Testing Beta 9.9932

For topics about current BETA or future releases, including feature requests.

Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Tue May 18, 2010 2:14 am

I've run some batch tests on the Current Beta.

Processed a few hundred files of various types, in several batches.

No anomalies noticed except that a lot of jslint processes failed giving errors. It was an inability to write a working file.

I'm sure I've seen that before, but can't remember the outcome.

A manual run of the linter worked (in the console).

This fault comes up as an error. It's not an error in the normal sense, maybe there's some other way of flagging it.

Looking good. Thanks.
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby Albert Wiersch » Tue May 18, 2010 11:57 am

Thanks Mike. A release is getting closer. I plan on releasing the final BETA soon.

I am a bit concerned about the jslint errors. Do you think this is a CSE HTML Validator problem or something on your computer or your setup is causing the problem with writing the temp files? If you think it is a CSE HTML Validator issue, then can you provide more details and the exact messages? Thanks!
Image
Albert Wiersch
User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Tue May 18, 2010 7:35 pm

I started running a test and loaded up SysInternals Process Monitor to see what is going on with file access (so that I could report more fully).

There seems to be something in the Beta that then intervenes. It shut the program and the Batch tool both. When I attempted to restart it kicked in with a message that there was a monitor running. (Message was from oreans.com, something called WinLicense.)

I've shut the monitor process and looked at running processes, it's gone as far as I can see. The oreans code still thinks it's running. Maybe it caches something! It sure seems to have it wrong.

So the Beta has stopped running altogether for me. I hope a reboot brings it back but that's not going to happen now. I'll report back later.
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby Albert Wiersch » Tue May 18, 2010 8:36 pm

MikeGale wrote:I started running a test and loaded up SysInternals Process Monitor to see what is going on with file access (so that I could report more fully).

There seems to be something in the Beta that then intervenes. It shut the program and the Batch tool both. When I attempted to restart it kicked in with a message that there was a monitor running. (Message was from oreans.com, something called WinLicense.)

I've shut the monitor process and looked at running processes, it's gone as far as I can see. The oreans code still thinks it's running. Maybe it caches something! It sure seems to have it wrong.

So the Beta has stopped running altogether for me. I hope a reboot brings it back but that's not going to happen now. I'll report back later.


Hi Mike,

Looks like your running into an issue with the software protection software CSE HTML Validator uses. I will report the issue of it thinking it's still running, but it may be by design.

If I send you a build without the protection will you try it out again? Thanks.
Image
Albert Wiersch
User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Tue May 18, 2010 8:50 pm

I ran a test using 9.03 and Process Monitor. It ran as expected and gave two failures from jslint.

The messages were like:
An error occurred trying to run the JavaScript linter. Error: 2005052001: can't open outputfile "C:\...\...\LOCALS~1\Temp\~cse_jsmsg37380800.tmp"

The test set was cut down to 20 files (to give a mix) of which 5 were js's.

So 2 of 5 javascript files failed with that message.

My look at the monitoring didn't give a cause, but I am out of practice!

So the problem is not just in the Beta's.

Hope that helps.

I've just seen your message. Yep I'll a build without protection if that will still be valuable.
Last edited by MikeGale on Tue May 18, 2010 9:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby Albert Wiersch » Tue May 18, 2010 9:26 pm

MikeGale wrote:I've just seen your message. Yep I'll a build without protection if that will still be valuable.


Thanks.... I'm not sure if it will be since you were able to reproduce the issue with 9.03 and didn't get anything helpful there.

Are you running any anti-virus/spyware software that might be temporarily locking the file? If so, can you try disabling it and see if you get any different results? Thanks!
Image
Albert Wiersch
User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Tue May 18, 2010 9:48 pm

Hi,

I ran the list twice more. With 1) Active Protection off and 2) with AP and Firewall both off.

In each case I got the same sort of failures (in 9.03). In fact I got more failures showing up directly on js files. It's random.

If I last installed the Beta, which DLL is running when I use 9.03 batch tool?
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Tue May 18, 2010 10:09 pm

On shutdown of 9.03 I got a message "Access violation at address 6016CDA4. Read of address 6016CDA4."

Looked like DPE (Data Protection...).

I added the exe's to the list (to not be protected) and tested again.

Results:
1) I got a random collection of errors, in batch processing. All were caused by jslint and file access. Some are direct on js files, others are indirect via a reference in a page. Page/files change each time.
2) On exit I don't get the Access violation.

Conclusion two issues, DPE and the jslint problem. (Separate.)
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby Albert Wiersch » Wed May 19, 2010 8:34 am

MikeGale wrote:If I last installed the Beta, which DLL is running when I use 9.03 batch tool?


Hi Mike,

With v9, it should use the v9 DLL. It was only much older versions and some 3rd party products that will use the DLL in the Windows system directory, and if that DLL is used, then that's when only the latest installed version's DLL is used.

I think I'm going to send you a new v10 BETA in the next day or so that will try opening the file a few times for up to 3 seconds if there is a failure. I'm hoping that whatever may be locking the file will be solved within that time.

Also, Oreans got back to me and said (with regards to the process monitor being shut down):
Code: Select all
The problem is that those process monitors are loaded in memory till the system is restarted. That is, even if the user closes the process monitor,
the process monitor driver is still loaded in memory and that's why it's detected.
Image
Albert Wiersch
User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Wed May 19, 2010 6:10 pm

Hi Albert,

Thanks for that.

Interesting point about the process monitor in memory. I don't know how to unload it so my machine can potentially be locked against using the Betas. Useful to know. I saw a note that Oreans have, on occasion, excluded some drivers from their lock. No idea what that involves.

That multiple try technique is the only one that came to mind. I'll gladly give it a try.
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby Albert Wiersch » Thu May 20, 2010 11:20 am

MikeGale wrote:That multiple try technique is the only one that came to mind. I'll gladly give it a try.


Thanks! Please try this and let me know how it works:
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/cse-html-v ... -setup.exe
Image
Albert Wiersch
User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Fri May 21, 2010 12:12 am

Hi,

The URI gave me a 404. (Tried a couple of variations, all failed.)
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby Albert Wiersch » Fri May 21, 2010 7:49 am

MikeGale wrote:The URI gave me a 404. (Tried a couple of variations, all failed.)


Oop! Sorry. I forgot to copy the file to the server. :oops:

Please try again.
Image
Albert Wiersch
User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby MikeGale » Fri May 21, 2010 8:00 pm

Hi,

It's still refusing to start because of the monitor in memory.

I'm not planning to reboot the machine soon. I'll reconsider that, but it does disrupt things.
User avatar
MikeGale
Rank VI - Professional
Rank VI - Professional
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Tannhauser Gate

Re: Testing Beta 9.9932

Postby Albert Wiersch » Fri May 21, 2010 8:50 pm

MikeGale wrote:It's still refusing to start because of the monitor in memory.

I'm not planning to reboot the machine soon. I'll reconsider that, but it does disrupt things.


Sorry Mike. I sent you an email about this.
Image
Albert Wiersch
User avatar
Albert Wiersch
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Near Dallas, TX

Next

Return to CSE BETA Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron