ET Setup 2.0 Installer Manager beta

cheesy · 2012-03-12 17:03:01 UTC

Update
What started out as a thread regarding a new update manager I was working on, has become a discussion on possibly making a newer, better, more advanced ET installer. My installer does not really fit that bill. I have not fully decided if I will release this for public purposes, or just use for my clan yet.

However, lets continue the conversation about making a community installer…and starting a web campaign to move players in the right direction.

I like the installer idea at etkey.org, perhaps we should support that project.
Lets discuss ways to make the etkey.org installer better and more recognized.

Update 03/15/2012
Here is a link to my installer/manager if anyone wants to help test it. Download
Fixs:
I used a different compiler, so it removed false AV alerts,
Some of the directory paths were fixed
Added Harlekin’s 2.60b installer
Renamed it to ET Setup Companion for Harlekins

FunnyMan1975 · 2012-03-12 17:21:16 UTC

I tested your program ET Setup 2.0, Installer Manager (beta) on Windows 7 Home Premium and it worked really well. I had no problems with it at all. I think everyone should use this it is easy to use and installs everything you need to play. I give this 2 thumbs up !!!

ailmanki · 2012-03-12 17:24:26 UTC

https://www.virustotal.com/file/a7c125621bc9c3093412e4b7811312714ae0460a7a9f2998c2015dfaad2ed5b0/analysis/1331572863/

Well even if that is normal, its not a good plan for a installer. I cannot recommend this to anybody
If its a batch, why does it comes as exe? edit: I see its an archive containing multiple files, and the actually installer. But well that is not really a batch.

Besides I tried it, and it did hang at Evaluating Environment…

cheesy · 2012-03-12 18:05:37 UTC

@ ailmanki
Fyi, batch scripting is a form of programming. It can be compiled into exe.
Because it is not certified yet, some batch scripts will trigger a false AV alert on the free or cheap AV software. Notice on your little report the major AV software passed.
I have not seen that yet with the hang. Perhaps you can be a bit more constructive than simply bashing it, since the purpose of this thread was to get testing feedback.

Please tell me what os, service pack, and antivirus you are using.

ailmanki · 2012-03-12 19:02:58 UTC

Well I am sorry if I sounded like bashing it. Its not my intention. If its true that the AV will update their signatures and include this stuff as clean. Then yes I can recommend it. Until then - not.

As for bash scripting, I know what that is,
I missunderstood: a batch script application and as such I expected some batch to find in your zip. But there is an exe, and in that exe are more exes packed into it.

In any case, I appreciate the effort.
So here my specs, I use Bitdefender total 2012. Windows 7 64bit in german.
It seems to hang at:

Evaluating game environment...

I had a look at your script, and I found you use hard coded path for Program Files, well in my german version that path is different.
If you use %ProgramFiles% instead of “c:\Program Files” it should work perfectly with any language. The antivirus did not say anything about it.
I did not further test this out, but I guess the “hang” its related to that path.

cheesy · 2012-03-12 19:11:42 UTC

Thanks for the update. It does not use program files at all, everything goes to %temp%. During “evaluating system”, it looks at %userprofile% for a version of WolfET, this way the user does not have to redownload something they already have. Please type those paths on your computer, does this work on your machine? Let me know.

Also, I think I found the false AV cause, one of the files I use from a contributor is compiled as silent batch, harmeless but makes av alert. I will fix asap.

thanks!

ailmanki · 2012-03-12 19:18:40 UTC

Well I am sorry to concur, but it definitly does use “Program Files” it even does (!) c:\program files, d:\program files, e:\ … you get what I mean. for each possible hd. It does also add registry keys with that path…
(Well anyway, surprising enough entering that in explorer: C:\Program Files (x86)\ , opens the correct path (in german).)

Both worked, %temp% and %userprofile%

cheesy · 2012-03-12 19:50:56 UTC

ok I think you are refering to the search for .tmp files in etmain before the install phase, now I see what you mean. I will convert to %programfiles% asap. Thanks for this!!! Mind if I pm you to test this issue when I fix?

ailmanki · 2012-03-12 23:45:08 UTC

I dont ‘mind’ … send it.

btw, with patched serverside you mean Enhmod or did I miss something?

2.55 is actually a potential security risk for the client as far as I understood, surprising I never heard of anyone having problems.
(from 2.60b changelog:)

R_RemapShaders buffer overflow
A second issue fixed in this release would let a malicious server exploit a buffer overflow to execute a shellcode on connecting clients.

cheesy · 2012-03-13 02:34:07 UTC

Server-side as in the 2.55+(2.60b) server patch by redsector that most owners run now. The last I spoke with them all of the security and stability fixes were applied server-side. I did not make that up…I was told that over a year ago by the developer that made the binaries. So the only thing the 2.60b client is good for is etpro and the redirect function. I could be wrong, there might be a fix that was not included in the 2.55+ server patch.

