Jump to content

Sky Slate Blueberry Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate

MSI for installation


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic
DR
  • Guests
  • Last active:
  • Joined: --
In Windows 7 (and Vista) it is easier to automate installations and more importantly uninstallations and clean updates if the installer were a native MSI.
Would the community consider creating a native MSI package as an option for the next release?

  • Guests
  • Last active:
  • Joined: --
Absolutly not (unless it was an alternative install package.) IMHO, MSI sucks. But beyond that AHK is a nice, simple program that only requires only autohotkey.exe to run any script and leaves no footprint of any kind when the .exe and .ahk files are deleted - a very much in demand behaviour for many (most ?) users.

pajenn
  • Members
  • 391 posts
  • Last active: Feb 06 2015 07:57 AM
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2009
there are EXE to MSI converters, though I'm not sure how well the free ones work.

Hardware: fast laptop with SSD
Software: Win 7 Home Premium 64-bit, android for phone and tablet


xaxas
  • Members
  • 1 posts
  • Last active: Jul 12 2016 03:17 PM
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2015

Sorry to ressurect such an old thread, but the responses here are...subpar.
 
 

Absolutly not (unless it was an alternative install package.) IMHO, MSI sucks.

Coming from someone with the username "Guests", they seem to be speaking for the entire project. Who cares if MSI sucks, so does Windows. I still have to use it, and I still have to deploy this software. Instead of using a proper method though, I have to use a hacked-together conglomeration of scripts, or use a third party program to distribute the software, which is not easily trackable. This does not allow for good management of the software. Additionally, with how simple the installer is, any additional features provided by NSIS seem unneccesary.
 

But beyond that AHK is a nice, simple program that only requires only autohotkey.exe to run any script and leaves no footprint of any kind when the .exe and .ahk files are deleted - a very much in demand behaviour for many (most ?) users.

Yes, to run a simple script, that is all that is required. To be able to run scripts consistently, the program must be installed, and associated with the ahk filetype, or else I'll have to select the exe every time I want to launch a new script. These are things that are solved by having an installer that fits in with the Microsoft ecosystem on which the program runs.

 

If anyone could please chime in on this, since this thread was from 6 years ago, I imagine that attitudes may have changed. MSI isn't going anywhere, and would be super-useful to be able to accountably deploy this software in a domain environment.



SOTE
  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Last active: Jul 06 2015 12:35 PM
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2015

@XAXAS

 

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm confused in where exactly the problem lies.  When I look at "Programs and Features" to uninstall,  AutoHotkey is there.  Also, when an .ahk file is right-clicked, to "run" or "edit" the file options show. 

 

If a person needs more, they can register the file type by .bat or registry.  http://www.autohotke...te-a-file-type/and https://msdn.microso...a_register_type

 

Files can also be run as compiled from the server, or the autohotkey.exe and scripts sit on a specified folder on the workstations.  If it's a logon script, from the domain controller, we would use the directory that corresponds to the domain controller's Netlogon shared folder (SystemRoot\SYSVOL\Sysvol\DomainName\Scripts).

 

Why not NSIS, as opposed to MSI, because aren't they accomplishing the same thing?  And there is an open-source option to create .msi called WiX, http://wixtoolset.org/.  Though it's supposed to be a monster to learn and not suited for everyone, but Microsoft uses it too.

 

Perhaps an explanation of your situation (like if using XP workstations, etc...) can clarify why MSI is needed and other solutions aren't acceptable.  Like if MSI is better for network wide installation of AutoHotkey.



Lexikos
  • Administrators
  • 9844 posts
  • AutoHotkey Foundation
  • Last active:
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2006

Additionally, with how simple the installer is, any additional features provided by NSIS seem unneccesary.

AutoHotkey v1.1 doesn't use NSIS for its installer.

MSI isn't going anywhere, and would be super-useful to be able to accountably deploy this software in a domain environment.

I have no idea what you mean by "accountably deploy". Unattended installations (including upgrade installations) of AutoHotkey are extremely simple; just run the installer with a simple command line switch.

joedf
  • Administrators
  • 986 posts
  • AutoHotkey Foundation
  • Last active: Jul 18 2017 06:01 PM
  • Joined: 20 May 2012

AutoHotkey v1.1 doesn't use NSIS for its installer.

AutoHotkey v1.1 uses AutoHotkey v1.1 for its installer. :D (... and 7zip :) )
Why ahkscript.org? - autohotkey.com is outdated

SOTE
  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Last active: Jul 06 2015 12:35 PM
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2015

Might be worth mentioning that WinZip and PeaZip have self-extractors in the form of .exe.  This can be used as a quasi-installer on computers in a network.  Just load all the files up in the self-extracting zip, including any .bat files, and distribute from the netlogon shared folder.  Even if you are running around by foot doing installs, can put on a usb drive, and install by a single double-click if the self-extracting zip/.exe is setup properly.