I have earlier version (1.0.0.0) of my product in .msi format and for that I delivered patch as .msp with version 1.0.1.0.
I generated patch by comparing two msi's (1.0.0.0 & 1.0.1.0), where existing binaries are modified, no new files added. In PatchTemplate.pcp, I updated FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies table as per MSDN (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369215%28VS.85%29.aspx) [From above link] To ensure this, the value in this field must be greater than all sequence numbers used in previous patches or in the original installation package.
So, I got the value of LastSequence from Media table of latest msi (1.0.1.0) and incremented it by 1 and mentioned the value in FileSequenceStart in PCP file.
So for example, - I have 10 files in 1.0.0.0 msi with a.exe's file sequence as 8 - Modified a.exe in new msi (1.0.1.0) and no new files added. - LastSequence value in Media table of 1.0.10 msi remains 10. - Updated pcp with FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies table as 11 (10 from LastSequence of new msi + 1) as per MSDN. - Now in msp, a.exe's file sequence was modified to 11 (this can be viewed using Orca, by Transform -> View Patch menu with 1.0.1.0 msp applied over 1.0.0.0 msi) - When user installs 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 msp, then a.exe's sequence in the cached installer will be 11 (my assumption).
Now I generate a new msi of version 2.0.0.0 with no new files added, still LastSequence in Media table is 10 (a.exe has file sequence as 8). - Invoke 2.0.0.0 msi with command line as msiexec.exe /i myproduct.msi REINSTALL=vomus REINSTALL=ALL /l*v "C:\myproduct_2.log" - Here file with sequence less than 10 are upgraded except a.exe - In verbose msi log, i see filecopy action for a.exe says Overwrite; Won't patch; Existing file is of an equal version - I doubt this is because of file sequencing for a.exe got modified in msp as 11 and 2.0.0.0 msi has LastSequence in Media table has value as 10.
Please let me know - My assumption is correct or something else is cause this issue. - Is there any issue in my PCP update for FileSequenceStart value. - How can I overcome this issue now, since 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 is already delivered to customer.
Could you confirm that the file a.exe itself is correctly versioned in all versions?
Thanks, Jie Wang
Microsoft Online Community Support
Delighting our customers is our #1 priority. We welcome your comments and suggestions about how we can improve the support we provide to you. Please feel free to let my manager know what you think of the level of service provided. You can send feedback directly to my manager at: msd...@microsoft.com.
Note: MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support Engineer within 2 business days is acceptable. Please note that each follow up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions. Issues of this nature are best handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/aa948874.aspx ================================================== This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
I agree with Jie Wang - you've said nothing about actual *file* versions, and these must be incremented for a patch or minor upgrade to replace them. There's nothing in file sequencing that is related to replacing versioned files on the system.
To avoid having to manually figure out sequencing in ImageFamilies use MinimumRequiredMsiVersion in the Properties table, set it to 200 and have Windows figure it all out.
>I have earlier version (1.0.0.0) of my product in .msi format and for that >I > delivered patch as .msp with version 1.0.1.0.
> I generated patch by comparing two msi's (1.0.0.0 & 1.0.1.0), where > existing > binaries are modified, no new files added. > In PatchTemplate.pcp, I updated FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies > table as per MSDN > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369215%28VS.85%29.aspx) > [From above link] To ensure this, the value in this field must be > greater than all sequence numbers used in previous patches or in the > original > installation package.
> So, I got the value of LastSequence from Media table of latest msi > (1.0.1.0) > and incremented it by 1 and mentioned the value in FileSequenceStart in > PCP > file.
> So for example, > - I have 10 files in 1.0.0.0 msi with a.exe's file sequence as 8 > - Modified a.exe in new msi (1.0.1.0) and no new files added. > - LastSequence value in Media table of 1.0.10 msi remains 10. > - Updated pcp with FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies table as 11 > (10 > from LastSequence of new msi + 1) as per MSDN. > - Now in msp, a.exe's file sequence was modified to 11 (this can be viewed > using Orca, by Transform -> View Patch menu with 1.0.1.0 msp applied over > 1.0.0.0 msi) > - When user installs 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 msp, then a.exe's sequence in > the cached installer will be 11 (my assumption).
