PDA

View Full Version : Will I have to ship ISScript with every PATCH?



neal007
05-21-2006, 08:58 PM
Currently I cannot ship a patch without including the ISScript. Although my app was originally installed with the same ISScript, I still need to ship it with patches. I would hope that with IS 12 (I haven't tested this) that once the application is installed with ISScript, I can deliver a patch (update.exe) that does not require either MSI or ISScript every time, further allowing me to deliver the smallest patches I can.

Christopher Painter
05-22-2006, 09:41 AM
I don't know for sure here, but here is my best guess:

The IScript Engine is no longer installed onto the workstation but instead embedded with each package.

If your using Basic MSI I wouldn't think you should have to since any CA's that use IScript will have them embedded in their DLL inside the Binary table of the base package. ( Think Type 1 CA )

For InstallScript MSI's I'd think you would have to redistribute the ISScript with the MSP since you need a bootstrapper to invoke the external UI. You can no longer have a tiny setup.exe that invokes an installed copy because there is no installed copy.

neal007
05-22-2006, 11:01 AM
And that's what I don't understand! Currently, with 11.5, it's ISScriptXXXX.msi which is installed to the system. One would think that if I installed that with my app, I could simply distribute a patch that didn't require ISScript included with the patch. But it's nearly another meg I have to distribute every time, would be nice if the original app would persist the scripting engine with the cached install files so I could deliver the smallest possible patches. Again, bandwidth is key to my dial-up users!

Christopher Painter
05-22-2006, 01:11 PM
The refactoring effort seems to have focused on reliability not size. There are alot less things that can go wrong with a minimal footprint that is statically embedded in the patch package versus a large footprint engine that your hoping is correctly installed on the target machine. Personally I think this is a good thing. If you are concerned about tiny packages then I'd suggest a Basic MSI project. And if you really really are worried about tiny then write your CA's in C++.