Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

Win7pe_se bug


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 03 January 2011 - 02:36 PM

I'm currently doing compatibility tests between WB 080 and WB 081.
With these tests I found a syntax bug in the above script in [WriteSettings]
There are several lines like:
If, ... ,RegWrite,"HKLM",0x3,"WB-default\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\StuckRects2,"Settings",28,00, ...
Here the quote behind StuckRects2 is missing.

That leads to wrong entries in the registry.
BTW: Here is no compatibility. The two versions write different nonsence:

080: ... StuckRects2,,00,28,00,00, ...
081: ... StuckRects2,""Settings,"28",00,00, ...
should be: ... StuckRects2,Settings,28,00,00, ...

BTW2: Here is NO quote necessary.

Peter

#2 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 03 January 2011 - 04:44 PM

Addon:
There are some multiple quotes which also bring both WB versions to wrong output.

Win7pe_SE\Tweaks\Display.script(799): reg_add,0x1,%reg%\ControlSet001\services\vga\Device0,""Device Description"","Standard VGA Graphics Adapter"
Win7pe_SE\Addons\NotePad.script(46): RegWrite,"HKLM",0x1,"Tmp_software\Classes\*\shell\%pTextBox1%\command","","notepad.exe ""%1"""

The first just must have single quotes around "Device Description"
The second should be: "notepad.exe #$q%1#$q".

Peter

#3 ChrisR

ChrisR

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 784 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 03 January 2011 - 05:44 PM

Ok, that will be corrected. Other syntax errors?
Is there a new syntax contol in WB81? I have no error message or warning on these lines in the WB80 log.

#4 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 03 January 2011 - 06:05 PM

Is there a new syntax contol in WB81? I have no error message or warning on these lines in the WB80 log.

Direct answer: NO. I found the issues by comparing two built PEs, one with WB 80 and the other with WB 81.

The issue is with 080 as well with 081: These syntax error internally build some "WB engine acceptable" arguments which are processed. And because the arguments are accepted, no error message appears in both cases.

Unfortunatelly the arguments are not resonable, therefore pure garbage is produced.
And also unfortunatelly, such syntax errors cannot be detected by the engine.
Some month ago I tried to introduce some syntax changes which require a couple of escapes. These syntax rules would be able to detect errors like the current one.

But the suggestion has not been accepted by .script developers (To be honest: I personally would not accept it, too. The script code lines become too cryptic and unreadable).

So we have to live with the situation that WB cannot detect every wrong written command, and sometimes does what it assumes to be done, even if there is an syntax error in the back.

BTW: Congratulations for your update!

Peter

#5 ChrisR

ChrisR

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 784 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 03 January 2011 - 06:20 PM

I understand for overtime that would take control of syntax.

Just for information and check for other potential errors. How have you found these syntax errors. On the number of lines of code, there are always the goal is to minimize them.

#6 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 03 January 2011 - 06:24 PM

Just for information and check for other potential errors. How have you found these syntax errors. On the number of lines of code, there are always the goal is to minimize them.

I think that your answer/question and my edit

Direct answer: NO. I found the issues by comparing two built PEs, one with WB 80 and the other with WB 81.

crossed.

Peter




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users