Private test build 569 released (and now finally 580)

jv16

tullik wrote
tullik wroteThe test case of HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\classes\Bad item display\by jv16PT\in structured list\Subkey 2\c (for example) does not get the same treatment as in PTLite.

PTLite does it better.

Five of the ten highlighted lines are actual duplicates, based on the caption areas and Open in RegEdit.

You are correct, this issue is now fixed! Thank you for reporting!

jv16

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

siliconman01

jv16 wrote
siliconman01 wrote

jv16 wrote

Do you mean the program crashed during scan, or after clicking the Fix button?

At the end of the scan. Nothing worked in jv16 following that.

In such case I do not see how PowerTools could have caused the problem with Windows, because during the scan everything works in read-only mode and PowerTools does not nor cannot change anything. But very strange indeed.

Have you installed and tested B575 on your lab XP-SP3 x86 system? You are obviously not convinced that something is wrong even though it will not install on my XP-SP3, it damaged something in my brother's system, and Boofo had to re-install Windows XP. Is it possible that the installer is not detecting these machines as 32-bit and is installing x64 bit code....or something of that nature?

jv16

siliconman01 wrote

Have you installed and tested B575 on your lab XP-SP3 x86 system? You are obviously not convinced that something is wrong even though it will not install on my XP-SP3, it damaged something in my brother's system, and Boofo had to re-install Windows XP.

I tried it under a virtual machine with XP-SP3 x86 and everything worked nicely, no problems. It's just that if the program crashed during the scan, I cannot see any way how it could cause any damage whatsoever, because as I said, during the scan everything works in read-only mode.

siliconman01 wrote

Is it possible that the installer is not detecting these machines as 32-bit and is installing x64 bit code....or something of that nature?

The installer doesn't do anything as complex as that, it just extracts and copies the files. The executable of both the installer and PowerTools is the same on 32 bit and 64 bit OS.

siliconman01

I just downloaded B575 again on my XP-SP3 system. This time it installed.

1. I ran a registry scan...not aggressive. I used the Fix option and it appeared to delete the keys...no fixes. The keys found were the typical garbage keys.

2. So I ran a registry compact (with ALL my programs disabled). On reboot, startup programs loaded. However, Windows Explorer went 100% busy and the startup did not fully complete. I had to hard reboot.

3. Tried to reboot again...no luck.

4. Did a system restore to get back to normal. Re-installed B 569 and repeated the above steps. All worked fine and system rebooted fine...no problems.

jv16

Version 576 released for testing. This version's window system has some issues while I'm trying to fix the one minimize button click minimizing everything, it's a rather tricky problem to solve.

You can download the new version here:

http://www.macecraft.com/downloads/betas/jv16pt_setup_576.exe

siliconman01

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

siliconman01

I don't know what you did, but B576 is working okay on XP-SP3 x86. Did a registry clean, registry compact and system rebooted normally. Thanks for the fix.

boofo

siliconman01 wrote
I don't know what you did, but B576 is working okay on XP-SP3 x86. Did a registry clean, registry compact and system rebooted normally. Thanks for the fix.

Did it work OK on your brother's system this time? And it is safe to install?

jv16

siliconman01 wrote
I don't know what you did, but B576 is working okay on XP-SP3 x86. Did a registry clean, registry compact and system rebooted normally. Thanks for the fix.

I did not do anything that could affect that, I believe the problem you had was just coincidence.

tullik

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

tullik

tullik wrote
. . . It is still failing to remove a few entries with invalid file references. I'll find the post that has the .reg code to reproduce the problem, and post its link in this thread. It may have been posted for PTLite … ?

It was posted for PTLite RC1 and also applied to PT2009: http://www.macecraft.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=19763#p19763

It appears to be happening the same way as originally posted. However, I did not retest all the situations described there.

tullik

I noticed you have the EasyFix tool "hidden" in 576's debug mode. I ran it once and saw no significant issues with a quick once-over. There was this:

The Temp Files section had 1 file. When I tried to see what the file was, I found the expand button did not work.

Also the text in the color debug tool was not all visible and the window could not be resized. I did not try a copy and paste ...

siliconman01

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

siliconman01

jv16 wrote
siliconman01 wroteI don't know what you did, but B576 is working okay on XP-SP3 x86. Did a registry clean, registry compact and system rebooted normally. Thanks for the fix.

I did not do anything that could affect that, I believe the problem you had was just coincidence.

That's pretty scarey considering three XP machines showed problems.

siliconman01

There is still something wrong with PT on XP-SP3 x86. When I close it, the GUI disappears but jv16PT.exe remains in memory. Have to "End Process" it to get it to fully exit. This does not happen every time...randomly.

drob

Firstly, seems to be solved with build 576, so great work!

for build 575, raw took about two minutes, i left structured running for about 10 minutes before giving up on it, but now with 576 is seems to be done in about 3 minutes.

jv16 wrote
drob wroteRegistry cleaner in structured mode still freezes for me, using raw list works fine.

Vista 64 sp2

How long does the raw list mode take to run, and how long have you waited for the structured mode to run?

jv16

tullik wrote
jv16 wrote
tullik wroteC:\hiberfil.sys still shows in red in the caption area. I suppose C:\pagefile.sys would also, but this PC's registry doesn't have the triggering entry.

Would it be possible to get a .reg file to reproduce the issue?

Here it is:
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
....


"C:\\hiberfil.sys"="07/21/2008 10 PM"
"C:\\pagefile.sys"="07/21/2008 10 PM"

And do C:\hiberfil.sys and C:\pagefile.sys exist in your system?

tullik

jv16 wrote
. . . And do C:\hiberfil.sys and C:\pagefile.sys exist in your system?

Yes.

jv16

tullik wrote
tullik wrote . . . It is still failing to remove a few entries with invalid file references. I'll find the post that has the .reg code to reproduce the problem, and post its link in this thread. It may have been posted for PTLite … ?

It was posted for PTLite RC1 and also applied to PT2009: http://www.macecraft.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=19763#p19763

It appears to be happening the same way as originally posted. However, I did not retest all the situations described there.

The issue is confirmed. The bug is that the program does not report in any ways for items that were fixed (as in fixed, not deleted). So I had to do yet another modification to the English.lng to get this fixed. These lines were added:

49=All done! {1} registry errors were fixed, {2} of data was removed ({3} files, {4} registry entries and {5} registry keys).

50=All done! {1} registry errors were fixed, {2} of data was removed ({3} files, {4} directories, {5} registry entries and {6} registry keys).

under section.

So the problem is now fixed! (of both jv16 PT and PT Lite), thank you for reporting!

« Previous Page Next Page »