WinBuilder is the most annoying-must-have tool I have ever seen!!!!

WinBuilder is the most annoying-must-have tool I have ever seen!!!!

I hate to be that guy but, though WinBuilder is a really-must-have tool, I finally give up trying to build something on that , so now I am trying from scratch (Windows AIK)

Some projects and Winbuilder itself have very erratic behavior in my opinion

The point is that WinBuilder could be a very good tool if it were really a community effort.

So I hope it can be an open-source project in the future

Regards

hell of a first post buddy . i hope you will stay longer enough to see what this really is and how you were wrong

Welcome to the Community

The first time i use winbuilder i thought it was a virus or something

But after weeks of hacking i actually succed i building something and it was worth the effort!

Winbuilder is great stuff!

So I hope it can be an open-source project in the future

You're likely confusing winbuilder.exe with the available boot disk projects.

Think it this way: WinBuilder is a script interpreter. Different people write different collections of scripts that are called projects. Don't blame winzip because of zip files you don't like..

And winbuilder projects always had their source wide open for anyone else to fork, change and improve.. talk with the project maintainers.

Right now is not a good time to ask for improvements, I suggested a simplified project a few days ago and just read on the reaction: http://www.boot-land...?...st&p=109327

It was a bit disappointing. I'm sure that with the right kind of effort it would be possible to achieve a multi-platform project, but go figure their reasons against the idea and they are the experts on boot disks so what can I to say.

Maybe next year we can see things moving on the right direction again, that's my hope for 2011.

Hey...

Thanks for your comments, I was away-from-keyboard on the weekend, and at this moment I have a very poor internet connection.

I will try again as soon as I get my hands on a dessent machine.

Could you guys post a link to download WinBuilder 081 RC 1 or later? because every single link on the web appears not to work or simple redirects to Winbuilder 080.

@Nuno Brito

don't get me wrong, I have seen what WinBuilder can do on the web, and what it is supposed to do, and I couldn't wait to build my own Preinstaled Environment on it.

My personal experience is that WinBuilder is a very powerful tool, and definitely a must-have.

However i think some nice features could be added/improved to bring a better experience to the user.

for instance:

- where can I easily choose what version to build for a given project (minimum/recomended/complete/beta)?

- where can I check/select after to have downloaded a Recomended, a Complete, or a Beta version of a project, whether is it posible to build a minimun version instead?

- when it is canceled or accidentaly stopped the download of a project, is it resumed the next time I try to download it?

- when I try to download a version that is supposed to be allready downloaded (just to check whether it is available to build) on the download center, winbuilder is put in downloading status, and there is no cancel button to stop the download.

Regards.

Hey...


Could you guys post a link to download WinBuilder 081 RC 1 or later? because every single link on the web appears not to work or simple redirects to Winbuilder 080.

http://nativeex.exec...est/WinBuilder/

- where can I easily choose what version to build for a given project (minimum/recomended/complete/beta)?

These classifications are defined by the project author. He decides which files belong to the individual group.
The only task WinBuilder does in this case: Display the tree according author's definitions.

- where can I check/select after to have downloaded a Recomended, a Complete, or a Beta version of a project, whether is it posible to build a minimun version instead?

That is also the responsibility of the project author.
nativeEx_barebone e.g has !WBManager which gives you the choice to build three different configurations.

• CMD window as shell (minimum)
• CMD Window with ability to start GUI applications
• Standard

!WBManager selects the scripts and changes interface options to get the desired build.
The user can define his own configurations and add them to the choice list.

- when it is canceled or accidentaly stopped the download of a project, is it resumed the next time I try to download it?

The files which are already on the local server are not selected in the download tree next download.

- when I try to download a version that is supposed to be allready downloaded (just to check whether it is available to build) on the download center, winbuilder is put in downloading status, and there is no cancel button to stop the download.

I do not understand. WinBuilder does not automatically start the download. Download is started when you click the "Download" Button.
And then, during download, there is a blue X button in the lower right which stops download.

Peter

It was a bit disappointing.

Hi Nuno,

I'd say what was more disappointing was that you propose something that will take much, much, much hard work -- with a level of near impossibility -- then say you don't have the time yourself to even develop a pilot project in order win support for your idea.

When one proposes something that isn't feasible, it's actually not surprising that the idea meets some criticism.

And why expect the people who think that the idea is frought with problems from the very start to begin to develop such a project? If it's such a good idea and you can see so clearly how to go about it, well why not take on the undertaking yourself?

