To clarify further about the AdminUISequence, AdminExecuteSequence, they are used when creating a so-called administrative install point. This has nothing to do with elevated privileges, and everything to do with system administration generally of several systems. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook. Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name. Email Required, but never shown. The Overflow Blog. Podcast Making Agile work for data science.
Stack Gives Back Featured on Meta. New post summary designs on greatest hits now, everywhere else eventually. Visit chat. Related 1. Hot Network Questions. Question feed. Manifests can also be used with library files such as DLL files , but in this article we will focus on manifests that are used with program files EXE files. Manifests that are used with programs are often referred to as application manifests and manifests that are used with DLL files and other library files are often referred to as assembly manifests.
One common setting that often is included in a manifest is information to Windows Vista and Windows 7 if the application requires administrator privileges or if standard user privileges are enough. If the program requires administrator privileges a User Account Control UAC dialog box is shown when the program starts and the user must confirm that the application can be run with elevated privileges.
If the application only need standard privileges the program is started without the UAC dialog box. A manifest can be used to give a program a modern design Manifests are also often used to inform Windows which version of a DLL a program is dependent of. By using manifests same DLL can exists in the computer in different versions and the program chooses which version of the DLL to load.
This is sometimes referred to as the side-by-side technology in Windows. Microsoft has finally published the fix for the blue screen crashes in Windows XP caused by Windows Vista manifests:. This duplicate tag exacerbates an XP schema parsing bug resulting in a crash on XP. In general , the manifest needs to be modified in two ways. See Example A. Example A:. Should be this:. Although a patch is planned for Windows XP to correct the XML parsing bug, developers need a way to deploy the same build of the application on both Windows XP and Windows Vista without relying upon this fix.
The procedure described below will permit this scenario. A fix is also planned for the mt. Until a new version of mt. If you are not using Visual Studio, you basically just need to change the version number in the trustInfo line of the manifest from v3 to v2.
If you are using Visual Studio , follow the steps outlined below. Open your project in VS. Under project, Select properties:. Remove any entry you have in the Additional manifest files line. It should not contain the trustInfo statements…. Manipulate the manifest in the. From a command prompt, extract the current manifest from the file. You should now be able to run your executable on both Vista and XP.
Managed code c , j and VB. Visual Studio does not currently embed a default manifest into managed code. For managed code, the developer would simply insert a default manifest into the target. The steps would be as follows:. Use a text editor like notepad to create a default manifest file, temp. Here is a default manifest that can be used as a sample. The command would be:. Hi, I've prepared a small script to add into post-build event.
Echo "Usage: patchmanifest app. CreateObject "WScript. Shell" ;. Exec "mt. Echo "Manifest Tool error" ; WScript. Quit 1 end if. Sleep loop. Echo "Manifest Tool error" WScript. Quit 2 end if. Quit 0. Echo "" WScript. Echo "Error:", Hex Err. Number , "-", Err. Description Err. Clear end if.
Another workaround is to copy the newer version of mt. The newer mt. Right SP1 does not fix this problem -- I came across the extra "newer" mt.
It's then that I found out there were actually three mt. It's better to copy the newer version overtop to prevent the old version from being used by accident. It seems that both v2 and v3 statements should work in Windows Vista and Windows XP if duplicate xmlns isn't specified. I have a simple manifest, does not require administrator testing at the mo and going as invoker.
Basiaclly embedding the manifest currupts the exe and foxpro first prompts for a file to run defaults to. For other os es leave the exe without the manifest. So basically you want to ship 2 executables. And let the installation install the appropriate one depending on whether or not its Vista.
I am not aware of another way to achieve elevation apart from the manifest route. But there are other ways of adding the manifest. NET you can configure your project to automatically embed a manifest after building.
I suppose you could achieve that in VFP by running a script in the post-build project event. I will try that. Thanks Mathias. I was just looking into embedding a manifest into a Visual FoxPro exe. I can use ml. However the exe gets corrupted as its reported size is only 32kb while it used to be KB. I do not understand what is happening. Were you ever able to embed an application manifest into a VFP executable. I am having the exact same problem that you describe.
When I use an external manifest and set the requestedExecutionLevel to "asInvoker", it does not disable virtualization for the application. Any help is appreciated.
We have an application installer that adds an add-in with outlook. But them all of a sudden every thing started giving error. In short all the data from Vista was lost and on trying to restart the machine, it gave error that windows is corrupted please insert CD to repair it. And reported an error with a file named something like intelide. I've just been reading through this thread because we have a set of applications in which we want to disable virtualization, and, after reading the MSDN information on virtualization it became apparent that we could do so by specifying a requiredExecutionLevel value in our manifests.
We merge the manifest file which the compiler produces with a 'standard' manifest file that contains the trustInfo information in and receive the annoying authoring warning into the bargain - which I understand is meant to be fixed in SP1? However I have 2 applications, both of which because they have the same runtime dependencies have the same manifest file content In one of these two applications, Virtualization is disabled, in the other, it's enabled - this is what task manager is telling me anyway.
It looks like a bug to me - because I cannot fathom why the two applications are being treated differently given that they are using the same content although one manifest is called program1. Anyone have any experience of this? It's the inconsistency I find most disconcerting.
I can see why the statement in my previous update left you in some doubt, I'll clarify the situation. I actually embed the merged manifest into the executable, in the runtime environment on Vista there are no external manifest files. The names I was referring to 'program1. I took your advice and picked up a copy of CFF Explorer to look at the two exe's resources it shows literally cut and pasted - so sorry about the formatting As you can see, they're identical, but with them set this way, program2 has virtualization disabled which is what I want but program1 has virtualization enabled which I don't want.
Just to re-iterate, there are no external manifest files on the Vista machine. The runas will cause a blue screen. Runas causes process elevation in Vista, not XP and In XP and , runas. However, in Vista runas either will change. That is why XP and crash. There's a way to include a manifest resource in your app without using MT at all.
This avoids the danger of VS generating an invalid one which blue-screens XP, and can be entirely automated within VS Test ". Then add the following line to the 'Compile-time directives' box in your Resource Includes:. Finally, in your project's properties, tell the manifest tool not to embed a manifest of it's own. Hi, in my vb.
0コメント