By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,686 Members | 2,392 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,686 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Annoying ACCESS 2000 RUNTIME installation triggered

P: n/a
Hello,

An ACCESS application (mde) is installed on a computer looking at an
mdb file on the same machine.
As far as I know the application is installed thru a Wise Installer
script. The installation process performs an installation of ACCESS
2000 RUNTIME thru a SAGEKEY script.
The application is designed to run only in within the scope of ACCESS
2000 RUNTIME.
Everything works fine.
For your information, OFFICE 2003 is installed as well on the machine,
with ACCESS 2003.

I'm coding some applications in VB 6.0, that are handling
(read/write/etc) data from the mdb file.
If I run one of my VB apps from the account which was used to install
the main ACCESS application everything works fine.
If I run the main application from any other user account, everything
works fine.
If I run one of my VB apps from any other user account, MICROSOFT
ACCESS 2000 RUNTIME starts installing itself and fails (missing files
MSO7FTP.EXE, ACCESS.PIP, etc ...) and starts and fails again, etc ...
until I press several times on the [Cancel] button.

I've got a reference to "Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects 2.8 Library"
in my VB project.
By tracing the program, I can tell that the "annoying" installation
occurs before opening any connection to the .mdb, in fact it occurs
before the first form load ...

Here are my questions (sorry if I sound a little bit confused):
- Is it possible that ACCESS 2000 RUNTIME is registered only for the
current user during its installation?
- Why is ACCESS 2000 RUNTIME involved here, on a machine with ACCESS
2003 installed? (once it's installed am I forced to use it?).
- I thought I could handle any .mdb file from VB without having any
release of ACCESS installed on the machine, am I wrong?

Thx,
Philippe.
Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
2 Replies


P: n/a
pe************@libertysurf.fr (Philippe PERON) wrote:
As far as I know the application is installed thru a Wise Installer
script. The installation process performs an installation of ACCESS
2000 RUNTIME thru a SAGEKEY script.


I'd suggest emailing the folks at www.sagekey.com.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Nov 13 '05 #2

P: n/a
Tony Toews <tt****@telusplanet.net> wrote in message news:<hv********************************@4ax.com>. ..
pe************@libertysurf.fr (Philippe PERON) wrote:
As far as I know the application is installed thru a Wise Installer
script. The installation process performs an installation of ACCESS
2000 RUNTIME thru a SAGEKEY script.


I'd suggest emailing the folks at www.sagekey.com.

Tony


Hello,

Well, I wasn't the one dealing directly with SAGEKEY, and I understood
that an incident support might cost 75$ (product purchased more than 3
months ago...). I would like to avoid that, as much as I can ...
But as I haven't got much time left to solve the problem I'll probably
end up paying them the money.

I've tried using REGMON to spot any "obvious" differences between
running the VB executable with the "working" account and running it
with another "non-working" one, but it's hard to tell what one account
is finding that the other ones don't find and therefore trigger that
"annoying" ACCESS RUNTIME 2000 faulty installation.

By the way, the problem occurs as well on a machine without any office
2003 installed. The solution is really around the way ART2000 is
installed/registered for the "first" user during the "main"
application installation.

As soon as I've got the solution to that problem I'll add it to this
thread, as I found a few other threads on the same topic, but without
any "clear" answer.

Best Regards,
Philippe Peron.
Nov 13 '05 #3

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.