#14 Dos Box needs an installer
Here's my InnoSetup 2.X install script. It installs the
DOSBox application files and allows the user to create
or not create:
-a start menu group
-a desktop icon
The version of DOSBox and its path are also placed in
the registry. Users are also able to run DOSBox from
the Windows Run command by pressing:
Windows + R
Typing "DOSBox" and pressing enter.
Everything that's installed including the uninstaller, start
menu, desktop icon, application files, and registry
settings are removed during uninstallation. I recall some
members of this project complaining about my creating
an installer. Frankly, I find this absurd, name one major
program that doesn't have an installer? Be it MS Office,
Windows, Linux (any distro), Netscape Navigator, Visual
Studio, or whatever they all come with installers,
because not everyone knows how to edit registry
entries, create start menu and desktop icons, create
folders, or even extract zip files. And of those who know
how to do it, a microscopic portion of them actually want
to place the files as settings themselves. Just think
about it the easier you guys make DOSBox the more
people there will be to enjoy it.
Every other popular open source project uses an
installer: FreeDos, Audacity, Linux, KDE, PDF Creator,
Bochs, and countless others.
If you'd like to use my installer, great. If not I'll be sorely
disappointed and will definitely think less of the DOSBox
team.
Installer Source Code:
http://www.rawsacramento.org/~christian/misc/DOSBox
%200.57.3%20Install%20Source.zip
Installer Distributable:
http://www.rawsacramento.org/~christian/misc/DOSBox-
0.57.win32.exe
Thanks,
Christian Blackburn
Logged In: YES
user_id=561770
I'd recommend renaming the distributable file to "DOSBox
0.57.exe", but for the time being I left it as is to follow the
current naming convention.
Logged In: YES
user_id=535630
The naming thing might be a good idea.
But we name the dosbox excutable on other OS also plain
dosbox.
We'll consider the use of a installer.
But this is a mayor considiratoin of mine. (not to offend
anyone and especially not you) :
If somebody can't unzip dosbox.
What use is there for them using dosbox.
I mean all dosgames you download are zipped as well !
Ps: you asked about the numeric part once: yes it's related
to my birthyear
Logged In: YES
user_id=561770
Hi Qbix,
I can definetly see where you are coming from when you're
saying if they're too stupid to work with zip files then
they're too stupid to use dos at all. To a certain extent
you are correct, someone who's too dumb to work with a zip
file probably will never be writing linux shell code or
anything, but they just might surprise you. Take my mom for
example, she has played the same stupid card game for the
past 8 years: Arachnid. She found the save as dialog and
open dialogs to be confusing so even after knowing how to
play the game and having me walk her through saving about 4
times she never got it. Of course she can play the game
just fine though. Would you think a gal like that would
have ever mastered e-mail? Or adding file attachments? I
sure as hell wouldn't. However she did. I think if people
can just get far enough along in your program to run it
there most of the way there. For example if they use my
installer they can get the program started, because they're
given the option of launching it automatically at the end of
the installation. Of course the readme file comes up too,
which is excellent. Even if they don't know how to work
with ZIP files (an online technology BBS/Internet) they
might know dos commands and be able to work a floppy disk
install of their favorite game. For example I've been
playing prince of persia I off a floppy disk and that didn't
require the know how to work with zip files. All I'm saying
is why not create the enviornment where as many people can
enjoy your program as possible? Sure it's cool being a
super geek and knowing how to do lots of things, but she we
hoard our knowledge or use it to benefit others?
Thanks,
Christian
Logged In: YES
user_id=535630
Hi Christian Blackburn,
Dosbox will get an installer. I checked the one you created
out and it looked nice. But the installer of dosbox will be
NSIS. It will do less with the register initially but it will
rename the CAPSFILES to CAPSFILES.txt
And will create shortcuts in the startmenu.
Maybe I'll add a named exe as well dosbox058.exe or so
but dunno.
Thanx for effort. It stimulated and convinced me that we
needed one.
Peter
Logged In: YES
user_id=561770
Hi Peter,
You wrote: "I checked the one you created out and it looked
nice.".
So I guess I'm wondering why you won't be using it? I was
trying to be a participant of this project. Why is it that
you feel that the best thing to do is discard my "nice" job
and make your own? This will clearly double the ammount of
work people have spent making an installer for this project.
Originally when I made the installer I was scorned for doing
so. Like it was a bad thing and something nobody would
want. In fact as far as I could perceive it was
communicated that no installer would ever be used, because
Dos Box users supposedly didn't want an installer. Clearly
that was never the case
Now I read your e-mail and it says I liked your installer,
but I'm going to throw your work away. Why is that? Don't
you think that's insult to injury?
What do you feel the NSIS installer will do for you that
InnoSetup can't? Do you know NSIS and that's why you want
to use it? It was my intent to maintain the InnoSetup
Installer for this project so it really wouldn't have
mattered whether or not you knew the language. Using NSIS
will only increase your workload, granted you will have more
control over things, but also more work.
"It will do less with the register initially":
Since my installer does work with the registry in a logical
or complete manner, again why are you discarding it?
"...but it will rename the CAPSFILES to CAPSFILES.txt" is
there some reason you thought that I wouldn't be able to do
that? I certainly can. You never asked.
"Thanx for effort. It stimulated and convinced me that we
needed one. " You're welcome. But help me out here again,
what's wrong with what I made? I'm glad I stimulated you,
but that wasn't the effect I was trying to arouse. A simple
thank you, you're part of the project, we'll let you handle
the installer seemed like the logical response. You didn't
have an installer, I made an excellent one that adds and
removes every file and registry setting it creates. Not
only that it displays your readme and license. Not only was
the installer good, but it seemed complete aside from the
renaming of a text file that could be done either in
InnoSetup code or with a batch file any day of the week.
Part of posting projects on SourceForge.net is being willing
to share tasks with others. I don't feel this team has done
that where my efforts are concerned.
Naturally, what I have just said reflects considerable
discouragement on my part, I spent 4+ hours making this
installer for you guys and it's just going to be thrown
away. I'm not trying to pick a fight or argument with you
Peter, I simply want you to see things from my point of
view, in addition to your own. Please let me know what you
decide.
-Christian Blackburn