[Shell Patcher] Super Turbo Tango Patcher 6000


Recommended Posts

Vertigosity, can't you make a little simple guide, that tells which files to mod and which icons go where and stuff if you get what i mean.

I'm willing to mod the system files manually, to obtain tango icons lol. Seriously.... I've done lots of modding, so i dont need no patcher :p

Well... it wouldn't so much be a guide as a list. Filelist.xml has the list of files (and where they go on a completely-typical installation) and the reshack scripts have the list of resources ;)
:blush: :pinch:

Sorry, I just figured it would help, since I don't know what else to try.

Yeah, me neither. I need to go through and do some thorough code tracing and re-writing, but I just don't have the time.
I'll try next time I'm in x64.. Changed to x86 since there's just some things i can't stand in x64. (No tango is one of em)
Yeah, it works. I'm not sure what the best way to get it to do a group of files using 'respatcher's - they look like they're strictly for modifying one file at a time, and once they're made they're black boxes - unmodifiable, with the target resources, resource modifier tool, and instruction script built in. The full app supports some command-line arguments that might be useful, though. I'll probably play with it later, if I have time.

So, for now, my verdict is:

It's neat, but I'm not sure it's worth $100. I doubt I'll use it directly for a publicly released version of the patcher, since it'd either make the patcher more of an unmodifiable black box, warez, or limited to 30 days of use.

post-52710-1211735098_thumb.png

I tried to mod the x64 files, but when i tried to import icons it just said the icons were corrupted.. when im trying to just take them out of the x86 .dll's which has been patched, it just says its a corrupt file.. using restorator

am using restorator as well, and i have managed to mod almost all server 208 x64 icons, (using server as workstation) i extracted vize icons, and modded most server 2008 x64 icons with vize icons. i did not get any errors at all.

Where can I download Tiize? ;)

By the way, I will work soon on how Vize deals with hardcoded paths. They will be detetcted at startup then written down to the FileList.xml file.

EDIT: Forget, got it from DevArt.

Edited by XPero
Where can I download Tiize? ;)

By the way, I will work soon on how Vize deals with hardcoded paths. They will be detetcted at startup then written down to the FileList.xml file.

EDIT: Forget, got it from DevArt.

Whee. Back when I started messing with the Vize source, I thought about writing a simple program to calculate all the paths and such using NSIS, but the modules available for it for dealing with XML aren't that nice. Of course, Python would probably be a perfect fit, since it's got nice XML support and an available module for working with the windows registry... of course, the registry module I found might be rubbish too ;) I didn't get around to doing it, though, before I had some nasty time constraints kick in a few months back.

I kinda like what I'm doing in the Python-Powered Patcher Package - because Python is an interpreted language, I can have it enumerate a list of python modules, load them at runtime, and then call functions within to return the paths. I still have some refactoring to do on it, though.

So, what are you doing with Tiize bits ;) :blink:

Anyone who has experience working with AutoIt and wants 64-bit Tiize, take a look at this:

http://www.autoitscript.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=62776

From the comments, if I can get this adapted for generalised use, it looks ridiculously promising... so I'm going to give it a thorough look sometime this week.

  • 2 weeks later...
Hey vertigosity I think you mentioned this somewhere else but why does this icon look crappy?

2ia5qna.jpg

It's a windows bug, it pulls the wrong icon index. It's present on a stock Vista install, and it's carried over from XP (when in large-icon mode).

post-52710-1213939406.png

post-52710-1213939482.png

I just only read the first post and saw that you said that x64 is a pipe dream.

Well just modify the files from x64 in an x86 environment, save and transfer. Only replace the ones in \System32\.

My mods are fully x64 compatible and I use the above method.

Sorry if this has been said, I only read the first post.

The timing of this post is kinda funny, because I just had my first semi-sucessful smoke test of an X64-supported version (using CFF explorer's reshack wrapping) of my old batch scripts just a few minutes ago :whistle: (No, it's not even alpha quality yet - but it looks promising)

I just only read the first post and saw that you said that x64 is a pipe dream.

Well just modify the files from x64 in an x86 environment, save and transfer. Only replace the ones in \System32\.

My mods are fully x64 compatible and I use the above method.

Sorry if this has been said, I only read the first post.

Yeah... the problem lies in that I don't package up pre-modified files, I modify the files that are actually on the user's machine - which makes it independent of language, edition, and patch-level, so I can't just modify a set of files on my computer, throw up the 100-megabyte archive for download, and call it a day until next Patch Tuesday. Yeah, it can be done (that's essentially what Rebdomine did for his screenshot, a few posts up), but there's a few reasons I don't really care to do it, even for my own personal use. Edited by vertigosity
Well i dont have any life so i did it.. :(
Just out of curiosity, what did you do to put the files into the system?

