Patches not changing the displayed version in Add/Remove

[ChrisClarkNZ]

Hi. I have an application which we are updating using patches and this is working ok. The version numbers for the patches are incrementing each release e.g. 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.0.3. All the updated files are copied across correctly.

What I've noticesd is that when a patch is applied the displayed version number in the Add/Remove programs is not updated in line with the patch. The displayed version remains the one at which the main installer was run (e.g. 3.0.0). So presumably the apply install command does all of this setup but the apply patch doesn't?

I'm using X2 Studio. Is there a setting needed for this or do I need to manually update a registry setting in the patch section of the script. If so which registry key would we need to update?

Thanks in advance.

[FrancescoT]

Dear ChrisClarkNZ,

with a patch project you can't change the version number, the version as other properties as well, must be identical to the one specified in the base project.

Honestly, it's quite strange that you didn't have any problems if you already changed it in the patch projects.
Eventually, you could store under registry a custom key and then to query it from your installed application to keep track of the version ... but of course, this will not be displayed in Add Remove Program.

I suggest you to have a look at following topics, where are available useful information on how to avoid common errors with patch creation.
Note, it's also available a ready to use sample project with the second link below.

http://www.installaware.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9656&hilit=+patch
http://www.installaware.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8697

Regards

[ChrisClarkNZ]

Thanks Francesco for the detailed reply and links. I'm understanding a bit better what you describe - the patches that we've released have been reasonably simple and also we're releasing the entire files rather than just a binary difference. So that part of the process for the most part has been "working" quite well. Though based on your links we have to think through a bit better our file structures. I'm sure I read somewhere in the forums that you don't need to keep the original sources of the installation for patches as long as you have the original install.exe file to build the patches from.

The main problem we have though with applying a full build - e.g. your 1.2.0.0 example in the first link - is that it prompts as a prerequisite to uninstall the existing application before continuing. However with that it also uninstalls configuration files and potentially other user data that has been changed so anything customised by the user is lost. Is there a missing piece of the puzzle that I haven't seen yet or is that what is expected. Obviously this isn't acceptable for our users which is why we're using patches the way we are.

We have the exe compiled with version information so it isn't important to retrieve this from registry it was just to keep the installer and exe versions in sync. So in practical terms we probably need to be just releasing the full builds without the patches however the problem above prevents this for us.

[FrancescoT]

Dear ChrisClarkNZ,

The main problem we have though with applying a full build - e.g. your 1.2.0.0 example in the first link - is that it prompts as a prerequisite to uninstall the existing application before continuing. However with that it also uninstalls configuration files and potentially other user data that has been changed so anything customised by the user is lost. Is there a missing piece of the puzzle that I haven't seen yet or is that what is expected. Obviously this isn't acceptable for our users which is why we're using patches the way we are.

Are you sure you haven't missed to set the "Always Cache Setup Sources" flag?
http://www.installaware.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10016

regards

[ChrisClarkNZ]

Hi Francesco. Thanks again for the information. I thought we had it ticked but no - just filled.

So if that flag is ticked and the sources definitely cached then would running a new version of the setup.exe (e.g. 1.2.0.0) only make modifications i.e. not run the uninstaller of the previous version.

I understand the update packs can be full installs or patches but obviously hadn't connected all the dots. So for general releasing application updates you're more likely to want full installs for 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 etc) and use patches for more urgent fixes?

[FrancescoT]

Use patches for very minimal updates only ...otherwise, full package updates.

Regards