> Now I generate a new msi of version 2.0.0.0 with no new files added, still > LastSequence in Media table is 10 (a.exe has file sequence as 8). > - Invoke 2.0.0.0 msi with command line as > msiexec.exe /i myproduct.msi REINSTALL=vomus REINSTALL=ALL /l*v > "C:\myproduct_2.log" > - Here file with sequence less than 10 are upgraded except a.exe > - In verbose msi log, i see filecopy action for a.exe says > Overwrite; Won't patch; Existing file is of an equal version > - I doubt this is because of file sequencing for a.exe got modified in msp > as 11 and 2.0.0.0 msi has LastSequence in Media table has value as 10.
> Please let me know > - My assumption is correct or something else is cause this issue. > - Is there any issue in my PCP update for FileSequenceStart value. > - How can I overcome this issue now, since 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 is > already > delivered to customer.
Hi Jie Wang, Yes, we usually version the binaries same as Product version, in case of 1.0.1.0 msp, a.exe was version ed as 1.0.1.0 and in new msi (2.0.0.0), a.exe is 2.0.0.0
> Could you confirm that the file a.exe itself is correctly versioned in all > versions?
> Thanks, > Jie Wang
> Microsoft Online Community Support
> Delighting our customers is our #1 priority. We welcome your comments and > suggestions about how we can improve the support we provide to you. Please > feel free to let my manager know what you think of the level of service > provided. You can send feedback directly to my manager at: > msd...@microsoft.com.
> Note: MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues > where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support > Engineer within 2 business days is acceptable. Please note that each follow > up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support > professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the > most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations > that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions. Issues of this > nature are best handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer > by contacting Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/aa948874.aspx > ================================================== > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Thanks Phil, I checked my pcp file, I set MinimumRequiredMsiVersion in Properties table as 200 only. What value do you suggest for FileSequenceStart in ImageFamilies table ?
But still I feel, file sequencing has some impact. -- Thanks, Vishnu
"Wilson, Phil" wrote: > I agree with Jie Wang - you've said nothing about actual *file* versions, > and these must be incremented for a patch or minor upgrade to replace them. > There's nothing in file sequencing that is related to replacing versioned > files on the system.
> To avoid having to manually figure out sequencing in ImageFamilies use > MinimumRequiredMsiVersion in the Properties table, set it to 200 and have > Windows figure it all out.
> "VishnuB" <vb...@community.nospam> wrote in message > news:250490D4-AEE0-4406-8896-A20CF0555ACF@microsoft.com... > >I have earlier version (1.0.0.0) of my product in .msi format and for that > >I > > delivered patch as .msp with version 1.0.1.0.
> > I generated patch by comparing two msi's (1.0.0.0 & 1.0.1.0), where > > existing > > binaries are modified, no new files added. > > In PatchTemplate.pcp, I updated FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies > > table as per MSDN > > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369215%28VS.85%29.aspx) > > [From above link] To ensure this, the value in this field must be > > greater than all sequence numbers used in previous patches or in the > > original > > installation package.
> > So, I got the value of LastSequence from Media table of latest msi > > (1.0.1.0) > > and incremented it by 1 and mentioned the value in FileSequenceStart in > > PCP > > file.
> > So for example, > > - I have 10 files in 1.0.0.0 msi with a.exe's file sequence as 8 > > - Modified a.exe in new msi (1.0.1.0) and no new files added. > > - LastSequence value in Media table of 1.0.10 msi remains 10. > > - Updated pcp with FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies table as 11 > > (10 > > from LastSequence of new msi + 1) as per MSDN. > > - Now in msp, a.exe's file sequence was modified to 11 (this can be viewed > > using Orca, by Transform -> View Patch menu with 1.0.1.0 msp applied over > > 1.0.0.0 msi) > > - When user installs 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 msp, then a.exe's sequence in > > the cached installer will be 11 (my assumption).
> > Now I generate a new msi of version 2.0.0.0 with no new files added, still > > LastSequence in Media table is 10 (a.exe has file sequence as 8). > > - Invoke 2.0.0.0 msi with command line as > > msiexec.exe /i myproduct.msi REINSTALL=vomus REINSTALL=ALL /l*v > > "C:\myproduct_2.log" > > - Here file with sequence less than 10 are upgraded except a.exe > > - In verbose msi log, i see filecopy action for a.exe says > > Overwrite; Won't patch; Existing file is of an equal version > > - I doubt this is because of file sequencing for a.exe got modified in msp > > as 11 and 2.0.0.0 msi has LastSequence in Media table has value as 10.
