Installer problems

[vefatica]

Even after updating the Windows installer, I'm still having problems. Yesterday I got a long stack trace early in the update process. The previous version was removed and nothing was installed. So I DL'd the distribution and installed afresh (which went OK).

Now I have a few references in the registry to the folder below.

E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\FEFB8C2\

It doesn't exist; the "Install" folder is empty. Is that right?

One such reference is in HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Installer\Products\318619EC69C9D674C9ACF685FAFE8B2C\SourceList\Net. That key is timestamped yesterday.

You can check this sort of stuff by searching for "Take Command 12.1" in RegEdit. I'm trying to figure out if my installation is correct.

 

[vefatica]

I also found this in the event log:

Product: Take Command 12.10 -- Error 1308. Source file not found: E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\FEFB8C2\updater.exe. Verify that the file exists and that you can access it.

 

[vefatica]

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 12:06:57 -0400, vefatica <> wrote:

|I also found this in the event log:
|
|Product: Take Command 12.10 -- Error 1308. Source file not found: E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\FEFB8C2\updater.exe. Verify that the file exists and that you can access it.

That was right after this one:

Beginning a Windows Installer transaction: E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP
Software\Take Command 12.10\install\FEFB8C2\tcmd.msi. Client Process Id: 2660.

And that one was the first installer event log entry for my failed attempt to
update.

That directory didn't exist before or after the installation.

 

[vefatica]

Rex, is there any way I can repeatedly go through the "UPDATE /U" process do I can try to debug this? Uninstall/re-install always works and it's weeks between updates.

 

[vefatica]

So I uninstalled. I verified that there was no mention in the registry of "Take Command 12.10" (except for the JPS keys) and no mention of the folder "E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10" (which I deleted).

Then I started a new installation. Here are the first two event log entries from the installer:

Beginning a Windows Installer transaction: E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\FEFB8C2\tcmd.msi. Client Process Id: 360.

Product: Take Command 12.10 -- Error 1308. Source file not found: E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\FEFB8C2\updater.exe. Verify that the file exists and that you can access it.

Note that that folder name, "FEFB8C2", is an old name ... from a previous installation. There was absolutely no mention of it in the registry after I uninstalled. Now, the 12.10 "Take Command 12.10\install" (in the tree mentioned above) exists again and is empty. It seems there should be a copy of tcmd.msi and updater.exe in there.

 

[rconn]

Now I have a few references in the registry to the folder below.

E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\FEFB8C2\

It doesn't exist; the "Install" folder is empty. Is that right?

One such reference is in HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Installer\Products\318619EC69C9D674C9ACF685FAFE8B2C\SourceList\Net. That key is timestamped yesterday.

You can check this sort of stuff by searching for "Take Command 12.1" in RegEdit. I'm trying to figure out if my installation is correct.

I think the obvious answer is "no".

I have a registry entry that points to "...\Appdata\Roaming\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\...", and there is no "install" directory. (There is an "update" directory.)

The Windows Installer creates keys off the \Installer\Products branch in the registry for any program it installs. I have more than 200; most don't point to a valid file / directory, but I doubt that it's the fault of Adobe / Apple / CollabNet etc. (I also don't really care; I'm not sure why it's bothering you -- but if it does, run a registry cleaner & it'll probably tidy them up.)

If you want to know why, ask Microsoft. It's their program, and they don't document the directories & keys it creates & uses. And they didn't send me the source code. I do not (cannot!) specify any of those directories or keys in the installer script.

I think the best solution to your many unreproducible problems is a big degausser and a fresh install of Win 7. (If my system was behaving like yours, I'd have reinstalled weeks ago.)

 

[vefatica]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 00:39:55 -0400, rconn <> wrote:

|I have a registry entry that points to "...\Appdata\Roaming\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\...", and there is no "install" directory. (There is an "update" directory.)
|
|The Windows Installer creates keys off the \Installer\Products branch in the registry for any program it installs. I have more than 200; most don't point to a valid file / directory, but I doubt that it's the fault of Adobe / Apple / CollabNet etc. (I also don't really care; I'm not sure why it's bothering you -- but if it does, run a registry cleaner & it'll probably tidy them up.)

Where's that key? Are you talking about XP?

I just did an "UPDATE /U" to b63. It went without a hitch (for the first time
in a while). Maybe my fooling around fixed something.

I'm not going to Windows 7 until I'm confident I can configure it to allow me to
do whatever I want, whenever I want. For starters, my logon script injects two
DLLs into Explorer. I won't tolerate being interrogated every time that
happens.

So ... question ... can Win7 be configured to let me do whatever I want,
whenever I want?

 

[Steve Pitts]

can Win7 be configured to let me do whatever I want,
whenever I want?

Almost certainly, by turning UAC off altogether. Of course, that will mean that if anyone else hacks into your machine and gains sufficient rights then they too will be able to do whatever they want, but if you can mitigate that possibility then you are good to go.

