Standalone Build Problem

Mike Bonner bonnmike at
Tue Jun 2 14:19:03 EDT 2015

One more thing I noticed.. This tiny splashstack i've created (tiny being
relative at around 9 megs)  takes a full 12 seconds to load on my machine.
All I can say is WOW what a slug.

On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Ben Rubinstein <benr_mc at> wrote:

> I'd echo this - I've always found the splash app approach to work well.
> I include in my splash app code which if it can't find or doesn't like the
> mainstack (stored in application support or analogous folder), directly
> loads an "updater" stack over http from my server; this update stack then
> manages the process of fetching and installing new mainstacks, including
> authentication when that's involved.  This is a tiny bit more complicated,
> but it has distributing updates much easier as well - I very rarely need to
> issue updates to the splash app itself.  I'd be happier if I could do it
> over https (to be fair, maybe I can now - it's a long time since I tried).
> My top tip is to use the "Include Error Reporting Dialog" feature of the
> standalone builder - for your test builds, regardless of whether you ship
> it that way.  That way when it just doesn't work when you first test, you
> can get an actual error code (that you have to do the hacky thing to
> interpret) to figure out what went wrong.
> (FWIW I've not had problems with sub-stacks, either in the mainstack
> invoked by a splash app, or in one app that I build as an all-in one
> standalone with sub-stacks.  Or if I did have problems, I must have found a
> workaround and then forgotten the awful process I had to go through to
> discover it....)
> Ben
> On 02/06/2015 17:51, Scott Rossi wrote:
>> Bob:
>> Follow Devin's advice.  Building a launcher (splash) app shouldn't be
>> that complicated.  The standalone just needs to be a simple minimal stack
>> that launches your "real" main stack containing all your logic, sub stacks,
>> etc.
>> Regards,
>> Scott Rossi
>> Creative Director
>> Tactile Media UX/UI Design
>>  On Jun 2, 2015, at 9:35 AM, Bob Sneidar <bobsneidar at>
>>> wrote:
>>> Thanks Devin.
>>> With this approach I am finding that letting Livecode automatically find
>>> the libraries it needs is not successful. First, none of my data grids
>>> work, even though I have added a data grid to the splash stack. Second,
>>> none of the image files I have referenced in the primary stack are being
>>> accessed. I suppose I will need to manually add those as well to the
>>> application folder.
>>> I will, at the risk of sounding like I am whining, repeat the sentiment
>>> others have expressed, that this is more difficult to get working than it
>>> ought to be.
>>> Bob S
>>> On Jun 2, 2015, at 09:21 , Devin Asay <devin_asay at<mailto:
>>> devin_asay at>> wrote:
>>> On Jun 2, 2015, at 10:09 AM, Bob Sneidar <bobsneidar at
>>> <mailto:bobsneidar at>> wrote:
>>> Hi all.
>>> So I am creating a standalone for the first time, and I am trying to use
>>> a splash stack. Taking the advice of others I have added a data grid to the
>>> splash stack so that the data grid library get added. Now when I attempt to
>>> set the mainstack of the actual stack that contains all the business logic,
>>> it fails. I think I might know why, but I’ll ask to be sure.
>>> The actual application stack has a number of substacks already. I am
>>> thinking that a substack cannot itself contain other substacks. If this is
>>> true, I will have to break out all of my other stacks as single files, then
>>> add them as substacks to the mainstack.
>>> If this is true, I can see why new users have problems creating
>>> standalones at first. It is a rather convoluted way of going about things.
>>> If not, then I am at a loss to know why I cannot set the mainstack property
>>> of a given stack.
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list