> > Please let me know > > - My assumption is correct or something else is cause this issue. > > - Is there any issue in my PCP update for FileSequenceStart value. > > - How can I overcome this issue now, since 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 is > > already > > delivered to customer.
Additional note, I tried with REINSTALLMODE=vemus to replace even if file is of equal version, I got following error
Error 1334.The file 'a.exe' cannot be installed because the file cannot be found in cabinet file 'Data1.cab'. This could indicate a network error, an error reading from the CD-ROM, or a problem with this package.
> Thanks Phil, > I checked my pcp file, I set MinimumRequiredMsiVersion in Properties > table > as 200 only. What value do you suggest for FileSequenceStart in > ImageFamilies > table ?
> But still I feel, file sequencing has some impact. > -- > Thanks, > Vishnu
> "Wilson, Phil" wrote:
>> I agree with Jie Wang - you've said nothing about actual *file* versions, >> and these must be incremented for a patch or minor upgrade to replace >> them. >> There's nothing in file sequencing that is related to replacing versioned >> files on the system.
>> To avoid having to manually figure out sequencing in ImageFamilies use >> MinimumRequiredMsiVersion in the Properties table, set it to 200 and have >> Windows figure it all out.
>> "VishnuB" <vb...@community.nospam> wrote in message >> news:250490D4-AEE0-4406-8896-A20CF0555ACF@microsoft.com... >> >I have earlier version (1.0.0.0) of my product in .msi format and for >> >that >> >I >> > delivered patch as .msp with version 1.0.1.0.
>> > I generated patch by comparing two msi's (1.0.0.0 & 1.0.1.0), where >> > existing >> > binaries are modified, no new files added. >> > In PatchTemplate.pcp, I updated FileSequenceStart value in >> > ImageFamilies >> > table as per MSDN >> > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369215%28VS.85%29.aspx) >> > [From above link] To ensure this, the value in this field must be >> > greater than all sequence numbers used in previous patches or in the >> > original >> > installation package.
>> > So, I got the value of LastSequence from Media table of latest msi >> > (1.0.1.0) >> > and incremented it by 1 and mentioned the value in FileSequenceStart in >> > PCP >> > file.
>> > So for example, >> > - I have 10 files in 1.0.0.0 msi with a.exe's file sequence as 8 >> > - Modified a.exe in new msi (1.0.1.0) and no new files added. >> > - LastSequence value in Media table of 1.0.10 msi remains 10. >> > - Updated pcp with FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies table as 11 >> > (10 >> > from LastSequence of new msi + 1) as per MSDN. >> > - Now in msp, a.exe's file sequence was modified to 11 (this can be >> > viewed >> > using Orca, by Transform -> View Patch menu with 1.0.1.0 msp applied >> > over >> > 1.0.0.0 msi) >> > - When user installs 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 msp, then a.exe's sequence >> > in >> > the cached installer will be 11 (my assumption).
>> > Now I generate a new msi of version 2.0.0.0 with no new files added, >> > still >> > LastSequence in Media table is 10 (a.exe has file sequence as 8). >> > - Invoke 2.0.0.0 msi with command line as >> > msiexec.exe /i myproduct.msi REINSTALL=vomus REINSTALL=ALL /l*v >> > "C:\myproduct_2.log" >> > - Here file with sequence less than 10 are upgraded except a.exe >> > - In verbose msi log, i see filecopy action for a.exe says >> > Overwrite; Won't patch; Existing file is of an equal version >> > - I doubt this is because of file sequencing for a.exe got modified in >> > msp >> > as 11 and 2.0.0.0 msi has LastSequence in Media table has value as 10.
>> > Please let me know >> > - My assumption is correct or something else is cause this issue. >> > - Is there any issue in my PCP update for FileSequenceStart value. >> > - How can I overcome this issue now, since 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 is >> > already >> > delivered to customer.
I think this could be caused by the file sequence. The installer might be getting the a.exe from wrong media, so you see the "same or older version" problem.
