I haven't been on here in the past week. I see that this writes to NVRAM and creates an entry in the EFI partition. I used this program in a Windows 7 x86_64 OS. The program loads into memory and Windows is activated after installing the certificate and product key with slmgr.vbs. Is it normal for the program to create the folder in the EFI partition with the GUID as the name? Is this necessary for the folder name to be named this way? How difficult would it be to add-in an option for naming the folder, such as the name of the SLIC OEM; Acer, Alienware, Dell, etc? Also, would it be easier to have the program to use an available bootx64.efi in the current directory that the user has edited with their own SLP and SLIC 2.1? I know that I can just mount the EFI partition and replace the one installed by the program. Thanks for your hard work and I'll attempt to log in each day and test any new updates you have.
One of the purposes of the installers is to help prevent detection from crappy anti-malware by check summing the file or looking for a default directory. When the installer is used it will randomly generate an encryption key, and the install directory name based on the EFI partition's unique GUID. It's probably an unnecessary level of paranoia. but it doesn't hurt to be cautious. I can add the SLIC/SLP you prefer, but a custom directory, or existing BOOTX64.EFI would defeat the purpose of the installer's.
Okay. Everything appears to work quite well. I was just curious as to if the folder naming was a glitch or intentional. I would prefer paranoia whenever it comes to protecting the program from possible "intervention". I don't care that it's named for that reason. Having the installer allow selection for any SLIC/SLP is just a nice convenience with diversity and not really necessary. I haven't attempted to check on what's changes are made by Windows GetVariable/SetVariable. What changes does the install make? I can delete the entry in NVRAM within the shell with 'dmpstore'. What else would I need to do for manual installs/uninstalls? Does this load similar to any other UEFI device driver? Thanks and let me know if there is any testing that need be done.
The installer add's and entry named BOOT00XX, XX can be any number from 00 to 99 I'm just searching for the lowest available free entry, and then modifies the BootOrder variable to add WindSLIC first. creating the BootEntry is pretty involved and took about 130 lines of code, I'm not sure if anyone would want to do that manually. and BootOrder is an array of USHORT so "020000000300" would mean a boot order BOOT0002, BOOT0000, BOOT0003.
Sorry guys, I've never used the XP version of SLIC injector. I've use the Windows 7 one made by Daz. Now I have a Windows XP SP2 loaded into a AMD X2 mobo/cpu with a nforce chipset. Do I just run WindSLIC UEFI SLIC injector and follow the prompts basically? Is it just one file or two? Some newbie step by steps would be greatly appreciated. Reading the tuts just makes it more confusing. For example, what the heck is the diff bet SLIC 2 and 2.1? How do we know which one. My computer has 2 more days be fore it expires and I am short on time.
This might work on 64bit XP if you installed it in EFI mode, I have no experience with activating XP so I can't be much help.
This might work on 64bit XP if you installed it in EFI mode, I have no experience with activating XP so I can't be much help.
Source updated, added projects: key/cert installer, WindSLIC NTFS VBS CLI installer, WindSLIC EFI GUI installer, WindSLIC EFI CLI installer.
nononsence, i've to use it on lenovo but it does not work and lenovo is nowhere to be found on the drop down menu, did i miss something? thank you.
what is the model of the Lenovo? open command prompt and type Code: bcdedit /enum firmware post results run SLIC_ToolKit_V3.2 and post results.
added search for bootmgfw on other devices, allows use of WindSLIC EFI with out changes to the system. install to "\EFI\BOOT\BOOTX64.EFI" on any FAT12, FAT16, FAT32 device supported by your firmware. use firmware boot menu to boot from that device.
@nononsence I imported your latest source into VS 2010 SP1 and attempted to build the 6 included projects. The 4 projects which depend on the ntdll.lib to be called are linked. I am not fluent in any language but would it be better to load this particular library because of different versions existing on different systems. With the existing linking of this library to the project; I am not able to compile these programs because of this error. Let me know how I can help. Thanks for your hard work. Update: I must have had a corrupted WDK installation. Reinstall and the build completes. I am receiving these two warnings and will troubleshoot them because they may not have anything to do with this project. warning MSB4057: The target "CoreCompile" does not exist in the project. Installer_NTFS_cli warning 81010002: Unrecognized Element "compatibility" in namespace "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:compatibility.v1". Installer_NTFS_cli Update: The "warning MSB4057" was related to the SharePoint services which this project did not use. I disabled the service for this project in VS and it resolved this warning. The "warning 81010002" was a known bug that you provided the URL for. Editing the Compatibilty.manifest by removing the <compatibility> and <application> references since they weren't needed to compile and build the applications resolved the error. I don't know if this error will always exist or only when these compatibility references aren't used in the project solution. Other than these two quirks. The six projects compiled, built, and were tested on my platform without any faults. BTW. Did you intend to spell "Compatibilty.manifest" file with the incorrect spelling of "compatibility"? Thanks for your work on this project.
Update: The "warning MSB4057" was related to the SharePoint services which this project did not use. I disabled the service for this project in VS and it resolved this warning. The "warning 81010002" was a known bug that you provided the URL for. Editing the Compatibilty.manifest by removing the <compatibility> and <application> references since they weren't needed to compile and build the applications resolved the error. I don't know if this error will always exist or only when these compatibility references aren't used in the project solution. Other than these two quirks. The six projects compiled, built, and were tested on my platform without any faults. BTW. Did you intend to spell "Compatibilty.manifest" file with the incorrect spelling of "compatibility"? Thanks for your work on this project.
the compatibilty manifest stops the "did the application install correctly" dialog from appearing, I did not intend to spell it incorrectly my typing and spelling suck. the project is under source control on my end, that is probably why SharePoint was enabled. thanks for testing.
I am a novice at all programming since my primary knowledge is of mathematics. My current pursuit is in GS and focus of actuarial science. I enjoy learning about any of the computer sciences as a hobby. Is the compatibility.manifest only used for this dialog within the Vista/7 OS? Suppose I had compiled and built these projects in XP and/or within an older VS IDE. Would this "warning 81010002" exist? Any feedback I can provide to you on this project or future ones is the least I can do. You freely contribute this project, your time, and knowledge without any monetary reward. I appreciate your hard work.
As I understand it the bug is in mt.exe which is part of the Windows 7 SDK, I read somewhere that there is a version that does not print a warning. the compatibility manifest is only used for Vista and later. the warning is meaningless the manifest is added to the exe and works as intended, it is safe to ignore the warning.