Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Kaz Kylheku <349-534-5780@kylheku.com> Newsgroups: comp.programming Subject: Re: To all who write uninstallation programs for software you distribute Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 04:24:55 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 44 Message-ID: <20160725212236.807@kylheku.com> References: <0hq7pblr580ec5n1sv05fapprarqc9ef9l@4ax.com> <20160725115231.545@kylheku.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: OGJi3KNpFOhM58UHZwXj0w.user.gioia.aioe.org X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-18 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.programming:6818 On 2016-07-26, Wally W wrote: > On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 18:55:22 +0000 (UTC), Kaz Kylheku wrote: > >>On 2016-07-25, Mark Storkamp wrote: >>> In article , >>> "Osmium" wrote: >>> >>>> "Osmium" wrote: >>>> >>>> > I probably dislike Windows as much as Richard does. If we could revert to >>>> > the pre-install era I would be willing to pay the price by doing a manual >>>> > file association. But I am not at all sure that is the only change in >>>> > practices that would be needed, it was just the most obvious one that >>>> > occurred to me. Perhaps someone that has actually written official >>>> > install/uninstall code could give more insight. >>>> >>>> I thought of another glitch when one bypasses the Windows install routine. >>>> >>>> A program should be visible via. the Start|all programs ... little dance. A >>>> program activated in Richard's way will not list the new program. Perhaps >>>> one could devise a patch. But you have started on the journey to make a >>>> user into a programmer - this is not a good trip. >>> >>> Here's a thought. The OS knows when something is written into the file >>> system. If that thing being written is an executable program, the OS >>> could keep track of that location and make it visible via. the Start|all >>> programs thing you're referring to. To make things even simpler, the >>> entire bundle of files required by the application could look like a >>> single file to the OS, and could be copied, moved or deleted by the user >>> at any time by referring to a single entity in the file system. >> >>If you accumulate more of these thoughts, you will soon reinvent >>such things as system restore points, versioned directory tree clones >>with hard-linked common content, and containment of individual >>applications by virtual machines. > > Or, better yet, standalone programs with INI files. Sure, but that's not an isolation technique that doesn't involve controlling the behavior of the installed program itself. If we have so much control over the program that we can determine how it stores its configuration, then we can fix its uninstall mess, too.