 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> My Documents!). One obvious example is software licensing, if an
>> organisation needs to track the licenses of all installed software for
>> audits then POV is going to slip through the net and cause problems.
>
> POV-Ray is installed into the users profile folder. This is as far as I
> could tell the best solution for a non-privileged user on Vista.
Sure, if your goal is to try and somehow allow installation without Admin
rights, rather than comply with the MS guidelines for software. I am just
trying to understand your reasoning why POV should be different from
standard software.
> I see many programs that install without admin rights.
That is not approved by MS though (hence they won't pass the Windows Logo
tests, binaries won't be protected, it could go all screwy if the user
profile is on a network resource, the installer might not work with future
Windows updates/versions, etc). OOC where do these other programs put the
binaries?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/07/2010 17:24, scott wrote:
>> POV-Ray is installed into the users profile folder. This is as far as I
>> could tell the best solution for a non-privileged user on Vista.
>
> Sure, if your goal is to try and somehow allow installation without
> Admin rights, rather than comply with the MS guidelines for software. I
> am just
Your statement is both offensive and also completely wrong. You do not
understand Windows installation, yet you pretend you do. You seem to have
the bizarre idea that only Admins should have the right to install software
on a Windows computer, and that software that allows otherwise is somehow
an attempt to 'bypass the rules'.
I challenge you to find a *current* Microsoft installation standard that
states that users without admin rights *may not install software at all*.
In the process, you will find the opposite: that Microsoft has made
significant effort to ensure that non-admins *can* install software,
subject to the group policy set by the admin.
> trying to understand your reasoning why POV should be different from
> standard software.
Aside from perhaps the exact choice of installation location, POV-Ray is
installed using the correct MSI-based procedure, which as I pointed out in
my previous message (which you completely ignored), subjects it to the
complete control of the system administrator via group policy.
Please read up on installation standards before implying that our group is
intentionally trying to allow users to sabotage corporate computer systems
by facilitating unauthorized installations.
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I challenge you to find a *current* Microsoft installation standard that
> states that users without admin rights *may not install software at all*.
See the link to the PDF I posted already. It clearly states that
applications should be installed in to "Program Files" by default. The POV
installer does not do this.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/07/2010 17:24, scott wrote:
>> I see many programs that install without admin rights.
>
> That is not approved by MS though (hence they won't pass the Windows Logo
> tests, binaries won't be protected, it could go all screwy if the user
> profile is on a network resource, the installer might not work with
> future Windows updates/versions, etc).
Since you're such an expert, I suggest you write to the Windows Installer
Team and tell them that they ought to stop promoting this sort of behavior
then:
----------------------------------------------
Question: Can a non-admin user run an msi?
Answer: If you only install to locations where non-admins users have
privileges, then the answer is easy: yes.
If you install to locations such as program files or HKLM, then the answer
is -- they can with MSI if the package has been blessed by an admin to run
elevated. Otherwise attempts by the non-admin to write to program files are
going to fail. And additionally, a package can't self-elevate -- that would
be a security issue.
For the latter case, consult the documentation on MSDN: Installing a
Package with Elevated Privileges for a Non-Admin. This is basically what
Group Policy and SMS are for.
------------------------------------------------
This is at
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windows_installer_team/archive/2005/08/01/451337.aspx,
and is what I've been saying all along: group policy sets install policy.
Here's some more info on installation, not that I expect you to read it as
you're already an expert, but for others following the thread it may be of
interest:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/Aa369519
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/259459
http://forum.installsite.net/index.php?showtopic=6753
I'll also refer to this Microsoft documentation page:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369784.aspx
and in particular to this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa368304.aspx
which documents how administrators may use group policy to prevent
installation of non-elevated software (such as POV-Ray's MSI) but still
allow elevated installs, and this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa368309.aspx
which allows the admin to block per-user installs (which again applies to
POV-Ray's MSI).
Fundamentally, your accusation that we somehow are conspiring to bypass
admin control of corporate systems is nonsense. If we wanted to do that, we
would definitely NOT use the MSI install system, as it's designed
explicitly to provide such controls.
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/07/2010 19:21, scott wrote:
>> I challenge you to find a *current* Microsoft installation standard that
>> states that users without admin rights *may not install software at all*.
>
> See the link to the PDF I posted already. It clearly states that
> applications should be installed in to "Program Files" by default. The POV
> installer does not do this.
You avoided answering the question. I asked you to show me something that
says non-elevated installs 'may not install software at all', you answered
with something about 'program files'. This is not the same thing.
I'll ask you again: find me a document that - as you claim - explicitly
states that it is wrong for a MSI setup to not require admin privileges.
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> I challenge you to find a *current* Microsoft installation standard that
>>> states that users without admin rights *may not install software at
>>> all*.
>>
>> See the link to the PDF I posted already. It clearly states that
>> applications should be installed in to "Program Files" by default. The
>> POV
>> installer does not do this.
