I have a system with two web applications, one web service, one Windows service and a WPF application running 24 hours a day on a touch screen. All of them are connected to a database.
I want to be able to upgrade all of those applications by uploading upgrade files to the database and set the date and time for the upgrade to occur.
I have one idea on how to do this.
An application has a thread running to look for available upgrades.
When an upgrade is found, the file is downloaded to the application's computer.
When download is complete, the applications triggers a restart.
When application starts, it looks for an upgrade file on the local computer.
If upgrade is available, the application upgrades itself.
I'm not really sure how all these steps should be done yet, especially the last one. But I want some comments about this. Is this completely wrong? Am I on the right track? Any tips on how to do it like this or in another way?
I think you're going down the right lines here. A polling application to check the database for the existence of a new update followed by an xcopy deployment script would do it.
This might be doable from a PowerShell script too, that runs on a schedule, say every 10 minutes. It could check the database, close the process and service, xcopy the application (from a shared source) and restart the said service and app.
All this assumes that you are not using Windows Installer to package and deploy your application initially. Although an xcopy to directly replace binaries wouldn't hurt an MSI package, it's not recommended. We use AD MSI deployment at work and it's a pain at the best of times!
MSDN contains references for MSI vs XCopy deployment for WPF applications (as well as the security requirements).
This was the first link I found for querying SQL from PowerShell: http://elegantcode.com/2008/03/27/discovering-windows-powershell/
Good luck!
You will have trouble doing this with ClickOnce. ClickOnce would only work for your WPF app, it can't do anything with the services or web application. You could write a separate ClickOnce-deployed "Updater" app whose job is to update the other apps, but that still seems a little iffy.
It may sound stupid, but I'd start with the simplest thing I could think of. How about using Dropbox to push your update files; then an AutoHotKey script that runs on startup, watches the Dropbox folder for new updates, and runs them?
Sounds hokey, but it's something you could prove out in an hour or two.
Microsoft have an Updater Application Block which might be what you are looking for.
Do you really want to run an update from the database or is this just a possible solution? You are reinventing the wheel.
Have a look at ClickOnce deployment, everything you need is already done for you and integrated into VisualStudio. If you use something that already exists you have the benefit of existing documentation, helpful blogs of people who have already gone through the pain points and updates and fixes.
ClickOnce Deployment
ClickOnce Deployment in .NET Framework 2.0
How you want to use ClickOnce depends on what you want to get out of it. Out of the box you can very easily create a deployment that checks for an upgrade every time you run the application but you can also with a little bit of code have the application check for updates whilst it is running.
The Updater Application BlockVersion that Dominic Zukiewicz mentioned is the pre cursor to ClickOnce.
EDIT
ClickOnce provides a roll-back scenario on both the Server and Client end. The client can roll back to a previous version using the normal add remove programs dialogue and you can easily republish a previous version.
You could create another Windows Service that does the updates on a daily basis. The service would look on a specific folder if there are any updates to be process. For example it could look for an xml file which tells it the new version of the application and what the files to update are. It would shut down the application/services, backup the files that it needs to update, start the application/services, and clean up backup files keeping at least three backup files. The service should keep track of the last and current version installed so that when it reads the xml file it can check if it is a new update or not or you can simply delete the xml file when it completes.
How about Google Omaha? It's an open source tool, currently used to push updates of Google Chrome and Google Earth. Omaha can handle application installation, too. A high-level design overview can be found here.
Related
For a testing usage of not very complex WPF applications I often don't make installer - just, after building project, copy Bin>Debug folder content of a VS2008 project folder to a hard drive of a user computer and put an icon to a desktop. No records to windows registry.
Are there any drawbacks of such a way of using windows applications for testing period?
There's nothing wrong with this approach at all - it is what's called xcopy deployment. You don't get a few things doing it this way:
an entry in the add/remove programs for users to uninstall with
the ability to add shortcuts to desktop/start menu/quick launch
any changes to the registry for settings etc...
Another benefit is that you can get your application onto a computer by a user who does not need administrative privileges to install.
It really comes down to your requirements. If you don't need any features of an installer, then just copying the files is a good approach.
I'd agree with the other comments about using a release build though - especially if you are deploying for real use and not just testing.
The only change you might want to make is to build the app in Release rather than Debug and take the files from the Bin>Release folder.
more info: http://haacked.com/archive/2004/02/14/difference-between-debug-vs-release-build.aspx
When you have multiple files to deploy along with your exe, dll's to register, file associations to set up, then an installer is a neat way to deliver all of that in a reliable manner. If you don't do this with an installer the user could easily screw things up.
