Alan_B

Please look again and consider who said what to whom and when and why. Double posts are generally deprecated, hence I advised continuing with the identical problem that was started under CCleaner Bugs. That topic was locked by a moderator for a valid reason that he stated, hence this became the topic for a continuation. Twas not I I am not prepared to analyse a problem that is dispersed with unrelated addition suggestions across a topic that is 130 pages and growing And since I had a diagnostic script available I chose to start a dedicated topic in the discussion forum.

Your problem is not recognised as a CCleaner Bug so your other topic has been locked This problem may take many posts with lots of unrelated posts in-between which will only distract us. I have therefore started a separate topic under Discussions and I ask that we should continue discussion in that topic "Debugging CCleaner and WinApp2.ini" http://forum.pirifor...showtopic=37464 P.S. Please include your Operating System and whether 32 bit of 64 bit in your first response to that topic

This topic is composed for the benefit of new member "Compare" Use a new folder and unzip into this the portable version of CCleaner. Also copy into this folder WinApp2.ini if relevant. Copy the following code to DEBUG.BAT in the same folder SETLOCAL EnableDelayedExpansion DEL CC*.LOG SET "CC=CCLEANER.EXE" & IF EXIST %WINDIR%\SYSWOW64 SET "CC=CCLEANER64.EXE" ECHO USING %CC% IF NOT EXIST !CC! ( (ECHO [Options] & ECHO UpdateKey=!DATE! !TIME:~0,8!) > CCLEANER.INI SET "CC=CCLEANER.EXE" & IF NOT EXIST !CC! SET "CC=CCLEANER64.EXE" ECHO OOPS - USING Non-Default !CC! PAUSE GOTO :EOF ) START /WAIT !CC! /DEBUG MORE CCLEANER*.LOG > CC-INFO.LOG FIND "][iNFO ] " < CC-INFO.LOG > CC-INFO.TXT Run DEBUG.BAT and this will launch CCleaner. When CCleaner opens and responsive then under both the Windows and Applications Tabs ensure each box is checked Where a section (such as Windows / "Advanced") has many unchecked boxes then click the section heading (twice if the first click empties the boxes) and accept any warnings you are given. Then click the CCleaner "Analyze" button, and after Analyze is completed simply close CCleaner. Then DEBUG.BAT should produce the file CC-INFO.TXT and this will identify all items which CCleaner has Analyzed, N.B. For your privacy, and to reduce the file size, all cookies etc and omitted. If you attach CC-INFO.TXT to a post then I and others can see what CCleaner is configured to deal with.

I am happy to agree to disagree. After spending 30 years designing real time operating systems and applications, I often had to estimate how to fit a requested extra feature into my own software, and what existing code might be in danger of breaking. Then I might guess at how much time and effort would be needed to implement and test. The quantity of lines of code would be totally irrelevant compared to the cost of my time, Even with all of my experience and skill, I would not presume to tell someone else who has developed software that I have never seen, how many lines of code he has to write to meet my requirement. You have the right to suggest a new feature. You have the right to request a new feature. BUT I find it offensive that you would criticise the nature and quality of the CCleaner software should the new feature require more than 36 lines of code.

I have only seen that sort of error message when I use the CMD.EXE command line and use the wrong arguments. Recuva can be launched on the command line, as per http://www.piriform.com/docs/recuva/advanced-usage/command-line-parameters QUESTION :- How are you launching Recuva ? via normal desktop shortcut with no arguments, or with an argument.

The free version is not crippled and is supported by volunteers here. The Free, Professional, and Business versions all have the same capability. The only difference is that your purchase obtains support from the developers. I now stand down for those with more skill to advise you.

The latest version is just the same as the previous for me. I just grab the boundary handle and shift it, The problem is that the "handle" is a little distance from the visible boundary, so I have to hover the mouse near but not on the boundary and when the cursor changes I click and grab and then I move it.

Using the Portable is a good step. Please clarify. Does this only occur when WinApp2.ini is added ?

First, desist from double posts. Second, remove WinApp2.ini and try again. Then do NOT continue in this topic but continue with the topic you started at http://forum.piriform.com/index.php?showtopic=37449

