Jump to content











Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

VOTE NOW: WAIK or Vista DVD - what do you use as VistaPE source?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
47 replies to this topic

Poll: Sourcefiles for building VistaPE (42 member(s) have cast votes)

What sourcefiles do you use for building VistaPE ?

  1. Windows Automated Installation Kit (WAIK) SP0 (2 votes [4.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.76%

  2. Windows Automated Installation Kit (WAIK) SP1 (4 votes [9.52%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.52%

  3. Vista SP0 files on HD (8 votes [19.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.05%

  4. Vista SP1 files on HD (14 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

  5. Vista SP0 DVD in DVD drive (4 votes [9.52%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.52%

  6. Vista SP1 DVD in DVD drive (8 votes [19.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.05%

  7. other (2 votes [4.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.76%

Vote

#26 pecd.net

pecd.net

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 947 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 25 June 2008 - 03:03 PM

I meant that some troubles, MedEvil and me have had, may depend on the language of the source.

Peter


Hmm, i was thinking the same, but i have no english vista dvd at hand to test it...but even if this is the reason, something has to be done...

@booty#1

Thanks for you support...

#27 was_jaclaz

was_jaclaz

    Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 7100 posts
  • Location:Gone in the mist
  •  
    Italy

Posted 25 June 2008 - 03:14 PM

Not at all my business, mind you, but a fork means that resources are spread instead of being concentrated. :)

Before forking I would suggest you to contact Nightman and see if you can contribute to the project, and should he refuse your help and contribution, go ahead, if you are determined to do so.

But both you and Nightman should take into account the possible consequences of a fork for the board and the Community, besides being a VERY "bad" example of cooperative work, we will soon have .scripts compatible with one of the branches and not with the other, members and users, already perplexed enough by the lack of documentation, will go mad trying to understand what is happening, we will be flooded with help requests, more generally entropy will increase at a higher rate than needed.

The foreseeable result will probably be in the end that of having two mediocre projects, each worse than what could hopefully become the "monolithic" one.

On the other hand, as I see it, having two versions of VistaPE, kept in sync, one that ONLY builds with WAIK and one that ONLY builds with Vista DVD, could simplify greatly the easiness for end users, though making things more complex for .scripts developers.

jaclaz

#28 pecd.net

pecd.net

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 947 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 25 June 2008 - 03:43 PM

Not at all my business, mind you, but a fork means that resources are spread instead of being concentrated. :)


Yes, exactly...that is why I am very reluctant going this way and that is also why i seek this discussion with you.

Just to make it clear: Nightman was very nice to me, he helped me and he included some of my corrections in the current beta.
So I am sure we can cooperate. This is not an anti Nightman/VistaPE discussion:-)

I am thinking about something in between:

Whenever a new vistape is released, we can take a snapshot, fix bugs and make changes as we think is needed without changing the package too much, we could call it "VistaPE 1x revisited" or something like that.
So people have something stable and easy to use, maybe with less functionality (in case something is so buggy that we need to remove it).
Nightman can use what he thinks is useful and if he does there will be less to fix in the next release, if not it will be our job to redo the fixes with the next release. If everything works out fine "revisited releases" will no longer be neccessary after e few VistaPE releases (if NightMan uses the improved stuff we produce (and if we produce something.-)))

Could that be an option? Comments please !

#29 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10549 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 25 June 2008 - 04:44 PM

Hmm..

Why not a common SVN server for members to upload and submit their changes to VistaPE or other currently discussed wb projects?

Give more free time and less worries to Nightman along with allowing members to submit improvements. Sounds a more logical development rather than having new branches like we once saw with VistaCE (Chip Edition) that later fell out of use.

When Nightman thinks a stable version is ready then we will surely have it working much better with added contributions.

So, let's focus on VistaPE and I think this seems the best approach to share a common work base with other developers while keeping things together in community style.

Only .script developers or trusted members would be allowed to commit changes and this server would be open to the public and for anyone interested in contributing with better modifications.

This should allow to cover a lot bugs and fixes that are required on daily basis while allowing a common ground to work and allow VistaPE to remain as one to avoid multiples forks.

I've created a simple SVN repository as http://winbuilder.net/svn - will shortly open a new topic to enroll .script developers interested in having an account with permission to upload files or make changes.

A combined community effort is without doubt tremendous.

This also valid for any other wb related projects, please let me know if this sort of SVN structure is worth being used as an option to this dilemma.

Let's get busy?

:)

#30 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

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

Posted 25 June 2008 - 04:50 PM

This also valid for any other wb related projects, please let me know if this sort of SVN structure is worth being used as an option to this dilemma.

That is a great idea :)
For me there is a current issue: Galapo suggested a small change in one nativeEx script. I agree with this suggestion, but I always postponed and didn't performe because I'm busy in other interesting issues.

