[lokisetup] setup v2 (was lokisetup for dummies)

Chunky Kibbles chunky at icculus.org
Sun Jan 4 14:35:25 EST 2004

On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 06:31:21PM -0500, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 17:54, Timothee Besset wrote:
> > Well I didn't know about autopackage existence. Gave it a brief review, 
> > they have a nice website. Anyone have experience with it, care to share 
> > it? In what ways does it compare to loki_setup?
> > 
> > After a quick review through the website, it lists a bunch of useful 
> > functionalities, but it has the design flaws which I don't like about 
> > most win32-style installers, and which loki_setup avoided. For instance 
> > it's script based, uses an API of bash script functions, and I'm really 
> > not fond of that stuff.
> The script base is because for many apps (not games, which loki_setup is
> mostly geared for) rather intricate installation procedures are
> necessary.

I hate to pick on this, but I think that's tosh.

Most apps SHOULD be simple to install and uninstall. That goes double
for windows. Most linuxy apps can either go in their own canned dir
[as loki_setup is primarily arrranged around], or be spread thinly
around the system. They're still JUST A LIST OF FILES.

Anything involving complex configuration, etc, should be done at
first-run time, or  as a post-install script [as loki_setup already

I'm actually with TTimo on this one. That whole script thing always
feel crappy, requires a coding ability as well as a simple descriptor
language to  anday what files are where. And you really shouldn't need
complex installation procedures. If you do, It's my considered opinion
your app is badly written.

For eg, if part of your installation requirements is logic on
whether-or-not to replace a certain file already on the system [win32
.dlls, I'm specifically thinking of], then you need to re-think your
installation strategy.

Just my .02, based on my own experience of crappy software and crappy

Gary (-;

More information about the Lokisetup mailing list