API has no certification!

Hi WinBuilder Developer

I can not use the WinBuilder 83.21 on my project. Because It gives an error : "API has no certification!". What is this ? Best regards

Winbuilder 83 is experimental and as only intended for use with multipe. However it is easy to get working with other projects. You just have to certify the api script with the latest certify.exe ( version 5.5.4 ).

Thank you paraglider for your answer. But How ?

You PM PscEx and ask him for a link to the latest certify package ( plus password ) and a signing key ( unique per script developer ). The helpfile with the certify package tells you how to use it.

Hopefully by the time winbuilder 83 is released as a alpha / beta / release version any signing requirements for the API files will be optional.

Only file I had to sign with certify.exe in win8pese project was Projects\Win8PESE\Build\Macro_Library.script

Hi paraglider

Unfortunately, I can not find the mentioned file in the specified location. Can you give me a download link ? Best regards

Please follow the rules I outlined above. PscEx will email you the link, the password to open the file and the developer specific certification key if you don't already have one. I did this earlier this week and the PM Pscex sent contained a valid link.

Hi paraglider

 

Unfortunately, I can not find the mentioned file in the specified location. Can you give me a download link ? Best regards

Max, just curious to know, is there any specific reason to use WB083 while your project (I think Win8pese) can be built by prior versions of WB, e.g. 082 or 080? As paraglider has pointed out, WB083 is to be used with MultiPE only.

Please follow the rules I outlined above. PscEx will email you the link, the password to open the file and the developer specific certification key if you don't already have one. I did this earlier this week and the PM Pscex sent contained a valid link.

Max, just curious to know, is there any specific reason to use WB083 while your project (I think Win8pese) can be built by prior versions of WB, e.g. 082 or 080? As paraglider has pointed out, WB083 is to be used with MultiPE only.

Don't know. He responded to me within 1 day usually much less.

Hi Developer

Maybe a useful program for batch processing. Best regards

http://www.maxrealqn...CertifyGuiv1.7z

I cannot unzip

Peter

Archive verifies wit 7-zip 9.20.

Wonko

Archive verifies wit 7-zip 9.20.

 

Wonko

I have 9.20 installed.

But some associations were still to 4.65 ...

Peter

I have 9.20 installed.

But some associations were still to 4.65 ...

Peter

I prefer to call this a "bug in my PC setup"

Peter

Hi Wonko the Sane

Thank you for your feedback. If you like this little program, I can improve it a bit more. Best regards

Well, all I did was to check the archive for (possible) corruption.

I am sure it is a handy utility , but I have no use for it .

Using a completely unneeded certification tool for something that makes little sense and that additionally requires "begging" to get included in the "private club" is really something I won't like to do (and thank heavens I don' t have a need for, not developing anything Winbuilder based).

Wonko

Hi Wonko the Sane

Yes, you might be right. But I still think a little to provide an update. I think, maybe pscEx's idea is a step too late for safety of our community. I think this method should have been done much earlier. But what happens disadvantages, it also need to discuss. Best regards

is a step too late

The first introduction to that method has been made in 2009: http://reboot.pro/to...ity/#entry76322

At that time Vista PE projects have been in the very beginning, and Win7 was unknown.

The idea was fully supported by the LiveXP development team and Lancelot created the keys for developers asking for it.

After he and some other people decided to make the revolution here, become bakers and forget or fight against their previous "life", I continued as "key generator".

Using a completely unneeded certification tool for something that makes little sense

Intelligent people can find the sence in the above link.

If they see only little sence, why they did not give their concerns 4 years ago?

BTW: @Wonko: You are well known here as person with sharp and logical behavement.
But due to the above quoted post I have some concerns: Even if something only makes little sence, the tool to perform the "something", cannot be unneeded gererally.

It can only be "not needed" for the individual user, when he decides not to process the "something".

and that additionally requires "begging" to get included in the "private club

At the stone-aged Lancelot time as well as now, nobody has to beg for a key.

There is no automatism which sends the key to every reboot.pro developer, but a PM of a serious reboot.pro member with the request has been and is still sufficient.

Peter