Regards,
Galapo.

you propose something that will take much, much, much hard work -- with a level of near impossibility

From experience, much, much. much hard work was understanding how registry hives were composed and how they could be rewritten.

Yet, rawreg was made possible and is still standing as the only hive writer outside of MS scope.

We already have a winbuilder and we already have winbuilder projects for each source. So, most of the pioneer work was done already. How hard can it be to mix one of two of these projects and detect the type of source inputted to make things simpler on the end user?

It was a suggestion, if you find it difficult then my best hope is that someone else can read and become interested in going for this goal as it would surely benefit the way how things get done.

We should have already learned that multiple projects for each source is not really working so well, just look on the current confusion for PE2/3 and possibly extendable to PE4/5/6/7..

We already have a winbuilder and we already have winbuilder projects for each source.

No, we have winbuilder projects compatible with a limited number of sources.

Remember, winbuilder does not support unicode, so we always confront big problems with the majority of non-English sources. That's one big hurdle your "build from any source" project will need to address.

Regards,
Galapo.

I'd say one step at time.

For the moment, bring support for sources that are already handled by current projects.

Did here somebody edit something quietly?

I miss the "W" in the title!

Peter

Sorry, that was a wrong positive. I found in Google's cache of sept-18 that the "W" is already missing in the original post.

Now I do a "public" edit and add the "W"


Peter

I'd say one step at time.

For the moment, bring support for sources that are already handled by current projects.

And like I said before: why not produce a pilot project to test the feasibility of your proposals? Why try to pass this buck to others, especially those who cannot see your proposal as at all workable in practice.

Regards,
Galapo.

Could you guys post a link to download WinBuilder 081 RC 1 or later? because every single link on the web appears not to work or simple redirects to Winbuilder 080.

http://nativeex.exec...est/WinBuilder/

To avoid misunderstandings:

The current WinBuilder version is 080.

After a couple of 081 alpha which got NO remarkable bug reaction / suggestion from the forum, I presented a suggestion of 081 RC1.

081 RC1 was not published by Nuno, because it caused the attack against a new windmill by Don Galapo and Lance Pansa.

Therefore 081 RC1 does not exist, and never existed. It is also not contained in the WinBuilder download server.

The link given by al_jo, is my personal sand box "081 RC2 T" on my own server, independent from WinBuilder. I use this exe, because it is much faster than the previous versions and has many bugs fixed which are known in 080.

But it is not recommended for any user, and very propably it will never be officially released.
Also e.g. my project nativeEX_barebone does not need 081 RC2 T (but it can run much better with it).

Peter

To avoid misunderstandings:
The link given by al_jo, is my personal sand box "081 RC2 T" on my own server, independent from WinBuilder. I use this exe, because it is much faster than the previous versions and has many bugs fixed which are known in 080.

Peter

Thanks for the clarification.
But I’m using the “081 RC2 T” anyway in:
LiveXP, VistaPE-Capi and Win7PE_SE with no problems.
Only some scripts has to be modified here and there…

Thanks for the clarification.
But I’m using the “081 RC2 T” anyway in:
LiveXP, VistaPE-Capi and Win7PE_SE with no problems.
Only some scripts has to be modified here and there…

Inspite your success, as told before “081 RC2 T” is my personal playground, and there is no guarantee that it will ever become an official WB version (at least as Don Galapo and Lance Pansa do not end their revolution)

BTW1: Your assertion that LiveXP after some small changes runs under O81 RC2, is totally different to the posts of Don Galapo and Lance Pansa. Understanding them, it is a mass of work to change LiveXP for build under 081.

BTW2: I personally(!) suggest to continue with the sandbox version, as long, as you do not offer scripts, depending on this version.
(And I'll update the sandbox version whenever I see a bug disturbing my personal project builds)
Maybe that anywhen 40000 - 2 - ??? LiveXP users use this version. Than it is time to offer “081 RC2 T” as "082".

(But that again is decided by Nuno)

Peter

I have read this and that other LONG, LONG post - been hectic with travel and work lately.

I think that everyone is still talking on different plane and at different angles. WinBuilder and the projects often get lumped together (as in this case). To many it isn't clear that there is the interpreter and the environment for running a project/script and the script/project itself.

Would a project that was MUCH MUCH "smarter" and better organized and able to take in a source setting and then do all the wonderful things Nuno proposed be possible - OF COURSE! Would it be easy - OF COURSE NOT! I don't think Nuno is that naive, nor was he suggesting that it would happen overnight!

