I have a 'simple' .exe (helper.exe), which is part of a software licensing package. My understanding of this file is that initializes a license file; it is run during install at elevated privileges.
I would like this file to be included with my install. I created an installer using the Wizard with default settings but every time I try to run my .exe UAC pops up and asks permission. How can I stop that from happening?
The first part of the answer was given by TLama:
You will have to modify your application's manifest to not set the
requestedExecutionLevel node to level="requireAdministrator. It has
nothing to do with the setup itself.
Later I realised I was using the file incorrectly...
I have edited the question so remainder of the answer is: helper.exe is used to initialize a license file and is supposed to be run once (I thought helper was used to check the license file and thus was supposed to be run for each check). For the record the software seems really good (I'm currently evaluating).
Cheers,
Related
I launched an appimage using appimagelauncher. Then, I modified some settings of that app.
I know that appimages are not installed, so it can't be uninstalled. So, I deleted the appimage file.
But, when I downlaoded the appimage again, I observed that the user's previously modified settings were still there.
Now, how can I completely remove those user modified settings and launch that software as if it were newly installed?
The AppImage format doesn't define an explicit place where the applications configuration should be installed. Which means that the application can write such file wherever they please (as a regular installed application does).
Applications usually write their configurations to "$HOME/.config", you can look there for a file or folder with the application name. You can also ask the application author or check the documentation.
I'm probably just being very thick here, but it's not clear to me where I'm supposed to install 'new' user-specific programs on Windows 7 (and presumably Vista too, though I've not specifically looked at that scenario yet).
Under Windows XP (rightly or wrongly) we always installed our programs into folders under 'Program Files' and accepted that they'd be kind-of available to everyone. From what I can gather under Windows 7 I'm supposed to install my software under the user's AppData folder (possibly AppData\Local\MyApp). That makes a degree of sense, but the fact that this folder is 'hidden' by default means that we're going to have 'fun' talking our users through support stuff.
I want to install our software so that it's user specific (the Users bit in Windows 7 makes perfect sense) but I do want the user to be able to access it if required. Our program also includes a 'data' subdirectory which it needs to write into while it's running (embedded database), but as the program is intended to be single-user/standalone, the data folder being inside a user-specific folder isn't going to be a problem.
My problem is just that whole 'hidden folder' aspect of AppData. As much as I've trawled the MSDN, I can't work out where else I'm supposed to install user-specific programs. Taken one way it would seem to be something like AppData\Local\MyApp, and another way it would seem to be just as valid under the user's My Documents\MyApp equivalent.
Has anyone got a clear guide for where all this stuff goes? I found the MSDN docs confusing. :-)
Not really.
The directory that serves as a common
repository for application-specific
data for the current roaming user.
AppData is, surprisingly, for application data, not for installation (Click Once/Silverlight applications aside). You can, and should still install into Program Files, just don't expect to write into that folder.
You can install software into AppData if you want it to follow a user about in an Active Directory environment, which happens if you put it in AppData\Roaming (the SpecialFolder.ApplicationData location).
You can also install into AppData if you want the software to be available to just the user that installs it. This can be useful if, for example, you have multiple users on the same machine, who all want to run different versions of the software in complete isolation.
If you want settings to only apply on the local machine then you use AppData\Local, which is SpecialFolders.LocalApplicationData - this will make AD administrators very happy as the roaming profile size won't suddenly jump up 50Mb or whatever the size of your software is.
If you wanted to create settings which apply to all users then you're looking at SpecialFolders.CommonApplicationData
You should remember never to rely on the actual name of the directory - localisation issues mean this can change and the location does change with OS versions two. You should be using the special folder enumeration in your software, or the equivalent in your installer.
Could you not install into Program Files, but use AppData as it's supposed to be used, and store your database in there?
Windows 7 added the FOLDERID_UserProgramFiles known folder and by default this maps to %LOCALAPPDATA%\Programs. This is used by MSI when ALLUSERS=2 & MSIINSTALLPERUSER=1.
On Vista and earlier there is no canonical per-user application folder but just using %LOCALAPPDATA% is pretty common. Sadly MSI will just use %ProgramFiles% on these systems.
