Recommended Posts

I have read the documentation, specifically the following:

"4.6 - ReleaseDate

This property defines the date on which the setup file the module installs was created. It must be an eight digit number in the format YYYYMMDD (year, month, day).

* However * This property is much more important than it sounds. It actually defines the order that things are installed! AutoPatcher will install modules in the order: older date to newer date (smaller number to bigger). It also has an effect on the order things are listed in the selection window. "

I basically want to list the Stand Alone programs in alphabetical order. First I tried setting the release date all the same - that didn't work. Then I tried setting the release date to a sequence: 20000101, 20000110, 20000120, 20000130. I expected these 4 items to be sorted accordingly, but no luck.

(BTW, the standalone.apm parent file has a release date of 00000005).

This happened in 5.6.72 and 5.6.76

Any suggestions?

-John

  M2Ys4U said:
As far as I know ReleaseDate is the oder in which things are installed, not displayed. I do not think you can control the order.

I know that the documentation is not always correct but it does say:

"It also has an effect on the order things are listed in the selection window."

I guess I was assuming that this "effect" was something I could utilize to alpha sort the selection list.

-John

i believed it did when i wrote the documentation because i gave sub-parents lower values and they appeared first. i didn't actually experiment though i have to admit and it could have been through raptors design that sub-parents come first... if so a correction to the documentation is in order... (on the todo list to check it out at some point and correct if necessary)

I've been playing with the order a lot so I know the answer to this one. The display order is 100 percent dependent on the module's releasedate property. Lowest release date on top, highest on bottom.

I was thinking about asking Raptor to create a new property to control the order of displayed updates compared to what order they are installed in but I've been having him play with the executable so much lately, I was going to suggest this later. <hint, hint>

  Tenchi103 said:
I've been playing with the order a lot so I know the answer to this one. The display order is 100 percent dependent on the module's releasedate property. Lowest release date on top, highest on bottom.

I was thinking about asking Raptor to create a new property to control the order of displayed updates compared to what order they are installed in but I've been having him play with the executable so much lately, I was going to suggest this later. <hint, hint>

Tenchi103,

Sounds like it works for you - what am I doing wrong? - I tried setting the ReleaseDate for 4 modules to a sequence: 20000101, 20000110, 20000120, 20000130. I expected these 4 modules to be sorted accordingly, but no luck!

Thanks, John

  Tenchi103 said:
How are you're modules currenlty being displayed when you run AP?

I tried a number of different schemes, even setting all the ReleaseDates to the same number (9010). Here is a list of the ReleaseDates from the APM files in the same order as displayed on the 'List of Available Items' screen:

ReleaseDate=00009010

ReleaseDate=00009010

ReleaseDate=20000130

ReleaseDate=00009010

ReleaseDate=00000050

ReleaseDate=00009010

ReleaseDate=00009010

ReleaseDate=20000120

ReleaseDate=00009010

ReleaseDate=00009010

ReleaseDate=20000101

ReleaseDate=20000110

I am running AP ver 5.6.76, but the same was happenong with 5.6.72

-John

First thing you should always practice is to create a standard naming scheme for your ReleaseDates making sure that the number is greater than the parent module they are in.

Try beginning with 2000005 and go in increments of 5 (Example: 2000005, 2000010, 2000015...)

Give this a try and see what happens.

  Tenchi103 said:
First thing you should always practice is to create a standard naming scheme for your ReleaseDates making sure that the number is greater than the parent module they are in.

Try beginning with 2000005 and go in increments of 5 (Example: 2000005, 2000010, 2000015...)

Give this a try and see what happens.

Tenchi103,

I finally found some time to play with the ReleaseDate. I set the modules to the following sequence:

ReleaseDate=20000110

ReleaseDate=20000120

ReleaseDate=20000130

....

ReleaseDate=20000360

And the Parent Module had a ReleaseDate=00000005

No luck, display order had no relationship to ReleaseDate order.

BUT, when I changed the Parent Module ReleaseDate to 20000005 it all worked fine!

So I hope this helps others....

John

  major4579 said:
Tenchi103,

I finally found some time to play with the ReleaseDate. I set the modules to the following sequence:

ReleaseDate=20000110

ReleaseDate=20000120

ReleaseDate=20000130

....

ReleaseDate=20000360

And the Parent Module had a ReleaseDate=00000005

No luck, display order had no relationship to ReleaseDate order.

BUT, when I changed the Parent Module ReleaseDate to 20000005 it all worked fine!

So I hope this helps others....

John

I'm curious, is the parent module you created inside another module or is it on the root of AP? If it's inside another module, this would explain why you had to up the ReleaseDate from 00000005 to 20000005. (The parent module has have a larger number than the module that it's in)

  Tenchi103 said:
I'm curious, is the parent module you created inside another module or is it on the root of AP? If it's inside another module, this would explain why you had to up the ReleaseDate from 00000005 to 20000005. (The parent module has have a larger number than the module that it's in)

It's a root module - the APM file resides in "\autopatcher\modules".

All the actual modules (the ones I numbered sequentially) reside in "\Autopatcher\modules\stand_alone_mods".

