Exe and vb run files

[PITBULLCJR]

THere is a tutorial here showing you how to make a simple Installation program to install your exe and dll files and whatever else. But I was thinking don't you need the vb run time files on their computer to run that instalation exe or is there a way to make it so you don't need them?

When you have installed a Visual Basic version. Go to the directory of vb and look under de wizards directory. There you can find the source of setup1.exe. this app is used in the vb setup wizard. You can then change everything to like to change. So you can build your own setup app that the setup wizard can use.

-Kayoca Mortation.

Or you can use the newest Vise Installer...

-Kayoca Mortation

[PITBULLCJR]

Umm i was going to try and edit the vb installer but I don't understand a thing they are saying so thats no good. And plus it is more fun making your own. So know does anyone have any idea how to make an exe file run without the vb runtime files?

[KENNNY]

where can I get VISE installer?
or any installer better than the p&d wizard
the install program looks like it was made by a 5 yr old

[JasAce]

Hi

Read your query

I'm using Fusion from www.bit-arts.com

Grabs any VB project and scans for dependancies - throws it all into an exe - NO RUN-TIME files needed

But wait - there's more!

Build it on any platform - and then USE IT on any platform!!!!

Saved me heaps of time - just use an installer or create your own! (I use isntallshield) to install exe!
No hassel with user UNINSTALLING shared files etc... as all built into the exe - just like a C++ program!

PS - I'm NOT from bit-arts - just a user!

[MartinLiss]

Unfortunately every VB exe requires the runtime files. The only time you wouldn't need to include them in your installation package is if you were sure that a user already had them all.

[JasAce]

Yes MartinLiss, I thought the same - but I've used Fusion and this stores the runtime files inside the .exe - so you do not need to install! - I've tested on win95a/win95b/win95d/win98/winnt and bit-arts support have verified they have tested on Win2000.

Grab the 30 eval and have a go - see what I mean...

www.bit-arts.com

[scottgreg1]

where can i get the p&d wizard

[MartinLiss]

JasAce: Well I guess you learn something every day. I'll keep Fusion in mind but it must result in some very large exe files if in fact all the OCX's and DLLs are fused into the exe.

KENNNY: You might also want to investigate InstallShield. It is pretty much the industry standard.

scottgreg1: The p&d wizard comes with both the Professional and Enterprise editions of VB6. It may also come with the learning edition but I don't know. If you have VB5, the Setup wizard is waht you would use to create an installation package.

[Crazy D]

I think Fusion is nice if the ole dll's are installed on the target machine.I tested it, and with the first exe (with just a button, which displays a messagebox (no, not 'Hello world'... :-)) I got the error that it was missing some ole dll (forgot the exact msg, was a while ago I tested it..)
I found visual installer a pretty good setup, it can be found on the M$ site, and it's free! :-)
And not only it read the dependencies, I used it for an app with database (SQL Server) support, and on the test machine, I simply couldn't continue with the setup until I had run mdac_type and dcom setups, which my customer liked since he didn't get any stupid errors anymore (which he got when I used the P&D wizard).

[PITBULLCJR]

Does anyone have any idea how to get the dlls in with the exe like fusion does. That would be awesome if we could figure that out. There has to be a way because they did it so we must be able to figure it out. Another thing the reason I wanted to make my own was because of the $$$ thing. Fusion is like 199 and Installshield is even more and vise is somewhere up there. Well anyone think we could figure it out?

[PITBULLCJR]

here I found this on vbsquare. Could you please check it out and tell me if it would work?
http://www.vbsquare.com/articles/setup/
Thanks!!

[Claudi]

Hi,

Fusion,hummm...
Just try to see what this progamm do with a file tracer:
It puts all dependances (exe, dll, ocx...) into one exe.
OK, that's all: if I take any prog that creates autoextract.
zipped files, I've got a single exe too.
In fact, the exe generated by fusion is a "false" zipped installation prog. If you delete the vb runtimes from your hdd, the exe will still run because the runtimes are back on your disk!
I don't particulary like prog doing such things on my computer, and there is no normal uninstall issue.
In my opinion(and for this price), you should better watch for something else.