If trusted members, in this case Galapo could relaize their suggestion: A good step forewards.

Peter

#31 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

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

Posted 25 June 2008 - 04:56 PM

That is a great idea :)
For me there is a current issue: Galapo suggested a small change in one nativeEx script. I agree with this suggestion, but I always postponed and didn't performe because I'm busy in other interesting issues.

If trusted members, in this case Galapo could relaize their suggestion: A good step forewards.

Peter


A small addon:

For the very beginning that is sufficient, but we also have to concider about WinBuilder's download mechanism.

For the future it is not recommended to have a redundancy with propably different contents.

Peter

#32 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:32 PM

Though bundeling efforts into a single project would be the best solution, it's not necessary the most practical as XP projects show.
Sometimes having a few different (script level comatible) projects is not such a bad thing. Especialy if developers steal heavily from each other! :)

At the end it's just as important to be happy with what you're doing, as it is that the community can benefit from your work.

Since in this special case it seems to be more a job than a hobby of you ctmag, i doubt that you will continue working on and supporting your project for an extended time.
So not branching off, might be the better solution since it is less likely to let all your work go to waste.

:)

#33 pecd.net

pecd.net

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 947 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:51 PM

Since in this special case it seems to be more a job than a hobby of you ctmag, i doubt that you will continue working on and supporting your project for an extended time.
So not branching off, might be the better solution since it is less likely to let all your work go to waste.

:)


I have the great situation that i can make a living out of my hobby, so you can expect me staying with the project as long as I can find the time and the project seems useful.
If everything works out, I think we will be releasing several CT PE version for the comming years. So my job is not intended as a one time release.
I always try to give back to the community where i can.

@Nuno

SVN sounds great, it would be nice get this in combination with direct downloding from WB. And it would be nice if we had enough room to store some older versions (like vpe11) too in case NightMan decides to remove them.

#34 Sirquil

Sirquil

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 108 posts
  • Location:Indianapolis, Indiana
  •  
    United States

Posted 26 June 2008 - 02:14 AM

I am using Damon Tools Lite emulating a CD drive (loaded with vLite version of an integrated Vista SP1); I checked the other button.

#35 JonF

JonF

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1185 posts
  • Location:Boston, MA
  •  
    United States

Posted 26 June 2008 - 01:18 PM

I am using Damon Tools Lite emulating a CD drive (loaded with vLite version of an integrated Vista SP1); I checked the other button.

A little OT but of interest to some; what version of VLIte did you use, what version of Vista, and how did you do it? Several of us were unable to get working builds out of vlite-slipstreamed SP1's.

#36 Sirquil

Sirquil

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 108 posts
  • Location:Indianapolis, Indiana
  •  
    United States

Posted 26 June 2008 - 10:30 PM

A little OT but of interest to some; what version of VLIte did you use, what version of Vista, and how did you do it? Several of us were unable to get working builds out of vlite-slipstreamed SP1's.


I used vLite 1.1.6 rc (There is a new release on the vLite website, vLite 1.2 Beta). http://www.vlite.net/download.html The DVD I used for source files (vLite) was an orginial Vista Home Premium OEM. Slipstreamed Windows6.0-KB936330-X86-wave0.exe.

Using vLite I selected to use only the Windows Ultimate image from the DVD. I choose three options; service pack slipstream, Integration, and bootable ISO. I never used the apply button.

This produced the ISO source image I use with Dameon Tools Lite CD/DVD emulator in my builds of VistaPE.

VirtualBox emulation does not work; however, CD or USB drive work okay. I believe the VirtualBox issue to be due to my image size -not sure.

#37 pecd.net

pecd.net

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 947 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 27 June 2008 - 08:22 AM

I just tried it:

  • working under vista (xp did not work)
  • use vlite 1.2beta
  • windows vista dvd german
  • chose ultimate version
  • slipstreamed Windows6.0-KB936330-X86.exe (from a sp1 cd from MS (455611504 bytes)) (please post if it worked with download version also)
  • integration took quite long
  • Building vistape12 worked fine (only got some avira errors, not important, and not a sp1 related problem).
BTW: Nightman recommends using sp1 as a source for vpe12 and sp0 for vpe11, so everyone who still uses vpe12 with sp0 should update his sourcefiles.

