Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 5:34 PM]
Lee,
Could you please upload a screenshot? If you see your company name in the
"warning" then everything is OK.
Friedrich
--
Friedrich Linder
CEO, Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
1.954.252.3910
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 6:53 PM]
Friedrich,
I know you are working hard on your docs, so I would like to ask if you
could work a little harder <g>. Let me explain.
At the moment, all my install projects deal with installing source code and
docs for them. I don't have any projects coming that deal with installing
programs (mainly because I build them on client sites or security
certificates are not applicable).
But I can envision a time where I want to do something like this. I think
it is a mark of good quality where a vendor signs the install. I think what
Lee is asking about (correct me if I am wrong) is a step-by-step method of
installing this. I get the impression this is the first time he's done so.
Coming full circle, perhaps your docs would explain how to install a given
certificate (or even in general terms if the various vendors are too varied)
as part of a SB5 project? Do patches or web updates need certificates too?
The viewpoint of this doc section should be from someone who has never done
this before. Why sign it? What are the advantages? What's the purpose?
What could happen if you don't?
Hope that makes sense.
--
Russ Eggen
www.radfusion.com
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:24 PM]
On 22 Mar 2005 12:53:10 -0500, Russell B. Eggen wrote:
> The viewpoint of this doc section should be from someone who has never done
> this before.
Absolutely.
Now, imagine the same type of approach in the CW docs, say for template
writing, or multi-dll class writing. Holy cow, Im off topic:)
--
Mark
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 8:37 PM]
There are tutorials that explain those concepts <bg>
--
Russ Eggen
www.radfusion.com
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 8:49 PM]
On 22 Mar 2005 14:37:56 -0500, Russell B. Eggen wrote:
> There are tutorials that explain those concepts <bg>
Certainly, but not in the terms you described, ie: "someone who has never
done this before".
Ive walked that path, somewhat stumbling along, as you know. Your book
helps a lot, but as we saw here in the NG some months ago, even it didnt
get me there.
IMO, there isnt one document or combination of SV/3rd party documents
anywhere that describes in detail each of the steps that is necessary for
Joe Newbie to take in order to write a class from scratch and successfully
link it into both a single exe and multi-dll app, with hand code and
(preferably) with a template.
And yes, I have asked for this in the suggestions or documentation NG, I
dont recall which:)
--
Mark
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 9:05 PM]
That's a tall order. There has to be some level of assumption here in that
regard and everyone is different. If I could do that so you would get it
easily all the way up the line, there are others that would tell me that it
would have made more sense if I said <whatever>. Have to appeal the most
generalized. Students are not absolved of all work <bg>.
I'm even going over my educational materials and filling in sections with
words to the effect of "The goal of this section is to get the reader able
to produce <product>. This is an important concept because <reason why
anyone would want to do this>"
If you give a student a purpose and goal, then their curiosity about how
that is done is the energy to propel them through the lesson. If there is
no goal or purpose why a topic is valuable, or what benefits it provides,
then a student is going to struggle at best.
And if a student never gives feedback or specifics as to what is wrong with
the materials, not much chance of them ever evolving, let alone improving.
I can think of one certain individual who is famous (or infamous) for that
<bg>. It is not you, Mark. ;-)
--
Russ Eggen
www.radfusion.com
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 9:27 PM]
On 22 Mar 2005 15:05:45 -0500, Russell B. Eggen wrote:
> That's a tall order.
No argument there.
Look back over the threads both here and in the kitchen at all the
responses I got that said something to the effect of "oh, well you just
have to know that", or "So and so said 'do this' and it worked, so I moved
on", or similar, as it related to things like what template code tells the
main exe to define/find the exported class/method and ditto for the main
dll.
IMO, there were far too many "black magic" responses for me to accept that
this is properly documented. As you know, I had to get example code from a
number of different people, rather than consulting the CW docs.
When I asked those people (whom I am in debt to, pass the TDog) where they
found out what they needed to write that code, the replies were often in
that black magic zone.
I actually had hoped to write a cmag article to expose the magic that I had
squeezed out of the docs and those helpful folks. Instead, I ended up with
a pile of tempate code that Im not sure anyone can explain<g>. At least it
works, but the newbie might not have/take the time to harass just the right
people to get those answers, or may not know who to harass. I just got
lucky<g>
--
Mark
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 9:59 PM]
Please promise me if you get material like that from me, you will grab me by
the scruff of the neck and not let go until you understand the data (meaning
you can apply the theory in practice). Same goes for anyone else.
I would want those teaching me things to extend the same courtesy to me as a
student. Thus, the point of my suggestion on this thread (to get it back on
topic <g>).
I'm just one of the few that is fearless to ask stupid questions <vbg>.
--
Russ Eggen
www.radfusion.com
Re: Code signing again.....
[Tuesday, March 22, 2005 10:07 PM]
On 22 Mar 2005 15:59:36 -0500, Russell B. Eggen wrote:
> Please promise me if you get material like that from me, you will grab me by
> the scruff of the neck and not let go until you understand the data (meaning
> you can apply the theory in practice). Same goes for anyone else.
>
> I would want those teaching me things to extend the same courtesy to me as a
> student. Thus, the point of my suggestion on this thread (to get it back on
> topic <g>).
>
> I'm just one of the few that is fearless to ask stupid questions <vbg>.
Sorry, I should have stated that. The black magic material didnt come from
you, but I should also say that I was darned glad to get it and to this day
I appreciate it and the efforts of those who helped me deal with it.
Ill remember that scruff opportunity<seg>
--
Mark