Sadly, Microsoft seem to be of the opinion that the management of our systems is their remit not ours and forcing the new OS to bend to your will rather than Redmond's can be a real pain in the rear. Oh, and don't bother purchasing anything below Windows 7 Professional, the Home editions are all crippled in various ways that will undoubtedly bug the heck out of you (Win 7 Home Premium lasted less than a week on my new PC before being replaced by Win 7 Pro - fortunately I hadn't activated and my system builder was very understanding and replaced one OEM version with another for the difference in what they would have charged me to have Pro installed from the get go)

 

[vefatica]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 02:55:43 -0400, vefatica <> wrote:

|I just did an "UPDATE /U" to b63. It went without a hitch (for the first time
|in a while). Maybe my fooling around fixed something.

That successful update created the six application event log entries below. The
last two seem redundant. Is this what others see? And there's nothing inside
the "Install" directory mentioned. Is that what others see? The files
mentioned used to remain after an update.

4/25/2011 02:24:22 4 0 1040 MsiInstaller ZZ\vefat
ica ZZ Beginning a Windows Installer transaction: E:\Users\vefa
tica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\D641D95\tcmd.msi. C
lient Process Id: 1612.

4/25/2011 02:24:25 4 0 1042 MsiInstaller NT AUTHO
RITY\SYSTEM ZZ Ending a Windows Installer transaction: E:\Users
\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\D641D95\tcmd.m
si. Client Process Id: 1612.

4/25/2011 02:24:25 4 0 11707 MsiInstaller ZZ\vefat
ica ZZ Product: Take Command 12.10 -- Installation completed su
ccessfully.

4/25/2011 02:24:25 4 0 1033 MsiInstaller ZZ\vefat
ica ZZ Windows Installer installed the product. Product Name: T
ake Command 12.10. Product Version: 12.10.63. Product Language: 1033. Installati
on success or error status: 0.

4/25/2011 02:24:28 4 0 11707 MsiInstaller ZZ\vefat
ica ZZ Product: Take Command 12.10 -- Installation completed su
ccessfully.

4/25/2011 02:24:28 4 0 1033 MsiInstaller ZZ\vefat
ica ZZ Windows Installer installed the product. Product Name: T
ake Command 12.10. Product Version: 12.10.63. Product Language: 1033. Installati
on success or error status: 0.

 

[David Marcus]

Is this what others see?

Where do you see this?

 

[David Marcus]

Sadly, Microsoft seem to be of the opinion that the management of our systems is their remit not ours and forcing the new OS to bend to your will rather than Redmond's can be a real pain in the rear.

If you don't like UAC, turn it off. I do.

the Home editions are all crippled in various ways that will undoubtedly bug the heck out of you

I'm running Vista Home Premium and Windows 7 Home Premium. I wouldn't call them "crippled".

 

[vefatica]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 10:27:10 -0400, David Marcus <> wrote:

|---Quote (Originally by vefatica)---
|Is this what others see?
|---End Quote---
|Where do you see this?

It's in the application event log (retrieved with DUMPEL.EXE).

 

[David Marcus]

It's in the application event log (retrieved with DUMPEL.EXE).

4/25/2011 10:08:11 AM 4 0 1040 MsiInstaller David-PC\David David-PC Beginning a Windows Installer transaction: C:\Users\David\AppData\Roaming\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\D641D95\tcmd.msi. Client Process Id: 7928.
4/25/2011 10:08:31 AM 4 0 8194 System Restore N/A David-PC Successfully created restore point (Process = C:\Windows\system32\msiexec.exe /V; Description = Installed Take Command 12.10).
4/25/2011 10:08:31 AM 4 0 10000 Microsoft-Windows-RestartManager David-PC\David David-PC 1 2011-04-25T14:08:31.958Z
4/25/2011 10:08:34 AM 4 0 8194 System Restore N/A David-PC Successfully created restore point (Process = C:\Windows\system32\msiexec.exe /V; Description = Removed Take Command 12.10).
4/25/2011 10:08:34 AM 4 0 10000 Microsoft-Windows-RestartManager David-PC\David David-PC 1 2011-04-25T14:08:34.073Z
4/25/2011 10:08:37 AM 4 0 8194 System Restore N/A David-PC Successfully created restore point (Process = C:\Windows\system32\msiexec.exe /V; Description = ).
4/25/2011 10:08:48 AM 4 0 8194 System Restore N/A David-PC Successfully created restore point (Process = C:\Windows\system32\msiexec.exe /V; Description = ).
4/25/2011 10:08:48 AM 4 0 1042 MsiInstaller NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM David-PC Ending a Windows Installer transaction: C:\Users\David\AppData\Roaming\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\D641D95\tcmd.msi. Client Process Id: 7928.
4/25/2011 10:08:48 AM 4 0 11707 MsiInstaller David-PC\David David-PC Product: Take Command 12.10 -- Installation completed successfully.
4/25/2011 10:08:48 AM 4 0 1033 MsiInstaller David-PC\David David-PC Windows Installer installed the product. Product Name: Take Command 12.10. Product Version: 12.10.63. Product Language: 1033. Installation success or error status: 0.
4/25/2011 10:08:48 AM 4 0 10001 Microsoft-Windows-RestartManager David-PC\David David-PC 1 2011-04-25T14:08:31.958Z
4/25/2011 10:08:48 AM 4 0 10001 Microsoft-Windows-RestartManager David-PC\David David-PC 1 2011-04-25T14:08:34.073Z
4/25/2011 10:09:09 AM 4 0 11707 MsiInstaller David-PC\David David-PC Product: Take Command 12.10 -- Installation completed successfully.
4/25/2011 10:09:09 AM 4 0 1033 MsiInstaller David-PC\David David-PC Windows Installer installed the product. Product Name: Take Command 12.10. Product Version: 12.10.63. Product Language: 1033. Installation success or error status: 0.

