Jump to content











Photo

Is there no subforum for Win10PE?


  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#1 pxstein

pxstein

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 11 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 16 February 2017 - 07:50 PM

When I go to web page:

 

http://reboot.pro/forum/22-winbuilder/

 

then I cannot find a subforum for Win10PE

 

Where is it?

 

Peter


  • Nuno Brito likes this

#2 homes32

homes32

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1021 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
  •  
    United States

Posted 17 February 2017 - 06:13 PM

there isn't one.

 

one could deduce that because of one or more or none of the following reasons there was never any Win10PE projects created on this forum so a subform was never created.

  • development on winbuilder 8x was halted causing developers to look for (or create) alternative builders
  • Disagreements among project developers and site administrators and/or winbuilder developers caused the majority of project developers to leave before Win10 was around therefore development took place somewhere else.
  • nobody is interested in discussing Win10
  • Chuck Norris roundhouse kicked the Win10 subform into oblivion

bootland reboot used to be the go-to place for building PE environments after Vista came around (BartPE only supported WinXP sources). Now with development on the builder stopped and the project developers mostly gone its more of a gathering place for tools like ImgDisk, rufus, TinyPXE and other small tools. and occasional the random question about how to config grub4dos, edit BCDs, or boot xxxx over yyyy using zzzz.

 

Don't get me wrong. there is still good information and discussion to be found here but unfortunately if you looking for existing information on projects and building projects with Win10 the information is scattered across a number of other forums where developers have congregated. Feel free to post any questions through. You never know who might have an answer.



#3 Trumk

Trumk

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 19 posts
  •  
    Belgium

Posted 17 February 2017 - 06:56 PM

I saw you already posted on one of "the other forums", and already met the wonderful "L".

 

And like he did with dozens of people before you, he told you that using a word like "script" is stupid, you are stupid, and will probably be banned within the next week. So now you know why things are so quiet there.



#4 homes32

homes32

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1021 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
  •  
    United States

Posted 17 February 2017 - 11:43 PM

Yep. I've know "L" for over 10 years. He wasn't always that way and you can be assured the rest of the guys/gals dont share his views and are very respectable. I've known them forever and a day as well.

Keep asking questions. How else are you supposed to learn anything? Lol.

#5 pxstein

pxstein

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 11 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 18 February 2017 - 05:19 PM

Thank you for clarifying things.

Yes, "L" seems to be somehow "special". I understand.

 

Newbies can understand his chopped FAQ only if they already know everything.

 

What I need (and that's the way as I learned many other thing) is a good guide of structures.

 

It is pity that there is no central real open forum for WinBuilder.

Anyway thanks for now. I will revert to this forum in the next time.

Maybe some question could be answered by you.

 

Peter



#6 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12688 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 20 February 2017 - 12:27 PM

Thank you for clarifying things.

Yes, "L" seems to be somehow "special". I understand.

 

Newbies can understand his chopped FAQ only if they already know everything.

 

What I need (and that's the way as I learned many other thing) is a good guide of structures.

 

It is pity that there is no central real open forum for WinBuilder.

Anyway thanks for now. I will revert to this forum in the next time.

Maybe some question could be answered by you.

 

Peter

Herzlich willkommen, Namensvetter!

 

I think you first need some more knowledge about WinBuilder.

 

To get a general overview across using Winbuilder 8x, look here

For an explanation / sample of WinBuilder / projects / scripts look here

To get a WinBuilder Help, look here

 

Some background: I'm the current developer of WinBuilder ("082" as well as "201x")

I stopped support of "082", because of the actions of the already known "L". At that time I canged my name from psc to pscEx to publish, that things are not longer like before.

Only my personal project "multiPE" has been continued including WinBuilder 083. New WinBuilder 083 project scripts need a License key which every "clean" developer can get for free.

 

"multiPE" can use source CDs XP, Vista, Win7. The architecture of multiPE allows an easy addidion of a new source CD like Win10.

The reason that I did not add  Win8, Win8.1 or Win10 is the fact that explorer.exe cannot be used as shell in these PEs.

