Alan_B

I use Folder Junctions (which I think is just another name for mklink) and 40% of my System Drive is now relocated on separate partitions. Acronis knows the difference, and its partition image of C:\ now excludes all these relocated files and folders, and are now 60% the size they used to be. My Disc Defragger knows the difference, and will defrag C:\ without touching the relocated files. Pretty well all other applications are deceived, and think the relocated stuff is still on C:\. I am sure that CCleaner would have the same perception, and will happily delete anything that is pretending to be on C:\. N.B. Folder Junctions can make a group of folders etc. appear to be simultaneously in different places, as if you have multiple instances on the system. One difference is that if you access through one folder junction to modify a file, then access through all the other junctions will see the same change. If a file is deleted, it is a world wide deletion. There is a special way to remove a Folder Junction without altering the rest of the system, but a simple deletion of one Folder Junction will destroy all the destination contents first, and all the remaining Folder Junctions will access nothing. Micro-soft give specific warning of this hazard, and advise upon protecting against it. Regards Alan

You are wrong - it does make sense. When installing software YOU SHOULD NEVER ALLOW CCLEANER (OR ANY JUNK CLEANER) - TO RUN. Sometimes software installs cleanly at first attempt. Firefox updates are almost clean, they only take effect after restarting the browser, but the computer does not need to reboot. Other software, such as M.S. O.S. security updates, require the P.C. to be restarted. Some such software plants deposits vital information for use after the restart so it can finally complete. Sometimes because the information is only needed for the next restart, the idiots decide the data is temporary and can be placed in a temporary folder. If temporary files are cleansed after the download/installation and before the restart/completion, then restart/completion will not get the data it needs, and it fails. If CCleaner auto-runs upon shutdown, the data is lost before it can be used. If CCleaner auto-runs upon start-up it could be a race to determines if the data is destroyed before use. It seems that World Clock has the same stupid practice of dumping the registration details in a temporary place, and expecting them to still be there after a restart. Regards Alan

A simple solution to the original problem of not booting should be SYSTEM RESTORE. In principle if you revert the system state to a date preceding disaster, Windows SHOULD be mended. N.B. Windows may make a mistake and fail to recognise as CRITICAL something it will need for booting up, and it may ignore any modifications to non-M.S. applications. I use and recommend ERUNT. For my system it spends about 6 seconds during boot-up make a complete image of the registry. I think it uses less than 20% CPU during this time, i.e. if it does delay the start-up it is too small an increase for me to notice. It gives me peace of mind - I know that no matter how severely trashed the registry may be, I only need to launch the ERUNT recovery operation and wait for the computer to reboot with this morning's working registry. You need to install and setup ERUNT before any future disaster. It cannot correct any pre-existing problem. Regards Alan

I am not the one who is confused. I never indicated any relationship between FireFox Session Restore and System Restore. I merely point out that, according to your logic, CCleaner FAILS to cleaner the Firefox cache in that it does not remove any copies of cache held in any Restore Point, and therefore System Restore is still able to resurrect these "deleted" items, and I for one would be unhappy about the consequences if CCleaner chose to delete items from Restore Points. I never suggested that Firefox Session Restore was placing its cookie copies in Restore Points, I merely suggest that it copies them in some "private" location which Firefox uses, and if CCleaner simply zapped that data it might disrupt the operation of Firefox. I for one would say Firefox has been "broken" if I expected session restore to take me back into a site and it failed because the vital cookie was killed. Alan

That also happens to me - BUT THEN I launch Windows Task Manager. I find that "Applications" does not show Firefox (unless I forgot to close it), But "Processes" shows that Firefox.exe is still running (a Firefox / Windows error). I select Firefox.exe, click the bottom right corner "End Process", and if that does not work I might right click Firefox.exe and select "End Process Tree". I may also look for a new "Dump*.*" and /or "DrWatson" processes that also need "End Process Tree". When Firefox.exe is no longer running a process, then CCleaner succeeds in cache cleaning. I do not know if Norton adds any further complication - it has quite a reputation ! ! Regards Alan

I think it might be appropriate for CCleaner to have a disclaimer that it has "removed what is known to be safe". To zapp a private copy that a new version of Firefox has made could unleash consequences ! ! CCleaner removes the Firefox cache, If CCleaner were to remove the private copies of cache that Windows puts into Restore Points, then CCleaner would immediately be a more powerful and aggressive cleaner of junk, but any-one who needs to use System Restore might find he has to re-install Windows. Be careful what you ask for ! ! Regards Alan.

1. It is generally considered bad form to make multiple posts in various forums for one particular problem 2. There is already an answer to your original post showing a high probability that CCleaner did its job perfectly, but that Browser.sessionstore had copied those cookies elsewhere before CCleaner ran, and when Firefox next started its sessionstore achieved its purpose in life and restored the cookies from where-ever it hid the copies. Regards Alan

Speed does not indicate effectiveness. e.g. Solve A = B * 2 The time taken to evaluate the value of A will be determined by :- Program language - e.g Basic interpreter running a batch script from a floppy disc, or a 'C' compiled program; The data type - e.g. floating point or 8 bit integer arithmetic; The value of B. Solve A = B * C Even if C is given the value of 2, the time taken may exceed the time taken to solve A = B * 2. I believe CCleaner is coded in C++, which is good for high speed. Heidi may use something other than C++. The language used has no effect upon how accurately it meets requirements, only how fast it performs. Before there was Windows, I had a 1 inch thick stack of fan-folded print-out listing innumerable DOS entry points for pretty will everything. Some did similar things to others. Windows NT probably has many more ways of doing the same things. Perhaps CCleaner uses system entry points that are different from Heidi's chosen set. Different entry points will probably affect speed, but this does NOT indicate effectiveness. If you want to test effectiveness, I suggest :- Create an empty TEST folder; Select a TEST file, and copy to the TEST folder as file Test_Copy Delete this test file from the test folder; Use a file recovery tool (e.g. RECUVA) to confirm that the file is available for recovery; Use a CCleaner Wipe Free Space; Use the file recovery tool to see if the wipe was successful, or if it can still retrieve Test_Copy Repeat the entire above test sequence, using Heidi instead of CCleaner Wipe Free Space. I strongly suspect that no File recovery tool is likely to retrieve Test_Copy, even if you used the fast wipe option of a single pass. Some file recovery tools can focus upon a designated folder, which could reduce the search / report time. A certain way to cut your test down from 24 hours to only 1 minute is to create 1 very small test partition for the wipe test. There are a tremendous number of file recovery programs, some of which may be more successful than others, depending upon lots of things, but a single overwrite is likely to stop them all. Special multi-pass Wipe over-writing improves protection against sophisticated tools developed by the security services, especially if they have your drive physically opened up in their laboratories. They probably can force the reading of a track with various amounts of offset from the nominal track radius, and thus focus upon what was written by stray fields. I believe they can also analyse the surface of the disc with specialised microscopes, totally free from any normal constraints imposed by the limitations of the Windows operating system or the electro-mechanical head position mechanism. The professional thief or hacker is unlikely to have such facilities, and even if he did it would take far more time to penetrate your system, than it would to steal and attack 100 alternative computers that had not been wiped. Regards Alan

Hi Keith If Analyze finds something I have any doubt about, then :- 1. I refrain from ALL cleaning until I am confident, then 2. I uncheck relevant CCleaner options until Analyze omits the items I worry about, then 3. I clean the stuff that both CCleaner and I agree upon, then 4. Search the Internet for further information upon the consequences of cleaning those items, then 5. re-adjust the CCleaner options to additionally remove the items that I then agree are safe to remove. Additional / alternative actions would be :- Manually delete into the recycle bin the things I want to retain, and after cleaning restore from the Recycle Bin, or Specify these items in Options => Exclude. What I gain is a 4 year old machine that has never needed re-installation of Windows. Acer sold this Laptop with XP pre-installed, and WITHOUT CDs, so re-installation is not a viable option. Regards Alan

I wonder how long before it fails to power up. Compressed files are NOT redundant files. They are files that have not been used for a while, but when Windows wants them it really wants them. Alan

Keith I want to. I need to - if I do not know what is about to go I lack the courage to clean ! ! Additionally, I use the Portable variant of CCleaner, so when a new version is available I unzip it to another folder, and copy across the previous CCleaner.ini file. Then I can analyze without cleaning with each version, one after the other, and if there are differences between what they want to zap, I know I am venturing into the unknown and have something else to worry about ! ! Almost always I find no difference between the results, so can use the new with no concern about increased aggression. I would like the option to select for cleaning exclusion any items in the analyze list that I wish to preserve, but I almost never see anything of that nature, and if I did I could always defer cleaning for another day. An even better option would be for deletion into the recycle bin, then I can defer final permanent deletion until the next day AFTER AND IF it reboots cleanly ! ! My 4 year old computer came without discs. Windows was pre-installed and has never been re-installed - I hope to keep it that way. Regards Alan

Hi This 5.0 MB file may tend to avoid deletion because :- a. CCleaner is not aiming straight; b. The File is write protected; c. The file has some other "permissions" blockage; d. Something comes along after it is deleted and resurrects it. Task Manager shows if Firefox has been closed but left its process running, and that immediately shows why CCleaner cannot cleanse the Firefox cache even though you have "closed" Firefox. You are using I.E.8 which I personally will consider to be out of Beta at least 1 year after general release ! ! Since I.E. is embedded irretrievably into Windows, I doubt that Task Manager would clearly tell you of any services or processes that may continue to run after closing the browser. I STRONGLY recommend that you use Windows Explorer to delete this 5.0 MB file, and then refresh the display and inspect whether it has remained or re-appeared. If you can delete the file and it stays deleted even after a reboot, then CCleaner could benefit from a fix. If however the file remains or reappears upon reboot, the problem is entirely the fault of Windows and/or I.E.8 etc., together with its bewildering array of services / processes / what-have-you's Regards Alan

If they were 7z compressed, would they be accessible in the emergency disaster "Recovery Console" ? For myself, every new day start-up ERUNT backs up to C:\WINDOWS\ERDNT\AutoBackup and this folder contains 3 backups totalling "Size 134 MB (140,699,578 bytes)" "Size on Disk 64.3 MB (67,504,640 bytes)" That is normal NTFS compression - I set the folder properties for the folder and its contents to be compressed, and they are automatically compressed upon creation. Regards Alan

As a general principle, I disagree. Why should CCleaner ignore Windows 7 one month before Beta 1 ? Why not wait until it is completely out of Beta and finally released ? Because CCleaner already made the attempt, bold spirits have already tried it and reported problems, so CCleaner can now be improved to better cope with Windows 7 before the general public lose everything. On behalf of the general public, I thank Housewife for "boldly going where no man has been before", and am pleased that she had the skills and wisdom to be prepared for disaster. On a personal note, I prefer to work on a "stable" system, and think of Vista as not having left BETA - but that is another rant ! ! Regards Alan

Here is a much easier way :- http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/sysexp.html Almost ANYTHING which appears on the screen can be copied and pasted with that tool. My include section is String Value C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\WindowsLiveInstaller\Temp\*.* 0 C:\Documents and Settings\Dad\Local Settings\Temp\*.* 0 C:\Documents and Settings\Default User\Local Settings\Temp\*.* 0 C:\Documents and Settings\Guest\Local Settings\Temp\*.* 0 C:\Documents and Settings\LocalService\Local Settings\Temp\*.* 0 C:\Documents and Settings\suzanne\Local Settings\temp\*.* 0 C:\temp\*.* 0 C:\WINDOWS\Temp\*.* 0 An alternative option gives ================================================== String : C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\WindowsLiveInstaller\Temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== ================================================== String : C:\Documents and Settings\Dad\Local Settings\Temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== ================================================== String : C:\Documents and Settings\Default User\Local Settings\Temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== ================================================== String : C:\Documents and Settings\Guest\Local Settings\Temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== ================================================== String : C:\Documents and Settings\LocalService\Local Settings\Temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== ================================================== String : C:\Documents and Settings\suzanne\Local Settings\temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== ================================================== String : C:\temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== ================================================== String : C:\WINDOWS\Temp\*.* Value : 0 ================================================== Regards Alan

If the location is unknown it will be difficult to zap. If it is known, it may be unwise to zap. Anti-virus protection software can be protective of its family jewels. It might have write protected its files. If CCleaner tries to delete, it might be considered the enemy, and be quarantined or worse. If you are lucky - you could be very UN-lucky, because if ESET looks in its log to see if it has the latest virus signature, a missing log might cause it to repeatedly re-load what it has already loaded, and ESET servers monitor this sort of thing and assume you have shared your registration key, so you all get classed as pirates and service is discontinued. If you decide to risk it, please advise us of the results. I will be interested, but I doubt this penguin will jump of the cliff and into the sea ! ! Regards Alan

SJB Thanks for feedback and appreciation. It is nice to put to good use the bitter experiences of M.$ ! ! A supplementary thought occurs :- You said I.E. gave you the warning 'your current security settings do not allow this file can be downloaded'. I assume you received no such warning previously when Firefox failed to get the goods. My experience was that Firefox immediately gave me that (or a very similar) warning, which made me realise that something had changed, and I then realised the I.E. security change affected all Windows browsers in the universe. If Firefox gave me a warning, but did not warn you, perhaps your pop-up protection was over vigilant Perhaps Adblock Plus 1.0; Flashblock 1.5.7.1; NoScript 1.8.8.8; or WOT "protected" you from knowledge ! ! I use Firefox 3.0.5 with Adblock Plus 1.0.1, and it is disabled for some sites. If I pause and contemplate during Internet banking, I get a warning two minutes before I am auto logged out for security reasons. When Anti-pop-up protection was in full swing the warning never appeared - I just lost the connection. Regards Alan