I've got CFF Explorer working as a reshack wrapper in both the old shell scripts and Vize, but the replacement methods they use don't seem to work for 3/4 of the files... and I'm lazy, so I'd like to see what you did before I get hacking ;)

Just out of curiosity, what did you do to put the files into the system?

I've got CFF Explorer working as a reshack wrapper in both the old shell scripts and Vize, but the replacement methods they use don't seem to work for 3/4 of the files... and I'm lazy, so I'd like to see what you did before I get hacking ;)

Scratch that, it's a reshack/cff explorer issue, it just looked like it wasn't replacing properly because of the dirty hackiness of what I threw together to wrap reshack... and it's breaking on basebrd.dll, shellbrd.dll, and imageres.dll, the three files I'm most likely to look at to spot-check things :p
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I think it depends on what you're looking for to do, and the time you have to spare. With my Dwarf 3, I easily spend 3-4 hour sessions; half an hour driving to an un-light polluted place, another half hour unpacking and setting up the smart scope + tripod for equatorial tracking, then 15 more minutes mucking around with settings and shooting calibration frames, spending a few hours shooting, merging with past photo sessions, etc. It's crazy how time flies and I often get home later than I expected. It's something I still need to set aside a good part of an evening to do, all in all. For one session, where you often need like four for best results when it comes to deep space objects. Even with a smart scope like Dwarf 3, regular non-astro photography is still way more approachable to people getting into photography. I find this is a time consuming niche no matter how I go about it. With practice, I can probably begin cutting time here but I think where smart scopes find their home is among people who love to shoot the night sky but don't have the spare time to go deep with the "navigator level" attunement to the night sky itself in addition to everything else. Having said this, _if_ you have even more time to spend on this hobby, it will probably be even more rewarding to do it more by hand and learn the skies and the details of how it all works.
    • I misread the title and thought Teams itself would be redesigned. Imagine having this one as a native WinUI app.
    • Dell, HP PCs ran into endless reboot, BitLocker recovery loops but Windows 11 isn't to blame by Sayan Sen Last month Neowin reported on a major issue on Dell systems wherein a bug in its official support tool was leading to endless blue screen of death (BSOD) and restarts. Following our report, Dell officially acknowledged its SupportAssist-related crash issue, confirming that the culprit is not Microsoft's operating system but rather a faulty version of its own remediation software. In a newly published support advisory, Dell stated that version 5.5.16.0 of Dell SupportAssist Remediation and Alienware SupportAssist Remediation can trigger blue screen errors and unexpected system restarts. The company notes that the problematic component operates independently of the main SupportAssist application, meaning users should not remove the primary SupportAssist software when troubleshooting the issue. According to Dell, the crashes are linked specifically to the SupportAssist Remediation service, which is bundled with SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools, and as such it has since released an updated version, 5.5.16.1, which is said to resolve the problem. Affected users are advised to first verify whether version 5.5.16.0 is installed by checking the Installed Apps section in Windows Settings. If so, Dell recommends updating SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools through either SupportAssist's "Update Software" feature or Dell Command Update. Dell also advises users to back up important data before performing the update and to ensure systems remain connected to power throughout the installation process. If you are still having issues though make sure to report to the Dell support forum. As it turns out though Dell is not the only PC maker currently dealing with update-related headaches as HP is also facing a separate but probably equally frustrating issue involving recent Windows Secure Boot updates that were released with recent Windows 11 Patch Tuesdays. Similar to Dell, HP also put up its own support article where it explains the issue. The company says that affected devices could hit a brick wall when booting as they run into a BitLocker recovery loop after the April 2026 updates. The problem appears to affect systems wherein the new UEFI Secure Boot CA 2023 certificates fail to apply properly. As such affected users will find themselves entering their recovery key over and over again despite the system otherwise functioning normally. HP says such PCs should be updated to the latest available BIOS version and configured with the necessary Secure Boot certificates before installing Microsoft's Windows 11 Patch Tuesday updates. Systems that are already experiencing the problem may require BIOS configuration changes to restore normal boot behavior. Admins can find information regarding that in the support article here on HP's official website.
    • Getting further away from the artistic study of mental disease that was the first game... (which never needed any sequels to begin with) But I get it, a company has to make money. And the second was at least visually impressive, if not in any other way.
    • If its the devs fault you would think Unreal would help M$ take full advantage of Unreal and work with them to fix the performance issues. Otherwise they are catching unwarranted bad press.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      246
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!