ShaunR

Yes. The path isn't passed through but I figured out what it was supposed to be. this is the one in my installation: It's a trivial change though. The important part is the adding the extra case and your new VI. I was about to go all Neanderthal on the "Write Linker Info" before you posted the proper solution.

Sweet. It's not quite the same but I'll figure the rest out. You've done the hard part Thanks.

There is a "Copy Resource Files and Relink" in "<program files>\JKI\VI Package Manager\support\ogb_2009.llb" and "<program files>\JKI\VI Package Manager\support\ogb_2017.llb". Is it "Write Linker Info from File__ogb.vi" that you have modified? I'll have to have a closer look.

Can the JKI builder be modified to do this? I've already hacked some of their VI's in ogb_2009.llb so it didn't take 6 hrs to build. It's a huge problem for me when building. I have a solution that sort of works, sometimes, but not a full proper solution. Can you detail your process?

Welcome back. Retirement not all it was cracked up to be? My only comment about this (because I still use LV 2009-best version ever) is that generally: Never do it in the middle of a project. Upgrading LabVIEW is a huge project risk. Don't upgrade if the software already works and you are adding to it (only use it on new projects). Only upgrade if everyone else in your team upgrades at the same time. Upgrade if there are specific features you cannot do without. Upgrade if it will greatly reduce the time to delivery (unlikely but it has been known). Upgrade if there is a project stopping bug that is addressed in the upgrade you are considering. Remember that you can have multiple versions on the same machine. You don't need (and should never) go and recompile all your old projects.

Nobody has met me, right? I might be A.I. without the I

Ask it how I can get past the sign-up CAPTCHA to use it?

You want EVP_PKEY_verify.

I have the binaries as arrays of bytes in the Post Install. I convince VIPM to not include the binary dependency and then write out the binary from the Post Install. You can check in the Post install which bitness has invoked it to write out the correct bitness binary. Not sure if that would work on Linux though.

Installing both binaries huh? Don't blame you. It takes me forever to get VIPM to not include a binary dependency so I can place the correct bitness at install time with the Post Install (64bit and 32bit have the same name. lol)

The longer it is unresolved, the less likely users will bother to return. I used to check the forums every day. Now it is every couple of weeks. Soon it will be never. Some might see that as a bonus

The objection is that I (as a user) do not have end-to-end encryption (as advertised by the "https" prefix) and there is no guarantee that all encryption is not stripped, logged and analysed before going on to the final server. But that's not just a single server, it's all servers behind Cloudlfare, so it would make data mining correlation particularly useful to adversaries. Therefore I refuse to use any site that sits behind Cloudflare and my Browsers are configured in such a way that makes it very hard to access them so that I know when a site uses it. If I need the NI site (to download the latest LabVIEW version for example) then I have to boot up a VM configured with a proxy to do so. I refuse to use the NI site and the sole reason is Cloudflare. So now you know how you can get rid of me from Lavag.org - put it behind Cloudlfare

Any site that uses Cloudflare is completely safe from me using it. As far as I'm concerned it is a MitM attack.

Not exactly a software solution though. I wrote a plugin for my CMS that uses Project Honeypot so it's not that difficult and this is supposed to be a software forum, right? The problem in this case, however, seems to be that it's an exploit-it needs a patch. Demoting highly qualified (and expensive) software engineers to data entry clerks sounds to me like an accountants argument (leverage free resource). I'd rather the free resource was leveraged to fix the software or we (the forum users) pay for the fix. The sheer hutzpah of NI to make you a no-cost employee to clear up their spam is, to me, astounding. What's even more incomprehensible is that they have also convinced you it's a privilege

Port 139 is used by NetBIOS. The person in the video is using port 8006 which is not used by any other programs.