PDA

View Full Version : Insalling to CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA



NewsArchive
06-20-2008, 02:11 AM
I install my programs database files to a folder under CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA

I have had an unusual number of users report that adter isntallation the
files that are supposed to ahve been isntalled in this location are not
there. In fact the folder had not been created.

After isntalling the files my script has the CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA
information written to a registry entry for use by my program.

Does setup builder report errors if the files cannot be isntalled ?

Any ideas why this is happening?

Install EXE is here : http://enercalc.cachefly.net/ECSEL6_SETUP.EXE (30MB)

Script is here: www.enercalc.com/downloads/EC_60_19_Full.sb6

Michael

NewsArchive
06-20-2008, 02:20 AM
Hi Michael,

>Any ideas why this is happening?
>
>Install EXE is here : http://enercalc.cachefly.net/ECSEL6_SETUP.EXE (30MB)

I use that folder for somet stuff but haven't had any problems so far.
Checking the uninstall log from computers that have problems might
shed some light on what's going on...

Best regards,

Arnór Baldvinsson
Icetips Creative, Inc.
San Antonio, Texas, USA
www.icetips.com


Subscribe to information from Icetips.com:
http://www.icetips.com/subscribe.php

NewsArchive
06-20-2008, 02:21 AM
I've used it extensively for over 5,00 user isntallations with nary a peep
out of them.

Then 9 reports in two days.

michael d. brooks

NewsArchive
06-20-2008, 02:21 AM
> I've used it extensively for over 5,00 user isntallations with nary a peep
> out of them.
>
> Then 9 reports in two days.

Any pattern to those 9? OS? Group policy managers? (ie: people bolting down
machines)
--

Mark Riffey
http://www.rescuemarketing.com/blog/
Guy Kawasaki & the Wall Street
Journal staff read it, maybe you should too.

NewsArchive
06-20-2008, 02:22 AM
Michael

I hit this problem also some time back.

SB is installing your files...

If you have a subscription to ClarionMag check out

http://www.clarionmag.com/cmag/v9/v9n08vista4.html

This is an article by Jane Fleming and here is a significant para from the article
(Hope DaveH does not object) ...

=========== 8< ===========
Two things make CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA, which on a Vista machine resolves to
C:\ProgramData, less than ideal. First, it's a hidden folder. Second, default folder
permissions give a user the ability to create and modify a document; but for anybody
other than the creator, permissions to that document are read-only.
=========== >8 ===========

You really should be using CSIDL_COMMON_DOCUMENTS

In my book, MS have really stuffed up by saying the folder is CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA

HTH

JohnG

NewsArchive
06-20-2008, 02:23 AM
> I install my programs database files to a folder under CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA

Mike,

After re-reading this, Id think hard about moving that to
drive:\EnercalcData to avoid a lot of the ugliness of security on Vista and
later Windows releases.

--

Mark Riffey
http://www.rescuemarketing.com/blog/
Guy Kawasaki & the Wall Street
Journal staff read it, maybe you should too.

NewsArchive
06-20-2008, 02:23 AM
Hi Michael,

>
> Any ideas why this is happening?
>

I assume the machined do not have Shlwapi.dll Version 5.0

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb776779(VS.85).aspx

Hope this helps.

--
Friedrich Linder
Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
+1.954.252.3910

"point. click. ship" - that's SetupBuilder
Create Windows Vista ready installations in minutes

-- Official Comodo Code Signing and SSL Certificate Partner

NewsArchive
06-21-2008, 12:17 PM
John,

Thanks...

I keep hearing three different approaches.

CSIDL_APPDATA
CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA
CSIDL_COMMON_DOCUMENTS

Where should I be putting files that our software must have
read/write/modify access to under all types of suer accounts and so the
files are accesible by all users on a particular computer ?

This must work for Windows 2000, XP and Vista.

Mike

NewsArchive
06-21-2008, 12:18 PM
Mike,

> I keep hearing three different approaches.
>
> CSIDL_APPDATA
> CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA
> CSIDL_COMMON_DOCUMENTS
>
> Where should I be putting files that our software must have
> read/write/modify access to under all types of suer accounts and so the
> files are accesible by all users on a particular computer ?
>
> This must work for Windows 2000, XP and Vista.

The COMMON_DOCUMENTS (Public folder) is for data that's not specific to one
user account.

Please allow me to repost a previously mentioned interesting SetupBuilder
related thread from the Microsoft MSDN forum:

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1213890&SiteID=1

IMO, CSIDL_COMMON_DOCUMENTS is the way to go.

--
Friedrich Linder
Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
+1.954.252.3910

"point. click. ship" - that's SetupBuilder
Create Windows Vista ready installations in minutes

-- Official Comodo Code Signing and SSL Certificate Partner

NewsArchive
06-21-2008, 12:19 PM
>Where should I be putting files that our software must have
>read/write/modify access to under all types of suer accounts and so the
>files are accesible by all users on a particular computer ?

Mike,

Go with what Friedrich suggested, CSIDL_COMMON_DOCUMENTS.

I found this last night:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms995853.aspx

The relevant bit is:

>By default, this location is read-only for normal (non-admin, non-power)
>Users. If an application requires normal Users to have write access to an
>application specific subdirectory of CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA, then the
>application must explicitly modify the security on that sub-directory during
>application setup.

HTH


--
Best regards,

Mark

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Why waste time learning when ignorance is instantaneous?

NewsArchive
06-25-2008, 01:21 AM
As a follow up, I need to admit that I found a programming error in my code.

It was one of those unfinished code changes that blew up in my face.

It was not the entire reason but at least 51%.

Ugh


Mike

NewsArchive
06-26-2008, 02:10 AM
> As a follow up, I need to admit that I found a programming error in my
> code.
>
> It was one of those unfinished code changes that blew up in my face.
>
> It was not the entire reason but at least 51%.
>
> Ugh

Thanks for the follow-up, Mike!

Friedrich