Since the 2.0.0.0 msi is a major version upgrade, is it possible to just assign it a new product code (keep the upgrade code) and have the installer remove previous versions before installing v2?
Thanks, Jie Wang
Microsoft Online Community Support
Delighting our customers is our #1 priority. We welcome your comments and suggestions about how we can improve the support we provide to you. Please feel free to let my manager know what you think of the level of service provided. You can send feedback directly to my manager at: msd...@microsoft.com.
Note: MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support Engineer within 2 business days is acceptable. Please note that each follow up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions. Issues of this nature are best handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/aa948874.aspx ================================================== This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Hi Jie Wang, Thanks for the confirmation and clarifying my instinct. Do you mean if we delivered patch as msp, then Major upgrade is the only option to upgrade the product with MSI. Major upgrade is not an easy decision (uninstall & reinstall), can you please provide me some other approach. The reason behind is similar to Windows 7, we want it to be considered as Major release from customer perspective, but internally we want to provide upgrade seamlessly.
> I think this could be caused by the file sequence. The installer might be > getting the a.exe from wrong media, so you see the "same or older version" > problem.
> Since the 2.0.0.0 msi is a major version upgrade, is it possible to just > assign it a new product code (keep the upgrade code) and have the installer > remove previous versions before installing v2?
> Thanks, > Jie Wang
> Microsoft Online Community Support
> Delighting our customers is our #1 priority. We welcome your comments and > suggestions about how we can improve the support we provide to you. Please > feel free to let my manager know what you think of the level of service > provided. You can send feedback directly to my manager at: > msd...@microsoft.com.
> Note: MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues > where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support > Engineer within 2 business days is acceptable. Please note that each follow > up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support > professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the > most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations > that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions. Issues of this > nature are best handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer > by contacting Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/aa948874.aspx > ================================================== > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Thanks Phil, I will try the behavior of providing no value for FileSequenceStart in ImageFamilies in pcp file. It's great, it works and I can implement same in my future hotfix releases.
Jie Wang confirmed that its because of file sequencing. I need to get rid of the current situation, how to provide minor upgrade in this case.
One more thing, do you think MSDN help article for ImageFamilies has to be corrected, since I got the information from there to increment the file sequence value or my understanding is wrong.
> "VishnuB" <vb...@community.nospam> wrote in message > news:69E3DC1F-D85E-4785-9244-ED952BC01095@microsoft.com... > > Thanks Phil, > > I checked my pcp file, I set MinimumRequiredMsiVersion in Properties > > table > > as 200 only. What value do you suggest for FileSequenceStart in > > ImageFamilies > > table ?
> > But still I feel, file sequencing has some impact. > > -- > > Thanks, > > Vishnu
> > "Wilson, Phil" wrote:
> >> I agree with Jie Wang - you've said nothing about actual *file* versions, > >> and these must be incremented for a patch or minor upgrade to replace > >> them. > >> There's nothing in file sequencing that is related to replacing versioned > >> files on the system.
> >> To avoid having to manually figure out sequencing in ImageFamilies use > >> MinimumRequiredMsiVersion in the Properties table, set it to 200 and have > >> Windows figure it all out.
> >> "VishnuB" <vb...@community.nospam> wrote in message > >> news:250490D4-AEE0-4406-8896-A20CF0555ACF@microsoft.com... > >> >I have earlier version (1.0.0.0) of my product in .msi format and for > >> >that > >> >I > >> > delivered patch as .msp with version 1.0.1.0.
> >> > I generated patch by comparing two msi's (1.0.0.0 & 1.0.1.0), where > >> > existing > >> > binaries are modified, no new files added. > >> > In PatchTemplate.pcp, I updated FileSequenceStart value in > >> > ImageFamilies > >> > table as per MSDN > >> > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369215%28VS.85%29.aspx) > >> > [From above link] To ensure this, the value in this field must be > >> > greater than all sequence numbers used in previous patches or in the > >> > original > >> > installation package.
> >> > So, I got the value of LastSequence from Media table of latest msi > >> > (1.0.1.0) > >> > and incremented it by 1 and mentioned the value in FileSequenceStart in > >> > PCP > >> > file.
