Application registration issues.

I have applied all required registry entires, and long with the files for running google chrome browser. However, when commiting changes, then rebooting...
the browser start fine, but there is no integration whatsoever even though the classes exist in the registry. Chrome will ask to set as default browser on every boot.

Along with WinRAR, the RarExt.dll cannot be registered via regsvr32, afaik.

What I do is, make a system snapshot, while Win7PE is live, then install application, then make another snapshot.
I filter out junk and then I mount the wim. Then I use runscanner to load cmd under WinPE offline registry.
Make file/registry changes, then commit changes, then reboot into new image.

I cannot get shell integration to stay for some reason.

Any help would be great.

Thanks guys, and good job btw. 

Hi

Why don't you try the great scrip creator plugin and "RegCPE" to create a "Winbuilder" plugin.

Because I am creating a hybrid windows PE. Live modifications, semi-Persistence, System Manager, etc. See, PEs are clean, if optimized properly. The idea is to have an OS, akeen to a normal installation, but have a modular approach. A system that will fit on a USB stick, and do everything you need, and then some. The plan is to have quite a few complexity boot options based the amount of ram available to the system.

Installations...if it can be done manually...it can be done automatically.

Boot, Remove, Boot, Remove, Boot, Remove, Boot, Remove, even PXE on a Gigabit LAN would be amazing. An entire network...10second boot, mount net drives, modular app design, PerUser, PerSystem, PerNetwork.

Just a few ideas on the system im working towards.

Infinity System Manager> Programs> Google Chrome *Right Click*> Import> System<User
Infinity System Manager> Programs> Google Chrome *Right Click*> Export> User>System

X:\Programs\Google\Chrome\.Data\Program.ini
Holds version information, update retrieval information, name, executables/operation modes/init, registry, dependencies, integration, services, etc.
...

And this is no only for the PE side of things, the initialization of apps needs to be possible everywhere, even on normal installations. PE OS, PE Apps.

Thanks again.

LODR (Load on Demand Ready) is not a new idea at all... (Portable PE apps)
not easy to prepare for complex things, besides possible (ex: JFX's vc++ package), although not popular 

maybe winrar do not like regsvr32 when booted from PE for whatever reason
--> may it does not like os (PE OS) on cd or mounted,
----> or maybe it requires explorer shell restarted on PE after regsvr ...

or maybe what you write
"I use runscanner to load cmd under WinPE offline registry."
maybe better not to use runscanner to load winpe offline registry (which sounds quite weird method to me, just open/mount with regedit regular way)
-->
use Utils\RegCPE  (Reg Convert PE) -> choose Convert Type "Reg" and select your reg files... after mounting (regedit) with default names just double click final .reg, unmount etc...



Over all, for your personal app preparations (Portable things for PE) you are responsible for preparations and final result work properly...

If all ok, better you share your packages for all 

Update:

-Added PAE support for x86 (Support for Less than 128GB (...)
-Added Auto FBWF support (pecmd shell only for now)

Update:

-Added PAE support for x86 (Support for Less than 128GB (...)
-Added Auto FBWF support (pecmd shell only for now)

Tested on 8GB

I attached screenshot, (can't yet edit posts idky.)


" alt="" class="bbc_img" />

Something I notice is that the FWBF filter only goes to 1GB yet according to this...

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff793622(v=winembedded.60).aspx

APIs support up to 4GB, im guessing this is only for 64bit. hmm, def needs workaround.
Ill msg around for a possible patch.

Hi BiatuAutMiahn
To:
W8PE - FWBF 1Gb max
W8.1PE - FWBF 512Mb max
You can use Ramdisk  (PrimoDisk (SCSI) or ImDisk and make variables &Temp& the Ramdisk.)

I use FWBF because its better for the system. imo

I don't know who told you, FBWF is NOT better for system, it is all matter of taste 
 In fact, from old days I remember FBWF was not secure to use its top limits, and it was not following limit settings published by msdn .
  Worse thing was when you need to use fbwf on its written maximum settings for whatever reason, system was crashing....
It is very good to have fbwf at hand, as long as you know what you have at hand. 

With other words:
If your needs does not go beyond a limit (512 MB, 1 GB) it is out of box fine to use fbwf for all things (which I also  )
else other ways for "temp" are as good as fbwf, even better than fbwf  ,
on this case, up to tastes needs,
Nothing Else Matters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAsA00-5KoI

u have good tatse (in music lol). and thanks btw. to me, the ideal is having the file system itself writable, and with a decent amount of space. Lately I have been working towards using the WinRAM driver, and grub to upload a regular image into the ram, and include some overhead for the freespace. Kind of like a live linux distro (good old knoppix)