 

[Steve Pitts]

If you don't like UAC, turn it off

It isn't only about UAC, which I actually like in principle if not entirely in execution, but about a whole raft of areas where MS expects you to do things their way, or jump through hoops to achieve otherwise. Most obvious example from my own recent experiences with setting up Windows 7 for home use (I've been using it since release day on my work laptop) would be trying to place the Users structure on other than the C partition. I like to separate data from the system and programs, and since my new PC has a 120GB SSD as C: and a 1TB HD as D: I didn't want the limited space on the SSD to be taken up with the kind of crud that ends up cluttering up the Users structure.

I'm running Vista Home Premium and Windows 7 Home Premium. I wouldn't call them "crippled"

I found several areas where I was unable to gain access to change things either partially or completely. Most of these related to user security, which I guess may not be an issue to everyone running the Home editions, but drove me up the pole as I like to lock things down so that my offspring cannot mess things up or install dodgy software. The fact that MS restricts access to things like the local users and groups, local security policy and local group policy editor snap-ins strikes me as being marketing driven and leads me to describe the Home versions as crippled.

 

[David Marcus]

Most of these related to user security, which I guess may not be an issue to everyone running the Home editions, but drove me up the pole as I like to lock things down so that my offspring cannot mess things up or install dodgy software. The fact that MS restricts access to things like the local users and groups, local security policy and local group policy editor snap-ins strikes me as being marketing driven and leads me to describe the Home versions as crippled.

I doubt most users would know what to do with those things. You are obviously a "pro". Most users can't even figure out how to organize their start menu or find a file that isn't on their desktop. Actually, most users probably let their offspring handle the sys admin tasks.

 

[Steve Fabian]

---- Original Message ----
From: David Marcus
| I doubt most users would know what to do with those things. You are
| obviously a "pro". Most users can't even figure out how to organize
| their start menu or find a file that isn't on their desktop.
| Actually, most users probably let their offspring handle the sys
| admin tasks.

You are probably correct for the typical users of Windows, but I seriously doubt it to be true for most users of TCC. I think most of us in this NG - Forum qualify for the title "pro". Just this past week I had to remove the Vista drive from my (almost) 16-year old's computer, install it into a case allowing it to be connected to another system via USB, and remove viruses before restoring it into his laptop. It still left many OS files missing! I'd not like him to use my main system with administrator privileges.
--
Steve

 

[vefatica]

Is the MSI file mentioned below supposed to exist after an install/upgrade or not?

4/25/2011 02:24:22 4 0 1040 MsiInstaller ZZ\vefat
ica ZZ Beginning a Windows Installer transaction: E:\Users\vefa
tica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10\install\D641D95\tcmd.msi. Client Process Id: 1612.

 

[David Marcus]

I don't have tcmd.msi on my disk.

 

[rconn]

Is the MSI file mentioned below supposed to exist after an install/upgrade or not?

It's not on my system. But you'll have to ask Microsoft about the "supposed to exist" part.

 

[JohnQSmith]

Don't know if this makes a difference, but...

[C:\]ffind /a /s /b tcmd.msi
C:\Documents and Settings\qcmsb0\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10
\install\B47E92B\tcmd.msi

[C:\]ver /r

TCC  12.10.63   Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
TCC Build 63   Windows XP Build 2600  Service Pack 3

 

[vefatica]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:57:13 -0400, JohnQSmith <> wrote:

|Don't know if this makes a difference, but...
|
|
|HTML:
|---------
|[C:\]ffind /a /s /b tcmd.msi
|C:\Documents and Settings\qcmsb0\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10
|\install\B47E92B\tcmd.msi
|
|[C:\]ver /r
|
|TCC 12.10.63 Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
|TCC Build 63 Windows XP Build 2600 Service Pack 3

That's exactly what I used to see. Now "install" is empty.

 

[vefatica]

Look inside. Is what's there old or new?

Don't know if this makes a difference, but...

[C:\]ffind /a /s /b tcmd.msi
C:\Documents and Settings\qcmsb0\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.10
\install\B47E92B\tcmd.msi

[C:\]ver /r

TCC  12.10.63   Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
TCC Build 63   Windows XP Build 2600  Service Pack 3

 

[JohnQSmith]

Look inside. Is what's there old or new?

File is dated 2011-03-24 14:32. Folders inside are dated 2011-03-24 14:31. Apparently a previous build of 12.10. Thinking back though, it could be from an upgrade install that had glitched and failed.

 

[vefatica]

Build 64 was the second clean update in a row (following a clean installation). I'm on a roll!