Using Everthing without the client running?

[gserack]

First, Everything rocks. Very Cool Stuff.

Second, I'm wondering if you could/would make a non-interactive version of Everything.. Actually, a version that was just library that could be used from an app, that doesn't require Everything to be running would be really handy.

Or, failing that the source code

I'm looking to build an open source tool that will need to search for certain files in the c:\windows\winsxs directory (which can be insanely huge). Doing so with something like Everything would take milliseconds, where other methods would be way too damn slow.

Garrett

[therube]

Re: Option to freeze database

[void]

The "Everything" SDK requires "Everything" is running in the background.
This is done for up-to-date results and efficiency.

If you do not need up-to-date results you could go directly to the Everything.db.
There is some information on the db here.

However, I would recommend waiting for the next alpha release as open custom file lists will be supported, and would be more suited to this.

I do have plans to release a SDK for custom file list support (this will not require "Everything" to be running).

[gserack]

The "Everything" SDK requires "Everything" is running in the background.
This is done for up-to-date results and efficiency.

Hmmmm. I think that it'd be perfectly ok to have an Everything 'service' in the background for my purposes... perhaps separating the Everything UI from the Everything service would be an idea.

That would actually be quite ideal; the service itself could run as an elevated user (as required), and the UI wouldn't have to, thereby closing the permission mismatch between the elevated user and the Admin account. (i.e. while the unelevated user could see the existence of such files, they couldn't operate on them unless they specifically elevated the client)

At which point, would perfectly suit my needs as well.

G

[fabioq]

@David...speaking of the next Alpha release...is there any timeline on it yet?

-Fabio