In some cases  it would be great to have one single .exe
to make a true portable. This has been discussed many times but I have 
not been aware of any solution, until now.

Some months ago I found this
http://www.boxedapp.com/boxedapppacker/index.html#.VfGzIUYVl4Y

At the beginning of my evaluation it didn't work with XBASE
but BoxedApp has made a great job each time I found problems.
Step by step it has been improved.

The present version of BoxedApp now works just great for me.
It gives one single .exe  from  exe+dll+other files

 From my perspective it is possible for the first time
to make a portable XBASE++ program without any installation.

It would be interesting to hear if anyone has experience with other
such programs.   Are there comments about further advantages or
disadvantages ?

Best regards
Bengt

Bengt:

> In some cases  it would be great to have one single .exe
> to make a true portable. This has been discussed many times but I have 
> not been aware of any solution, until now.
> 
> Some months ago I found this
> http://www.boxedapp.com/boxedapppacker/index.html#.VfGzIUYVl4Y

Interesting.
What is your case, that you are looking for a solution like this.

Peter

Peter,

I think it offers simplicity

A complete XBASE system can be delivered in one single .exe file
It doesn't need installation  and it is truly portable
as all the necessary dll's are hidden inside the single file.
It runs from an USB or CDROM

There might be disadvantages as well.  Several simultaneous
XBASE programs can't share the same dll's  as they are hidden inside the 
.exe file.  It would be interesting to learn if there are more 
disadvantages.

So far I can only see the positive sides.
XBASE++ with all its dll's and 3-party extensions has an enormous power.

I have also successfully packed the dll's and exe with Aspack before 
boxing them into one single .exe

The PC computer is so powerful today and disk space is not an issue as 
it is cheap. Who cares that such a file often gets  2 - 20 MB in size
if it is simple to use ?

With any of the languages under Visual Studio it has always been 
possible to make a single .exe portable system.

XBASE has been missing this option, until now I guess


Best regards
Bengt

What is the difference if you have one EXE vs. one EXE + 12 DLL's to copy 
into a USB or drive folder. The one EXE + 12 DLL's is just as easy to 
copy and just as portable as one big EXE. 

Nobody says that you need to 'install' the DLL's in the system folder. We 
always place the DLL's in the same folder where the EXE is located. I 
don't think your one big exe offers any simplicity. In fact I think it's 
the opposite:

- you need to use some external tool to pack everything into one exe (an 
extra step)

- if you need to replace one DLL with a newer version, you need to repack 
everything

- replacing the exe over a remote connection takes much longer.

- it adds another level of complexity and another potential support 
variable.

Best regards,
Boris Borzic

http://xb2.net
http://sqlexpress.net
industrial strength Xbase++ development tools


Bengt Ovelius wrote in news:39392121$490e0832$394b@news.alaska-
software.com:

> I think it offers simplicity
> 
> A complete XBASE system can be delivered in one single .exe file
> It doesn't need installation  and it is truly portable
> as all the necessary dll's are hidden inside the single file.
> It runs from an USB or CDROM
> 
> There might be disadvantages as well.  Several simultaneous
> XBASE programs can't share the same dll's  as they are hidden inside 
the 
> .exe file.  It would be interesting to learn if there are more 
> disadvantages.
> 
> So far I can only see the positive sides.
> XBASE++ with all its dll's and 3-party extensions has an enormous 
power.
> 
> I have also successfully packed the dll's and exe with Aspack before 
> boxing them into one single .exe
> 
> The PC computer is so powerful today and disk space is not an issue as 
> it is cheap. Who cares that such a file often gets  2 - 20 MB in size
> if it is simple to use ?
> 
> With any of the languages under Visual Studio it has always been 
> possible to make a single .exe portable system.
> 
> XBASE has been missing this option, until now I guess
>

Boris,
  Thanks for interesting comments.


The box can contain all kinds of resources, images , a number of 
separate .exe's etc..

What is easier for the customer if we talk about a portable program ;
1, to use an installer and direct the install to  portable USB
2, to grab one single .exe and place it on the USB with explorer ?

Somebody said that some virus programs could complain about such a 
boxed.exe but I have not seen this behaviour so far,

The boxed program starts up slightly slower,

As I am not sure myself yet,
it is great to consider all comments on it.


By the way,
I can get a considerable size reduction by  compressing the xbase.exe 
and all xbase.dll's  before placing them on an USB.
No matter if they are all boxed in one exe or if several files populate 
the USB. It is about half the size for the total system, and the startup 
is often slightly faster - less disk access.

Are there any known disadvantages with this ?




Thanks and best regards
Bengt