UPX and XTP
Printed From: Codejock Forums
Category: Codejock Products
Forum Name: Toolkit Pro
Forum Description: Topics Related to Codejock Toolkit Pro
URL: http://forum.codejock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4120
Printed Date: 04 May 2024 at 9:47am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: UPX and XTP
Posted By: ABuenger
Subject: UPX and XTP
Date Posted: 03 May 2006 at 11:11am
|
If I use UPX to pack an EXE that is statically linked with the XTP library some controls have the wrong theme (docked panes, CommandBars, tab control) or to be more precise, they don't get skinned with the Office 2007 theme. To reproduce it please do the following quick steps with the GUI_Whidbey sample. Add #define _XTP_STATICLINK to the StdAfx.h Add #include "XTToolkitPro.rc" to GUI_Whidbey.rc2 Add XTPSkinManager()->LoadSkin (_T("Styles\\Office2007.cjstyles")); to the constructor of CMainFrame You can download UPX here: http://upx.sourceforge.net - http://upx.sourceforge.net This is how it looks if the EXE is not packed:
And this is how it looks if the EXE is packed:
|
Replies:
Posted By: ABuenger
Date Posted: 03 May 2006 at 12:19pm
|
FYI: It works with PECompact. Didn't want to delete the post so that others can find this info. |
Posted By: IRMark
Date Posted: 16 June 2010 at 2:30pm
WE have run into the same problem with UPX and the skins. Does anyone else have any information regarding this? Or the reason why UPX is not compatible with the skins? Thanks! |
ABuenger wrote:Posted By: znakeeye
Date Posted: 17 June 2010 at 4:48am
|
API hooking does not like packing. I've seen the same problem with other packers. ------------- PokerMemento - http://www.pokermemento.com/ |
Posted By: ABuenger
Date Posted: 17 June 2010 at 9:05am
PECompact works and does the same as UPX. ------------- Codejock support |
Posted By: znakeeye
Date Posted: 17 June 2010 at 11:29am
|
PECompact is not the same as UPX. If it was, then both would show the same result. Obviously.
Try looking at different packing options of UPX. The error lies in UPX, not in CJ code. For comparison, I had to consult the author of another packer to make it compatible with the CJ API-hooking. It's not like CJ will change their hooking engine at this point :P ------------- PokerMemento - http://www.pokermemento.com/ |
Posted By: IRMark
Date Posted: 21 June 2010 at 12:16pm
|
Interesting, thanks for the information everyone. Does anyone from codejock have any details that they would like share? |
Posted By: Oleg
Date Posted: 23 June 2010 at 4:55am
|
Yes, afraid we can't do anything here - we need DLL Entry table to allow API hooks and such tools break it. ------------- Oleg, Support Team CODEJOCK SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS |