Package parameters not taken into account

mathstuf commented 3 months ago

Checklist

[X] I confirm there are no unresolved issues reported on the Chocolatey Status page.
[X] I have verified this is the correct repository for opening this issue.
[X] I have verified no other issues exist related to my problem.
[X] I have verified this is not an issue for a specific package.
[X] I have verified this issue is not security related.
[X] I confirm I am using official, and not unofficial, or modified, Chocolatey products.

What You Are Seeing?

I have a set of Ansible rules that build up a string for package_params. If this changes, the package is not prodded to analyze the parameters again. For example, I build up the set of --add flags for visualstudio2022community. If I deploy once with one set of --add flags, further deployments with additional --add flags do not end up adding those components to the existing installation.

What is Expected?

Package parameters changing cause the new state to be realized.

How Did You Get This To Happen?

---
- name: 'Prepare key Visual Studio variable'
  ansible.builtin.set_fact:
    vs_year: '{{ item | replace("vs", "") }}'

- name: 'Prepare architecture variable (Intel)'
  ansible.builtin.set_fact:
    vs_arch: 'x86.x64'
  when: 'ansible_machine == "x86_64"'

- name: 'Prepare architecture variable (Intel)'
  ansible.builtin.set_fact:
    vs_arch: 'ARM64'
  when: 'ansible_machine == "arm64"'

- name: 'Build Visual Studio C++ component arguments'
  ansible.builtin.set_fact:
    vs_args: >-
      {{ vs_args | default("") }}
      --add Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.VC.{{ toolchain }}.{{ vs_arch | mandatory }}
      --add Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.VC.{{ toolchain }}.CLI.Support
      --add Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.VC.{{ toolchain }}.MFC
  loop: '{{ software[item].cpp }}'
  loop_control:
    loop_var: 'toolchain'

- name: 'Build Visual Studio Windows SDK'
  ansible.builtin.set_fact:
    vs_args: >-
      {{ vs_args | default("") }}
      --add Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.Windows11SDK.22621
      --add Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.VC.Tools.{{ vs_arch | mandatory }}
      --add Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.VC.CLI.Support
      --add Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.VC.ATLMFC
  when: 'software[item].cpp is defined'

- name: 'Install Visual Studio {{ vs_year }}'
  chocolatey.chocolatey.win_chocolatey:
    name: 'visualstudio{{ vs_year }}community'
    package_params: '{{ vs_args | mandatory }}'
    state: latest

System Details

Operating System: Windows 10
Windows PowerShell version: 5.1.19041.4170
Chocolatey CLI Version: 2.2.2
Chocolatey Licensed Extension version: N/A
Chocolatey License type: Community
Terminal/Emulator: cmd

Installed Packages

Chocolatey v2.2.2
chocolatey 2.2.2
chocolatey-compatibility.extension 1.0.0
chocolatey-core.extension 1.4.0
chocolatey-dotnetfx.extension 1.0.1     
chocolatey-visualstudio.extension 1.11.1
dotnetfx 4.8.0.20220524
git 2.44.0
git.install 2.44.0
KB2919355 1.0.20160915
KB2919442 1.0.20160915
visualstudio2022community 117.9.5
visualstudio-installer 2.0.3     
12 packages installed.

Output Log

https://gist.github.com/mathstuf/9649614a99964e3057449e79f3e3a20b

Additional Context

No response

mathstuf commented 3 months ago

Even using force: true doesn't help; the existing components are the only ones installed.

mathstuf commented 3 months ago

state: reinstalled fails because the parameters are passed to the uninstaller and not understood.

mathstuf commented 3 months ago

Is there some mechanism by which the package could get some handle on the request to do its own syncup action? For example:

look at the requested components
list the already installed components
internally craft a vsinstaller command to --add and --remove to make the state consistent

vexx32 commented 2 weeks ago

So... a couple things:

Yes, force: true would be required, otherwise choco itself won't do the reinstallation. As far as I know, choco doesn't consider changed parameters to be sufficient for a reinstallation on their own.
The exact behaviour of this would depend on how the package and the underlying software is written. There should be a way to handle this in the package, but you would need to contact the package maintainer if the existing package for this does not handle this use case, or roll your own package to handle this for your use case.

I don't think this is something we can handle in this collection, though, so I'm going to close out this issue for now.

mathstuf commented 2 weeks ago

Thanks. I think we came to the conclusion that using choco to install VS (component-less) but a specific VS Installer-aware action to manage its components is a better solution.

chocolatey / chocolatey-ansible