It's 2019, and I just installed Visual Studio Code (a Microsoft product) in the default folder of
%userprofile%\AppData\Local\Programs\Microsoft VS Code
This is probably for getting around the requirement to have an administrator or UAC prompt authorise the installation
Windows 7 folder structure is deeply inspired on Unix structure:
/usr/ -> C:\Program Files\ -> binaries: executables and dynamically linked
/etc/ -> C:\ProgramData\ -> global settings
/home/ -> C:\Users\ -> a folder for each user
~/.* -> C:\Users\Hikari\AppData\Roaming\ -> settings for each user
Windows has more folder, like My Documents for files with content produced by user, AppData Local and Roaming (which Unix usually handles with NFS).
It's about time for us developers to start using these structures. We must separate at least binary files that don't need to be replicated, global and user settings.
When a setup is installing an app, this setup should expect to have permission to write on Program Files. Once the setup is finished, Program Files should be writable only for other setups aiming to update binaries to other versions.
Please install executable files to the %programfiles% folder in Windows - a simple MSI based install package can perform an active setup for any new user who logs onto the machine to create the user specific files and folders in their profiles %appdata% folder. You see this behaviour for Internet Explorer, Adobe reader, etc. - It's the little MSI installer window that pops up the first time you log onto a machine which has those applications installed. - Thanks - a system admin :)
My opinion, for what it's worth, is that user-specific program files is just asking for trouble and is a damn stupid thing to do.
A much more sensible approach is to install different versions of your program to:
\Program Files\Your Program\Program_v0.1\Program.exe
\Program Files\Your Program\Program_v0.2\Program.exe
\Program Files\Your Program\Program_v0.3\Program.exe
\Program Files\Your Program\Program_v0.4\Program.exe
I would then place a bootstrapping launcher at:
\Program Files\Your Program\ProgramLauncher.exe
Then, the user application data folder will only contain data, including an INI/XML/Settings file that indicates the version of the program that this user is working with.
Such an approach satisfies the core tenant of keeping data and executing code separate, allows every user to run a specific version of the code, and offers a small amount of de-duplication by ensuring the same executable code is not copied multiple times across user folders.
Otherwise, go right ahead with installing programs to AppData and undoing the years it has taken us to achieve clean separation of code and data. I found this thread because I noticed that Chromium and DropBox are installing code to AppData. I'm going to uninstall those program, and change the permissions on my AppData folder to exclude execution to ensure I can easily spot other programs attempting the same BS.
On my website I need to give users an ability to download and easily start my executable (AppImage binary) on Linux.
For Windows version it is just .exe which works after downloading and clicking:
Download file
Click on file in browser downloads panel to start it
For Linux user now needs to do following:
Download file
Open folder containing file from browser downloads panel
Right click on it to add exec permission
Click on "Allow execution of this file" checkbox
Press Ok
Click on file to start it
It is hard to explain this flow for regular user, it makes users leave away.
Is it possible to minimize it to minimal clicks as on Windows?
Any advises appreciated to achieve minimal clicks. I can compile app for any format (its on electron but I can process it before upload)
I thought about using .deb . It will limit app for Debian-based only, but main problem in same time that I did not find ability to run post installation to exec app, and I don't want ask user to enter start menu.
Executable bits are a basic UNIX security measure thus it is not really easy to work around this (for good reason). Thinking about this, for the specific case of downloaded files, Windows also applies some restrictions (special NTFS stream which tells Windows Explorer to warn about the dangers of an executable file from the Internet).
You can of course provide your application as a .tar.something archive and store executable files in there. After extraction, they will normally have the correct execution bits set.
The option with the deb-package can also solve your problem (for some users) but is a little more complicated:
User downloads deb package
User clicks on deb package and has some program installed that provides a GUI for installing packages (like gdebi). Like on Windows there will be some "security check" in form of a dialog box where the user needs to enter a (sudo) password. Afterwards, apt will install the package
If the package is created correctly, it can transport the executable bit correctly such that no explicit permission change is needed afterwards. If for some reason there is need to do something post-installation, Debian packages can provide postinst scripts which run (as root!) at the end of the package's installation.