#38 sda1

sda1

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  •  
    South Africa

Posted 27 June 2008 - 10:51 PM

Built vPE 1.5 with total commander using the neosmart recovery iso if that counts ? :)

#39 Max_Real Qnx

Max_Real Qnx

    Gold Member

  • Patrician
  • 1382 posts
  • Location:Istanbul
  • Interests:To be or not to be that is the question.
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 29 June 2008 - 07:21 AM

Vlite is only compile install.wim for Sp1 . All right , is it compile boot.wim

WBuilder uses it on VistaPE 11 , %BootSRC% :)

Am I thinking mistake....
Why is project need this file (boot.wim)....

script.project

[Variables]
%BootSRC%=%BaseDir%\Temp\VistaPE\BootWimSrc
%InstallSRC%=%BaseDir%\Temp\VistaPE\InstallWimSrc

%BootSRC%=%BaseDir%\Temp\VistaPE\InstallWimSrc

Does this become correct ? :)

#40 pecd.net

pecd.net

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 947 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 29 June 2008 - 10:12 AM

Sorry, i do not understand, can you try to explain and make it more clear?

#41 Augusto

Augusto

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 17 posts
  •  
    Dominican Republic

Posted 02 July 2008 - 09:22 PM

Well... With Waik u can Add the Recovery tools from the MSVista DVD .. Just have to "force" your way in :) check Attachment
For QNX Boot.win if pre V12 And the other .Wim is for V12

Edited by ctmag, 03 July 2008 - 06:10 AM.
removed attachement, might not be legal to redistribute the files included


#42 JonF

JonF

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1185 posts
  • Location:Boston, MA
  •  
    United States

Posted 02 July 2008 - 09:56 PM

The legality of that script is questionable.

#43 pecd.net

pecd.net

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 947 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 03 July 2008 - 06:11 AM

@Augusto

I removed the attachment, just to prevent trouble, but thanks anyway

#44 booty#1

booty#1

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 285 posts
  • Location:Near Frankfurt
  •  
    Germany

Posted 16 July 2008 - 06:08 PM

A little OT but of interest to some; what version of VLIte did you use, what version of Vista, and how did you do it? Several of us were unable to get working builds out of vlite-slipstreamed SP1's.

LOL, that statement is definitely an understatement. I have been trying to integrate SP1 into Vista for several days - no chance. If I install vLite directly on my PC (WinXP SP3) and start vLite I get a BSOD directly after selecting "Vista Ultimate". Then I tried it in a clean VM (XP as well) - the integration fails.
The only possibility left is installing Vista in a VM with vLite and then trying to integrate it in that environment.

Conclusion: If you are not running Vista or Windows 2008 the chance of succeeding in integrating SP1 into Vista is near to zero.

booty#1

#45 pecd.net

pecd.net

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 947 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 16 July 2008 - 06:39 PM

jepp, the same here...this sucks...

#46 dera

dera

    Gold Member

  • .script developer
  • 1335 posts
  •  
    Hungary

Posted 18 July 2008 - 02:22 PM

I am a new to VistaPE,
and I have a qustion about using vlite-slipstreamed SP1 as source.
I do not really understand this slipstreaming SP1 into Vista RTM with vLite to use with VistaPE 12:
as Max_Real Qnx noticed in Post #39
in many case VistaPE 12 use the %BootSRC% as the source, which is the VistaDVD\sources\boot.wim Image Index:2 if building from DVD and not from the AIK ,
while vLite modify only the install.wim when integrating SP1.
Or am I wrong?

#47 booty#1

booty#1

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 285 posts
  • Location:Near Frankfurt
  •  
    Germany

Posted 18 July 2008 - 02:38 PM

I am a new to VistaPE,
and I have a qustion about using vlite-slipstreamed SP1 as source.
I do not really understand this slipstreaming SP1 into Vista RTM with vLite to use with VistaPE 12:
as Max_Real Qnx noticed in Post #39
in many case VistaPE 12 use the %BootSRC% as the source, which is the VistaDVD\sources\boot.wim Image Index:2 if building from DVD and not from the AIK ,
while vLite modify only the install.wim when integrating SP1.
Or am I wrong?

Yes and no. Boot.wim is not the only source used by VistaPE. All scripts that are marked as "requires Vista DVD" use the Install.wim alias %InstallSRC% as source (just make a full text search over all scripts for "%InstallSRC%" and you will see how many scripts refer to it).

But Max_Real Qnx pointed out an important fact: The base file collection of VistaPE originates from boot.wim. As it is left untouched we end up in a PE system containing files from SP0 and SP1...

booty#1

#48 Max_Real Qnx

Max_Real Qnx

    Gold Member

  • Patrician
  • 1382 posts
  • Location:Istanbul
  • Interests:To be or not to be that is the question.
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 20 July 2008 - 09:22 AM

Yes and no.
But Max_Real Qnx pointed out an important fact: The base file collection of VistaPE originates from boot.wim. As it is left untouched we end up in a PE system containing files from SP0 and SP1...

booty#1


Well; In this case, what can we do :cheers:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users