1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

OPTION /U

Discussion in 'Support' started by vefatica, Mar 22, 2011.

  1. vefatica

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,952
    Likes Received:
    30
    Is it correct that v12.01.44's OPTION /U allow upgrading to 12.10.56?

    What will happen in AddRemovePrograms if one follows that route and installs on top of 12.01? Will the 12.10 entry replace the 12.01 entry? After simply installing 12.10, it is seen as distinct from 12.01.
     
  2. rconn

    rconn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    9,859
    Likes Received:
    83
    Yes.

    Yes. (Though your Windows Installer setup is so screwed up I won't hazard a guess as to what it will do.)
     
  3. vefatica

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,952
    Likes Received:
    30
    On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 00:17:25 -0400, rconn <> wrote:

    |---Quote (Originally by vefatica)---
    |Is it correct that v12.01.44's OPTION /U allow upgrading to 12.10.56?
    |---End Quote---
    |
    |Yes.
    |
    |
    |---Quote---
    |What will happen in AddRemovePrograms if one follows that route and installs on top of 12.01? Will the 12.10 entry replace the 12.01 entry?
    |---End Quote---
    |
    |Yes. (Though your Windows Installer setup is so screwed up I won't hazard a guess as to what it will do.)

    So I ARP-removed the independently-installed 12.10 and, via OPTION /U, updated,
    in-place, 12.01 to 12.10. ... no problems. The ARP entry was changed as you
    said it would be.

    But I still have

    Code:
    E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command 12.01
    with useless stuff in it. And I collected yet another new directory in

    Code:
    E:\Users\vefatica\Application Data\JP Software\Take Command
    12.10\install
     
  4. rconn

    rconn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    9,859
    Likes Received:
    83
    I understand that your Windows Installer configuration is fubar, but I honestly don't know what I can do about it (or what you want me to do about it).

    Have you contacted Microsoft?
     
  5. Charles Dye

    Charles Dye Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    3,307
    Likes Received:
    39
    Microsoft would probably suggest running MSICUU2 ... which they no longer provide or support. (The left hand doesn't know that there is a right hand.)
     
  6. vefatica

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,952
    Likes Received:
    30
    On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 11:06:47 -0400, rconn <> wrote:

    |I understand that your Windows Installer configuration is fubar, but I honestly don't know what I can do about it (or what you want me to do about it).
    |
    |Have you contacted Microsoft?

    I don't know why you say that. I have no installer problems other than those
    associated with TC. And I have several apps which are updated regularly. What
    about other users? Do they still have a 12.01 tree in AppData (along side the
    12.10 tree) after upgrading to 12.10? And among the beta testers ... are they
    accumulating outdated "install" directories, each containing an MSI file, and
    most with no mention in the registry?
     
  7. rconn

    rconn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    9,859
    Likes Received:
    83
    I don't know about other users, but

    1) Nobody else is reporting it;

    2) I don't see it on my system, and

    3) I couldn't do anything about it anyway, as it would be happening inside the Windows Installer and there are NO options available to me to control this.

    Some of what you're seeing is probably normal behavior if the "repair" option is enabled in the installer. (The installer has to keep the files *somewhere* in order to do a repair.)

    Are you doing all of your installations to different directories?
     

Share This Page