[16] in installers
Re: Different name than SETUP.EXE?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Saylor)
Tue Mar 4 17:15:57 1997
To: Jim Repa <REPA@mitvma.mit.edu>
Cc: Jerry Isaacson <GII@MIT.EDU>, INSTALLERS@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 04 Mar 1997 16:13:28
EST."
<9703042117.AA12280@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 17:15:44 EST
From: John Saylor <jsaylor@MIT.EDU>
Hi
>>>repa@mitvma.mit.edu writes:
[x]
> Lee Ridgway, while writing documentation for Ksign, was
considering what
> instructions to give to users about overwriting an
existing "SETUP.EXE"
> (from previous installers) on their hard drive. We
thought it would
> reduce confusion if the Ksign installer was named
something special
> (KSETUP.EXE), so it would be unlikely to conflict with
an installer
> for a completely different application.
>
> Does that sound like a good idea?
Not to me. Installers are always named setup.exe and it is
a troubleshooting technique to go to the directory and look
for a setup.exe file to start the process again. Also, if
someone is installing via the Add new program control
panel, it looks for setup.exe in the target directory.
I think there is more to be lost than gained by changing
the name.
Virtually all of the software that I install uses a program
called setup.exe. By adding this wrinkle in the installation
procedure you are losing the common practice of windows
installers.
That's my opinion.
--
John Saylor MIT E40-335 617.253.0172
