Portable testing process

Discuss anything related to portable freeware here.
Message
Author
User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7792
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Portable testing process

#1 Post by webfork » Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:32 pm

As guinness' thread pointed out, there are many ways to test for portability, but I wanted to look at exactly what we're testing for to maybe demystify some of the steps. So I developed a process map.

NOTE: Version 2 has been posted based on forum feedback.

Image

Comments welcome. Source file for xmind is here if you want to edit it directly.
Last edited by webfork on Sun Jul 31, 2016 10:39 am, edited 5 times in total.
Reason: (fixed links)
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

User avatar
m^(2)
Posts: 890
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 2:38 am
Location: Kce,PL
Contact:

Re: Portable testing process

#2 Post by m^(2) » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:09 am

Misses checking for dependencies.

User avatar
guinness
Posts: 4118
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: Portable testing process

#3 Post by guinness » Fri Jan 14, 2011 7:56 am

Excellent MindMap! It's good to have a visual representation of what is required for those that Test Portable Applications. Thanks webfork.
Added 179 Applications: Portable

crownixx
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 6:26 am

Re: Portable testing process

#4 Post by crownixx » Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:18 am

Thumbs up to the process map. I love visual representation information.
If the process map is specific to TPFC, then i think the first criteria and most important for the app to be in the database is the app licenses should not be a payware :wink:
JauntePE the portable maker: <<JauntePE Google Site >>

User avatar
Wolfghost
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:14 am
Location: Norway

Re: Portable testing process

#5 Post by Wolfghost » Sat Jan 15, 2011 10:01 am

Really great work with this webfork :wink:
<<---It have to be STEALTH !!!--->>

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7792
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Portable testing process

#6 Post by webfork » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:01 am

Wolfghost wrote:Really great work with this webfork
guinness wrote:Excellent MindMap! It's good to have a visual representation of what is required for those that Test Portable Applications. Thanks webfork.
Cool, thank you both.
crownixx wrote:Thumbs up to the process map. I love visual representation information.
If the process map is specific to TPFC, then i think the first criteria and most important for the app to be in the database is the app licenses should not be a payware
Wow, "license check" is a conspicuous absence. Well said.
m^(2) wrote:Misses checking for dependencies.
I think this is missing in my own portable checking process. How is this done and where should this step go in the order above?
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

User avatar
I am Baas
Posts: 4144
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:51 am

Re: Portable testing process

#7 Post by I am Baas » Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:49 pm

Nice work (in progress) webfork.

One more thing missing is (in case it is an installer) the 'how to extract' method.

As for dependencies, PeStudio (portable) can help. Look under '.Net' tab, 'Libraries' and 'Imports' tab. Alternatives are Dependency Walker (not portable), FileInfo plugin for Universal Viewer (you would have to search the forum for that + it's not portable). There are a few more PE analyzers... will list a few more later.
Bəəs 2.0

User avatar
m^(2)
Posts: 890
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 2:38 am
Location: Kce,PL
Contact:

Re: Portable testing process

#8 Post by m^(2) » Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:31 pm

webfork wrote:
m^(2) wrote:Misses checking for dependencies.
I think this is missing in my own portable checking process. How is this done and where should this step go in the order above?
It's a complex task because there are many types of dependencies:
-Dependencies on particular OS features, usually mentioned by the developers as "Works on:...". This info is not always accurate.
-Sometimes not mentioned at all dependency on a particular service pack
-Dependency on common libraries like MSVCRT
-Dependencies on other libraries from the same company. They might be installed on your PC, so you'll miss they are actually needed.
-Drivers. Please note that if you run a program once as admin, it may install needed drivers and then work w/out admin. You should check w/ only guest rights first.
-.NET
-Java
-I'm sure I forgot about some things.

The best way to spot a dependency is to have a set of virtual machines with OSes that you care for, in my case it was Windows XP, XP SP1, XP SP2, 2000 SP smth. , NT4 SP smth.. What matters is that they should be clean installations, nothing but OS. Then if something is required, it's missing and you see that a program doesn't run or is in some way limited. To identify what is needed you can use the tools mentioned by I am Baas. Personally I use FileInfo (which is actually a Total Commander plugin adapted by some other programs :P ). And Process Monitor to see all files read.

Where to put it? Don't know, but probably one of the later stages.

User avatar
I am Baas
Posts: 4144
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:51 am

Re: Portable testing process

#9 Post by I am Baas » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:38 pm

m^(2) wrote:Personally I use FileInfo (which is actually a Total Commander plugin adapted by some other programs :P ). And Process Monitor to see all files read.
Yes, FileInfo is the TC plugin I was referring to, but, afaicr, it creates an .ini file in WINDOWS folder + writes to the registry.
m^(2) wrote:Where to put it? Don't know, but probably one of the later stages.
I always check for .net and Java requirements first and if it is needed I normally would not bother with any further analysis.
Bəəs 2.0

TP109
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Illinois/Indiana

Re: Portable testing process

#10 Post by TP109 » Sun Jul 31, 2016 9:39 am

webfork wrote:Comments welcome. Source file for xmind is here if you want to edit it directly.
Link is broken. Is the source file still available?

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7792
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Portable testing process

#11 Post by webfork » Sun Jul 31, 2016 10:02 am

TP109 wrote:Link is broken. Is the source file still available?
Updated, thanks. Some time ago Dropbox changed all it's public links settings so I've slowly gone through the site and updated old posts but I there's still some missing.
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

TP109
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Illinois/Indiana

Re: Portable testing process

#12 Post by TP109 » Sun Jul 31, 2016 10:11 am

Working now. Thanks

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7792
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Portable testing process

#13 Post by webfork » Sun Jul 31, 2016 10:28 am

Update: Version 2.

When I fixed the links realized I never went back in and made changes based on feedback. I went ahead and updated the original with some of the suggestions.

Overview

Image

Detailed

Image

View source file, which can be edited in XMind.

Any other feedback welcome.
Last edited by webfork on Sun Jul 31, 2016 10:41 am, edited 3 times in total.
Reason: (fixed img)
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

TP109
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Illinois/Indiana

Re: Portable testing process

#14 Post by TP109 » Sun Jul 31, 2016 11:32 am

Good improvements over 1st version. Thumbs up.

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 4273
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Portable testing process

#15 Post by Midas » Mon Aug 01, 2016 4:15 am

Great! You should probably link to v2 from the site FAQ. 8)

Post Reply