Dear Les,
We were missing the moment you were reaching the second millenium. Congratulations
to reach this new milestone.
About your note:
The cookie method is fine, provided the cookie is dropped only on success. MCA's package
will drop the cookie even if it fails to drop the binaries. KiXCheck will however, remove
the cookie if it fails to find the binaries.
I tried talking MCA into updating KiXCheck to do a CRC to verify the version and/or detect
trojans. I also thought a duplicate file checker would be nice. Guess he didn't like my
ideas 'cause he stopped answering my emails.
Les, are you using the latest package. This one is removing all previous 'cookies' before
start installing or updating kixtart binaries. Only one cookie will be there by a successful
installation.
The previous releases of our packages let 'cookies' from other kixtart installation
untouched.
Les about the KiXCheck tool. It doesn't mean: we doesn't like your input and we aren't doing
something with it, but the update of kixtart board (UBB 6.2.1) and scriptlogic functionlib page
requires a lot of changes on the summary pages on our site those days. After that we make
updates for KiXtart 4.10 beta release. Elements from your mail was incorporated in the
new scripts used by the packages. At least our main computer get damage which cost a period
of doing nothing.
Your mail is still there in the TO-DO folder.
- your input about "c:\*.ok" (users doesn't have write access) will also be implemented.
will high on our priority list.
Changes to it gives us also input for document attention for KiXcheck. KiXcheck returns
an ERRORLEVEL value which can be used instead of checking 'cookie'. - 'cookies' doesn't have any relation with previously iexpress packages. The only impact
can one unnecessary update installation. Contents is only usefull for debugging reasons:
- which files were installed or updated
- where are those files located
- which type of package was installed - the /Q switch by package usage is based on the documentation from Microsoft.
We doesn't see also no difference. - your idea about CRC for KiXCheck we like and will be implemented in a newer release.
- your idea about snapshot to make KiXCheck flexible we like also. During above re-
design we will implement this too. - finding duplicates of KiXtart files with KiXCheck may this verification phase
slowdown. Searching through all directories cost in our opinion too much time. - KiXCheck must stay backward compatible when we add switches to it.
The rest of your mail we will answer soon. Your mail wasn't lost.
Sorry for the delay.
greetings.
btw: first for handling the TO-DO list after such doing nothing period we are reading the new
and updated topics on kixtart forum.
(TO_DO)
[ 24 May 2002, 12:06: Message edited by: MCA ]