I hope we all agree with his initial comments that stability in the scripting engine is important, and that we as a community should focus tool improvements on the environment - ones like in the editor (for the screen GUI) and ability to write and manage scripts, etc. The other MAJOR efforts could/should be focused on new, well designed and thought out projects. And all he got was "crap" for suggesting one that while very ambitious isn't that far fetched. It is what we call a BHAG - a Big, Hairy, Audacious Goal - something to strive for. Now maybe that's not the right goal, but it sure is Big and Audacious!


There have been a LOT of good things happening - BUT, also the signal to noise ratio has gotten worse. So, can we all just get back to business. As a community (IMNSHO) the most important thing right now is to decide what we want to be! Is the focus on the tool or the projects?

I personally think it can be both, but we need to learn to emotionally separate them and let ourselves be wrapped around the axle on every comment anyone makes.

Thanks for reading/listening
Scott

p.s. One final comment ...On the tool - I like it, and it's not too frustrating. BUT for most of the projects, I think that they have too many ties to the past, that project creators tend to want to get their own "flow" working and forget about making it general purpose or easy to configure.

For example, these instructions for setting up the new Multi-Leopard project. Come on - does it really need to have 4 separate "saves" - that just isn't very user friendly as a project. And I'm NOT trying to pick on them - they did an EXCELLENT job, but getting it to work, and making a polished project are two different things - i.e. most of the other projects aren't any better!

I forget, which project is it you need to keep updated? Maybe after some months or years developing a large project, you'll have a better understanding of what it's like to see your project not supported by new releases. No need to respond, I don't really care...

I AGREE with you...This is the kind of mis-informed posting I get tired of reading.

Should the engine be a lot more concerned with stability and compatibility - YES. Does that excuse bad project - no.

Hopefully - 'nuff said.

BTW1: Your assertion that LiveXP after some small changes runs under O81 RC2, is totally different to the posts of Don Galapo and Lance Pansa. Understanding them, it is a mass of work to change LiveXP for build under 081.

Hi Peter,

Note that "LiveXP after some small changes runs under 081 RC2" is not the same thing as saying "LiveXP after some small changes runs without problems under 081 RC2". When I've been posting about 081 in relation to LiveXP, I've been meaning the latter statement is not possible. That is, sure, you can get WB to process the project and get a booting ISO after not too much effort. But that is not the same thing as saying there aren't further script issues that will take a long, long time to sort though.

Just as one example: 081 presents some interface changes with file/dir boxes and a lot of script interfaces require adjusting.

Hope that clears up things for you.

Regards,
Galapo.

considering how diverse and complex this program is its going to have some bugs, though I rarely run into any. On top of that it's FREE.

WinBuilder is the most annoying-must-have tool I have ever seen!!!!

I hate to be that guy but, though WinBuilder is a really-must-have tool, I finally give up trying to build something on that , so now I am trying from scratch (Windows AIK)

Some projects and Winbuilder itself have very erratic behavior in my opinion

The point is that WinBuilder could be a very good tool if it were really a community effort.

So I hope it can be an open-source project in the future

Regards

After reading this topic and others related, I do believe Winbuilder Projects need to be simplified. To me, the solution would be to settle for a single project per OS. The idea of a one fits all project, seems Utopic at this time.

That way everyone would be working to make scripts available for a one or more OS, not projects.

For example, The biggest issue to me so far with Win7 scripts, is that they don't always work for all Win7 Projects, but are tied to a specific project. The issue becomes more complex when script writers try to make programs compatible with several OS and projects.

Another issue by having several projects, you choose one, spend time customizing it to your liking, and then the project becomes discontinued. So now, you start back to square one, choosing another project. If you focus your efforts on a single project per OS, someone can always maintain the project for that OS instead of making a new project.

Now, the biggest question that arises from all this is what project should be chosen per OS? That is another topic altogether.

Edited by carloscape, 01 November 2010 - 07:58 PM.

For example, The biggest issue to me so far with Win7 scripts, is that they don't always work for all Win7 Projects, but are tied to a specific project. The issue becomes more complex when script writers try to make programs compatible with several OS and projects.

Agreed. I am one of those authors that writes scripts to be compatible with all projects. It quite frankly can be a pain in the ass. It has become much easier with the birth of the common API but still suffers from a lack of (or undocumented) standardization of global project variables and structural differences between source operating systems.