Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

ANNOUNCE: Magicsplat Tcl/Tk 8.6.9-1.9.1 for Windows

266 views
Skip to first unread message

Ashok

unread,
Mar 18, 2019, 9:51:54 AM3/18/19
to
Version 1.9.1 of the Magicsplat Tcl/Tk 8.6.9 for Windows binary
distribution is released.

The following new packages have been added in this release:

- Next Scripting Framework nsf (2.2.0) with nx and XOTcl
- Ffidl 0.7
- Critcl 3.17
- Tix widget library 8.4.3

The installation package is also now signed (80 bucks for a cert just
to stop AV and Anti-malware complaining about a lack of Authenticode
signature, grumble grumble).


See https://www.magicsplat.com/tcl-installer/ for details and downloads.
Pay particular attention to installation notes when upgrading from
earlier versions.

/Ashok

Alexandru

unread,
Mar 19, 2019, 8:37:08 AM3/19/19
to
Hi Ashok,

Might be of topic: How do you manage to avoid the anoying complain about unknown software in Windows? I would like to have the same for my app...

Many thanks!
Alexandru

Ashok

unread,
Mar 19, 2019, 9:17:50 PM3/19/19
to
On 3/19/2019 6:07 PM, Alexandru wrote:
> Am Montag, 18. März 2019 14:51:54 UTC+1 schrieb Ashok:
>> The installation package is also now signed (80 bucks for a cert just
>> to stop AV and Anti-malware complaining about a lack of Authenticode
>> signature, grumble grumble).
>>
>> /Ashok
>
> Hi Ashok,
>
> Might be of topic: How do you manage to avoid the anoying complain about unknown software in Windows? I would like to have the same for my app...
>
> Many thanks!
> Alexandru
>

That's what I was referring to above - you have to add an authenticode
signature (google for details) to your application. Fwiw, I got my
signing certificate from K-Software (https://codesigning.ksoftware.net/)
for $80 which was the cheapest I could find. (It's a Comodo / Sectigo
reseller). Their support was pretty good too. Follow their instructions
*exactly* - use IE or Firefox to apply for the cert and *the same
browser on the same machine* to download it. Chrome and Edge will not work.

/Ashok

Alexandru

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 3:52:39 AM3/20/19
to
Thanks! Indeed, this is cheap. Digicert asks 600 $ for the code signing cert!

Can you explain what happens when signing software? Is the information storred on a server and Microsoft checks the database or is the information stored with the software (but how)?

Christian Gollwitzer

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 6:51:35 AM3/20/19
to
Am 20.03.19 um 09:52 schrieb Alexandru:
A signature is appended to your executable file. Windows computes the
fingerprint of the EXE, compares it with te stored signature. The
certificate is signed by a certificate from the vendor, which is
downloaded upon first use into Windows and cached.

So MS doesn't know, but their key trusts the key of DigiCert, and their
key trusts your key, your key signs the app. It's similar to PGP email
signing in a way.

Christian

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 8:39:45 AM3/20/19
to
At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 12:51:32 +0200 Christian Gollwitzer <auri...@gmx.de> wrote:

>
> Am 20.03.19 um 09:52 schrieb Alexandru:
> > Am Mittwoch, 20. März 2019 02:17:50 UTC+1 schrieb Ashok:
>
> >> That's what I was referring to above - you have to add an authenticode
> >> signature (google for details) to your application. Fwiw, I got my
> >> signing certificate from K-Software (https://codesigning.ksoftware.net/)
> >> for $80 which was the cheapest I could find. (It's a Comodo / Sectigo
> >> reseller). Their support was pretty good too. Follow their instructions
> >> *exactly* - use IE or Firefox to apply for the cert and *the same
> >> browser on the same machine* to download it. Chrome and Edge will not work.
> >>
> >> /Ashok
> >
> > Thanks! Indeed, this is cheap. Digicert asks 600 $ for the code signing cert!
> >
> > Can you explain what happens when signing software? Is the information storred on a server and Microsoft checks the database or is the information stored with the software (but how)?
> >
> A signature is appended to your executable file. Windows computes the
> fingerprint of the EXE, compares it with te stored signature. The
> certificate is signed by a certificate from the vendor, which is
> downloaded upon first use into Windows and cached.