Here's the contents of the root module APM file:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[AutoPatcher 5.6 Module]

[General]

Title=Stand-Alone Modules

Description=

Author=Various

ModuleAuthor=ModuleEditor2

WebPage=

ReleaseDate=20000005

[behavior]

ParentID=

UniqueID=STAND_ALONE_PARENT

Critical=False

AutoExpand=True

Depends=

TimeToInstall=0

TimeToRemove=0

RequiresReboot=False

[DetectionRegistry]

RegistryPath=

KeyName=

KeyValue=

[DetectionFile]

FilePath=

FileName=

FileVersion=

[OperatingSystem]

WindowsVersion=ANY

SystemLanguage=1033

[systemComponents]

InternetExplorer=ANY

WindowsMediaPlayer=ANY

DotNetFramework=ANY

WindowsInstaller=ANY

MSNMessenger=ANY

[OfficeComponents]

Word=ANY

Excel=ANY

PowerPoint=ANY

Outlook=ANY

Publisher=ANY

Visio=ANY

Project=ANY

OneNote=ANY

FrontPage=ANY

InfoPath=ANY

Access=ANY

[installation]

[Removal]

--------------------------------------------------------------------

-John

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • It makes more sense when you realize this is for the handhelds, and the Xbox app is likely what's going to control/activate the "Xbox full-screen experience" that disables unneeded desktop services and such.
    • I'm not against the idea...it just isn't going to work. We are already dealing with multiple launcher issues, between game stores like Steam and games that require their own launcher. There is no way adding a 3rd layer makes it better for anyone. Now IF game studios universally moved away from their own proprietary launchers in favor of a universal launcher like this, that might be cool, but even if the launcher is fully capable of providing all the features they want (which I highly doubt), then I still doubt companies would choose it over their software...we all know companies want to run as much software as possible on our computers, and something like a launch that has an excuse the run in the background for reasons, even better.
    • I was going to say that search engines and such, have been scraping everyone's copyright, IP and data, since the beginning of the internet.
    • Microsoft is officially making the Xbox app on PC a universal launcher by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe It was earlier this year that an image mockup from Microsoft showed the Xbox app on PC with an interesting change: including support for other PC stores on the app, teasing that it may be becoming a universal launcher like GOG Galaxy or Playnite. Considering the company's new handheld initiative that will house a brand-new gaming-focused version of Windows, it was clear that this feature was on the way. And now, Xbox Insiders have access. Announced today as the 'aggregated gaming library' feature, it's poised to land this holiday on the ROG Xbox Ally and ROG Xbox Ally X to easily manage all their installed games from a single place. But before that, Xbox Insiders on PC can have a crack at it to see how it functions and provide feedback to Microsoft. In its current state, Microsoft says that the feature now supports Xbox, Game Pass, Battle.net, and "other leading PC storefronts," all handled via the Xbox PC app. The company did not detail what these other storefronts are, but Steam, Epic Games Store, Ubisoft Connect, and EA Play apps seem likely candidates. "Whether you’re on a Windows PC or a handheld device, your Xbox library, hundreds of Game Pass titles, and all your installed games from leading PC storefronts will now be at your fingertips," said the company. When a game from a supported store is installed on a PC, Insiders should now see it appear on the Xbox app in the My Library and Most Recent sections for easy access. "And this is just the beginning," adds Microsoft. "We’ll continue rolling out support for additional PC storefronts over time." Insiders can also disable this functionality and hide games from specific stores if needed from the Settings > Library & Extensions menu. Anyone interested in testing out the new 'aggregated gaming library' update can use the Xbox Insider app on PC to enroll in the ongoing Insider Previews.
    • Get this powerful mini PC with Core Ultra 9, 32GB RAM, and 1TB SSD for just $799 by Taras Buria The ASUS NUC 14 Pro+ is a powerful mini PC with capable hardware, and right now, you can get it on Amazon with a big discount. At just $799, this computer offers a Core Ultra 9 processor, 32GB of memory, and a 1TB SSD. The NUC 14 Pro+ features a low-profile aluminum chassis, which can be opened without removing rubber feet or undoing any screws. Its toolless design lets you access the storage without a screwdriver. The computer also has a rich set of ports. On the front side, you will find two USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C, one USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type-C, and a power button. Unlike the Mac mini, which has a frustrating power button placement, the power button in the NUC 14 Pro+ is located where it should be. The back of the NUC 14 Pro+ has a DC-in port, two Thunderbolt 4 ports, one 2.5G Ethernet port, one USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-A, one USB 2.0 Type-A, two HDMI 2.1, and a Kensington lock. Finally, there is a VESA mount, which lets you place the device on the back of your monitor for a cleaner desk. The computer is powered by Intel's 14th-gen Core Ultra 9 185H processor, 32GB of DDR5 memory, and a 1TB PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD. Windows 11 Home is preinstalled, so you do not need to bring your own drive, memory, or Windows 11 license. ASUS NUC 14 Pro+ Core Ultra 9 185H, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD - $799.99 | 27% off on Amazon US This Amazon deal is US-specific and not available in other regions unless specified. If you don't like it or want to look at more options, check out the Amazon US deals page here. Get Prime (SNAP), Prime Video, Audible Plus or Kindle / Music Unlimited. Free for 30 days. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      fredss earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      fabioc earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      GoForma earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      GoForma earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      ravenmanNE earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      650
    2. 2
      Michael Scrip
      226
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      219
    4. 4
      +FloatingFatMan
      144
    5. 5
      Xenon
      137
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!