Exporting Builds and Fast Building
#1
Posted 22 March 2008 - 10:43 PM
I wrote a batch that allows to reproduce PE build from MS source.
It's available at http://alexei.boot-l...ublic/FastBuild
Why and how you may want to use it:
- It allows to "export" your build for using by somebody else w/o WB
- It allows to "export" your build for troubleshooting
- You can compare two builds easily and clearly see all differences
- You can compare builds of different sources (for ex. WB vs. Bart PE)
- You can save your work for future reference
- You can verify if your Build is compatible with different MS sources
- You can play with registry settings, add/remove files and test results almost instantly.
- You can test backward compatibility of new versions of WB and scripts.
- You're getting .reg files easy to view and compare.
Finally, it's really fast
Some side notes:
- In fact, what I did is kind of "decompiler" that creates building batch, converts PE hives into .reg files, and collects all necessary 3rd party files, as well as files created by developer.
- I've already mentioned WB compiler. FastBuild.BAT+OwnFiles (created by DumpBuild.BAT) is what WB can do instead of direct creation of PE.
- I think the best way to provide PE "components" is ".reg+batch+files", though WB scripts are good to build those components at developer's side. Of course, tweaking PE settings is also OK with WB scripts.
Alexei
#2
Posted 22 March 2008 - 11:10 PM
Would you move this topic to here: http://www.boot-land...roject-f64.html
Hopefully this way it wouldn't get obfuscasted as more general development topics get posted on this section.
#3
Posted 23 March 2008 - 06:48 AM
I moved the topicThis sounds very interesting to try out in the future for comparing files and fast boot disk building.
Would you move this topic to here: http://www.boot-land...roject-f64.html
Hopefully this way it wouldn't get obfuscasted as more general development topics get posted on this section.
Alexei
PS
BTW, my stuff does not need installation. All you need to try it is to specify locations of WB "target" and MS source of that build.
It's fully automated.
#4
Posted 23 March 2008 - 08:39 PM
#5
Posted 24 March 2008 - 04:42 AM
everybody!
I wrote a batch that allows to reproduce PE build from MS source.
It's available at http://alexei.boot-l...ublic/FastBuild
Why and how you may want to use it:
- It allows to "export" your build for using by somebody else w/o WB
- It allows to "export" your build for troubleshooting
- You can compare two builds easily and clearly see all differences
- You can compare builds of different sources (for ex. WB vs. Bart PE)
- You can save your work for future reference
- You can verify if your Build is compatible with different MS sources
- You can play with registry settings, add/remove files and test results almost instantly.
- You can test backward compatibility of new versions of WB and scripts.
- You're getting .reg files easy to view and compare.
Finally, it's really fast
Some side notes:
- In fact, what I did is kind of "decompiler" that creates building batch, converts PE hives into .reg files, and collects all necessary 3rd party files, as well as files created by developer.
- I've already mentioned WB compiler. FastBuild.BAT+OwnFiles (created by DumpBuild.BAT) is what WB can do instead of direct creation of PE.
- I think the best way to provide PE "components" is ".reg+batch+files", though WB scripts are good to build those components at developer's side. Of course, tweaking PE settings is also OK with WB scripts.
Alexei
Yes! -- The best way to provide PE "components" is ".reg+batch+files".
This is what we do it using Little Angel for XP/2k3 also. We provide a vshadow component in such a way.
@Alexei,
See if you could port your FastBuild for making PE for us to work under Little Angel. Make a FastBuildPE.cpn for us? Give you a prize of DA EULA for that if you like.
#6
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:40 AM
I'm trying to avoid using software that requires "installation" (BTW, PE is basically an "installation-less" windows). So your "Angel" doesn't work for meYes! -- The best way to provide PE "components" is ".reg+batch+files".
This is what we do it using Little Angel for XP/2k3 also. We provide a vshadow component in such a way.
@Alexei,
See if you could port your FastBuild for making PE for us to work under Little Angel. Make a FastBuildPE.cpn for us? Give you a prize of DA EULA for that if you like.
BTW, as copyright holder, I allowed free usage of my creative work (see my post), but I still have a right to object creation of dereviative works (see common copyright law).
However, the ideas behind my FastBuild are not protected, so you can use them to make more mon
#7
Posted 25 March 2008 - 06:16 AM
After designing components consisting of .reg, .cmd & .txt files, you can easily add components and services to your running system.
#8
Posted 26 March 2008 - 03:20 AM
What did you mean by "in a more generic way"? Is it exactly ".reg+batch+files" or not?Little Angel already implements ".reg+batch+files" in a more generic way.
After designing components consisting of .reg, .cmd & .txt files, you can easily add components and services to your running system.
If YES,
then that's what I was talking about a long time, but I think there is no reason to search who said it first You did it and that's very nice. The "only" problem I see is that if all components are in ".reg+batch+files"-form then there is nothing to protect (nothing to hide and nothing to install). However, I may be wrong and you sell your original drivers, which significantly changes the whole picture. Unfortunately, documentation on your site does not explain much.
If NO,
thhen it's not of interest to anybody, but you
Anyway, I consider commercialization of the software to be an evil mostly not because users have to pay for the programs, but because of limitations and inconveniences that come from necessity to "protect" the software
Alexei
#9
Posted 06 April 2008 - 08:48 AM
What did you mean by "in a more generic way"? Is it exactly ".reg+batch+files" or not?
If YES,
then that's what I was talking about a long time, but I think there is no reason to search who said it first You did it and that's very nice. The "only" problem I see is that if all components are in ".reg+batch+files"-form then there is nothing to protect (nothing to hide and nothing to install). However, I may be wrong and you sell your original drivers, which significantly changes the whole picture. Unfortunately, documentation on your site does not explain much.
If NO,
thhen it's not of interest to anybody, but you
Anyway, I consider commercialization of the software to be an evil mostly not because users have to pay for the programs, but because of limitations and inconveniences that come from necessity to "protect" the software
Alexei
#10
Posted 30 April 2010 - 08:30 AM
#11
Posted 30 April 2010 - 02:58 PM
can't confirm - all links on that page give this message
Error: Unable to open file ./counter.txt with write access.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users