>
> You avoided answering the question. I asked you to show me something that
> says non-elevated installs 'may not install software at all', you answered
> with something about 'program files'. This is not the same thing.
Obviously msi installers can install software without admin rights (as POV
does), so such a document won't exist. However to install to the correct
location (Program Files) it seems you do need admin rights, which is why
normally when you install a program without admin rights it asks you for
them.
Contrary to your belief, I am not an expert at writing installers (nor do I
wish to become one), I am just a user who is wondering why POV feels the
need to be different to other installers. Why can't it just install
"normally" like every other piece of software I use?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 28/07/2010 12:01, scott nous fit lire :
> Contrary to your belief, I am not an expert at writing installers (nor
> do I wish to become one), I am just a user who is wondering why POV
> feels the need to be different to other installers. Why can't it just
> install "normally" like every other piece of software I use?
It's not because you are used to 'old' pieces software which did in fact
offer no choice (back to the W3.1/W95/... time) but to install in
'Program Files' (sometime even hard-coded, so when installing on foreign
windows version, you still end up with some in C:\Program Files\,
despites a translated name does exist), that such bad behaviour must
continue.
Recommendations for installation (*) are now to offer a system/user only
installation (well, the choice might be implicit by the right the
running user has or has not). For system wide installation, Program
Files is fine; but for user-only, it should end in the user's folder.
(*): I would have to cite msdn website and the various certification
programs (I'm more familiar with the pain of making drivers for windows,
especially to now have them install in x86_64 & Itanium with all the new
mandatory cryptography, but the unpriviledged software has also its
certification paths, if you want to apply to that kind of label).
Could you please provide a list of your other pieces of software that
you use ? (so I can check if they are not out-dated / non-conformant by
themselves to the installation rules for 7/Vista/2008/2008R2/XP ? They
might very well be designed for older windows)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/07/2010 20:01, scott wrote:
> Obviously msi installers can install software without admin rights (as POV
> does), so such a document won't exist. However to install to the correct
> location (Program Files) it seems you do need admin rights, which is why
> normally when you install a program without admin rights it asks you for
> them.
Yes, and as Microsoft recommends (in fact, *pushes*) authors to write
installers that do NOT require admin rights, POV-Ray chooses to install
outside of program files by default.
> wish to become one), I am just a user who is wondering why POV feels the
> need to be different to other installers. Why can't it just install
> "normally" like every other piece of software I use?
Your prior comments implying we were assisting users in bypassing corporate
security restrictions seemed to me to be more than a user who was wondering
about the install location. You were outright rude.
Many programs to this day still stick with the old program files location,
even if it means getting a UAC prompt. One of the most hated features of
Vista was the constant unneeded UAC prompts. We chose to create an
installer that was UAC-prompt free. It installs smoothly and without
hassle. In other words, it gives the *majority* of users a better experience.
If, however, a user wishes to install the 3.7 beta to \program files, they
are quite welcome to. It's simple:
Run it without elevation and it defaults to the user profile dir.
[This makes sense as they can't install to program files.]
Run it with elevation and they are offered an option to install as one
user or for all users. If they choose all users, it installs to
\program files.
[This make sense since as an elevated install, they are given the option]
I don't see why this is so much of an issue to you. If you don't like the
place it installs, why not run it with elevation and be done with it,
instead of whining here and accusing us of nefarious intentions?
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Your prior comments implying we were assisting users in bypassing
> corporate
> security restrictions seemed to me to be more than a user who was
> wondering
> about the install location. You were outright rude.
Sorry if it appeared rude, it wasn't my intent, my comments were in response
to the post about allowing students to bypass security restrictions and
people installing it in their lunch hour.
> Run it without elevation and it defaults to the user profile dir.
> [This makes sense as they can't install to program files.]
Is this recommended from MS? Other programs seem to ask for admin rights if
you run them as non-admin.
> Run it with elevation and they are offered an option to install as one
> user or for all users. If they choose all users, it installs to
> \program files.
> [This make sense since as an elevated install, they are given the option]
Any reason why the default isn't in to program files in this case?
> I don't see why this is so much of an issue to you.
Just trying to understand why POV feels the need to be different to what
most people have grown to expect.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/07/2010 11:35 AM, Chris Cason wrote:
> Your prior comments implying we were assisting users in bypassing corporate
> security restrictions seemed to me to be more than a user who was wondering
> about the install location. You were outright rude.
To calm it down a bit, I thought it was me that Scott was having a pop
at, not the PovRay development team. I understood his post to mean that
being able to install without admin rights was not there so I could use
PovRay on a work machine.
Although it is very handy that I can on a lot of machines. I move around
from company to company in my work and although there are a few
companies that lock their machines down so tight that you almost need a
password to open the CD drive. Most are content not to give you admin
about companies where you need security clearance to work.
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
