Maintenance service not installed in User-selected installation directory.

RESOLVED INVALID

Status

Thunderbird
Installer
RESOLVED INVALID
5 years ago
3 years ago

People

(Reporter: Stefan Kanthak, Unassigned)

Tracking

17 Branch
All
Windows 2000

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Reporter)

Description

5 years ago
User Agent: Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 5.0; U; de) Presto/2.10.289 Version/12.02

Steps to reproduce:

Start Thunderbird installer, choose custom, select installation directory ("%ProgramFiles%\Mozilla\Thunderbird" for example) and install Maintenance Service too.


Actual results:

Thunderbird installed in user-selected directory, but Maintenance Service not.


Expected results:

Installer MUST respect user-selected installation directory for ALL components.

If this is not possible, then user MUST BE informed about the reason and the possibility to abort.
(Reporter)

Updated

5 years ago
Hardware: x86 → All

Comment 1

3 years ago
(In reply to Stefan Kanthak from comment #0)
> User Agent: Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 5.0; U; de) Presto/2.10.289 Version/12.02
> 
> Steps to reproduce:
> 
> Start Thunderbird installer, choose custom, select installation directory
> ("%ProgramFiles%\Mozilla\Thunderbird" for example) and install Maintenance
> Service too.
> 
> 
> Actual results:
> 
> Thunderbird installed in user-selected directory, but Maintenance Service
> not.
> 
> 
> Expected results:
> 
> Installer MUST respect user-selected installation directory for ALL
> components.
>
> If this is not possible, then user MUST BE informed about the reason and the
> possibility to abort.

Stefan, 
Thanks for reporting this.
Do you still see this in a newer version?

(The real fix, is to install properly :) )
Flags: needinfo?(stefan.kanthak)
(Reporter)

Comment 2

3 years ago
Created attachment 8569135 [details]
Command lines run during installation of Thunderbird 31.5.0
Flags: needinfo?(stefan.kanthak)
(Reporter)

Comment 3

3 years ago
It's your defective installer that doesn't work properly.

Comment 4

3 years ago
(In reply to Stefan Kanthak from comment #3)
> It's your defective installer that doesn't work properly.

I'm not trying to suggest you are at fault. What I mean is the solution is not to have a warning, but that the maint service install correctly in the first place.
(Reporter)

Comment 5

3 years ago
(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #4)
> (In reply to Stefan Kanthak from comment #3)
> > It's your defective installer that doesn't work properly.
> 
> I'm not trying to suggest you are at fault. What I mean is the solution is
> not to have a warning, but that the maint service install correctly in the
> first place.

Correct.

I interpreted your "(The real fix, is to install properly :) )" but as
"dont try to perform a custom installation": see 1136686 for example!
Microsoft has had "shared" components, files, etc. that install into directories other than the application directory for a very long time. The maintenance service is shared.
See Also: → bug 1136413

Comment 7

3 years ago
Robert, thanks for pointing out bug 1136413, so the example here is also invalid - it is working properly, and as designed.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 3 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
Summary: User-selected installation directory ignored, NO information given to user → Maintenance service not installed in User-selected installation directory.
(Reporter)

Comment 8

3 years ago
(In reply to Robert Strong [:rstrong] (use needinfo to contact me) from comment #6)
> Microsoft has had "shared" components, files, etc. that install into
> directories other than the application directory for a very long time. The
> maintenance service is shared.

20+ years ago Microsoft introduced "%CommonProgramFiles%\<vendor>\<component>" for the installation of shared components.
Fix you defective installers.
(Reporter)

Comment 9

3 years ago
(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #7)
> Robert, thanks for pointing out bug 1136413, so the example here is also
> invalid - it is working properly, and as designed.

Neither does the installer work properly (it fails to secure the installed service against exploitation) nor as designed: see comment #8

Updated

3 years ago
See Also: → bug 1137015
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.