Minor upgrade validation failed due to .net Scan at build "dependencies and properties"
Hi All,
Two releases ago, we mapped new files in our original msi.
Unfortunately the ".Net Scan at Build" value was left on "Dependencies and Properties".
Now 2 minor upgrades later, we have discovered that the latest minor upgrade (msp) does not patch certain files.
We have already established that this is because of dependencies that were dynamically linked into the msi each time we built the minor upgrade msp. It dynamically generated a new component for each dependency with a new GUID.
So the patch cannot find the previous component which now seem to it to have been dropped in the latest release and which is also not allowed for minor upgrades.
Previously we discovered the same type of issue, but only in the immediate minor upgrade following a previous version. We then succesfully corrected this by setting the ".Net scan at build" to none, and statically creating a component with the same ID and GUID as the one in the previous version.
Now we have two minor upgrades since the version where the files were mapped and incorrectly flagged to scan .net dependencies at build.
I tried to fix this by mapping the original first release's components statically, as well as the components for the first minor upgrade.
When I have the components for both the first release and the first minor upgrade, the second minor upgrade still fails.
When I remove the components for the first minor upgrade, leaving only the components for the first original release, then the patch succeeds to upgrade the first original release.
We need to somehow specify the components for both the original release and the first minor upgrade, because the client can either have just the original release and skip the first minor upgrade by directly installing the latest (second) release on the original.
But another client should be able to upgrade his environment that has already been upgraded to the first minor upgrade.
Has anybody else encountered this and have suggestions/answers as to how we can solve this issue?
This is quite urgent! Please!
Two releases ago, we mapped new files in our original msi.
Unfortunately the ".Net Scan at Build" value was left on "Dependencies and Properties".
Now 2 minor upgrades later, we have discovered that the latest minor upgrade (msp) does not patch certain files.
We have already established that this is because of dependencies that were dynamically linked into the msi each time we built the minor upgrade msp. It dynamically generated a new component for each dependency with a new GUID.
So the patch cannot find the previous component which now seem to it to have been dropped in the latest release and which is also not allowed for minor upgrades.
Previously we discovered the same type of issue, but only in the immediate minor upgrade following a previous version. We then succesfully corrected this by setting the ".Net scan at build" to none, and statically creating a component with the same ID and GUID as the one in the previous version.
Now we have two minor upgrades since the version where the files were mapped and incorrectly flagged to scan .net dependencies at build.
I tried to fix this by mapping the original first release's components statically, as well as the components for the first minor upgrade.
When I have the components for both the first release and the first minor upgrade, the second minor upgrade still fails.
When I remove the components for the first minor upgrade, leaving only the components for the first original release, then the patch succeeds to upgrade the first original release.
We need to somehow specify the components for both the original release and the first minor upgrade, because the client can either have just the original release and skip the first minor upgrade by directly installing the latest (second) release on the original.
But another client should be able to upgrade his environment that has already been upgraded to the first minor upgrade.
Has anybody else encountered this and have suggestions/answers as to how we can solve this issue?
This is quite urgent! Please!
0 Comments
[ + ] Show comments
Answers (0)
Please log in to answer
Be the first to answer this question