In addition to that, the installer is sometimes used as a means to ensure the computer is truly ready for the application. For example, the installers I've written check to ensure the proper version of .NET is installed, and will download & install it if necessary.
However, there are many times when these characteristics are simply not worth it and deploying a standalone application in a single exe is perfectly acceptable. Simple applications that don't need to store a lot of settings on your computer and don't have a lot of prerequisites are perfect examples. The first thing that comes to mind are all the utilities from Sysinternals.
I see only one potencial drawback. There is nowthing wrong in your approach as long as you don't have more than 1 to 3 users and changes during test session are not often.
When changes are often and you have to copy library to more than 3 users (hosts etc.) the drawbac I mean is maintenance time. I know what I'm talking about because in place where I work, we have such issue.
Last time I've started to more taking care about maintaining our application and copying files from one host to another than coding. :(
In my honest opinion sometimes is better to invest your time on the beggining and write an installer than have a lot mainteneance and copy things later.
To solve the number of users problem, there's a very simple solution that does not require to setup a full installer.
Basic setup for multi-users xcopy/.bat deployment:
A shared drive, with one folder for the .bat files, one for the binaries.
Upload the binaries to the shared
drive and update the install script
if needed.
Have every user run the install script.
By the way, some very complex information systems are ENTIRELY deployed by .bat files (even when not testing!).
I need to create a patching routine for my application,
it's really small but I need to update it daily or weekly
how does the xdelta and the others work?
i've read around about those but I didn't understand much of it
the user shouldn't be prompted at all
Ok this post got flagged on meta for the answers given, so I'm going to weigh in on this.
xdelta is a binary difference program that, rather than providing you with a full image, only gives you what has changed and where. An example of a text diff will have + and - signs before lines of text showing you that these have been added or removed in the new version.
There are two ways to update a binary image: replace it using your own program or replace it using some form of package management. For example, Linux Systems use rpm etc to push out updates to packages. In a windows environment your options are limited by what is installed if you're not on a corporate network. If you are, try WSUS and MSI packaging. That'll give you an easier life, or ClickOnce as someone has mentioned.
If you're not however, you will need to bear in mind the following:
You need to be an administrator to update anything in certain folders as others have said. I would strongly encourage you to accept this behaviour.
If the user is an administrator, you can offer to check for updates. Then, you can do one of two things. You can download a whole new version of your application and write it over the image on the hard disk (i.e. the file - remember images are loaded into memory so you can re-write your own program file). You then need to tell the user the update has succeeded and reload the program as the new image will be different.
Or, you can apply a diff if bandwidth is a concern. Probably not in your case but you will need to know from the client program the two versions to diff between so that the update server gives you the correct patch. Otherwise, the diff might not succeed.
I don't think for your purposes xdelta is going to give you much gain anyway. Just replace the entire image.
Edit if the user must not be prompted at all, just reload the app. However, I would strongly encourage informing the user you are talking on their network and ask permission to do so / enable a manual update mode, otherwise people like me will block it.
What kind of application is this ? Perhaps you could use clickonce to deploy your application. Clickonce very easily allows you to push updates to your users.
The short story is, Clickonce creates an installation that allows your users to install the application from a web server or a file share, you enable automatic updates, and whenever you place a new version of the app on the server the app will automatically(or ask the user wether to) update the app. The clickonce framework takes care of the rest - fetching the update , figure out which files have changed and need to be downloaded again and performs the update. You can also check/perform the update programatically.
That said, clickonce leaves you with little control over the actual installation procedure, and you have nowhere close to the freedom of building your own .msi.
I wouldn't go with a patching solution, since it really complicates things when you have a lot of revisions. How will the patching solution handle different versions asking to be updated? What if user A is 10 revisions behind the current revision? Or 100 revisions, etc? It would probably be best to just download the latest exe(s) and dll(s) and replace them.
That said, I think this SO question on silent updates might help you.
There is a solution for efficient patching - it works on all platforms and can run in completely silent mode, without the user noticing anything. On .NET, it provides seamless integration of the update process using a custom UserControl declaratively bound to events from your own UI.
It's called wyUpdate.
While the updating client (wyUpdate) is open source, a paid for wybuild tool is used to build and publish the patches.
Depending on the size of your application, you'd probably have it split up into several dll's, an exe, and other files.