In any case, as dealing with executable files is a common procedure on Linux, it might not scare so many users away as expected. If you want to make it comfortable for the users, provide the package as they expect/like them. On Windows I would think that to be a .msi package and on Linux I prefer a package corresponding to my distribution (.deb, .rpm).
If you want the users to update their packages regularly (good for security) then it is helpful to provide a "repository" that users can add and install your package from. Of course, "the best" is having a package as part of the distribution, but that is quite some effort and needs to pass a lot of "quality assurance gates" :)
I have a windows desktop application which is currently available on a Linux server for download on user's machine. I want to automate the process of MSI packaging on the same Linux server using any EXE/DLL.
I have an App.exe and App.txt file. Some information should be read from text file and injected into exe before creating an MSI package. This entire process has to happen dynamically in the Linux server only after the user clicks on download.
Can anybody point me in the right direction as to how i can achieve my goal? I want to achieve the same by having minimum dependencies on any additional/3rd party tool. TIA for any time and effort.
p.s - I have done some R&D about various installers but none of them were matching the criteria as they have too many dependencies.
False Positive Risk: Creating a new binary for every user would seem to be very unwise because of malware scanners and their ability to recognize "known" versions of binaries (by hash).
If you create a new binary for each user, the malware suite might suddenly start to quarantine your setup without any warning or sense. This problem is not trivial anymore as malware control is hardened everywhere and setups that run with elevated rights are "prime suspects for risk management".
Digital signatures can help, but they are merely a guarantee that you made the setup, and not a guarantee that the setup doesn't contain anything harmful. Nothing worse than signed malware vectors. In fact it is proof positive that the malware came from you :-). Note: some people even manage to tamper with signed executables. The combination of the latter two fact is very troubling.
Application Setup: I like to eliminate such features and details from the setup and make the application itself responsible for it own configuration on first launch after installation. I find this more reliable and easier to debug.
Custom Configuration: You can apply custom configuration information at runtime via various mechanisms. You should add in a transform, or you can create a batch file next to the setup with this information embedded and pass to the MSI or the setup.exe.
Batch File?: The msiexec.exe command line supports passing parameters to the MSI. You can generate a batch file that will run the setup with such parameters if you design your setup to support these "incoming" parameters.
msiexec.exe /i myinstaller.msi ADDLOCAL="Program,Dictionaries" SERIALKEY="1234-1234" /qn
Transform: You can also create a transform to contain the parameters (a transform is a tiny MSI fragment with settings and changes to the original MSI):
msiexec.exe /i myinstaller.msi TRANSFORMS="mytransform.mst" /qn
A transform would be difficult to create on a Linux box, seeing as they are COM-structured storage files native to Windows only. I am not sure if it is even possible, but maybe.
Some Links:
Can the resulting command line be determined after running an .msi installer?
Change Program Name and Shortcut Title during installation
How to make better use of MSI files
We have had some success with wixl from msitools.
Also WiX will run under WINE.
However, in both cases we have not had EmbedCab="yes" work, which may or may not affect you.
The software created a Web Upload folder for me, which I uploaded to the site using an FTP Client (specifically WS_FTP). The first lines of the pearl files say "#!usr/bin/pearl" that I changed to "/home/calakpsi/pearl". However, when I execute the html file it searches my computer under "/C:/Users/myname/AppData/Roaming/Ipswitch/WS_FTP/Storage/cgi-bin/ciwweb.pl". I made sure the file it's looking for was in that folder, but for some reason the webpage would still not execute.
Any help or step by step solution (since I do not have an in depth technical background) would be much appreciated.
I think the problem is that your server is not configured properly to run perl scripts. Have a look at this, to see if it helps. The answer by Dave Sherohman should help you out.
Once you are able to run perl scripts, it should run (barring other issues which are script specific).
Overall the steps required to execute perl scripts are as follows. You can look up their details on the internet, as I don't know them myself.
Install any mods required for server, for instance mod_perl, on ubtuntu it would be something like sudo apt-get install libapache2-mod-perl2. If you are in windows, perhaps take one of those bitnami or other LAMP installers. They should come installed with it.
Configuration for server/virtual host, so that perl files in the directory are executed
ensure they have correct permission (and you should be all set).