[squeak-dev] Re: Packaging of 4.1 for Windows

Torsten Bergmann astares at gmx.de
Thu Mar 25 08:36:48 UTC 2010

>I can still give a hand to make it happen.

Would be good, my time is very limited.

>Would this be handled/maintained by the release team afterwards? 

At least it should - otherwise why would we need a release
team ;) 

But once the script/installer meets all expectations 
one just have to update it to newer squeak versions.
Even this could be automated.

>I think it's important that official installers be generated by a trusted
>source if not directly on a windows server managed by SOB.

+1, the task could be easily automated - anything we need
is a build server with windows

>It was unclear whether you wrote the script or just taken what Pharo 
>guys did.

I wrote the script based on a script I wrote to generate the 
Pharo installers (see the "Ready made setup" on

>I would also prefer a different name for the installer.

This is how we name the files in pharo. However - feel free to
change for Squeak.

>However, ZipDLL is not used at all and we should probably get rid of the

Yes, this was from an early test where I zipped the files
in the Pharo distribution. You can remove it.

>Since I have extremely limited time and never used NSIS, I'm looking 
>for someone else to provide an MSI for testing.

We dont need an MSI file, EXE is enough. Also MSI files can be
delivered as EXE (in such scenarios the EXE checks if MSI is 
installed on old systems). 

>First thing I notice is that the installer doesn't actually install 
>anything into C:\Program Files?

That's correct since this can lead to problems on Win7

>Installation directory can be defined however we want, including on 
>different drive or allow a user defined location. It is currently set to
>%LocalAppData%. It should be all right for a single user environment.

Yes, this works well in most situations and people are able
to change the installation directory during the install process anyway.

I would not separate the image folder from the VM folder
Space is cheap these days and it would be more confusing.

>The other thing I noticed is that for some reason after the installation 
>was complete and I ran Squeak I got a Windows notifier saying that the 
>app might not have installed correctly.

Do you use Win7 - maybe you should install as "Admin".

I tested on Win7, Vista, XP - installed without any problems 
(VirtualBox images)

>And one nitpick: The splash screen for Squeak shouldn't be used as 
>splash screen for the installer. It's confusing; I thought that for some 
>reason the installer was launching Squeak.

We could easily deactivate the splash for the installer in the script
or if you have one include another.

A similar installer works well on Pharo without any
complaints by the users. However - I still think it would 
help Squeak too to additionally provide one and hope that
someone is able to take care of it (Ian/release team).


GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list