> >> > So for example, > >> > - I have 10 files in 1.0.0.0 msi with a.exe's file sequence as 8 > >> > - Modified a.exe in new msi (1.0.1.0) and no new files added. > >> > - LastSequence value in Media table of 1.0.10 msi remains 10. > >> > - Updated pcp with FileSequenceStart value in ImageFamilies table as 11 > >> > (10 > >> > from LastSequence of new msi + 1) as per MSDN. > >> > - Now in msp, a.exe's file sequence was modified to 11 (this can be > >> > viewed > >> > using Orca, by Transform -> View Patch menu with 1.0.1.0 msp applied > >> > over > >> > 1.0.0.0 msi) > >> > - When user installs 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 msp, then a.exe's sequence > >> > in > >> > the cached installer will be 11 (my assumption).
> >> > Now I generate a new msi of version 2.0.0.0 with no new files added, > >> > still > >> > LastSequence in Media table is 10 (a.exe has file sequence as 8). > >> > - Invoke 2.0.0.0 msi with command line as > >> > msiexec.exe /i myproduct.msi REINSTALL=vomus REINSTALL=ALL /l*v > >> > "C:\myproduct_2.log" > >> > - Here file with sequence less than 10 are upgraded except a.exe > >> > - In verbose msi log, i see filecopy action for a.exe says > >> > Overwrite; Won't patch; Existing file is of an equal version > >> > - I doubt this is because of file sequencing for a.exe got modified in > >> > msp > >> > as 11 and 2.0.0.0 msi has LastSequence in Media table has value as 10.
> >> > Please let me know > >> > - My assumption is correct or something else is cause this issue. > >> > - Is there any issue in my PCP update for FileSequenceStart value. > >> > - How can I overcome this issue now, since 1.0.0.0 msi & 1.0.1.0 is > >> > already > >> > delivered to customer.
Sorry for the misunderstanding but what I meant is that the problem *could* be caused by the file sequence and the media table, that was not a confirmation though.
I will try finding out more about this scenario and how exactly it works, and of course what other options we have. But that might take some time.
I'll update here ASAP.
Regards, Jie Wang
Microsoft Online Community Support
Delighting our customers is our #1 priority. We welcome your comments and suggestions about how we can improve the support we provide to you. Please feel free to let my manager know what you think of the level of service provided. You can send feedback directly to my manager at: msd...@microsoft.com.
Note: MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support Engineer within 2 business days is acceptable. Please note that each follow up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions. Issues of this nature are best handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/aa948874.aspx ================================================== This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> Sorry for the misunderstanding but what I meant is that the problem *could* > be caused by the file sequence and the media table, that was not a > confirmation though.
> I will try finding out more about this scenario and how exactly it works, > and of course what other options we have. But that might take some time.
> I'll update here ASAP.
> Regards, > Jie Wang
> Microsoft Online Community Support
> Delighting our customers is our #1 priority. We welcome your comments and > suggestions about how we can improve the support we provide to you. Please > feel free to let my manager know what you think of the level of service > provided. You can send feedback directly to my manager at: > msd...@microsoft.com.
> Note: MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues > where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support > Engineer within 2 business days is acceptable. Please note that each follow > up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support > professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the > most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations > that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions. Issues of this > nature are best handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer > by contacting Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/aa948874.aspx > ================================================== > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"VishnuB" wrote: > Hi Jie Wang, > Sorry for my mis-understanding. Any quick help will be very much > appreciated.
> -- > Thanks in Advance, > Vishnu
> ""Jie Wang [MSFT]"" wrote:
> > Hi Vishnu,
> > Sorry for the misunderstanding but what I meant is that the problem *could* > > be caused by the file sequence and the media table, that was not a > > confirmation though.
> > I will try finding out more about this scenario and how exactly it works, > > and of course what other options we have. But that might take some time.
> > I'll update here ASAP.
> > Regards, > > Jie Wang
> > Microsoft Online Community Support
> > Delighting our customers is our #1 priority. We welcome your comments and > > suggestions about how we can improve the support we provide to you. Please > > feel free to let my manager know what you think of the level of service > > provided. You can send feedback directly to my manager at: > > msd...@microsoft.com.
> > Note: MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues > > where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support > > Engineer within 2 business days is acceptable. Please note that each follow > > up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support > > professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the > > most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations > > that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions. Issues of this > > nature are best handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer > > by contacting Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/aa948874.aspx > > ================================================== > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|