What you could do is have the main program check for updates. If updates are available, the main program would close and the update program would take over - updating old files, creating new ones, and deleting current files as specified by the instructions sent along with a patch file (probably a compressed format such as .zip) downloaded by the updater.
If your application is small (say, a single exe) it would suffice to simply have the updater replace that one exe.
Edit:
Another way to do this would be to (upon compilation of the new exe), compare the new one to the old one, and just send the differences over to the updater. It would then make the appropriate adjustments.
You can make your function reside in a separate DLL. So you can just replace the DLL instead of patching the whole program. (Assuming Windows as the target platform for a C# program.)
Just a quick question:
I'm in the finalizing state of my current C# project, and I'd like to send a version out to people that has 90% of the features initially requested, but it'll be a version of the software that will do all they need - they need the software as soon as possible, basically.
Therefore I'm going to be using the online install option in VS2008 that will use updating to add the final few features, as well as additional things, later. What I'm wondering is the following:
The program will come packaged with a .mdf file. When I create a new version of the program however, I don't want to change all of the data that has been added to the database already. My question is how do I go about doing this?
Thanks!
How are you planning to distribute the update? An installer will have flags indicating when a file should be replaced. (Date, version etc)
One-Click installation has the ability to check for changes on program startup.
Forgive me if this has already been asked, but I'm new to C# and am currently working on a side application to automate the install of the product that I test. My question is: Is it possible to check a folder location on the build server and pick up the most current build without having to manually stipulate what the location/build number is? I'm looking to make this as automated as possible and would like for the application to automatically execute the install. Forgive me if this is a trivial question, I just don't want to invest too much time on a feature that is either not possible or would take too long to implement. Thanks in advance!
/matt
You should investigate ClickOnce. Unless you're doing strange things (like ActiveX controls etc) then ClickOnce has all the abilities you've asked for in your question.
Failing that simply have your automated build copy the outputs to a "latest" folder. We have our MSI's copied there, then you just use Windows scheduled tasks every few minutes to see if a new version is there. If it is you uninstall old, copy new MSI locally and install new with batch files.
Its simple and works well for some circumstances.
What would be the Most secure and Safe way to allow software to auto-update without opening too many holes to enable a hacker easy access to a system?
Have you looked into ClickOnce Deployment?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/t71a733d(VS.80).aspx
The short overview is here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/142dbbz4(VS.80).aspx
I recommend not building your own auto-update, use ClickOnce if it works for you or a commercial auto-update component if not.
If you want to see what is involved I wrote a series about writing an auto-update component on my blog some time ago, the last post with links to all the posts in the series is at: http://www.nbdtech.com/blog/archive/2007/08/07/How-To-Write-an-Automatic-Update-System-Part-8.aspx
If you are going to make your own system then you will probably want to have a public/private key pair.
So, you would zip up the update.
Then encrypt with the private key on the server.
The client can then decrypt and unzip it, and then install it.
That way, as long as your private key is secure then you can ensure that the update is legit.
The only weakness here is that if someone changed the public key to some other key, then they could fool that program into thinking that a trojan is a valid update.
There are various schemes you can use to get around this, but that would depend on how much work you want to put into this.
ClickOnce auto update is all fair and well but anyone can admit that it is not the most of fashionable solution. I've recently developed a solution that requires such an auto-update feature. Here is a list of brief steps I took to deploying my very own updating service that also allows for roll-backs with 'minimal' know-how.
Add a Setup project to the solution so that the project could be wrapped up neatly in a .exe or .msi installer package.
The following is to setup a FTP server with your desired user credential that only your application knows. On the ftp server, setup a default directory for where you will put any new updates.
Your application will check for internet connection on start-up, log into your remote FTP server and check for any new files to download.
Download new updates to your client application and put them in a date-time named folder for future reference. Some checks need to be in place to make sure that you don't download the same old files.
Close the application and run the new installation. Depending on how you setup your Setup project, the installation wizard may remove the previous version completely or just update partial (patches, etc.).
Your application may have a feature to roll-back to previous version by going into the local update directory and fish out the previously downloaded files. This is where the date-time stamped files come in handy for reference.
This solution offers a level of customization that I think most Enterprise solutions will need and I found that it works very effectively for me. FTP servers are secure and reliable as far as file downloads are involved. You can find a lot of FTP download helper library on the internet so its a matter of making work the way you want and not worry too much about how it works.