In the other forum they use the workaround, to patch some original explorer files. IMHO a patch with some M$ original code from a different CD is illegal. Therefore I decided not to do.

 

Maybe you are the member starting to add Win10 to multiPE with a new way.

BTW: On demand I'm ready to add every senceful extention to WinBuilder 083.

 

Peter



#7 homes32

homes32

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1021 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
  •  
    United States

Posted 20 February 2017 - 05:43 PM

Only my personal project "multiPE" has been continued including WinBuilder 083. New WinBuilder 083 project scripts need a License key which every "clean" developer can get for free.

I'm a bit disturbed at this. As it seems to have the potential for abuse or for restricting users from adding their own app scripts to the project for personal use. Perhaps some clarification is in order.
 

BTW: On demand I'm ready to add every senceful extention to WinBuilder 083.

How about a changelog between 82 and 83 for starters?
as for a extension: how about fixing RegImport so it properly writes Binary entries? this has been an issue from winbuilders beginning and causes "messy" scripts that instead of using RegImport to write a .reg file from attached/encoded file you need to write hundreds of RegWrite or resort to ugly crap like this to work around it

Unpack,Reg,regx86.7z,True,%ScriptDir%,Temp
RegHiveLoad,WB-software,%RegSoftware%
ShellExecute,hide,%RegeditexeFolder%regedit.exe,"/s #$q%ScriptDir%\Temp\regx86.reg#$q"
RegHiveUnLoad,WB-software

instead of nice clean code like this

RegHiveLoad,WB-software,%RegSoftware%
RegImport,%ScriptFile%,Folder,regx86.reg
RegHiveUnLoad,WB-software


#8 paraglider

paraglider

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1716 posts
  • Location:NC,USA
  •  
    United States

Posted 21 February 2017 - 01:28 PM

I have used winbuilder 83 in the past with the Chris pe se 8 project. There are a small number of scripts that execute sections in the script based on the winbuilder version. For those you have to copy the 82 section to a 83 section.

 

You also have to certify the macro library using the new wb 83 certification scheme otherwise the project will fail to build. In the end it was for that reason I went back to the latest 82 version.



#9 pxstein

pxstein

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 11 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 21 February 2017 - 03:31 PM

Thank you for the explanations above. Just a couple of more related general questions:


1.) Who owns the source code of WinBuilder? Is it the "magic L" or someone else from this forum here?

2.) If the developers disagree in the future of WinBuilder why not do an official "fork" like many other projects did in  the past and label the
    new fork e.g. "Open Winbuilder" or "WinBuilder Advanced"?
    
3.) I cannot imagine why "L" hates "scripts" and favor plugins instead?

     What are the (dis)advantages scripts vs. plugins?

 

4.) pscEx wrote "
 

The reason that I did not add  Win8, Win8.1 or Win10 is the fact that explorer.exe cannot be used as shell in these PEs.

In the other forum they use the workaround, to patch some original explorer files. IMHO a patch with some M$ original code from a different CD is illegal. Therefore I decided not to do."

 

 

Is this the only reason for not setting up v8.1 resp. v10 WinPE?

 

On the one side I distrust Win10 because of its fuzzy "Telemetry" transfers. On the other side Win10 will have much more and better drivers compatibility  for new hardware equipment like SSDs, USB 3.1, 4K+5K displays,...

So on the long run it would be better to have WinBuilder based on Win10

 

Peter



#10 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12688 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 21 February 2017 - 05:58 PM

3.) I cannot imagine why "L" hates "scripts" and favor plugins instead?

     What are the (dis)advantages scripts vs. plugins?

Scripts and plugins are two different things. So you cannot compare (Dis)Advantages.

 

A script is a series of commands for an application, which are interpreted and executed by the application.

Plugins are additional functionalities added to an application. They are present, but not executed automatically by the application. They can be executed by a user command (or starting a script).

 

I'm not sure whether in the Bakery forum other applications besides WinBuilder are used for generating a PE, but declaring a WinBuilder Script as Plugin is a stupid and bad marketing action.

 

Peter



#11 Trumk

Trumk

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 19 posts
  •  
    Belgium

Posted 21 February 2017 - 05:58 PM

3.) I cannot imagine why "L" hates "scripts" and favor plugins instead?

     What are the (dis)advantages scripts vs. plugins?

 

You don't get it. He may be right about the fact that scripts/ thingamajiggies/ pieces of code/ whatever should actually be called "plugins" when used in Winbuilder, but that's not the point. It's the way he tries to force his ways in a childish and pathetic manner. Well, actually, more like a dictator. Some people don't like that on a forum.

 

EDIT: Sorry, I was typing this at the same time as pscEx.

 


Edited by Trumk, 21 February 2017 - 06:02 PM.


#12 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12688 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 21 February 2017 - 06:41 PM

EDIT: Sorry, I was typing this at the same time as pscEx.

:thumbsup:

 

Peter



#13 Trumk

Trumk

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 19 posts
  •  
    Belgium

Posted 21 February 2017 - 06:48 PM

So, pscEx, what are the chances of you continuing development of Winbuilder 083? That 'd be sweet.

I'm sure everybody (-1) has matured a lot over the years, and things can be wonderful, once again.



#14 homes32

homes32

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1021 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
  •  
    United States

Posted 21 February 2017 - 08:09 PM

Thank you for the explanations above. Just a couple of more related general questions:


1.) Who owns the source code of WinBuilder? Is it the "magic L" or someone else from this forum here?

Nuno the owner of this forum) owns Winbuilder
 

2.) If the developers disagree in the future of WinBuilder why not do an official "fork" like many other projects did in  the past and label the
    new fork e.g. "Open Winbuilder" or "WinBuilder Advanced"?

I wish. I understand Nunos desire to keep quality control of his "baby", but the community has suffered because of the 1-2 developer closed development. I respect peter and the work he has done over the years, but the certification thing in 83 is the perfect example of what can happen. instead of spending that development time fixing long standing defects or improving builder speed to improve the quality of the program and improve the lives of the script/project developers we now have a feature that further restricts development of scripts/projects and goes against what is in the license window about creating an open and free environment. all this with no improvement to the builder engine itself. again. this is not a personal attack on peter, just an all to common example on what happens time and time again when only one or two people "control" something hundreds of people use. its too easy for them to make special modifications to further their own agendas and/or personal projects and forget why the program was created in the first place and the spirit and intent of the community it built and inspired.

 

3.) I cannot imagine why "L" hates "scripts" and favor plugins instead?
     What are the (dis)advantages scripts vs. plugins?

He only wants to rename scripts to plugins to "be different" from here and disconnect the 2 communities. It's silly and confusing. the whole idea behind the .script language as that you should be able to drop app scripts into any project no matter where created and they should work. as long as your using native syntax (note: don't confuse app scripts with project build scripts, the later of which work together and expect that various procedures are handled by each other.). A good .script developer creates app scripts that can stand on their own and don't require linking to functions in other scripts, with the exception of generally agreed on cross-project marcos such as Add_Shortcut. In this respect the current monster that is "Macro_Library" has gone way out of hand and digressed from a small and simple compatibility layer to a 15k line lumbering beast that trys to "fix" a couple of long standing winbuilder bugs but ends up trying to re-create the whole script language to some extent. quite a few scripts over there use this library so in that respect "L" is correct, you would not be able to drop those scripts into another project and expect them to work.


  • Nuno Brito likes this

#15 misty

misty

    Silver Member

  • Developer
  • 703 posts
  •  
    United Kingdom

Posted 21 February 2017 - 08:50 PM

...A good .script developer creates app scripts that can stand on their own and don't require linking to functions in other scripts....

I cannot comment on other projects, but the three I have coded contain app scripts that are absolutely not intended to stand on their own. Due to my own frustration about the complexity of various projects and the share volume of options in them (some of which might easily break the build) I opted out.

I coded MistyPE/Mini-WinFE and MiniXP to be completely standalone. For me this shows the versatility of winbuilder and what a great tool it is. :thumbsup:

In my opinion trying to maintain compatibility between the different projects has caused an extra level of complexity. It's a great concept and congratulations to anyone who has managed to achieve it :worship: For me personally, I joined the winbuilder movement way behind everyone else and just couldn't understand the content of most scripts - hence starting from scratch and learning the scripting language as I went.

Regards,

Misty

P.s. I'd love to see further development of the legacy winbuilder and perhaps a Windows 10 project - a modular build would be ideal!
  • Nuno Brito likes this

#16 homes32

homes32

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1021 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
  •  
    United States

Posted 21 February 2017 - 09:51 PM

I cannot comment on other projects, but the three I have coded contain app scripts that are absolutely not intended to stand on their own. Due to my own frustration about the complexity of various projects and the share volume of options in them (some of which might easily break the build) I opted out.

 

see my previous comment

 

(note: don't confuse app scripts with project build scripts, the later of which work together and expect that various procedures are handled by each other.).

 

an APP script (a script who's purpose is to add 3rd party program xxxx.exe to the build) generally needs nothing more then the program file(s), perhaps a reg entry or 2 and a shortcut.

more complex applications (like antivirus) might need a couple extra files from the source media if the project developer didn't include them for some reason

 

the only thing that is really variable here between projects of the same type is shortcut creation because we don't know what shell the user will chose to use and shells like BSExplorer use xml configuration for startmenu/desktop so creating .lnk files for explorer will leave us with nothing in the startmenu/desktop for BSExporer and similar users)

copying files, making registry edits, extracting files from attachment will work regardless of whatever the other scripts are doing. nothing in a app script should break the build (unless your really careless/dumb and start deleting random stuff in the Win/sys dirs) or depend on other scripts to do work for them (with the exception being compatibility layers for commands such as Add_Shortcut which is needed on a project wide level.)  its not that difficult. even CORE scripts that I wrote such as ShutdownPE, VC++ Runtimes, Wallpaper, etc. could all be dropped into any nt6 based project and run happily without modification. Projects change from time to time but if you take the extra time to do it right and make scripts as standalone as possible you will save headaches and maintenance in the long run as well as have them usable by a wider fanbase.


  • Nuno Brito likes this

#17 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 10452 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 22 February 2017 - 10:09 AM

From my side, I was so happy breaking apart any Windows installation and creating something better out of the same files. Really miss that.. :-)

 

At the time, main problem is that any changes added on the builder would break different projects (loud protests and flame wars). Indeed the certification became more of an headache than a solution. In the end you couldn't even adapt the builder to solve other problems that were appearing more recent editions of Windows, so a new builder from scratch using learnings from the old one seems a more feasible approach.

 

The new builder also tried to address several problems:

+ write native registry hives without admin permissions (not blocked by UAC)

+ write WIM archives without installing third-party tools (no need for installing DISM)

+ use the same Windows ISO as base to bring stability (and one click automation)

+ text interface for visually impaired user (and launch from command line for unattended builds)

+ native creation of windows shortcut links

+ true multi-platform (run/build on any version of windows, Linux or Mac and CPU regardless of x86, x64 or ARM)

+ automatic plugin/script download based on the files section here at reboot (a sort of apt-get)

+ full HTML pages to create interface/settings

+ full access to the Java platform (endless libraries and connections to other things)

+ Java language instead of custom scripting language (easier entry path for new developers)

+ new engine developed with easier/modern IDE tools (delphi stopped development, lazarus is not usable)

 

These are very unique features that make project building easier, but didn't had as much resources as before to fully document and improve the tool. I was sad, we finally had an engine completely independent from Windows that could ease so much the building process but this wasn't a joint community effort, so it failed completely on that sense.

 

IMHO don't think that bringing back the delphi-based builder to development helps. If it is one single person developing it and maintaining his own project, it just gets worse as seen before. If it is a more open development, then you see the same project fragmentation now upgraded to fragmented versions of the same engine, with the same fragmented projects. Also, a big problem from the old engine is that we didn't had the modern tools that exist today such as automatic test cases that we can use to verify that a specific functionality is always working as expected (same output) so that a change on the code doesn't break an expected functionality elsewhere. A big problem of the new engine was requiring the JVM runtimes that made the download around 100Mb and didn't had included the nice UI editor as before. Even thought recently became possible to compile java code as normal x86 binary (no JVM runtimes) with a few Mbs as the old engine and keep the other binaries running multi-platform. We'd just need to polish what was missing, as a community.

 

If we want Windows 10. I think this new builder is the best equipped tool to get there.

 

Releasing the code for the old builder will predictably cause havoc (and people complaining that Unicode isn't supported among all the other limitations). For the new builder there is no such expectation. If there are enough members here to join at a place like github to help improve what is missing, then I would certainly be happy to make the new engine open source.

 

:cheers:

 

 

 


  • pscEx and homes32 like this

#18 paraglider

paraglider

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1716 posts
  • Location:NC,USA
  •  
    United States

Posted 22 February 2017 - 12:58 PM

The problem is there are mature projects ( 7, 8.1, 10 PE SE ) for the old winbuilder that are actively developed by several developers along with application scripts for almost every program you could want to run on pe. There is no way to convert these project / scripts to the new winbuilder and also no desire by anyone involved to do it either. Most people that use windows pe also use windows so really for the great majority the ability to develop on other platforms provides no benefit. These projects already use 3rd party tools to access / create wim files so can be used without dism / imagex. Only place where dism is optionally used is to inject extra drivers into the build others than those supported out of the box by pe.

 

There are several ways the old winbuilder could be developed further:

 

it could ported to the latest delphi. I am sure this would fix some of the bugs in current windows platforms. Certification scheme should be removed or at least made optional. Warnings about none certification should be removed from logs as well. Current delphi also provides cross platform support as well if that is required.

 

It could be ported to free pascal / lazurus. Total commander program ( http://www.ghisler.com/) successfully did this to create a 64 bit version.


  • Nuno Brito likes this

#19 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 10452 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 22 February 2017 - 01:16 PM

It's a pain to program in Delphi. Even worse in Lazarus. There is a simpler engine, already updated and without need for third-party libraries using a well established platform. Old projects will be broken anyways even if slight changes are introduced. If you say that old projects won't move to a new builder, that's OK. Let's then start with Windows 10 and keep the new project simple from the ground up.

 

We moved away from any Windows dependency because Windows itself changes. Now there is a Windows running on ARM. Tomorrow they will not even be including the registry hive API any longer or changed the WIM and added some other restriction. Here we are looking at future proof projects.

 

Projects that run today, projects that will run tomorrow.



#20 homes32

homes32

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1021 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
  •  
    United States

Posted 22 February 2017 - 02:58 PM

The problem is there are mature projects ( 7, 8.1, 10 PE SE ) for the old winbuilder that are actively developed by several developers along with application scripts for almost every program you could want to run on pe. There is no way to convert these project / scripts to the new winbuilder and also no desire by anyone involved to do it either.

good point. there are a lot of blood, sweat, and tears put into the current projects. Its only reasonable that developers are reluctant to redo all that work on a new, untested, unproven, undocumented engine.

kare has had a bit of success creating a clone with mostly compatible syntax and a similar interface, but its rough around the edges and again written by one person in a nitch language (PureBasic) famous for small fast executable but also for breaking things with each new  compiler release.

 

From my side, I was so happy breaking apart any Windows installation and creating something better out of the same files. Really miss that.. :-)

me too. it was exhilarating coming here every day. so such knowledge and new things/issues/solutions to be found every day.
 

+ text interface for visually impaired user (and launch from command line for unattended builds)

Here we have issue #1. This is lovely for visually impaired but a support nightmare for project devs. for example.

  • how do they get a list of all scripts/options they have installed in the project?
  • how do you see at a glace what scripts are enabled/disabled?
  • what options to I have to configure them
  • who the author is?
  • what version are they? (important if there are known issues.)
  • how do I see if file logging is on?
  • how do i get syntax help on what to do with this bloody black window? I type HELP and nothing happens. this is a no brainer. nobody is going to think to type LIST to see what commands are available.

If your trying to get people to use your builder, specifically those not familiar with the inner workings of how to build a PE you need a simple, clear interface. This is what I consider one of the old winbuilders biggest strengths.

 

These are very unique features that make project building easier, but didn't had as much resources as before to fully document and improve the tool. I was sad, we finally had an engine completely independent from Windows that could ease so much the building process but this wasn't a joint community effort, so it failed completely on that sense.

Bingo! And here we get to the biggest issue of all. THERE. IS. NO. DOCUMENTATION. ON. HOW. IT. WORKS.

 

How do I start my own project? there is zero information on how to even start creating a new Win10 project with the new engine. none. zippo. nada. several requests were made by various members for such documentation but they were just pointed to some minimalist template for APP scripts instead.

same with app scripts. for years there was no instruction on how they could be created and even if you had managed to create one you could've add them locally. you had to upload them to the download area. not acceptable for beta stuff or personal/private scripts with licensed software. all this without bring the certification thing into the mix.
 

A big problem of the new engine was requiring the JVM runtimes that made the download around 100Mb and didn't had included the nice UI editor as before. Even thought recently became possible to compile java code as normal x86 binary (no JVM runtimes) with a few Mbs as the old engine and keep the other binaries running multi-platform. We'd just need to polish what was missing, as a community.

a standalone .exe would def help. you forgot slow. jars are bloody slow to load.


Edited by homes32, 22 February 2017 - 04:16 PM.

  • Nuno Brito likes this

#21 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13749 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 22 February 2017 - 03:11 PM

Sorry to be late to the party :( but I got delayed as the interwebs were clogged, maybe by the enormous amount of traffic caused by all the people attempting to run the ONLY project there is (AFAICT) today for the "new" Billy-Bob. :dubbio:

 

 

Projects that run today, projects that will run tomorrow.

Possibly (one single) projects that maybe runs today, projects that will run tomorrow (if someone writes them or at least gives some instructions on how to write them).

 

:duff:

Wonko


  • Nuno Brito likes this

#22 Trumk

Trumk

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 19 posts
  •  
    Belgium

Posted 22 February 2017 - 03:23 PM

Just wanted to say I really enjoy reading all the different viewpoints. I guess you guys ALL make valid points. I still think it would be great to develop the "old" builder, but I understand Nuno as well. To me it seems like a case of "so close, yet so far away". Too bad there's no "builder" to make the ultimate builder out of WinBuilder 8x, 201x and LSP :P

At least we don't have the childish flaming here (yet?) from our good friend "L".

Also wanted to give some love to ChrisR, the more I read about all this stuff, the more amazed I am at how he managed (and still manages) to keep his projects "together", not exactly sure how to say it, but I'm sure you understand...



#23 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12688 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 22 February 2017 - 03:38 PM


Bingo! And here we get to the biggest issue of all. THERE. IS. NO. DOCUMENTATION. ON. HOW. IT. WORKS.

Maybe you should use the search fuctionalty of the forum.

You can find a documentation dated 05-July 2013 :smart:

 

Peter :cheers:



#24 homes32

homes32

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1021 posts
  • Location:Minnesota
  •  
    United States

Posted 22 February 2017 - 03:48 PM

Maybe you should use the search fuctionalty of the forum.

You can find a documentation dated 05-July 2013 :smart:

 

Peter :cheers:

 

I do know how to use the forum search. though not as well as the great Finder

 

please tell me where in this list it points me to documentation on "how to make a project" ????

 

Available single documentation

shortcut-syntax

registry-functions-syntax/

ini-text-files-syntax/

wim-extract-syntax/

howto-create-own-plugins/

howto-add-custom-drivers

howto-add-custom-folders/

howto-add-driverpacks/

 



#25 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12688 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 22 February 2017 - 03:54 PM

Install WinBuilder into a directory of your choice and run it. Your installation is the project. On Build a bootable minimum PE ISO will be crated.

You can extend the PE by your own addons.

 

Peter






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users