Integrator and SVCPACK Order

Questions about Update Pack making? Ask here.
Post Reply
jfcarbel
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:08 am

Integrator and SVCPACK Order

Post by jfcarbel » Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:23 am

I realize that integrator has an order of how it organizes the SVCPACK SetupHotfixesToRun and I believe it was alphabetical. But I noticed my final list below is not in any order.

Here's maybe why.

I keep all my AddOns organized into different directories and Integrator seems to limit you to choosing Addons from one directory when it presents the Add file dialog. So I have to go thru multiple iterations of integrating from each directory one by one.

So my question is, should I now take this list and put it in some kind of order? Does order even really matter and is there certain AddOns that should always go first?

Here is my SVCPACK.INF
[SetupHotfixesToRun]
Reapers_Adobe_Shockwave_11.0.3.472_Slim.exe
RedDXManaged_1.1.0.exe
RedDXRuntimes_0.6.1_32bit.exe
2_VC2005SP1VC2008SP1.exe
5_OtherRuntimes.exe
Java6u12.exe
Silverlight.exe
netfxAIO.exe
HandBrake_RS_Multimode.exe -ai
IrfanView_RS_Multimode.exe -ai
Reapers_7Zip_4.65.exe
AC3.exe /S
AdobeReader.exe -ai
cmdopen.exe
CoreTemp.exe
DVDShrink32015.exe /SILENT
Firefox3.exe -ms
Foobar0962.exe /S
HWMonitor.exe
ImgBurn2420.exe /S
MozBackup148.exe /S
Mp3tag242.exe /S
RealAlternative190.exe /VERYSILENT /SP- /NORESTART
TagScanner50525.exe /VERYSILENT /SP-
TrueCrypt.exe
VideoLAN-098a.exe
Audacity126.exe /VERYSILENT /SP-
QuickTimeAlternative280.exe /VERYSILENT /SP- /NORESTART
SpyBotSD.exe
Yahoo_9.exe

User avatar
crashfly
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:39 pm
Location: Arkansas, USA

Post by crashfly » Wed Feb 18, 2009 1:29 am

I have this recommendation for you, jfcarbel:

If the addon does not "directly" modify important system components, then they should go first. Usually switchless installers of most programs fall into that category. Depending on how they were written, you will usually not notice any problems.

In your list I can see a very big *potential* problem. .Net installers should *always* go last. The reasoning behind this is that .net becomes very integral into the OS and tends to cause issues with other installing programs if done before. .Net also makes changes to certain system files and can cause many unforeseen problems. I do not know which version of Adobe Reader you are installing, but there have been reports of .Net causing major issues with Adobe Reader v9. The only exception to the rule of .net going last would be those programs that actually check for the existence of .net before installing. Those can be applied after .net with little ill effect.


Please realize that what I have outlined above is only a general recommendation and should not necessarily be taken as "gospel". I am just giving my opinion on the matter as what I have experienced and some of what I have read on the matter.
A mind is like a parachute, it only functions when it is open.
--Anonymous

How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

jfcarbel
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:08 am

Post by jfcarbel » Wed Feb 18, 2009 1:54 am

I am using:
RogueSpear_Adobe_Reader_9.00.332_Silent_AddOn.7z

Also, I was under the impression that logically .NET should go first as programs might depend on it to be installed.

Why would .NET effect other installers of programs? Isn't .NET just a runtime engine just like the Java JRE. I would not think a VM that runs a layer above the system layer would be modifying any system level files in the OS. Do you recall where you read about this?

User avatar
crashfly
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:39 pm
Location: Arkansas, USA

Post by crashfly » Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:51 pm

The issue specifically with Adobe Reader 9 was on RougeSpear's site. However, .net is not an issue, per se, with the modification on what files it does, the issue is that the .net runtime optimizations are done immediately after install causing tie ups with other installers in general. One also cannot install .net v1.1 directly after .net v2 because .net v2 locks up some files .net v1.1 needs to update.

I will try to get you the specific information on it, but I would always recommend doing a .net install last. It tends to cause less problems.
A mind is like a parachute, it only functions when it is open.
--Anonymous

How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

User avatar
beats
Posts: 772
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:11 am
Location: Netherlands

Post by beats » Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:38 pm

crashfly wrote:In your list I can see a very big *potential* problem. .Net installers should *always* go last. The reasoning behind this is that .net becomes very integral into the OS and tends to cause issues with other installing programs if done before. .Net also makes changes to certain system files and can cause many unforeseen problems.
Just a side note: NetFXAIO.exe by jd976 is a switchless installer, thus not a true addon. You can even install it on a live system without any problems. ;)

Post Reply