sure theres a way, make your own installer , as i did, i used setup factory, but if u dont wanna pay, u can use many other freeware programs..

also, u can use installrite & it will make u the installer

regards

i used install rite for Cursor XP, and the software didnt work on my unattended CD.. maybe i did it wrong.?

yep, u must have done it wrong, works flawlessly for CursorXP here

Hey,

weren't we using the mozilla 1.7's "setup.exe" ?

And isn't firefox 0.9 based on moz 1.7 ?

therefore, isn't the moz 1.7 installer included with ff 0.9 win32 ?

So there should be no problems for unattending it, right?

Dudes, tell me if the above inferences are right - and if unattending firefox/thunderbird has really become simple enough as to be done by me (until now, I was just copying the installed folder over).

[*]copy mozillas setup.exe (file version 1.0.0.2) to the location you copied the firefox files to, replacing the original one (or rename it beforehand)

@996: If you check the file version of Firefox's setup.exe (in 0.9) it is also 1.0.0.2.

So, since firefox already has 1.0.0.2 for a setup, I followed your directions, but still didn't get the silent install working.

]Bonkers[

Is there any way to prevent the screen from flashing during the installation method sumarized by 996?

-Marticus

@Bonkers

I'm sorry to hear it isn't working for you. As I read your post I tried my procedure yet again from scratch and it worked.

I used the Firefox 0.9 windows installer and the Mozilla 1.7 RC3 windows installer to extract the exe from.

As you pointed out, both setup.exe files have the same file version (1.0.0.2) but they are indeed different files. They have different icons and a comparison of the files revealed over 200.000 differences:

Search for differences

1. D:\ff\FFsetup.exe: 217'222 bytes
2. D:\ff\moSETUP.EXE: 250'880 bytes
Offsets: hexadec.

[multiple pages of detailed offsets omitted]

201'919 difference(s) found.

@996: So today I gave your method a go, and suprise, it worked. I was a little surprised but also thankful .

Thanks for all the help.

]Bonkers[

@all

I ask pardon for my barefaced question, but what's actually wrong with just copying the ZIP-filed Mozilla?

my2001 it is not wrong for you do so. people just want to be able to use the installer because it creates the right registry entries and shortcuts for firefox. At least thats what i gather from this thread. mooj made an autoit script for firefox and thunderbird using the installer(s). You could try that way if ya want. Later.

people just want to be able to use the installer because it creates the right registry entries and shortcuts for firefox. At least thats what i gather from this thread.

Yeah, I assumed that, too. I guess people just tend to prefer installers because they look good. But seriously, what's so "right" with those registry settings created by the installer? Just wondering. I mean, Mozilla also runs absolutely problem-free when just copied. It's only Sun Java Plugin which needs one single registry key to get installed properly, but that key can easily be imported by a tweak.

....... which needs one single registry key to get installed properly, but that key can easily be imported by a tweak.

Exactly.

And the Flash plugin wants to see a registry entry as well.

So, if that's what these apps want, that's what we'll give 'em.

I do the same - copy the installed (zip) firefox & make the registry entries through .reg files.

And in the foreseeable future, I will continue the same; maybe until a bug-free (universally proven to work) method to set it up using the installer evolves.

@my2001 and/or prathapml: could you plz post those .reg tweaks? That would definetely save other people (incl. me ) some time!

Bonkers[,Jun 25 2004, 09:01 PM] @996: So today I gave your method a go, and suprise, it worked. I was a little surprised but also thankful .

Thanks for all the help.

]Bonkers[

And here I thought I was the one that told 996 what to do.....blast, people never see that

The switching of the isntallers works fine, as all the "setup.exe" is is a stub loader for the config.ini to gather it's settings to install with. My guess is that the installer is a custom build, and they didn't bother changing version number, but they did tinker with it a bit.

Has anyone tried hexing the installer to find the offset for the switches?

It was indeed Alanoll who gave me the idea to try the Mozilla installer on Firefox. Thus he deserves the credit for it.

Issues remaining unsolved however are XPI extension installations via Firefox's config.ini (or any other way of installing Firefox extensions silently and unattended).

Any help with this issue is greatly appreciated.

Why hexing the installer when it works just fine this way? The files have more than 200.000 differences...