Can one signing certificate be used for multiple .EXE files?

Can the EXE file be signed under Linux or does the signing software only run
under MS-Windows? In either case can it be used to sign a batch of files,
*preferably* as a non-interactive process (eg something that can go in a
Makefile or a script).

I have a bunch of programs (EXE files) that I cross-build under Linux (they
are all in fact Tcl/Tk programs wrapped with SDX). I don't actually have a
machine running any version of MS-Windows, although I do have Wine installed
on at least one of my machines. From time to time I get reports that the
programs might be malware, because MS-Windows discovers that the programs are
not signed and complains.

>
> So MS doesn't know, but their key trusts the key of DigiCert, and their
> key trusts your key, your key signs the app. It's similar to PGP email
> signing in a way.
>
> Christian
>

--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
hel...@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services

Ashok

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 10:25:29 AM3/20/19
to


On 3/20/2019 6:09 PM, Robert Heller wrote:

> Can one signing certificate be used for multiple .EXE files?

Yes.

>
> Can the EXE file be signed under Linux or does the signing software only run
> under MS-Windows? In either case can it be used to sign a batch of files,
> *preferably* as a non-interactive process (eg something that can go in a
> Makefile or a script).
>

I don't know about Linux. On Windows you can should be able to use
signtool.exe in a batch file provided the certificate does not require a
hardware token (OV certs do not and suffice for code signing, EV
certificates generally require a token and are more expensive).

> I have a bunch of programs (EXE files) that I cross-build under Linux (they
> are all in fact Tcl/Tk programs wrapped with SDX). I don't actually have a
> machine running any version of MS-Windows, although I do have Wine installed
> on at least one of my machines. From time to time I get reports that the
> programs might be malware, because MS-Windows discovers that the programs are
> not signed and complains.

Now signing tclkits (and probably freewrap exes also) is potentially a
problem. Tclkits append the "kit" to the back of the executable. If I
recall correctly, depending on whether you sign first and then attach
the kit, or the other way around, either the signature check fails or
the check succeeds but the kit vfs cannot be loaded (because it cannot
be located by the tclkit init script). I don't think this problem is fixed.

Before spending the money, you can test for yourself by generating a
self-signed certificate and using that for signing. Obviously Windows
will warn it is not trusted but at least you can verify it is read and
the tclkit works before springing $$ for a real cert.

/Ashok



Ashok

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 10:27:59 AM3/20/19
to
On 3/20/2019 1:22 PM, Alexandru wrote:
> Thanks! Indeed, this is cheap. Digicert asks 600 $ for the code signing cert!
>
> Can you explain what happens when signing software? Is the information storred on a server and Microsoft checks the database or is the information stored with the software (but how)?
>

Basically, what Christian said. If you look at my cert, it is signed by
Sectigo. If you start up certificate manager (certmgr.msc) and go to the
view that says "View by Purpose", you will see Sectigo under the "Code
Signing" category.

/Ashok

Alexandru

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 10:34:41 AM3/20/19
to
Is it possible to sign using a website cert?

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 11:26:20 AM3/20/19
to
At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:39:38 -0500 Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:

>
> At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 12:51:32 +0200 Christian Gollwitzer <auri...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> >
> > Am 20.03.19 um 09:52 schrieb Alexandru:
> > > Am Mittwoch, 20. März 2019 02:17:50 UTC+1 schrieb Ashok:
> >
> > >> That's what I was referring to above - you have to add an authenticode
> > >> signature (google for details) to your application. Fwiw, I got my
> > >> signing certificate from K-Software (https://codesigning.ksoftware.net/)
> > >> for $80 which was the cheapest I could find. (It's a Comodo / Sectigo
> > >> reseller). Their support was pretty good too. Follow their instructions
> > >> *exactly* - use IE or Firefox to apply for the cert and *the same
> > >> browser on the same machine* to download it. Chrome and Edge will not work.
> > >>
> > >> /Ashok
> > >
> > > Thanks! Indeed, this is cheap. Digicert asks 600 $ for the code signing cert!
> > >
> > > Can you explain what happens when signing software? Is the information storred on a server and Microsoft checks the database or is the information stored with the software (but how)?
> > >
> > A signature is appended to your executable file. Windows computes the
> > fingerprint of the EXE, compares it with te stored signature. The
> > certificate is signed by a certificate from the vendor, which is
> > downloaded upon first use into Windows and cached.
>
> Can one signing certificate be used for multiple .EXE files?
>
> Can the EXE file be signed under Linux or does the signing software only run
> under MS-Windows? In either case can it be used to sign a batch of files,
> *preferably* as a non-interactive process (eg something that can go in a
> Makefile or a script).

Nevermind, I found a program in the mono-devel package that will do this.

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 11:46:53 AM3/20/19
to
At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:34:37 -0700 (PDT) Alexandru <alexandr...@meshparts.de> wrote:

>
> Am Mittwoch, 20. M=C3=A4rz 2019 15:25:29 UTC+1 schrieb Ashok:
> > On 3/20/2019 6:09 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> >=20
> > > Can one signing certificate be used for multiple .EXE files?
> >=20
> > Yes.
> >=20
> > >=20
> > > Can the EXE file be signed under Linux or does the signing software onl=
> y run
> > > under MS-Windows? In either case can it be used to sign a batch of file=
> s,
> > > *preferably* as a non-interactive process (eg something that can go in =
> a
> > > Makefile or a script).
> > >=20
> >=20
> > I don't know about Linux. On Windows you can should be able to use=20
> > signtool.exe in a batch file provided the certificate does not require a=
> =20
> > hardware token (OV certs do not and suffice for code signing, EV=20
> > certificates generally require a token and are more expensive).
> >=20
> > > I have a bunch of programs (EXE files) that I cross-build under Linux (=
> they
> > > are all in fact Tcl/Tk programs wrapped with SDX). I don't actually ha=
> ve a
> > > machine running any version of MS-Windows, although I do have Wine inst=
> alled
> > > on at least one of my machines. From time to time I get reports that t=
> he
> > > programs might be malware, because MS-Windows discovers that the progra=
> ms are
> > > not signed and complains.
> >=20
> > Now signing tclkits (and probably freewrap exes also) is potentially a=20
> > problem. Tclkits append the "kit" to the back of the executable. If I=20
> > recall correctly, depending on whether you sign first and then attach=20
> > the kit, or the other way around, either the signature check fails or=20
> > the check succeeds but the kit vfs cannot be loaded (because it cannot=20
> > be located by the tclkit init script). I don't think this problem is fixe=
> d.
> >=20
> > Before spending the money, you can test for yourself by generating a=20
> > self-signed certificate and using that for signing. Obviously Windows=20
> > will warn it is not trusted but at least you can verify it is read and=20
> > the tclkit works before springing $$ for a real cert.
> >=20
> > /Ashok
>
> Is it possible to sign using a website cert?

Probably. A cert is a cert...

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 11:46:54 AM3/20/19
to
At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 19:55:25 +0530 Ashok <pal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On 3/20/2019 6:09 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
>
> > Can one signing certificate be used for multiple .EXE files?
>
> Yes.
>
> >
> > Can the EXE file be signed under Linux or does the signing software only run
> > under MS-Windows? In either case can it be used to sign a batch of files,
> > *preferably* as a non-interactive process (eg something that can go in a
> > Makefile or a script).
> >
>
> I don't know about Linux. On Windows you can should be able to use
> signtool.exe in a batch file provided the certificate does not require a
> hardware token (OV certs do not and suffice for code signing, EV
> certificates generally require a token and are more expensive).
>
> > I have a bunch of programs (EXE files) that I cross-build under Linux (they
> > are all in fact Tcl/Tk programs wrapped with SDX). I don't actually have a
> > machine running any version of MS-Windows, although I do have Wine installed
> > on at least one of my machines. From time to time I get reports that the
> > programs might be malware, because MS-Windows discovers that the programs are
> > not signed and complains.
>
> Now signing tclkits (and probably freewrap exes also) is potentially a
> problem. Tclkits append the "kit" to the back of the executable. If I
> recall correctly, depending on whether you sign first and then attach
> the kit, or the other way around, either the signature check fails or
> the check succeeds but the kit vfs cannot be loaded (because it cannot
> be located by the tclkit init script). I don't think this problem is fixed.