[PITBULLCJR]

Does anyone have any idea about the thing that is on vbsquare that i posted about 2 posts ago. Thanks!!!

[Paul282]

The VB6 Package software comes with a setup.exe written in VC++ which reads the setup.lst file and then loads setup1.exe. The setup1.exe is VB and can be modified or re-written as all the source code is included so you can open it up in VB.

I don't really understand the complaints about the VB setup program, if I don't like some part of the interface, I change it. It does a good job of registering all the right DLLs and dependancies.

I've got a copy of wise too, but I don't really have a problem with the VB one, all the help files are included in the MSDN library if you want to learn how to modify it.

Most people just want the setup wizard / installshield look and feel because they think it adds credibilty to their app... yawn... get over it

[lumin]

Crazy D: if you tested it on a win95 computer I know what the error is. you will be needing dcom95 and you can get it from microsofts site.

http://download.microsoft.com/msdown.../en/dcom95.exe

it contains updated OLE files.


-Lumin

[Serge]

Let me add something to this thread. At my previous job I was responsible of creating weekly builds and custom Setups for our customers using Wise. By the way our software had a logo on it: Designed for Windows95/98/NT.
After shipping the setup to the customer site, everything went fine and smooth....until the point when the customer called us back adn said that they have a Microsoft consultant at their site and he said that we are missadvertising our software. He was concerned that we had that Designed for Windows95/98/NT logo on our software.
We couldn't understand what he meant by that. But then this guy called us and said that, in order for us to have that logo (and this is the Microsoft Requirement) you should not copy anything to Windows or Windows\System directories. If you need to have your DLLs shared, you can copy it anywhere else. We were looking so dumb, that we didn't know that before. Also, he added, you cannot write to Win.ini and System.ini, but rather, create your entries in the registry.

Next he said (it was the best of all) you cannot distribute VB runtime files with your setup. We were like WHAT???. But then he added, you would have to distribute MDAC (Microsoft Data Access Components) and DCOM95/98 (for customers who has Win95/98), which will install all needed DLLs (runtime, OLE, ADO, Jet etc).

So the choice is yours. Of course, you still can copy files over to Windows or Windows\System or write to Win.ini or System.ini or ditribute runtime files, BUT.....you won't get that logo to be on the box of your software.

I just wanted to pass this information on to everyone for a future reference.

Regards,

[Crazy D]

That's pretty funny... Programs should not distribute the runtime dll's themselves but use installers available from the M$ site (mdac, vbruntime, etc).
Funny that M$ programs themselves don't have the windows logo then (tell me where the VB 5 runtime dll comes from on a clean win98 machine.. it sits in the system dir.. so win98 is not even "designed for windows" *LOL*)
Also funny that when Windooz first came out, it was cool cus you dump your dll's in the systemdir (by then that was what M$ told us to do), so we only have 1 instance of a dll on a computer, not so long latet M$ found out that that idea is cool but the reality sucks cus programs dump the dll's in the system dir, but don't remove them. So, they changed the requirements.
Now I only wonder, where am I supposed to put my runtime dll's? It's a shared component, so I assume /Program Files/Common Files is the place to be.
Nice, but the VBruntime setup package (from the M$ site) actually dumps the dll's in the systemdir. So as long as I use that setup in my setup, I can never get the designed for windooz logo (now not that that is my first priority, but it's always nice to have....)
Mdac and dcom indeed install (most of) their dll's in program files/common, so that's kinda designed for windooz ...
I wonder how the "designed for W2K" rules are... back to the old days, where every program included it's own libraries, although maybe the user had those libs already on their comps? And how do they do that with ActiveX components? They are registered, and windooz picks them when you use them. How can I make sure they use "my" comdlg.ocx instead of the ones all other programs have installed?
Maybe one day I actually will understand windooz, but by then, I think I use Linux, write in C and distribute source and let the user compile it themselves....
Intresting to read though Serge, it sure is something to keep in mind when "running for the win logo". (hehe I knew about win.ini.. does anyone actually writes to the win.ini?)