Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Osmium" Newsgroups: comp.programming Subject: Re: To all who write uninstallation programs for software you distribute Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:13:36 -0500 Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: <0hq7pblr580ec5n1sv05fapprarqc9ef9l@4ax.com> <20160725115231.545@kylheku.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net YyMwSd8kGcyBMZJN9obTrQElyLLmwgSRuRp8i41w+NNJ0YCZ+r Cancel-Lock: sha1:o03RGQtL9MTiE4mQdy3LwyQ5/Yo= X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Xref: csiph.com comp.programming:6827 "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. That was one of the µsoft "magic" solutions I was thinking of. That was the solution in the Windows 3.1 era wasn't it?