Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mailrus!ulowell!cbmvax!andy From: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: S/W Installation methodology Message-ID: <5540@cbmvax.UUCP> Date: 20 Dec 88 20:19:13 GMT References: Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 73 In article kim@uts.amdahl.com (Kim DeVaughn) writes: >procedures and how to simplify them, I would love to say "Write a REXX >program to do it." That's how it's done in the VM/CMS world, where nearly >every vendor's installation sequence boils down to "Unload the first file >from this tape and run it." > >In order for this sort of thing to happen in the Amiga community, we must >be able to PRESUME that Rexx will be available on the computer. For this >to be true, Commodore must license REXX and supply it with every Amiga >sold -- i.e. with AmigaDos 1.4. Not quite. A specific language isn't the problem or the issue here. At the moment, a vendor could write an installation program in a compiled language (ie C or M2), a shell script, even AmigaBasic. The availability of Arexx doesn't have much to do with the problem at hand. The problem, of course, being how can a vendor best write an installation procedure that addresses the *already* customized installations that his/her potential customers are using ? A language has nothing to say about this problem. Even when we start talking about languages designed to install programs, we're not talking about complete solutions. For instance, I keep my C: directory completely standard. (It helps in updates) I keep other executables in Tools: or Bin: How can an installation program take account of this particular preference, not to mention all the other strange configurations other people may have ? :-) I do sysadmin on the Sun network here. When I get a software update, or a new program, I prefer getting shell scripts for installation. Not to run, though, since its really unlikely that the configuration the person designing the script had matches my current configuration. No, I read through the script a couple times until I figure out what its trying to do and where it wants to put everything, then I turn on the script facility (like hardcopy on the Amiga, for use if something goes horribly wrong ) and do it all by hand. It generally comes out better that way. (All right, I admit if a script is really customizable, ie through a Makefile, I sometimes use it. Never blindly, though :-)) > >I strongly believe that this should be done. (And I won't be any richer >because of it.) >UUCP: kim@amdahl.amdahl.com Entirely separate question. While this may be a good answer to a question (and personally, I think Arexx would be a nice thing to have) its not the answer to the current question. Anyway, we've made a couple attempts in a couple of our products for installation procedures (in the 2090 hard disk software, it was a script, in the Bridge card software it was a program). I know we don't have a finally answer. There are at least 2 problems...installing software in the right places on a particular system configuration, and referencing all resources that come with the program in a configuration independent manner. andy -- andy finkel {uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy Commodore-Amiga, Inc. "Possibly this is a new usage of the word 'compatible' with which I was previously unfamiliar" Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.