Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

v12 Release Build test - 32-bit fixed

rconn said:
Let me know how it works.
Click to expand...

Installed TCMD12 with no problems.

Code: 
TCC  12.00.30   Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
TCC Build 30   Windows XP Build 2600  Service Pack 3
As an added bonus, TCMD11 still works.

Joe
 
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:33:40 -0400, rconn <> wrote:

|I've uploaded a fixed build (for the IsLicense50.dll mismatch) for the 32-bit TCMD to:
|
| ftp://jpsoft.com/beta/tcmd.exe
|
|This is still build 30, so if you installed the previous build 30 you'll need to uninstall it first before running this version.
|
|Let me know how it works.

All's OK here now. I tried the bad version twice. The second attempt resulted
in a "repair". If this newest one is again buold 30, why no "repair" option
when I ran the installer? ... would have been easier than uninstalling.
 
---- Original Message ----
From: Joe Caverly
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 09.58
Subject: RE: [Support-t-2362] Re: v12 Release Build test - 32-bit fixed

| Quote:
| Originally Posted by rconn
| Let me know how it works.
|
| Installed TCMD12 with no problems.
|
|
| Code:
| TCC 12.00.30 Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
| TCC Build 30 Windows XP Build 2600 Service Pack 3As an added
| bonus, TMCD11 still works.

Likewise, no problems. Installed on both desktop and laptop WinXP SP3 (32b). All versions from V6 on still work properly.
--
Steve
 
On 2010-10-25 15:33, rconn wrote:

> I've uploaded a fixed build (for the IsLicense50.dll mismatch) for the 32-bit TCMD
Click to expand...

This one installs fine on 32-bit Windows, and registration also goes OK.
 
I ran into an odd install inssue. While build 30 installed and runs fine,
it took a really long time to actually install. Normally, it's a very
fast installation. I thought maybe there was an issue with installing it
via Remote Desktop Connection so I also installed it on my Win7 PC at
home. My home PC did not yet have a TC12 install on it. And while it did
not take as long as my work PC, it still took a lot longer than previous
installs.

-Scott

rconn <> wrote on 10/25/2010 09:33:37 AM:


> I've uploaded a fixed build (for the IsLicense50.dll mismatch) for
> the 32-bit TCMD to:
>
> ftp://jpsoft.com/beta/tcmd.exe
>
> This is still build 30, so if you installed the previous build 30
> you'll need to uninstall it first before running this version.
>
> Let me know how it works.
>
>
>
>
Click to expand...
 
samintz said:
I ran into an odd install inssue. While build 30 installed and runs fine, it took a really long time to actually install. Normally, it's a very fast installation. I thought maybe there was an issue with installing it via Remote Desktop Connection so I also installed it on my Win7 PC at home. My home PC did not yet have a TC12 install on it. And while it did not take as long as my work PC, it still took a lot longer than previous installs.
Click to expand...

Not reproducible here; and nothing has changed in the installer for several weeks.

However, if you haven't installed & registered the COM dll IsLicense50.dll previously, it'll take Windows a little while to do that (but only the first time).
 
WinXP sp3 32 bit.
Installed v 12. It said upon installation that it had to update files
for v 11. I let it do so. Now v12 works as expected but I cannot start
v11 without it saying I've expired.

Is this supposed to happen this way?



On 10/25/2010 09:33 AM, rconn wrote:

> I've uploaded a fixed build (for the IsLicense50.dll mismatch) for the 32-bit TCMD to:
>
> ftp://jpsoft.com/beta/tcmd.exe
>
> This is still build 30, so if you installed the previous build 30 you'll need to uninstall it first before running this version.
>
> Let me know how it works.
Click to expand...
 
drrob1 said:
WinXP sp3 32 bit.
Installed v 12. It said upon installation that it had to update files
for v 11. I let it do so. Now v12 works as expected but I cannot start
v11 without it saying I've expired.

Is this supposed to happen this way?
Click to expand...

No, and I cannot reproduce it here (nor has anybody else reported that). V12 has *no* files in common with v11, and Windows Installer shouldn't be trying to update anything in v11. (There certainly isn't anything in the TCMD install script for that.)

I'd have to know the exact sequence of TCMD installations you've done in the last few days to make a guess as to what Windows is doing.
 
That's much easier to determine than you'd think. I've been testing
v-12 in a vmware workstation 7.1.2 setup that I've kept fairly bare. I
haven't even installed firefox or chrome. But it is a fully patched sp3
that started as WinXP sp2. And I've reverted the vm to the point before
this happened. I installed an earlier v-12, maybe build 20 or so a few
weeks ago, then I confirmed that build 29 crapped out with the
registration time-out. Others have also reported that their tcmd v-11
is altered by v-12; I'm not the only one here. Some have said they had
to do a repair installation to get their v-11 working. Others have said
they had to fully remove tcmd.

And then I installed build 30. I have not started this VM a lot in the
last few weeks, either.

SO OTHERS HAVE REPORTED SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT I'M SEEING.

Don't dismiss this as "cannot reproduce it here (nor has anybody else
reported that)."

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

On 10/25/2010 07:39 PM, rconn wrote:

> ---Quote (Originally by drrob1)---
> WinXP sp3 32 bit.
> Installed v 12. It said upon installation that it had to update files
> for v 11. I let it do so. Now v12 works as expected but I cannot start
> v11 without it saying I've expired.
>
> Is this supposed to happen this way?
> ---End Quote---
>
> No, and I cannot reproduce it here (nor has anybody else reported that). V12 has *no* files in common with v11, and Windows Installer shouldn't be trying to update anything in v11. (There certainly isn't anything in the TCMD install script for that.)
>
> I'd have to know the exact sequence of TCMD installations you've done in the last few days to make a guess as to what Windows is doing.
>
>
>
>
>
Click to expand...
 
drrob1 said:
SO OTHERS HAVE REPORTED SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT I'M SEEING.

Don't dismiss this as "cannot reproduce it here (nor has anybody else
reported that)."

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

On 10/25/2010 07:39 PM, rconn wrote:
Click to expand...

That's not relevant to the current build -- builds 29 and earlier used the same (registered COM dll) IsLicense40.dll that was used in v11, so if you uninstalled one version it would break the other. Builds 30 and later do *not* use this dll, so, as I said, there are NO files in common between v11 and v12.

Nobody else has reported anything similar to what you're seeing with build 30; in fact others have confirmed that v11 and v12 no longer have any interaction, and nobody else has had any problems with 12.0.30 (other than the initial upload had an x64 dll inadvertently included in the x86 build -- this was corrected in the subsequent upload).
 
Sorry. I get it.

Are you interested in working w/ a VM?



On 10/25/2010 09:34 PM, rconn wrote:

> ---Quote (Originally by drrob1)---
> SO OTHERS HAVE REPORTED SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT I'M SEEING.
>
> Don't dismiss this as "cannot reproduce it here (nor has anybody else
> reported that)."
>
> WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
>
> On 10/25/2010 07:39 PM, rconn wrote:
> ---End Quote---
>
> That's not relevant to the current build -- builds 29 and earlier used the same (registered COM dll) IsLicense40.dll that was used in v11, so if you uninstalled one version it would break the other. Builds 30 and later do *not* use this dll, so, as I said, there are NO files in common between v11 and v12.
>
> Nobody else has reported anything similar to what you're seeing with build 30; in fact others have confirmed that v11 and v12 no longer have any interaction, and nobody else has had any problems with 12.0.30 (other than the initial upload had an x64 dll inadvertently included in the x86 build -- this was corrected in the subsequent upload).
>
>
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Rex Conn
> JP Software
Click to expand...
 
Installation . The VMWare machine is fine.

Sent from my Droid Incredible Verizon Wireless phone

----- Reply message -----
From: "rconn" <>
Date: Tue, Oct 26, 2010 9:19 am
Subject: [Support-t-2362] Re: v12 Release Build test - 32-bit fixed
To: <[email protected]>

---Quote (Originally by drrob1)---
Are you interested in working w/ a VM?
---End Quote---

Yes -- all of my development and testing is done in VMs (HyperV, VMware, VMware Fusion, and Virtual PC).

It's unclear from your previous message whether you're having a problem with the VM or simply with installation / configuration.
 
Looks like V12 is released? There is no beta on the FTP site, and the tcmd download is version 12. I've owned almost every version of 4DOS/4NT/TCC since like 4DOS 2.0 or something like that. But, I skipped version 11. So, I'm going to get 12, if I still get upgrade pricing.
 
Speedie6 said:
Looks like V12 is released? There is no beta on the FTP site, and the tcmd download is version 12. I've owned almost every version of 4DOS/4NT/TCC since like 4DOS 2.0 or something like that. But, I skipped version 11. So, I'm going to get 12, if I still get upgrade pricing.
Click to expand...