That takes me back 40 years when a colleague told me of his previous job on the team that designed "virtual reality" aircraft cockpit simulators. The end result was a pilot's cabin in which the trainee pilot sat and experienced all the consequences of moving the controls, except that he could crash and then walk away. The entire cabin and flight crew were thrown up and down by a hydraulic vertical jack that was controlled by the pilot's actions, The entire cabin and flight crew and very heavy vertical jack were tilted fore and aft by a larger heavier jack controlled by the pilot's actions, and all the above was were tilted left and right by a heavier jack controlled by the pilot's actions. That was a 3 dimension servo controlled feedback system, with complex interactions between each dimension. Each system was custom designed for each customer and each aircraft. The sales department were asked for a 4 dimension control system and they added 30% to the delivery time and 30% to the price of the previous 3 dimension system. The sales department ignored the fact that a standard 3 dimension system had to be thrown around by a super super super super massive hydraulic system, which still had to operate with pin-point accuracy and stability (no bouncing up and down nor any other direction). On the due delivery date the customer's representatives arrived for acceptance tests, and performed the tests and found the results acceptable. What they did not know was that for the last 6 months there was no further development of the product, instead the engineers were focussed upon the compilation of a product acceptance test procedure that the product was capable of passing, and the customer knew no better until the equipment had been shipped to them and then they found the simulation was unlike reality. Moral of the story - do not evaluate a manufacturer's product with a utility from the same source. There is nothing new under the Sun

Documentation shows that Pagefile.sys is subject to a Boot Time Defrag. http://www.piriform.com/docs/defraggler/technical-information/boot-time-defrag I wonder if this remains true, or if Boot Defrag now considers it as being just another non-special file.

It may be worth trying Palemoon which is based on the same open source code as Mozilla but is much less inclined to rabid ( = rapid and crazy mad) updates. It is now at 15.3.2 but includes security fixes included with Mozilla numbers that exponentially increase, and I believe has refrained from some of the adventures that Firefox exposes users to http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes-ng.shtml

The Estate Agents were guilty for selling those homes. The Morgage Lenders were guilty for lack of due diligence before granting a mortgage. The immediate victims made a mistake and may be less trusting of "experts" in future.

My post above proves that when Pagefile is Not Fragmented then Defraggler shows it as being Not Fragmented, and when I hover over it then it pops up to show that the block holds one file It is very probable that a fragmented Pagefile would similarly be reported as Fragmented, and version 2.12 would very probably be prepared to defrag the Pagefile if Windows allows it to,

I find that PageFile is BLUE = "Not Fragmented" instead of YELLOW when I use DF 2.12 instead of 2.11 In case my display was not compatible with a new Defraggler colour palette I changed "Not Defragmented" to GREEN and then Pagefile also appears as Green. Below are screen-shots showing relevant views DF-211.gif shows version 2.11 with a yellow streak which is the 8 GB Pagelfile located on E:\ DF-212.gif shows version 2.12 with a green streak which is the 8 GB Pagelfile located on E:\ Defraggler is no longer reporting the Pagefile as such, but merely showing that it is Not Fragmented (and just possibly it might show fragmentation but I am not going to trash my Pagefile to find out.) I am using 64 bit Windows Ultimate + SP1

Free RevoUninstaller already does a good job, BUT ONLY on 32 bit systems. The Professional RevoUninstaller has more options which include creating Log files during installation to improve subsequent removal, AND this can deal with 64 bit systems. CCleaner has a focus on removing junk and as such does not create log files. The existing UnInstall feature is a convenient and fast short cut to the standard Windows Uninstall code, and probably adds much less than 1% to the CCleaner code. I would guess that CCleaner would be increased by perhaps 1000% if it was to incorporate a fully effective Revo Look-a-Like. I vote against making CCleaner so much fatter. I vote against tarnishing CCleaner's reputation with the inclusion of sub-standard Revo type capabilities. It may be feasible for Piriform to produce a product that competes with Revo, and that will involve deciding whether to charge for a version that exceeds Professional Revo.

I prefer separate. I suggest you create a separate topic in the Suggestions forum with a Poll, and that would avoid disrupting the normal purpose of this topic with :- hundreds of posts that simply Love It / Hate It ; and dozens of posts that give full and complete explanations of why we should Love It / Hate It.

Agreed. Some computer users may have more than one use for the Internet, and may prefer more than one browser for different situations. Perhaps such a user might like to clean the cookies on one browser and clean download history on the other. Separate Application checkboxes for Firefox and Palemoon, and separate Application checkboxes for the installed version and the Portable version of any browser, would be a benefit.

Welcome Defraggler and Recuva should work just the same regardless of whether you are dealing with an internal or external drive. CCleaner can recognise the programs that are installed in Windows, and knows the junk that each program is likely to leave on C:\ and can remove that junk. CCleaner is unlikely to recognize junk that is held on external drives so would not offer to clean them, but it does have under "Options" the "Include" a section which allows you to specify types of files and folders to delete from any chosen drive. All the above can be done without needing to install on the external drive. Personally I only have a single instance of the portable version of each in E;\TOOLS\PIRIFORM\ P.S. I am not sure what you mean by "marked for deletion". I only know of this as being a very temporary state following a deletion attempt which cannot be completed at that time, and the system is the set up to delete that item at a later time. I suspect that if you make a backup copy to the external before the item is deleted then the copy will be made, but when the original is deleted the copy will remain and neither Windows nor CCleaner will be aware that it is an unwanted copy.

My code above fully meets the first requirement which was to merge a static and never changing Custom.ini. A subsequent need was to allow for additions to Custom.ini. and for these to also be merged. Hence the above code permits such additions but reminds you that it has been performed more than once. I believe having duplications will have no effect on those with a static Custom.ini. and have no significant degradation on performance for those who add to Custom.ini, Degradation will be eliminated upon :- the next Winapp2.ini download ; or a slight edit on the merged WinApp2.ini ; OR (hopefully - but not tested) by running Trim.bat. I have already noted the Trim.Bat problem reported with an entry that includes a path containing "*]" and may attend to that next.

When I was at school the normal games involved accuracy in rolling the marble into a chalk circle on the ground, or into a small hole in the ground. Those were gentle games with pretty glass marbles. One lucky lad had a marble that was twice the normal size. It was salvaged from a monster sized vehicle ball bearing. It was a bright shiny indestructible ball bearing. Any pretty glass marble that rolled across the playground and against a wall was fair game for a destruction derby. Happy days - for some of us.

I think the tools you have found only change serial numbers. I wish to change "Free Text". I attach the Windows Explorer view of two Removable Boot Flash drives. On the left is a Boot Tool from OCZ that runs under LINUX to operate on their SSD, and below that are its Hardware and Volume properties which show that "SMI USB DISK USB" is the hardware Drive that holds the partition Volume "OCZ-LINUX" On the right is a Boot Rescue Tool from Macrium Reflect version 4694 that runs under WinPE and "USB DISK 2.0 USB" is the hardware Drive that holds the partition Volume "MAC-4694-P" N.B. I always wrote the version number on Macrium Rescue non-re-writable CD's to identify which was the latest. I similarly specified the version number on the first Macrium Rescue Flash Drive but have never got around to updating the volume label. I chose meaningful names for the partition volume names, and that is how I recognise them. I know my Flash Drives by the names on the partitions. My problem is that when I plug both flash drives in and rattle the F8 function key during the BIOS power up, I then have to Select the Boot Device required, and I then ignore the CDROM and 3 off SATA devices and choose which of the two removable devices I need first :- USB:SMI USB DISK USB: USB DISK 2.0 I know that I first want the "OCZ-LINUX" tool for secure erase and then the "MAC-4694-P" tool for restoring the image backup. but unfortunately those familiar and friendly names are NOT what the Boot Selection Screen offers me to choose from. I have found that the "Details" tab under "Device Properties" has a very large quantities of Properties I can select, and the property "Friendly Name" is "SMI USB DISK USB Device" for one and for the other "USB DISK 2.0 USB Device". I can select this so called friendly name but I need to modify it to a name that is friendly to my purpose. Right now I have fought a hard battle with Windows and now know which hardware name will achieve which purpose, BUT the next time I wish to use both tools again I will have forgotten, hence I wish to change what Windows calls the "Friendly Name" It is (I know not how) possible to hack a Flash drive and sell it as having much larger capacity. I would like a legal tool that would allow me to change the "Friendly Name".

I hear and obey. New topic with new version of Merge.bat at http://forum.pirifor...showtopic=37419

Further to posts at #2528 through to #2546 in http://forum.pirifor...c=32310&st=2520 This is a discussion area and another solution for appending your own Custom.ini to WinApp.ini New code @ECHO OFF (ECHO ;;+; Custom.Ini below Added %DATE% %TIME% :- & ECHO( & MORE Custom.ini ) >> Winapp2.ini FIND ";;+;" < Winapp2.ini PAUSE New features are :- The data and time of appending are recorded ; A blank line precedes Custom.ini to ensure valid separation before the custom entry code blocks ; New or modified Custom.ini may be additionally appended. After the Append action, all Date + Time stamps in the latest WinApp2.ini are shown as a reminder if you have already merged and when. I believe that any repetition of an entry MAY result in a duplication of CCLeaner checkboxes but is unlikely to do harm. You are warned by the appearance of 2 or more time stamps if there is potential duplication by repeated Merges. N.B. without far more code there can be no warning if a Custom.ini entry duplicates a downloaded WinApp2.ini entry. I do not have time now to exhaustively test the consequences. of repetitions, but will be interested in seeing your experiences.

@ SuperFast You are asking for "1 Tab ..." Is that really you The fact that more than one browser is used suggests that only one does NOT meet all needs, and therefore you may have different requirements of what needs preserving and what needs removing. e.g. one browser + addons might be used for secure banking transactions where you trust the other site but must protect against hackers, and another browser might download from the dark side of the internet where you are in greater danger from the site you have chosen.