| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Yook
Joined: 20 Nov 2008 Posts: 58 Location: Thionville, France
|
Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi, thanks for this program, it's pretty useful. Just a suggestion, the command line support could be improved.
I noticed that the function that retrieves the icon ID of a file returns a wrong integer for certain files, and only for certain resources of these files. This happens for example with the first icon of Skype.exe.
Is there a way to fix this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ladiko
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 Posts: 281 Location: Berlin
|
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
which command line parameters do you miss?
i have to see how to handle icons with letters instead of numbers as icongroup name.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yook
Joined: 20 Nov 2008 Posts: 58 Location: Thionville, France
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh now i understand better for the icons, thanks.
My goal was to choose some compilation options using command line, but i eventually programatically edited the ini file relative to the file to compile and used the /nogui option.
I will edit your code so that the tray icon won't show when using this option ; this could be a default behavior.
Is there a way to detect that the compilation failed or was aborted?
When I have time, I will try to port your code to the unicode version of AutoHotkey, as i sometimes use paths containing unicode chars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ladiko
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 Posts: 281 Location: Berlin
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you change line 3344: | Code: | _EXIT() {
ExitApp , 1
} | the app exits with exitcode 1 on error and with zero if the compilation was successful. what do you mean with "aborted" ? by the user or by a fault?
i will add it in the next release, but don't hold your breath - it could take a little bit longer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I ran through this thread, but couldn't find an absolute answer/solution. Image resources aren't copied to the exe when compiled!
It also assumes the exe is being made in the folder where these image resouces are kept. If I have the destination folder seperate, the images don't appear in the application when run, but they appear when the applicable is run from the original resource folder.
Has this been encountered/solved by anybody else? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ladiko
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 Posts: 281 Location: Berlin
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i tried to compile a script and include a bmp-file - the exe file is almost the same amount bigger as the bmp file has. so it seems ok for me.
please explain what you did and maybe post some code?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
The code's fine (to be clear, not trying to be defensive), and the images show up perfectly when the exe is run from the resources' originating folder, just not otherwise.
Create a gui and have the image file displayed in the gui. Compile it in the resource's folder (i used a generated passkey, nodecompile and settings saved in script, but nothing else specifically) and then move the exe onto your desktop or anywhere else.
If you run the exe from outside of the original image's folder it wont show when the gui pops. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ClockManV2 Guest
|
Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
i got error:
---------------------------
Compile_AHK_Setup.exe - Application Error
---------------------------
The application was unable to start correctly (0xc0000142). Click OK to close the application.
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------
I'm running on Windows 7 Ultimate with UAC disabled.
Whats the problem? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ladiko
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 Posts: 281 Location: Berlin
|
Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
seems to be a failed download. try to download again, maybe with another browser?!
it worked for me with firefox 2.0, 3.0 and 3.5 on windows xp home and professional 32bit, vista business 32bit, windows 7 business 32bit and 64bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As with the image resource saving bug, I've since specified the image resources' full directories, compiled, and of course the images show on my station (as the compiled exe is looking in that specific directory, which exists), but when I move the exe to another computer they don't show, as expected.
Is there something else I should be specifying to have the copies of the images saved to the compiled exe be the ones used, and not the original ones on my station? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lexikos
Joined: 17 Oct 2006 Posts: 4472 Location: Qld, Australia
|
Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How are you using the images in your script? If you're specifying image paths with the Gui command (even relative ones), it will look for files even if you've instructed Compile_AHK to embed them as resources. Compile_AHK cannot automagically detect all references to images in the script, and AutoHotkey's built-in commands can't ordinarily load images from resources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kinda limits the cosmetic options when it comes to compiled scripts then huh. Guess I'll need to find a way to work around having images in the gui. ): |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest2 Guest
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quick Question.
What are the benefits using this complier over the standard supplied compiler ?
Is the source more secure ? Faster / Smaller etc ?
Thx |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
poetbox
Joined: 07 Jan 2007 Posts: 94
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Guest2 wrote: | Quick Question.
What are the benefits using this complier over the standard supplied compiler ?
Is the source more secure ? Faster / Smaller etc ?
Thx |
you can make it smaller,add icon,add version info ,or other which you maybe like |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pekkle
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 9
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| poetbox wrote: | | Guest2 wrote: | Quick Question.
What are the benefits using this complier over the standard supplied compiler ?
Is the source more secure ? Faster / Smaller etc ?
Thx |
you can make it smaller,add icon,add version info ,or other which you maybe like |
To add to the above, you can modify Manifest for Vista Administrator Exection Level (User Account Control) easily, instead of using the "standard" compiler, which you need to change the Manifest by using Reshacker manually.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|