program may use.
Again. The author is aware of this and suggests that I tell my users to turn off their anti-virus programs during installation. (Like that's going to happen)