Lets take a poll: How many of us 2.55 players were exploited lately? I have no idea. But I do not want to debate 2.60b versus 2.55 here

I just want to test this tool I am making pofavor

ETJump-Zero · 2012-03-13 07:57:10 UTC

[QUOTE=cheesy;395286]Server-side as in the 2.55+(2.60b) server patch by redsector that most owners run now. The last I spoke with them all of the security and stability fixes were applied server-side. I did not make that up…I was told that over a year ago by the developer that made the binaries. So the only thing the 2.60b client is good for is etpro and the redirect function. I could be wrong, there might be a fix that was not included in the 2.55+ server patch.

Lets take a poll: How many of us 2.55 players were exploited lately? I have no idea. But I do not want to debate 2.60b versus 2.55 here

I just want to test this tool I am making pofavor :D[/QUOTE]
I wouldn’t use 2.55 as for example a typical 2.6b config would crash the game for being too huge. While it may not be a huge problem I still prefer 2.6b. There could be other problems I’m not aware of. Why would you use 2.55 anyways? Every server is either running 2.55+ which allows everyone to play on the same server or 2.6b for which you will need the 2.6b client.

cheesy · 2012-03-13 15:50:38 UTC

because it works

The 2.55+ patch was made because of all the 2.55 players out there. WHY is irrelevant…they are there.

Mateos · 2012-03-13 16:47:38 UTC

They just took the full installer and have not looked for any update or patch. If you remove from the Internet this one and replace it with a 2.60b full installer for Windows, 2.60c for Linux etc… There would be only latest-version players.

Indloon · 2012-03-13 18:20:26 UTC

The problem why 1/4 of player are having 2.55 is because they don’t know about 2.60 and don’t have experience with installing/replacing.

Other reason is lack of supporting players.

2.55 version compered to the newest one is a buggy.
I can give a million reasons why to use newest(tbh…2005) patch over 2.55.

But I didn’t come here to say my opinion about patches.

I came here to say Great job cheesy!

cheesy · 2012-03-13 19:22:15 UTC

@Mateos
yes I agree…if they took the original WolfET.exe away but they will not. That would solve everything, then I would say why not move to 2.60b
but I think many 2.55 players have already patched the master list, or have menus that keep them playing. if we start losing 2.55 servers, because we are losing 2.55 players, its just going to create a cascade effect.

@Indloon
I agree, there were plenty of reasons. For instance, clients would crash on servers with lots of maps, security problems, stability problems…but if you log on a 2.55+ patched server thats not an issue anymore.

My opinion…
Any new installers should make it an OPTION to upgrade to 2.60b, for people that know what that is. Otherwise the default should be 2.55.
the result…nothing changes, we still have our 2.55 player base and 2.60b player base. No change…is a good thing.

I will probably add the 2.60b but as an “option” , not sure yet. so much to concider

schnoog · 2012-03-13 21:01:10 UTC

Maybe we could bring our work streams together, and built up ONE installer for all purposes.
A real full-installer, with all stuff needed to be able to join ANY server out in the wild.
A full installer for windows, linux and the apple-crew

Why not setup a git or something like that?
And a site, oc. multilingual, which explains how to setup ET.

cheesy · 2012-03-13 22:00:22 UTC

I am beginning to like that idea. But I just can’t shake this 2.60b only direction though. Maybe I am pist because its going to kill my servers on the 2.55 list idk. I think the real solution is a game that can see both lists and all servers.

Schnoog I was going to ask if you or hark had a stand-alone patch that updates to 2.60/b in one snap, I was going to make this “optional” on my installer/updater tool. If not I was going to attempt to make it.

Shownie · 2012-03-13 22:25:30 UTC

[QUOTE=cheesy;395390]I am beginning to like that idea. But I just can’t shake this 2.60b only direction though. Maybe I am pist because its going to kill my servers on the 2.55 list idk. I think the real solution is a game that can see both lists and all servers.

Schnoog I was going to ask if you or hark had a stand-alone patch that updates to 2.60/b in one snap, I was going to make this “optional” on my installer/updater tool. If not I was going to attempt to make it.[/QUOTE]

But if there is only ONE installer, what is the problem having 2.60b? It is not like they can fail install 2.60b if it is the only thing in the installer?

Mateos · 2012-03-13 22:27:09 UTC

I knew some players who preferred playing 2.55 instead of 2.60/2.60b; maybe letting the choice and not forcing to be the latest version is a good option?

cheesy · 2012-03-13 22:52:16 UTC

I favor 2.60b being optional, just because we would need more than a simple installer to get everyone on 2.60b. We would also need…

removal of original WolfET.exe on the internet (most at least)
removal of any master list resolutions that support 2.55
removal of the etkey/punkbuster support for 2.55
most the 2.55 server owners would have to comply
a website, committee, and overall campaign towards 2.60b

If you guys think we can make all this happen, then I would say lets do it.

I would love to see as Schnoog says…[QUOTE=schnoog;395386] built up ONE installer for all purposes. A real full-installer, with all stuff needed to be able to join ANY server out in the wild.[/QUOTE]…but one list that sees both lists.