Damn...

>
> Before spending the money, you can test for yourself by generating a
> self-signed certificate and using that for signing. Obviously Windows
> will warn it is not trusted but at least you can verify it is read and
> the tclkit works before springing $$ for a real cert.
>

There is no way I can test it, since I don't have a MS-Windows machine.

Maybe someone else can perform this test and let us know if there is a way to
get it to work.

> /Ashok

Christian Gollwitzer

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 2:41:26 PM3/20/19
to
Am 20.03.19 um 17:46 schrieb Robert Heller:
>
>>
>> Before spending the money, you can test for yourself by generating a
>> self-signed certificate and using that for signing. Obviously Windows
>> will warn it is not trusted but at least you can verify it is read and
>> the tclkit works before springing $$ for a real cert.
>>
>
> There is no way I can test it, since I don't have a MS-Windows machine.

You can download free MS Windows virtual machines for testing purposes
here:

https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/tools/vms/

These machines are meant to test the browsers. There used to be ones
with developer tools installed to check compatibility with Windows 10.
So even if you are not strictly testing IE, I think it still OK with the
EULA.

Christian

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 3:25:11 PM3/20/19
to
I really do know how to use MS Windows and none of the virtualization
platforms listed are the one I am using (KVM/QMU under CentOS 6).

> Christian

Christian Gollwitzer

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 6:58:18 PM3/20/19
to
Am 20.03.19 um 21:25 schrieb Robert Heller:
>> You can download free MS Windows virtual machines for testing purposes
>> here:
>>
>> https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/tools/vms/
>>
>> These machines are meant to test the browsers. There used to be ones
>> with developer tools installed to check compatibility with Windows 10.
>> So even if you are not strictly testing IE, I think it still OK with the
>> EULA.
>>
>
> I really do know how to use MS Windows

was that meant as "do not know how to use MS Windows"? Because it
doesn't make sense for me otherwise.

> and none of the virtualization
> platforms listed are the one I am using (KVM/QMU under CentOS 6).

I can't see a reason why you couldn't install Virtualbox on your system.
Unless you run on ARM or other non-x86? Or run out of disk space - a
virtual Windows 10 system takes at the minimum 40 gigabytes. The
VirtualBox package is actually just an ova (open virtualization
arcihtecture), so maybe you could even import this into KVM (but I have
never tested this).

I think it is almost impossible to do the signing thing correctly
without a possibility to test this.


Christian

Peter Dean

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 7:42:48 PM3/20/19
to
There's a paragraph here about the problem. It may help. I know nothing.
https://www.patthoyts.tk/tclkit/

Ashok

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 9:06:54 PM3/20/19
to
On 3/20/2019 8:04 PM, Alexandru wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 20. März 2019 15:25:29 UTC+1 schrieb Ashok:
> Is it possible to sign using a website cert?
>

Nope.

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 20, 2019, 9:26:33 PM3/20/19
to
At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 23:58:14 +0100 Christian Gollwitzer <auri...@gmx.de> wrote:

>
> Am 20.03.19 um 21:25 schrieb Robert Heller:
> >> You can download free MS Windows virtual machines for testing purposes
> >> here:
> >>
> >> https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/tools/vms/
> >>
> >> These machines are meant to test the browsers. There used to be ones
> >> with developer tools installed to check compatibility with Windows 10.
> >> So even if you are not strictly testing IE, I think it still OK with the
> >> EULA.
> >>
> >
> > I really do know how to use MS Windows
>
> was that meant as "do not know how to use MS Windows"? Because it
> doesn't make sense for me otherwise.
>
> > and none of the virtualization
> > platforms listed are the one I am using (KVM/QMU under CentOS 6).
>
> I can't see a reason why you couldn't install Virtualbox on your system.

I don't partitulary like Virtualbox. Unless it is statically linked there is
the possibility it won't run because of shared library versions.

> Unless you run on ARM or other non-x86? Or run out of disk space - a
> virtual Windows 10 system takes at the minimum 40 gigabytes. The

40Gig! That is insane.

> VirtualBox package is actually just an ova (open virtualization
> arcihtecture), so maybe you could even import this into KVM (but I have
> never tested this).

I think I tried this some time ago, but that might have been with CentOS 5
using zen.

>
> I think it is almost impossible to do the signing thing correctly
> without a possibility to test this.

Which means I probably won't bother. I don't really "support" MS-Windows, I
just cross-build my code and provide the binaries on an "as is" basis.

sled...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 12:59:33 AM3/21/19
to
First, thanks for the binaries...

Second, re: cert.- that is a management issue, not windows. In those instances where antivirus software "has decided" not permit our software to execute for any reason (absence of cert or a payload of viral material), those who manage the Windows environment make the necessary changes to either the 'anti virus' software or Windows Policies. To date, no customer has asked to us to obtain or provide certification.

Internally, no one has experienced Windows ever flagging our software due to cert in either a host or guest environment. Again, it comes down to how you manage windows.

Christian Gollwitzer

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 3:05:19 AM3/21/19
to
Am 21.03.19 um 03:26 schrieb Robert Heller:
> At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 23:58:14 +0100 Christian Gollwitzer <auri...@gmx.de> wrote:
>> I can't see a reason why you couldn't install Virtualbox on your system.
>
> I don't partitulary like Virtualbox. Unless it is statically linked there is
> the possibility it won't run because of shared library versions.

I'd be surprised if it wouldn't work. There is even a VirtualBox in the
EPEL repo:

https://tecadmin.net/install-oracle-virtualbox-on-centos-redhat-and-fedora/


>
>> Unless you run on ARM or other non-x86? Or run out of disk space - a
>> virtual Windows 10 system takes at the minimum 40 gigabytes. The
>
> 40Gig! That is insane.

I totally agree. It's understandable, though, because you get a full
Windows 10 installation, including tons of tools like a browser, media
players etc.


>> I think it is almost impossible to do the signing thing correctly
>> without a possibility to test this.
>
> Which means I probably won't bother. I don't really "support" MS-Windows, I
> just cross-build my code and provide the binaries on an "as is" basis.
>

That's fully understandable. In that case I wouldn't bother either.

Christian

Ralf Fassel

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 7:46:01 AM3/21/19
to
* Ashok <pal...@yahoo.com>
| Fwiw, I got my signing certificate from K-Software
| (https://codesigning.ksoftware.net/) for $80 which was the cheapest I
| could find. (It's a Comodo / Sectigo reseller). Their support was
| pretty good too. Follow their instructions *exactly* - use IE or
| Firefox to apply for the cert and *the same browser on the same
| machine* to download it. Chrome and Edge will not work.

We also used a cert from Komodo to sign one of our non-binary hardware
drivers, the experience being the same as you describe: follow the
instructions exactly, and it just works. Support was very helpful, too
in the aquisition process: try it, if it does not work => refund.
Of course it worked, so I can't tell about the refund ;-)

HTH
R'

Alexandru

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 8:02:40 AM3/21/19
to
I'm using sdx.kit to create executables of my Tcl/tk app and I would like to sign it. Something like that:

# Generate the .kit file
puts "Wrapping..."
exec $tclkitsh sdx-20110317.kit qwrap $tclfile
puts "Done."

# Generate the .vfs folder
puts "Creating a standard unwrapping..."
exec $tclkitsh sdx-20110317.kit unwrap $tclname.kit
puts "Done."

# Generate the .exe file
puts "Producing the starpack..."
exec $tclkitsh sdx-20110317.kit wrap $tclroot.exe -runtime $tclkit
puts "Done."


