jv16 PowerTools 2012 Beta2

[deleted]

Leonardo wrote
redseujac wrote

3) File Recovery

'Files to find': *.* - 'Search in': C:\

When I click 'Start', I get 'The following infomation must be provided: correct size search settings or uncheck the option'.

The option to search by size IS unchecked.

So the tool does not work.

4) Registry Monitor

Created simple snapshot (default settings).

When I try to compare it with actual registry, it fails.

The 'hourglass' keeps spinning, but nothing happens.

jv16PT.exe process takes huge memory nearly 198.000 kB.

3. Not confirmed for XP-SP3 and W7-SP1 x86

4. Not confirmed for XP-SP3 and W7-SP1 x86

Could other W7-SP1 64bit users please test the above mentioned issues 3). and 4).

I couldn't reproduce either problem with W7-SP1 64bit. redseujac, please list all the settings you had set in the File Recovery tool.

redseujac

The File Recovery problem seems to be solved.

I noticed that fore some strange reason originally there was nothing in the first box under "Files that are..." (where you see now "Smaller than") (look at the attached image below).

Even with "Look only for files of specific size" disabled the tool did not work and showed each time the warning I mentioned before.

So, I checked the box preceeding "Look only for files of specific size" and I made appear "Smaller than" in the first box under "Files that are...".

Then I unchecked the box preceeding "Look only for files of specific size" again and everything worked properly now.

Conclusion: all the boxes (rectangles) must contain some numbers or text, even with "Look only for files of specific size" disabled, if not you get the warning I mentioned in my original post and the tool does not work.

redseujac

The Registry Monitor problem was already present in PowerTools 2011 and never got solved for my system.

I never succeeded in comparing a simple default snapshot with the actual status of the registry.

When I click on Compare nothing happens but the hourglass keeping spinning and process taking huge memory.

[deleted]

redseujac wrote
Conclusion: all the boxes (rectangles) must contain some numbers or text, even with "Look only for files of specific size" disabled, if not you get the warning I mentioned in my original post and the tool does not work.

This should now be fixed for the next version (there was a misplaced parenthesis in the input validation) logic.

leonardo

W7-SP1 and XP-SP3:

The beta2 jv16PT new "Immunization" feature adds a number of lines to the file c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts..

The entry www.googleadservices.com causes a annoying problem in 'Google Search': "a number of found sites can not be accessed"

Removing this entry from the 'hosts' file solves the problem. Please see the attached screenshots.

Googleadservices_0.jpg

Googleadservices_1.jpg

arctucas

@Leonardo,

How did you get the Immunization to work?

I ended up using MVPS hosts file because PT would never add any entries.

leonardo

Arctucas wrote
@Leonardo,

How did you get the Immunization to work?

I ended up using MVPS hosts file because PT would never add any entries.

For both XP-SP3 and W7-SP1 x86:

Immunization feature works the first time after a clean start of jv16PT-beta2.

See the screenshot below.

The 15155 lines already in the current system hosts file are the result of 'Spybot Search and Destroy'.

jv16PT_Immunization.jpg

It takes a ~20-30 seconds before the below screenshot appears at the second 'Immunization' attempt, after a restart of jv16PT-beta2.

jv16PT_After Immunization.jpg

kaholzer

When I want to use the WIPER I missed an option to select "wipe only free space of a disk".

Will a plan to implement that selection?

vasek

kaholzer wrote
When I want to use the WIPER I missed an option to select "wipe only free space of a disk".

Will a plan to implement that selection?

This option is avalaible - see "Settings" tab (option "Wipe only free space").

kaholzer

Vasek wrote
kaholzer wroteWhen I want to use the WIPER I missed an option to select "wipe only free space of a disk".

Will a plan to implement that selection?

This option is avalaible - see "Settings" tab (option "Wipe only free space").

SWorry. It was my problem. I used "file wiper" not the "disk wiper". Under disk wiper I found the option.

