dummzeuch

Good to know I am not the only one with that kind of setup. And yes, the toolbars are being scrambled on my system too. And I don't even move the IDE between the HighDPI and normal display, it stays on the HighDPI display all the time. That doesn't prevent the problem from occurring though. I have ceated a bug report on this in the new qp (again): IDE toolbars get scrambled over time The toolbars of the IDE lose icons when starting, exiting and restarting the IDE multiple times (see screenshot). This bug had already been reported in the old quality portal for Delphi 11 and 12. It’s still there in Delphi 12.1. Resetting the toolbars to their default using the View → Toolbars → Customize dialog, helps for a while before the same happens again.

I am taking yet another different approach: The "If you download the sources, the buildnumber will 0. Live with it." approach.

This is not about how to add the build number to the executable, but that the existing build script uses the svn revision as the build number, which is 0 if the sources are not checked out but downloaded as zip file from sourceforge. So there is already an automatic way to add the version number to the dll. There is also a script for generating the installer(s).

Is that only within a project group or global over all projects that MSVS ever opened?

Hey, we are back to slapping the UX designer who made that stupid decision. 😉

Maybe I should simply turn off source code downloads from SourceForge ...

In that case you should file a bug report on Embarcadero's definition of bug. Good luck with that. Or, you could simply heed Uwe's advice to file a feature request for what you actually want them to do. I think your chances would be much better with that, but I still wouldn't hold my breath.

Nobody keeps you from doing that.

The build number is generated by the following entry in GExperts_version.ini and the call to dzprepbuild in the prebuild.cmd which is called in the pre-build event of the project: Build=redirect:..\..\SVN_Version.ini,SVN,HighestVersion SVN_Version.ini is a template updated by a call to the subwcrev subversion command in prebuild.cmd. So, in a subversion working copy the process is automatic.

You mentioned in a different thread that you downloaded a napshot. There is no subversion revsion number available in that case, so you get the build number 0. On my computer with freshly checked out sources to a new folder, I get build 4256, which matches the svn revision number. Which reminds me of a warning in yet another different thread not to use that number because it is some subversion specific thing and doesn't exist in other SCMs.

No, it's not that. I just checked out the sources to a new folder and i compiled fine for Delphi 12. No error message, no file(s) missing.

"showed an error" is not really a good description... I guess some file was missing the automatically gets created by the IDE but not by the script.

The release config does not write to the debug window. There might be some other debug functionality too that's turned off. Of course the main difference is that it does not include debug info for the debugger. I don't think that there is a big impact on performance. The default when building in the IDE is debug, when building with the build scripts it is release.

If I remember correctly (can't check right now) the build number is supposed to correspond to the revision number of svn. The screenshot doesn't look like that is working though.

The control is actually a TVirtualStringTree (with the name "VirtualStringTree1" ... somebody else to slap).

You definitely don't know me. 👿

No. It's not a matter of configuring the control. To overcome this annoyance, one must owner draw it, which is quite a lot of work. The correct way would be to slap the stupid idiot^D^D^D^D^D^D^D^D^DUX designer at Microsoft who made this decision until he sees the light and reverts it. Since this is not going to happen, every software developer must decide for himself whether he thinks it's worth the effort to fix this annoyance everywhere. Usually the decision will be to not bother unless his customers complain loudly and/or pay him for the effort.

I have no idea how blogger works and my HTML skills are very rusty since I stopped handcrafting webpages a while ago. My approach would be to add some CSS for setting the background color for the whole section.

No, it's not there. And I don't plan to put it into Getit.

How do I create a self signed certificate for signing executables? I am only aware of that option for TLS certificates (for secure internet connections).

I can confirm this. Unfortunately that's simply the default behaviour of any Windows program, and it gets aggravated by theming.

I don't think there will be a problem unless you plan to uninstall the patch at a later time. In that case Getit would try to restore the files saved during installation and this may fail. But this is just a guess based upon what I know how the installation works.

The current installer for Delphi 11 and 12 contains an ancient DLL which is full of bugs (mostly in highDPI environments), so I don't think it should be re-released just as a signed executable. I'll think about it.

Thanks for your kind offer. But how would that work in practice? The point of signing is trust, so if you sign the installer you are taking over the responsibility for this installer. If "anything bad" happens due to running this installer, you will be blamed for it because you signed it. Therefore you'd have to read the GExperts source code and also the installer script to make sure they don't contain anything malicious, and in addition you would have to keep track of any changes made to them. - Alternatively you would have to trust me and all past (many) and current (very few) contributors to GExperts. - Then you'd have to build the DLL and the installers - simple: Get the source code and run two batch files - and sign it.

I'm not going to buy a certificate just so I can sign my open source programs. But if anybody else wants to create a signed installer, go ahead. GExperts is open source after all. Just make sure you comply with the license.