Ashok writes, that there is a problem with these types. Can it be pached somehow?

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 8:40:12 AM3/21/19
to
At Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:05:16 +0100 Christian Gollwitzer <auri...@gmx.de> wrote:

>
> Am 21.03.19 um 03:26 schrieb Robert Heller:
> > At Wed, 20 Mar 2019 23:58:14 +0100 Christian Gollwitzer <auri...@gmx.de> wrote:
> >> I can't see a reason why you couldn't install Virtualbox on your system.
> >
> > I don't partitulary like Virtualbox. Unless it is statically linked there is
> > the possibility it won't run because of shared library versions.
>
> I'd be surprised if it wouldn't work. There is even a VirtualBox in the
> EPEL repo:
>
> https://tecadmin.net/install-oracle-virtualbox-on-centos-redhat-and-fedora/
>
>
> >
> >> Unless you run on ARM or other non-x86? Or run out of disk space - a
> >> virtual Windows 10 system takes at the minimum 40 gigabytes. The
> >
> > 40Gig! That is insane.
>
> I totally agree. It's understandable, though, because you get a full
> Windows 10 installation, including tons of tools like a browser, media
> players etc.

A full Linux install with a full set of compiler, binutils and devel libraries
fits in less than 10G (I have several VMs just for building, using several
"flavors" of Linux) -- hell, I have a Raspberry Pi with a 32G MicroSD card,
with *five* complete incarnations of GCC/Binutils/stdc++: native ARM, embeded
ARM (2 versions), AVR, and ESP32, and only 18G is used (and that includes a
couple of code trees and a pile of other stuff). And yes, it also has the
whole Desktop, including chromium-browser (I did nuke libreoffice).

>
>
> >> I think it is almost impossible to do the signing thing correctly
> >> without a possibility to test this.
> >
> > Which means I probably won't bother. I don't really "support" MS-Windows, I
> > just cross-build my code and provide the binaries on an "as is" basis.
> >
>
> That's fully understandable. In that case I wouldn't bother either.
>
> Christian
>

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 9:12:52 AM3/21/19
to
At Thu, 21 Mar 2019 05:02:37 -0700 (PDT) Alexandru <alexandr...@meshparts.de> wrote:

>
> Am Donnerstag, 21. M=C3=A4rz 2019 12:46:01 UTC+1 schrieb Ralf Fassel:
> > * Ashok <pal...@yahoo.com>
> > | Fwiw, I got my signing certificate from K-Software
> > | (https://codesigning.ksoftware.net/) for $80 which was the cheapest I
> > | could find. (It's a Comodo / Sectigo reseller). Their support was
> > | pretty good too. Follow their instructions *exactly* - use IE or
> > | Firefox to apply for the cert and *the same browser on the same
> > | machine* to download it. Chrome and Edge will not work.
> >=20
> > We also used a cert from Komodo to sign one of our non-binary hardware
> > drivers, the experience being the same as you describe: follow the
> > instructions exactly, and it just works. Support was very helpful, too
> > in the aquisition process: try it, if it does not work =3D> refund.
> > Of course it worked, so I can't tell about the refund ;-)
> >=20
> > HTH
> > R'
>
> I'm using sdx.kit to create executables of my Tcl/tk app and I would like t=
> o sign it. Something like that:
>
> # Generate the .kit file
> puts "Wrapping..."
> exec $tclkitsh sdx-20110317.kit qwrap $tclfile
> puts "Done."
>
> # Generate the .vfs folder
> puts "Creating a standard unwrapping..."
> exec $tclkitsh sdx-20110317.kit unwrap $tclname.kit
> puts "Done."
>
> # Generate the .exe file
> puts "Producing the starpack..."
> exec $tclkitsh sdx-20110317.kit wrap $tclroot.exe -runtime $tclkit
> puts "Done."
>
>
> Ashok writes, that there is a problem with these types. Can it be pached so=
> mehow?

You need a patched version of the virtual filesystem code that detects that
there is a signature and adjusts the indexes to the metakit data.

