Virtual Registry and File system?

[wally]

There is a brilliant application that allows you to wrap your EXE and all
associated DLLs, OCXs, etc. into a single executable and run the executable
on Windows OSs with no install and nor registration of the files. It will
even include only the portions of the .Net framework that are required for
your application.

The app is called Thinstall. the problem is the cost. $4,000 license fee
PER APPLICATION PLUS A PER PC LICENSE FEE for the "virtual OS" on each
client PC that runs your application. This is clearly ridiculous. I bought
the program when it was only $795 for unlimited use and I thought that was a
bit steep for most developers.

I and want to build a cheaper version of this application. I would
appreciate any links to source code or theory on virtual registries and
virtual file systems (as these seem core to the success of the application).
Maybe we can make this an open source project to eliminate the need for
installations altogether and ease the frustrations of sys admins and
software shops everywhere.

Thanks for your help!

 

[Ian Collins]

wally wrote:

OT on comp.lang.c++ - follow-ups set.

 

[Rolf Magnus]

There is a brilliant application that allows you to wrap your EXE and all
associated DLLs, OCXs, etc. into a single executable and run the
executable on Windows OSs with no install and nor registration of the
files.

Why on earth would you want to pack an executable into one file together
with dynamically linked libraries instead of just linking statically?

 

[Ian Collins]

wally wrote:




Why on earth would you want to pack an executable into one file together
with dynamically linked libraries instead of just linking statically?

Not all compilers ship static libraries. Still not a reason for putting
everything in one file though.

 

[wally]

Not all compilers ship static libraries. Still not a reason for putting
everything in one file though.

Using a virtual registry and file system and placing all files into a single
EXE (except for files that must change, like database files) does several
things that I can see value in.

1) It eliminates the need for admin privileges to run the application
(great for kiosks and flash drives).
2) There is no traditional install - again, eliminating the need for admin
level rights.
3) It keeps all of your app's DLLs and OCXs together with your app,
eliminating DLL Hell (or .Net Framework Version Hell).
4) It lowers support call numbers and costs because its really hard to
screw up running a no-install app.
5) It adds a level of security by wrapping and encrypting all needed files
into a single exe.
6) The end user is not required to install runtimes or .Net frameworks to
run your app (they're wrapped inside the app).

It does have drawbacks though... Like you can't use it to do kernel level
hooking or to run video drivers and other low level drivers.

All in all, it keeps your app installation more simple, insulates you from
DLL problems, doesn't require runtime or framework installs and can be run
from limited accounts - reducing the need for system admins to test, install
or oversee the application and increasing the odds that a company will use
it.

I think it's really cool. I'd love to make it available to all programmers.

Hell, it should be offered as an addin for .Net.