2.3.1_24028 - Is It Working For You?

Windows created environment variables TMP and TEMP pointing at temporary directories optionally of the user’s choice is the standard configuration. It would be a bug to assume a directory for temporaries is anywhere else.

2 Likes

Isn’t that what I said? The temp folder lives by default on C:, unless you move it.

The point of having the temp directory set by an environment variable is for it to be varied - the clue is in the name.

1 Like

Hello guys,

We’ll have a look at this problem.

Thank you,
Regards,
Svetlana G.

Official Microsoft documentation: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/fileapi/nf-fileapi-gettemppatha

I agree. As it is, for Windows users, multiple downloads of files of the same name are enumerated (digit added to the filename) so you’re not overwriting the current one with the new, and a user should be able to locate the previous version just by picking a photolab installer with a lower (or no) number, but a version number would make this somewhat easier.
That said, I’d expect the version information to be available in Windows (right click an EXE file, select ‘Properties’ from the drop-down, then the tab labeled ‘Details’). I can’t chect this with a PL installer right now as I’m on a work PC, and so don’t have any available to test

Unfortunately, the specific file version is not revealed by this method. The “Properties” dialog below is for PhotoLab 2.3.

Regards, Joseph

Hello,

  • Yep, we’ve got the task in the backlog to have the installers enumerated to allow you differentiate them quickly.

Regards,
Svetlana G.

3 Likes

Then the ‘ask’ over in ‘what improvements do you need’ should be to fix this. I’m a retired software architect. IMO this, for a Windows app is a bug. I get how a build procedure can’t easily be modified to produce a dynamically named installation EXE.Version info in the header is easily set with dynamic info (and has been in the MS spec for win EXEs for a few decades - not a new thing).
@sgospodarenko Svetlana, could I trouble you to ask the build team to fix this?
I’ll put an entry in the “what improvements…” section once I’ve had a chance to verify - if that’s needed.
I also find myself wondering how your installation QA team is verifying things…
Thanks!

1 Like

Hello,

I’ve already pushed them as soon as got this message once again and we’ll try to do our best to deliver it with the new release. Internally, it’s not a problem to distinguish builds because they contain the number in the name of the installer but to have the same public - it needs some rework of the server. I can promise that the job will be done and this request will be implemented but I can\t say nothing about the timeframe.

Regards,
Svetlana G.

Thanks!
And once they’ve got it fixed, we’ll have a how-to answer for anyone who can’t figure out which PL installer is which version. :slight_smile:
I have to ask: is there a similar issue with the Mac build? I don’t have a Mac so no way to check myself.