See: https://www.patthoyts.tk/tclkit/

Rich

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 12:22:20 PM3/21/19
to
Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
> At Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:05:16 +0100 Christian Gollwitzer <auri...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 21.03.19 um 03:26 schrieb Robert Heller:
>> > 40Gig! That is insane.
>>
>> I totally agree. It's understandable, though, because you get a
>> full Windows 10 installation, including tons of tools like a
>> browser, media players etc.
>
> A full Linux install with a full set of compiler, binutils and devel
> libraries fits in less than 10G (I have several VMs just for
> building, using several "flavors" of Linux) -- hell, I have a
> Raspberry Pi with a 32G MicroSD card, with *five* complete
> incarnations of GCC/Binutils/stdc++: native ARM, embeded ARM (2
> versions), AVR, and ESP32, and only 18G is used (and that includes a
> couple of code trees and a pile of other stuff). And yes, it also
> has the whole Desktop, including chromium-browser (I did nuke
> libreoffice).

Windows is well known for being a bloaty, disk space consuming mess of
an OS. How it manages to use 4x+ the disk space of any given Linux
distro, yet supply in that 4x+ disk usage for the base OS almost
nothing useful (compared to the tools that are installed on Linux) for
doing any 'work' on a machine, is unknown.

Robert Heller

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 1:25:05 PM3/21/19
to
Gratious Eye-Candy maybe...

sled...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 21, 2019, 4:55:15 PM3/21/19
to
If you haven't already done so, take a look at macrium viboot. Have had no issues with it at all.

Leverages MS Hyper-V.

Rick

Ashok

unread,
Mar 22, 2019, 1:58:00 AM3/22/19
to
I think there's something wrong with the installation if your Windows
system takes up 40GB. I run two VM's for testing - my Debian takes up
10GB, my Win8.1 just over 6GB fresh, and 8GB after installing the SDK.
That's Win 8.1 but I seriously doubt Win 10 would be that almost 7x bigger.

/Ashok

Christian Gollwitzer

unread,
Mar 22, 2019, 2:13:51 AM3/22/19
to
Am 22.03.19 um 07:57 schrieb Ashok:
> I think there's something wrong with the installation if your Windows
> system takes up 40GB. I run two VM's for testing - my Debian takes up
> 10GB, my Win8.1 just over 6GB fresh, and 8GB after installing the SDK.
> That's Win 8.1 but I seriously doubt Win 10 would be that almost 7x bigger.

I was referring to the virtual machine with Edge and Windows 10 64 bit
downloadable from here:

https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/tools/vms/

I've installed it and added only a relatively small program to it, then:

Apfelkiste:VirtualBox VMs chris$ du -sh MSEdge\ -\ Win10/
35G MSEdge - Win10/


So I don't know what is seriously wrong with it. It came like this
packaged by MS. Maybe that is wrong ;)

Christian

Christian Gollwitzer

unread,
Mar 22, 2019, 2:19:08 AM3/22/19
to
Am 22.03.19 um 08:13 schrieb Christian Gollwitzer:
> Am 22.03.19 um 07:57 schrieb Ashok:
>> I think there's something wrong with the installation if your Windows
>> system takes up 40GB. I run two VM's for testing - my Debian takes up
>> 10GB, my Win8.1 just over 6GB fresh, and 8GB after installing the SDK.
>> That's Win 8.1 but I seriously doubt Win 10 would be that almost 7x
>> bigger.
>
> I was referring to the virtual machine with Edge and Windows 10 64 bit
> downloadable from here:
>
>     https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/tools/vms/
>
> I've installed it and added only a relatively small program to it, then:
>
> Apfelkiste:VirtualBox VMs chris$ du -sh MSEdge\ -\ Win10/
>  35G    MSEdge - Win10/
>

Ok, some closer inspection: The downloaded compressed .ova package is
4.3 GB. After decompression / importing, it unpacks an image of 20 GB in
size + negligible metadata. The +15 GB are from two snapshots I created.
So 20GB, but still hefty. The image is sparse with a maximum size of
40GB and current size of 19.8 GB.

Christian
0 new messages