I remember the good old days, when DOS did what I told it to do. Now we have much faster computers, and Windows that spends far more time doing what it wants instead of what I told it. I like Windows 7 because of the amusement, within one day of installation it seems to need urgent cleaning ! ! Oldtimer Alan

Can you download ANY *.exe file from anywhere ? Last year M.$ knew for some time of an internet threat they could not defeat. Eventually they issued a public warning, and recommended that the I.E. Security level should be raised to HIGH until they had it fixed. I followed that advice, even though I never use I.E., only Firefox. I then found that Firefox could NOT download *.exe from anywhere. All I could get were *.zip files. Since the "Out-of-cycle" patch was released I lowered I.E. back to its previous setting, and now Firefox can again download *.exe. When I download any file, my anti-virus takes an interest. When the download is complete it is not available until the file is closed, and my Anti-virus prevents the file from being "closed" until it has inspected it. Inspection of OpenOffice *.paf file (Portable Apps delivery package) takes a very long time, Inspection of the "standard" installation *.exe takes a much shorter (but still very long) time. Inspection of a *.zip of the same thing is much faster. You do not say what protection you have. If you have no protection you could already have a full complement of malware, some of which could rest in a Temp file so would block CCleaner. If you have protection then a false positive could cause it to block the file. Is it possible protection has blocked the file but failed to tell you of its action ? I suggest you try the Portable Build of CCleaner. My Anti-virus (ESET Nod32) has no problem with any of the CCleaner variants, but perhaps your system would be happier with a *.zip. Regards Alan

This may be too late after what you did, but it may help. What you should have done first :- Right click "My Computer" and select Manage; Under storage select Disk Management; The "pictures" for various disc drives show their partitions. Simply click on any part of the external drive and right click. Now you have the option to "Change Drive Letter". Simply set the Drive letter as it was for each partition, and you have finished. I did this 2 years ago when my external disappeared. I cannot remember - it is possible you might have to follow with a reboot. I had painless recovery - all files re-appeared as I had left them Once you have drive letters you have probably lost the files by what you already did. I strongly recommend that you seek further advice before you aggravate your situation. What you cannot see today may still be restorable until you try something else. Incidentally, I am very new to Recuva so I could be wrong, but your snapshot suggests to me that Recuva was scanning C:\, which is not a drive letter I would expect for an external drive. Regards Alan

This is nothing to do with Recuva. It applies to ANY data recovery utility. I suggest you should NOT put your stuff into the System Partition. Windows is ALWAYS busy and building up fragmentation so it needs to be de-fragmented. It is likely to have an extra burst of business whenever you delete a file from the system partition. Every time Windows writes to the system partition, it is likely to hit the sectors which hold deleted _SECONDS_ ago. If you have a partition which the system does not meddle with, ( i.e. excluded from System Restore monitoring, and possible FAT32 rather than NTFS ), THAT would be a safer place for your video etc. Sectors holding any accidentally deleted file should not get overwritten by Windows, but they will still be vulnerable to anything you subsequently write to that partition. Regards Alan

I have many POSSIBLE answers, I just do not have the time to waste. If you would post EXACTLY what you are talking about then I, and many others, would willingly offer any RELEVANT answers. Regards Alan

I easily believe that STANDARD Firefox has no knowledge of a future BETA release. Using STANDARD Firefox to purge BETA cookies has to be like spitting against the wind. You might have better luck if you re-instal the BETA that gave you cookies, and use that BETA to purge its own cookies - with luck it will know where they are. Then you can revert back to standard. Regards Alan

With no knowledge of your software, I suggest :- 1. Inspect the Recycle bin and if you want to retain something do not proceed. 2. Empty the Recycle bin. 3. Use Windows Explorer to DELETE the files to the Recycle bin. Do NOT use CCleaner. 4. Look at your pictures. If any pictures have disappeared then :- a) You have rubbish software that scatters valuable pictures in temporary files; You now know that removing these files will lose your pictures; c) Return to the recycle bin and restore what you deleted. Your pictures should now come back. Otherwise, you can purge the recycle bin, and you now know it should be safe for CCleaner to delete these temporary files. Regards Alan

I think you are wrong. I believe many (and possibly all) hotfixes have an associated "KB...", BUT every Patch Tuesday security update I have monitored has a "KB..." for each and every item. I believe "KB..." merely indicates a K(nowledge) B(ase) reference number to tell you what M.$. wants you to know, and "KB..." tells you nothing about whether it is a hotfix or otherwise. I do not know, but as a matter of interest, what is a hotfix ? My suspicion is that every time M.$ has another security hole to fix, they try to fix it and test it a bit, and depending upon the urgency of issuing a fix, they either have confidence that the fix will be good for at least another month, and we get a "proper" patch, or they know it is not good enough, so we get a "hotfix" which they hope will hold us till they make it better ! ! Regards Alan