World: r3wp

and it doesn't happen with sdk 2.7.6 ?

Yes, it worked with the older SDKs (at least that's the only change 
I can recognize). The .res and .ico files are all the same.

Can someone try to change an icon with ICOFX in an encapped EXE based 
on SDK 2.7.7? Maybe I'm doing something wrong here.

not enough memory

 ... that's happened in the past for me after icon sizes and color 
 depth values have changed. You may have to recreate the icon set.

Ok, thanks for the tip.

with icofx, extract the rebol icon, and look at all its sizes/color 
depths.    then open batchmode, import the image you want to use, 
tick only those which are in the rebol icon, press OK.

and use the result icon in reshacker  with:

call rejoin ["reshacker  -addoverwrite " exe-path "," exe-path "," 
icon-path ",ICONGROUP,REBOL,1033"]

paths, being absolute and in os-local form

simple as pie :-)

For those of you who want IcoFx Portable: http://portableapps.com/apps/graphics_pictures/icofx_portable

Thanks!

But no iPhone support?

not enough memory

 ... I'm getting either that one right now or a decompression error. 
 I'm fairly sure the only change I've made is to source code. Ideas?

Just a note...

We check www.rebol.com/feedback.html twice a day.


If you have something to ask or report, do it there. Otherwise, we 
may never see it posted in other places. Thanks.

I've seen that before .. and I just encap it again and sometimes 
it goes away

It's quite persistent here. my build system has various settings 
where it will show up or run normally. I guess I'll have to spend 
some hours digging.

Henrik, see PM.

apparently it's enough to run a second instance of the encapped program 
to cause this error.

lInteresting... sounds like a linked DLL problem.

the strange thing is that sometimes it would yield a compression 
-3 error, while other times it would be out of memory error.

Because both are the same problem with decompression.

Can someone answer this question ?

http://www.quora.com/REBOL/Will-the-Rebol-SDK-only-make-executable-apps-for-the-platform-purchased

The answer is yes.

So, user has to pay 750 $ to generate app for Linux, MacOSX, Windows 
?!
Is this affordable for personnal developpers ?

I don't know if there are cross-platform discounts.

There used to be ...

and the one for bsd is free :)

and 2.7.8 ????

there's always a lag between the 2 release and the SDK.  And these 
days there's a charge for updates for the SDK.

The SDK came out at the same time as the regular release, before 
the blog. Windows only for the moment.

Apparently we might be getting even more cool stuff for the SDK than 
have already been posted, so you might want to wait on the SDK for 
a bit.

I discovered what is causing my program to hang in windows 7....something 
to do with a "Call/output" command i'm using:

ver: copy ""call/output "ver" ver

ver: copy ""
call/output "ver" ver

works in xp and vista

Strangly it would run the first time on install (sdk version) but 
never there after, and it would not run from script.

call/output does not seem to work at all on win 7 ... is this a known 
prob?

Just wondering if there is a way to have an sdk app run in admin 
mode (without the user doing it)? For syncing purposes I had offered 
to auto correct time nad it worked for XP but windows 7 needs the 
app to run in admin mode ... I know it goes against the whole idea 
of security but just in case I'm missing something....

Not that I know of. Figuring out how to trigger the UAC prompt is 
on the list of things to do for the new installer though.

Yes that would work.... (Promt)

I'm lost with SDK builds for Linux. What is the difference between 
4.2 (Libc6) and 4.3 (Fedora)? Is 4.3 really Fedora-only specific?

It's just the build platform, but it may determine on what other 
systems it does and doesn't work

4.2 Should be an older Ubuntu. In theory, that should produce good 
compatibility, but View is unreliable on Fedora and other newer systems, 
hence the Fedora build

I think my own graphical Syllable Server currently needs the Fedora 
build to have reliable graphics

Do you think that it also has something to do with kernel version 
(2.4 vs 2.6)?

2.4 Is ancient now; that shouldn't play a role anymore

Ok, thanks. I think I'll stick with 4.2 for now.

Usually, versions of the GLibC C library and X11 graphics are much 
more critical than the kernel

Be sure to test the graphics parts, then

It's for Cheyenne, shouldn't matter.

Oh, right, the popup is Windows only

The older Ubuntu build is indeed best for Core compatibility

It's a tray icon ... I don't think there is a popup now in windows 
.. at least I hope not.