Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

allowAppDataPlugins.xml is not recognised #125

Open
P-Bouche opened this issue Aug 21, 2018 · 7 comments
Open

allowAppDataPlugins.xml is not recognised #125

P-Bouche opened this issue Aug 21, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@P-Bouche
Copy link

Description of the Issue

I have created a 0 length file called allowAppDataPlugins.xml in the Notepad ++ installation folder. When opening Plugin Manager Settings, in the information section, it is said:

"Plugin Config path is:
C:\Users\XXX\Documents\Apps\Notepad++\plugins\Config
Plugins in user's AppData directory are disabled - to enable in Notepad++ version 5.9.7 onwards place an empty file called allowAppDataPlugins.xml in the Notepad++ directory."

Steps to Reproduce the Issue

  1. Create a file called allowAppDataPlugins.xml in the Notepad++ folder
  2. Launch Notepad ++
  3. Open Plugins -> Plugin Manager -> Show Plugin Manager -> Settings

Expected Behavior

The use of Plugins in user's AppData directory enabled by creating the allowAppDataPlugins.xml file in the Notepad ++ directory.

Actual Behavior

The use of Plugins in user's AppData directory is not enabled by creating the allowAppDataPlugins.xml file in the Notepad ++ directory.

Debug Information

Notepad ++ v7.5.6 (64-bit) (zip installation)
PluginManager v 1.4.11.0
Installation Folder : "C:\Users\XXX\Documents\Apps\Notepad++"
Windows 7 (64 bits)

Error window
npp_plugin_manager_app_data_issue

Other Plugin List
npp_plugin_manager_app_data_issue_plugin_list

@schnaggi
Copy link

A user has r/w access to this folder. Why sb should use a user installation?

@P-Bouche
Copy link
Author

Now that I read it again, I am unsure it will fix the issue I have... I do not have admin rights on my laptop therefore I have issues running gpup.exe.

Nonetheless it still is an unwanted behaviour.

@alexhass
Copy link

Why sb should use a user installation?

Because our 350 users do not have permissions in ProgramFiles folder to install any software, but they need to be able to install per user plugins in their own.

@alexhass
Copy link

alexhass commented Oct 20, 2018

I checked the reported issue here, but I cannot verify and issues. If the allowAppDataPlugins.xml exists the the greyed our checkbox is enabled and unchecked. DLLs are installed to %APPDATA%\Notepad++ folder, too.

So all is correct from this side.

@schnaggi
Copy link

schnaggi commented Oct 20, 2018

Why sb should use a user installation?

Because our 350 users do not have permissions in ProgramFiles folder to install any software, but they need to be able to install per user plugins in their own.

my answer was a reply to this thread opening and the user installed the program to appdata folder. A user has r/w permssion to this folder.
I also deployed NP++ to program files folder and used user based plugin installation and had no problem. The prolbem here is: the user can write to program files folder. And I also checked it with my portable version and the same problem occoured. So the problem is: installation to r/w folder and not only r folder.

@chcg
Copy link
Collaborator

chcg commented Oct 21, 2018

Regarding:

Now that I read it again, I am unsure it will fix the issue I have... I do not have admin rights on my

laptop therefore I have issues running gpup.exe.

Nonetheless it still is an unwanted behaviour.

@P-Bouche From my understanding the installation of N++ is already a non admin install to your user directory. So you have full read/write access there.
The problem is that gpup.exe requests admin rights also for operations within the user folder during update/install/delete actions.

So I guess your problem is that gpup.exe always requests admin rights, similar to #35 and #128.

@alexhass
Copy link

That is a total different issue than the title here. There is another issue for this UAC bug.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants