2 replies to this topic

[Brito]

Using version 23 of the CreateISO script I think that it needs to be simplified.

The %PostISOScript% and %PreISOScript% files are only executed once and deleted afterwards and the FBWF also requires to create the ISO image to add this filter feature.

---

Is it possible to create two new scripts to keep these features separated from the actual call to mkisofs?

Thanks!

[pscEx]

Using version 23 of the CreateISO script I think that it needs to be simplified.

The %PostISOScript% and %PreISOScript% files are only executed once and deleted afterwards and the FBWF also requires to create the ISO image to add this filter feature.

---

Is it possible to create two new scripts to keep these features separated from the actual call to mkisofs?

Thanks!

The preiso and postiso scripts are a very good idea smiley has had in the very beginning.

I think that postiso is never used, but preiso contains at least two important tasks:

[Process]

 Echo,"Pre-Processing:BuildModel"

 Exec,C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\Peter\Desktop\WB Archiv\Beta8\Projects\nativeEx_core\Basic\Build\4 - BuildModel.Script,Build-Model

 Exec,C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\Peter\Desktop\WB Archiv\Beta8\Projects\nativeEx_core\Basic\Build\3 - hivesFactory.Script,Cleanup

It is not so easy to remove or move to a different place.
It will affect other scripts like ReOpen.

Question:

What does it help due to performance, ressources etc?

IMHO: When it has gone, cou cannot add any additional script to the ISO which uses buldModel or API.Script, w/o rebuilding the complete project

Peter

[pscEx]

Using version 23 of the CreateISO script I think that it needs to be simplified.

The %PostISOScript% and %PreISOScript% files are only executed once and deleted afterwards and the FBWF also requires to create the ISO image to add this filter feature.

---

Is it possible to create two new scripts to keep these features separated from the actual call to mkisofs?

Thanks!

@Nuno

My first answer is founded on the current situation and describes which in my opinion could / could not be done.

Please allow me as a friend now, to bring some arguments containing a bit of critics.

I did a lot of scripts and always I tried to use the current offerred background. When it has not been sufficient, I wrote an app doing the work, in spite it would be much more easier (and efficient due performance etc.) to do it in WinBuilder itself. (Last sample)

Live would be much more easier, and the WinBuilder project overall could become much better featured, if there would be the possibility to work in the source code and to suggest addons / changes for acceptance by you.
As known: That does not demand to publish the code, but you should give a read-only access to members you trust.

Peter