After many hours of downloading and installing, i was thinking i could finally build VBA-M, but it wasn't so.

At the end, he spitted out this error:
(Manualy translated it from dutch to english)

Any1 know the solution for it?

Here my software specs:
- Windows Vista Home Premium 32bit
- Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 Professional Edition
- MSDN installed
- Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 Feature Pack installed
- SDK for Visual Studio 2008 installed
- SDK for DirectX installed (latest)
- Added the extra required files to the right places

I have to wonder about your motives.

Why are you acquiring the SVN when there is public builds? Are you planning of forking VBA-M or something? (why someone would do a fork of a fork is beyond me)

well because i like it to build them, you allways have the latest release, and indeed, maybe to help on some small points...

i used to be a antrix/ascent/arcemu compiler, and also did some fixes to it, but there are now to much wow projects, all sort of competing against eachother...

if there are any typo's, sorry, am typing now with one hand, cause i've broken my right hand last night.

(11-27-2008 02:18 AM)kameleon20 Wrote:  if there are any typo's, sorry, am typing now with one hand, cause i've broken my right hand last night.

OT; Ow, I hope it gets to feeling better. Both broken things and Hand Impairments are awful so getting both is yechk.

Quote:well because i like it to build them, you allways have the latest release, and indeed, maybe to help on some small points...

I see.

You might have to ask another developer for help since:

A) I really dislike helping because I have lost trust in people and the emulator scene. People in the past have stolen and abused this project and the GPL for thier own gain. Whats stopping you from doing the same?

B) Compiling builds for the sake of compiling doesn't sit right with me. The builds this project offers are always done when worthwhile changes are made. Compiling on every single SVN revision does not make sense.

C) I no longer have Nach's tools, since I have quit the emulator scene.

D) Anyone who knows C/C++ can reverse the protection offered in the MFC build......And no, I am not going to explain it to people who don't understand C/C++. Because it doesn't need explaining to coders, and I have to wonder why non coders even have a compiler in the first place.

E) I don't feel like making a patch for this so some idiot can squander the VBA-M executable.

If you go to the release_temp folder, you probably have a log there.
Take a look inside and you'll probably see its complaining about .asm files its not able to process.

Got to: http://www.nasm.us/pub/nasm/releasebuilds/2.05.01/

Download the win32 version and extract it wherever you want. Go to your Executable directories settings and add the folder where the nasm.exe is in.

Give it try again after that.

If the log isnt related to nasm, post it here and someone can surely help you.

actually, looks more like it can't find protect.exe, which you need to download the entire current svn, and not just the trunk to aquire.

VBA-M | NGOHQ | Post Impact Productions | TNHW | XBCD 0.2.7

You need protect.exe to sign the executable.
You can download the entire SVN as you wish, only that you need protect.exe to make a working release grade MFC executable.

If people have bothered to even read, Linux users don't have this issue, since they have enough brains not to steal shit, since for thier distro, code is needed. Stealing via resource modification mostly occurs on common platforms like Win32/Win64.

If you are a programmer, you can easily weed out the code yourself. It ain't that hard. Jeebus....

no need for the hate eh mudlord, this isn't emuforums, and spyhop is nowhere around.

VBA-M | NGOHQ | Post Impact Productions | TNHW | XBCD 0.2.7

i lolled

not everyone is out to get you mudlord XD

Well Chrono Archangel, it certainly feels that way.

I remember arguing with you, and now I don't feel anything. Yet I still feel ill will around these parts..

no i really don't have any bad intentions mudlord, trully...

but i've searched the whole svn repo, but couldn't find protect.exe
a little help maybe?

@Mudlord: what i've seen so far, is really, REALLY promising

protect.exe is private property.

kameleon: see PM, it should give you an idea
ill refrain from posting it in the actual thread since this protection seems to be soooo important.

(11-28-2008 12:12 PM)kameleon20 Wrote:  no i really don't have any bad intentions mudlord, trully...

but i've searched the whole svn repo, but couldn't find protect.exe
a little help maybe?

There is no need. The latest revisions always have builds available (especially the mfc ones).

Why your insistence, since you can just use the latest builds directly, and immediately share feedback about these? (if sharing feedback and testing the latest revs really was the intent, needless to state).
More specifically, why the repeat avoiding to provide direct answer to that question ?

Quote:kameleon: see PM, it should give you an idea

Any programmer should have a idea how to remove it. Sheesh.

Quote:ill refrain from posting it in the actual thread since this protection seems to be soooo important.

You just don't quit, don't you?
Why don't you now post it in the thread, since the instigators are long gone. Besides, there is MUCH better protections out there. If we wanted to, the executable could be wrapped with ASProtect with encrypted PE sections. Least that will give even pros a challenge.

(11-28-2008 05:35 PM)mudlord Wrote:  Any programmer should have a idea how to remove it. Sheesh.

Apparently not, and your attitude towards potential new devs is really sad. Everyone has to start somewhere.

(11-28-2008 05:35 PM)mudlord Wrote:  Besides, there is MUCH better protections out there. If we wanted to, the executable could be wrapped with ASProtect with encrypted PE sections. Least that will give even pros a challenge.

Duh.

Quote:our attitude towards potential new devs is really sad.

They should NOT be starting with such complex things. They either should learn to code properly, or GTFO.

Quote:Everyone has to start somewhere.

Anywhere but here >.>

Quote:Duh.

No need for the attitude, or is that reserved just for your most hated minions?

(11-29-2008 06:38 AM)mudlord Wrote:  No need for the attitude, or is that reserved just for your most hated minions?

I don't hate you. You just can't get over the fact you got banned from Emuforums. My attitude is nothing compared to what you gave me a while back.

Back on topic please. I believe someone was looking for help.
In fact, if these kinds of threads are frowned upon, why not just close it now?

Quote:I don't hate you.

Liar.

Quote:You just can't get over the fact you got banned from Emuforums.

Again, another lie. I have got over that place long ago and I see it for what it really is.

Quote:My attitude is nothing compared to what you gave me a while back.

Does that justify it though?

Quote:In fact, if these kinds of threads are frowned upon, why not just close it now?

Because I can't close it. Don't you fucking get it that I am NOT a admin and I am NOT part of this?