It's not yet released. There will be an announcement when everything is in place, hopefully later today or early tomorrow.

You can upgrade from any previous version for the same price.
 
I think I have a theory as to why I had a problem. The version to tcmd
v12 I have installed still uses license40. When I installed build 30 on
top of what I had, it had to try to remove license40 before it put its
own license50 in. When it removed license40 my installed v11 was unhappy.

I was the first to report this because I have not been very diligent in
installing new builds as you released them, so I still had the old
license40 installed for v12 while others had not.

Comments?
 
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:05:11 -0400, drrob1 <> wrote:

|I think I have a theory as to why I had a problem. The version to tcmd
|v12 I have installed still uses license40. When I installed build 30 on
|top of what I had, it had to try to remove license40 before it put its
|own license50 in. When it removed license40 my installed v11 was unhappy.
|
|I was the first to report this because I have not been very diligent in
|installing new builds as you released them, so I still had the old
|license40 installed for v12 while others had not.

Where was that IsLicense40.dll located? I doubt v12 would try to delete it from
the v11 installation directory.
 
On 2010-10-27 04:59, vefatica wrote:

> Where was that IsLicense40.dll located? I doubt v12 would try to delete it from
> the v11 installation directory.
Click to expand...

It won't matter, as there can be only one instance of IsLicense40.dll
registered in the registry. The uninstaller for build 29 unregisters
it, rendering the licensing component inoperative.

E.g. doing regsvr32 "<tcmd11installdir>\IsLicense40.dll" should always
fix any problems afterwards.
 
I did a repair install that fixed it.



On 10/27/2010 03:43 AM, dim wrote:

> On 2010-10-27 04:59, vefatica wrote:
>
>
> ---Quote---
>> Where was that IsLicense40.dll located? I doubt v12 would try to delete it from
>> the v11 installation directory.
> ---End Quote---
> It won't matter, as there can be only one instance of IsLicense40.dll
> registered in the registry. The uninstaller for build 29 unregisters
> it, rendering the licensing component inoperative.
>
> E.g. doing regsvr32 "<tcmd11installdir>\IsLicense40.dll" should always
> fix any problems afterwards.
Click to expand...
 
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 03:43:10 -0400, dim <> wrote:

|---Quote---
|> Where was that IsLicense40.dll located? I doubt v12 would try to delete it from
|> the v11 installation directory.
|---End Quote---
|It won't matter, as there can be only one instance of IsLicense40.dll
|registered in the registry. The uninstaller for build 29 unregisters
|it, rendering the licensing component inoperative.

It didn't do that here. My installation of v11 never faltered.
 
Hi Rex,

There is one thing that I noticed and that is that V12 load slower that V11. I think it may have to do with network connected drives.

Craig
 
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:41:38 -0400, cgunhouse <> wrote:

|Hi Rex,
|
|There is one thing that I noticed and that is that V12 load slower that V11. I think it may have to do with network connected drives.
|
|Craig

What's slower? I haven't noticed anything.
 
When connecting for the first time before any information is cached, I noticed that the connection was a bit slower. I have tried it again after I registered V12 and it was much fast, but the network drive stuff is also now cached. The reason I said network drives is because I watched TCMD.EXE load in Process Monitor from Sysinternals and the delay was during the network connections. Of course there are other issues that maybe factors like network traffic but I never notice such delays from version 9 and up.

Craig
 
cgunhouse said:
There is one thing that I noticed and that is that V12 load slower that V11. I think it may have to do with network connected drives.

Craig
Click to expand...

If it's like prior versions then the startup time is dependant on whether you have any drives that are asleep. TC queries (and waits for replies) from all drives in the system. If some are asleep, you have to wait for them to spin up. I gave up waiting for a solution so I just load TC on boot and try to never exit.

http://jpsoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=627
 
rconn said:
V11. I



Are you referring to the first-time startup (which would be expected), or
subsequent starts (which should be slightly faster than v11)?

Rex Conn
JP Software
Click to expand...

It is on start up, but one of my network drives was unavailable and it seemed that V11 recovered faster than V12. V12 took 30 seconds to recover from the unavailable drive.
 
I'm still perplexed that TC has to wait for all drives in the system to respond before it starts. Is there a specific reason for this or is it the result of some library you're using that you have no control over?

If it was displaying free space for every drive in the task bar, I'd understand.

There's so much in TC. Maybe there are some internal variables that get initialized that require all drives to be queried.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
[FOX] Ultimate Translator
Translate