Thanks:

arctucas

@Leonardo,

I put the MVPS list in my HOSTS file, and ran Immunize:

Closed Power Tools and ran Immunize again:

~~So, why did the number entries not increase as much as it did with yours?~~

leonardo

Arctucas wrote
@Leonardo,

1. I put the MVPS list in my HOSTS file, and ran Immunize:

2. Closed Power Tools and ran Immunize again:

3. So, why did the number entries not increase as much as it did with yours?

jv16PT 'Immunization' is downloading a MVPS file too.

Could it be the ignored duplicate entries in your installed MVSP file compared to the MVSP file from jv16PT 'Immunization'?

arctucas

Leonardo wrote
Arctucas wrote@Leonardo,

1. I put the MVPS list in my HOSTS file, and ran Immunize:

2. Closed Power Tools and ran Immunize again:

3. So, why did the number entries not increase as much as it did with yours?

jv16PT 'Immunization' is downloading a MVPS file too.

Could it be the ignored duplicate entries in your installed MVSP file compared to the MVSP file from jv16PT 'Immunization'?

Looking at the HOSTS file, I see entries for both, so I do not believe anything is being ignored, and the file is over 1MB.

leonardo

Arctucas wrote
Leonardo wrote
Arctucas wrote@Leonardo,

1. I put the MVPS list in my HOSTS file, and ran Immunize:

2. Closed Power Tools and ran Immunize again:

3. So, why did the number entries not increase as much as it did with yours?

jv16PT 'Immunization' is downloading a MVPS file too.

Could it be the ignored duplicate entries in your installed MVSP file compared to the MVSP file from jv16PT 'Immunization'?

Looking at the HOSTS file, I see entries for both, so I do not believe anything is being ignored, and the file is over 1MB.

After running 'jv16PT Immunization', do you see duplicate entries in your final MVPS hosts file?

If so, I do not think that that is meant to be!

arctucas

Yes, there were duplicates.

After cleaning:

leonardo

jv16PT2012 Beta2, 'Immunization feature'.

Is it the jv16PT-2012 final design objective to just copy all entries from the http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm 'MVPS file' into the existing user 'hosts file' (chance on duplicate entries) or is it intended to be a merge process (no duplicate entries).

If it is just a strait copy process than a warning message should be considered, if the user 'hosts file' already contains entries from other sources e.g. "Spybot Search & Destroy".

muggle

Leo::

Does this mean :.. = 'Immunization feature'

If:

If it is just a strait copy process ...?..from:

# http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/

then:

the user's original 'hosts file' ...

which already contains entries from "other sources" and "manual" entries are removed...?

FYI:

Reason for concern..?..

"my" host file = has "over a decade" of "MANUAL"... entries dating back.... to windows 98 (Second Edition)........

IMPORTANT:

Question:

Is the original host file ...merged..?..OR...Replaced...?

It is with hope this question can be answered...?

Note:

I do have a manual back-up of my original Host file...

Again:

Thanks for this great opportunity to test the B2..

avatarrr

I seem to remember an issue with the color coding of the abort buttons on a few items being fixed in the last beta. In beta2, I recently noticed this:

jv1.png jv2.png

It is a small cosmetic thing, but shouldn't they be the same, or, at least, consistent?

edit1: Shouldn't the wording be the same, as well?

edit2: Lol, I just noticed, after I posted this, that the blue shading around the box for C&F is missing, as well. Ha-ha, one can never have enough eyes, can one?

Geez.

edit3:

1. -1 on me for not being consistent with the use of contractions :| *It's a small...*

2. Clarification on edit1: "This may..." versus "This can..."

Perhaps a better phrase would be: This will take some time.

Just a thought. Perhaps too many. Sorry about that.

[deleted]

muggle wrote
Question:

Is the original host file ...merged..?..OR...Replaced...?

The contents are merged; your custom hosts entries should stay untouched.

leonardo

hukka wrote
muggle wroteQuestion:

Is the original host file ...merged....OR...replaced...?

The contents are merged; your custom hosts entries should stay untouched.

Please see: http://www.macecraft.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&p=29874&sid=9497eefd96baed3012b0a239a12acf1e#p29871

Is the goal to end up with a final 'hosts file' that is compared/merged without duplicate entries?

~~« Previous Page Next Page »~~