Charlotte Foust
cfoust at infostatsystems.com
Tue Aug 2 13:02:44 CDT 2005
The packaging wizard in all its versions has been a pathetic installer. It gave you no choice as to where the dlls (or pretty much anything else except the mdb itself) were installed. Wise and InstallShield have far greater flexibility and SageKey makes them hum. Actually, as I recall pretty much *every* version of Office has asked if you want to remove the previous version, including the runtime, so that isn't peculiar to 2003 and it's something the client either have to be warned about, or you have to say, "Look, dummy, you broke it. Now reinstall my application from your CD." ;-} Charlotte Foust -----Original Message----- From: William Hindman [mailto:dejpolsys at hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 10:38 AM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: Re: [AccessD] Runtime Vs Full Access Install ..hhhmmm ...the default runtime install using the Access ODE is to the same directory as a full install ...and that includes the WinSys32 directory ..since I no longer allow full Access installs I've had no need to use Wise ..installing the runtime to a different directory certainly makes sense but that would still leave the dlls and ocx's in the sys32 exposed unless Wise puts the alias' in the registry, something the ms runtime wizard certainly won't do. ..even with a runtime in a different directory and with aliased references, an A2k3 full install will ask if the user wants to remove previous versions and if the user oks it, will promptly remove an older runtime ...but then I suspect Wise has a way around that as well ...the long and short of it being that if you can't control the environment then Wise is a necessity, not a convenience. ..as with anything, you live and learn ...I'm an independent ...I don't need to and therefore don't take on clients that don't want to do it my way ..makes my life much less complicated ...I don't envy anyone forced to deal with client controlled application environments ...especially notwork dba's on steroids who don't know their own jobs, much less mine ...been there, done that and like pissing into the wind, it doesn't take a repeat to know better. ..hope all this hasn't left Kath more confused :) William ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlotte Foust" <cfoust at infostatsystems.com> To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 11:47 AM Subject: RE: [AccessD] Runtime Vs Full Access Install > Then you're very fortunate to have that much control, William, but I > must disagree with you. Your runtime files are NOT dependent on how > the user does an Access install unless you unwisely (no pun intended) > install the runtime in a generic location where it can be easily > mucked up. We install the runtime files in their own directory and > have not run into any collisions with installed versions of Access, > either before or after the installation of the runtime. We've been > doing this for years through multiple versions of Access (and > Windows), so I think you can say it is time tested. > > The only real issue with runtime and full install on the same machine > is that you MUST start the application using a shortcut that > specifically points to the runtime executable or Windows will try to > load the last full version of Access to open the database, whether or > not it is appropriate. > > Charlotte Foust > > > -----Original Message----- > From: William Hindman [mailto:dejpolsys at hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 8:53 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Runtime Vs Full Access Install > > > Kath ...afaik the runtime is a "package" at install only ...but if a > user subsequently installs full Access ...any version ...all bets are > off because > your runtime files integrity is dependent upon how the user does the > install > ..a "default" install will screw your runtime more often than not > because > it defaults to removing older file versions, even if they are needed by > your > runtime ...Wise/Sage won't block that type of problem from happening > either > but when you reinstall your runtime they will handle the concurrent full > > version issues for you. > > ..I work with no full Access installs allowed on client systems with > the > > exception of developer dedicated workstations ...and no "office" > upgrades either even if they don't include Access, except by me ...the > latter because > the office vba modules share some common parts with Access vba. > > ..but I'll be the first to admit that most developers don't have that > type of control over their app runtime environments and there may well > be other, > better ways to deal with it ...I just find that keeping it clean makes > my > life a lot simpler and my clients with a lot fewer problems. > > William > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kath Pelletti" <KP at sdsonline.net> > To: <AccessD at databaseadvisors.com> > Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 9:04 PM > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Runtime Vs Full Access Install > > > William - maybe I have misunderstood. I thought that by including all > dll's (or other files referred to in the vba references) in the > runtime install > package, that it could then be standalone. By that I mean that it would > run > regardless of whether the user had (any version of Access) or not, as it > is > a packaged entity. > > Have I got that wrong? (And I am assuming using Sage / Wise) > > Kath > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: William Hindman > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 3:26 PM > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Runtime Vs Full Access Install > > > ..hhhmmm ...either I'm misreading you or there is a fundamental > misunderstanding somewhere in here ...a runtime mdb/mde is exactly the > > same > as a full install mdb/mde ...the difference is that Access itself is > not fully installed in a runtime ...the design/coding elements are > not there > so > a user can't change anything ...it runs exactly as you designed it to > run. > > ..if you have an A97 mdb and an A2k runtime it should still run as > long as the references are there ...but the reverse is not true ...so > I use startup > code to check the installed version and call the corresponding fe > mdb/mde. > > ..if you invest in the wise install tools, they handle those issues > much better than the native Access distribution tools do and the > default is to > let them do all the work for you. > > William > > -- > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > -- > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > -- > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com