07-17-2006 12:03 PM
07-17-2006 03:31 PM
Jack,
There is currently no way to prevent the deployment utility from modifying absolute paths, however if all paths are relative to the sequence file then the in TestStand 3.5 the sequence file will NOT be saved 3.1 and older versions always save the sequence files. Relative to the sequence file is the best path to use because it is at the top of the default search paths. Using relative paths is better than absolute paths because your system can still work if a user installs things to non-default locations.
-Rick Francis
07-17-2006 06:22 PM
Rick,
In my experimentation to see if using relative paths, I was able to prove that a sequence that uses them will not be updated - with one caveat; if the path that is referenced by the sequence is not itself in a sub-directory, i.e.; it's in a different branch of the relative directory structure with respect to the Target (such as the TestStand directory), then the sequence file is always updated and re-saved. An example is that we have a sequence in the Tools directory that calls a DLL in the FrontEnd directory of the Components\User path. This re-saving causes a checksum change and screws up our verification mechanism.
It is unfortunate that I cannot prevent the deployment utility from modifying sequence files - Since we control the entire Test environment, including the location that software gets installed to - Test Station custodians can't go installing the software in a different location, or worse, multiple locations, so we don't have the issue to worry about.
Because of this 'better' method, we now have to re-evaluate how to control the installed version of the software, or use a different installer, such as CVI, which while it has been working for us, has it 's own issues that we're trying to get away from. I'm glad that I am finding out about this now before I've locked down the sequences so that I can probably move the features in the Tools to the Frontend Callback sequence.
It's almost always the case thought that one persons forced enhancement is another's 'feature' or worse 'bug'.
Thanks for confirming the behavior on the Deployment utility for me.
-Jack
07-18-2006 02:17 PM
07-19-2006 04:28 PM
Rick,
I would be interested in this and you can contact me at any of the following that work for you:
--
Jack T. Morgan
Principal Test Design Engineer
BAE SYSTEMS, Inc.
P.O. Box 868
Mail Stop: NCA01-6218
eMail: jack.t.morgan@baesystems.com
Phone: 603.885.3724
Page: 603.423.4318
Thanks for at least looking into this - If you actually get something that is functional, we would be happy to give it a try.
-Jack
07-21-2014 12:35 PM
I am updating out test stand to use TestStand 2013 and am trying to use the "No File Update" version of the Deployment Tool that the original poster (my coworker Jack), had forwarded to me. Would it be possibel to get a version of that tool that will be compatible with TestStand 2013 software and file paths?
It is something that we need so our checksums, which we use for validation of files, will work correctly.
Please let me know if this is available, or if there is some setting in TestStand 2013 that will prevent the deployment utility from modifying sequence files.
Thanks,
John Corrado
Test Design Engineer
BAE Systems, Inc.
john.corrado@baesystems.com
603-885-5238
07-25-2014 01:33 PM
This issue can be resolved using the standard TestStand 2013 Deployment Utility. After configuring the deployment, let TestStand analyze the source files. Then, in the Distributed Files tab, check the box labeled "Include without processing item or dependencies" and build the project.
Myriam
07-25-2014 02:27 PM
That worked perfectly for me.
Thank You!
-John