mike42

Ah, OK, I see. So defragmenting an SSD (with wear-levelling) makes no sense per definition.

Of course it's a bug. The MFT zone is not supposed to be filled with normal data files. BTW, it is easy to reproduce. I installed version 1.18 and it imediately started to fill my MFT zone (NTFS, 84% free). File corruption should not occur. It does not damage the MFT, but the MFT will get fragmented pretty soon. Same on SSDs, why would it be different there?

... provided, you haven't moved your documents folder somewhere else (as I have). In that case there is a registry entry but no predefined environment variable (afaik). You have to define one manually (in the windows env. variables). Mike

So?? I know. I didn't deny that. I didn't claim it was impossible to find out about the status. I was just saying, a notification would be nice. So you don't have to switch to Defraggler and check the status all the time (in case you do something else in the meantime).

I agree with Andavari. Searching recursively from the root directory takes a long time. Depending on the number of files and folders on your drive it may take several minutes. The only reason why it takes even longer since the latest version is that now the recursive search really works. Before v2.27 the search was simply not done (properly). Anyway, why it takes longer than the Windows search I cannot tell.

I think so too. I can see no qualitative difference between the files found and those not found. You could try again and then (without changing anything else, eg. closing any apps or so) try whether you can delete thos files manually. BTW: are those files just not deleted or are they not found at all?

I tried your 'not found' files with your winapp2.ini. There was no problem. Maybe you didn't have access rights to some of the folders (eg. the admin folder) or some folders were locked?

I know, it's been there for years. And I have been cursing M$ for years now and have been searching the internet, why my Word keeps 'forgetting' its settings. But if you just untick 'Office XP' all the rest won't get cleaned as well. As I wrote in my OP, that's what I have done for the moment. And if the devs decide that they want it that way I can leave the exclude settings. But I still don't get the point in those entries. Usually people adjust the settings of a program, because they want them that way (at least for me). And they don't want to redo the settings over and over again. But, let's let the devs decide. regards, Mike

This is not exactly a bug, but still it has to be corrected in my opinion. Here is the problem: For a long time I have been wondering why my MS Word keeps losing most of its settings from time to time. Of course, I have been blaming M$ for its usual sloppy programming, but yesterday I discovered by mere coincidence that CCleaner was responsible for this mess all along. In the built in cleaning entries I found in the section "Office XP": RegKey8=HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Office\10.0\Word\Data|Settings RegKey9=HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Office\10.0\Access\Settings Ladies and gentlemen, what on earth is that supposed to be? Those two lines have caused me a lot of grief and I really don't understand what possible use they could have. As for now I put those two entries into the GUI-exclude section, but I strongly suggest they be removed from the program entirely. Please, bug fixers, can you comment on this issue? Thank you, Mike

Sure thing! I think, if someone doesn't want to delete their prefetch cache, they should simply not tick that little check box. No more, no less. As it seems, the whole thing is a question of belief, so there's no point in arguing. Wars about belief usually end up in a mess, as we know. But: I still find it sensible to point out that ...... Arghhhh, just read that article above, then you know what I mean. Btw: I realize just now that this has nothing more to do with the thread topic, sorry for that. I just mentioned it because it was in this DOS script.

[Damn temp files] LangSecRef=3002 Default=True FileKey1=c:\users|*.tmp|RECURSE FileKey2=c:\users|*.pdb|RECURSE FileKey3=c:\users|*.pch|RECURSE Big surprise? You might also take the time and read the documentation page, especially this one: ( http://docs.piriform.com/ccleaner/advanced...leaner-to-clean )

Depends on your data structure. The sections in my winapp2.ini scanning from the root take rather long (~10 sec) since they search the complete folder tree (at least the first time, after the folder structure is cached it's faster of course). I have no comparison, so I can't really tell if it is slow or not. Btw: Why the new account? Did your old one get banned?

Holy s...! What is this!? How come we find a several page DOS script for deleting temp files in a forum board of a Windows-GUI program doing exactly that task (only more flexible)? The issue of this thread was originally that something was not working right in CCleaner, not a lecture in DOS scripting. I am sure you can do everything with a DOS batch or you could even recode it in C, but what's the point? As pointed out by FleetCommand ... ... the issue is resolved. So I advise the Mods to close this thread before someone posts how to rewrite your operating system. I am sure, Mr. 5secondnews.com, your suggestion was well-intentioned. That's +3 points for programming skills but -10 for wrong forum. kind regards, Mike PS: please excuse my sarcasm PPS: Btw, it is a much debated issue whether it is a good idea to clean the prefetch cache. (see http://www.populartechnology.net/2005/10/c...ation-load.html )

This is how mine looks like, at work and at home too (attachment, hope this works). Both are Windows XP Pro SP3. Just to make sure: Your drive does not happen to be that empty, so that you only see the gray free space, right?

What exactly does quick defrag do (as opposed to normal defrag and free space defrag)?

Ah, thanks hazelnut! That would be a VERY nice feature. However, unfeasible to implement, I would say. It would require Defraggler to simmulate the whole defrag run in advance, because there is no direct/linear relation between the remaining data and the time to completion. In fact, it appears to me, that with the current algorithm defraggler ends up with only the smallest files of the drive at the end of defragging and thus the process slows down dramatically in the end.

You don't see the pie like shown in Dennis' post (#2, this thread)? Then it is a bug, but not necessarily Defraggler's. Maybe it is some system library used for the pie chart display and maybe your's is broke? Honestly, I don't know. Can you post a screen shot? It would be interesting, if others experience this thing too. But you are not trying to threat anybody by not using Defraggler

Absolutely! Maybe it doesn't need to be a page long, but some notification would be nice. Some people don't want such a thing because of defraggler running scheduled tasks in background. So probably the reporting should be optional. Maybe this too should be configurable. After a while you certainly know, what the colors mean. And then the legend occupies precious screen space. ETA - what? Probably quite useful for certain users. Generally the scheduled tasks should be fully configurable. Mike

Keno, how come you don't see the pie in color? On my screen it is clearly blue. Of course, it is a matter of taste, but I personally like the new design. I don't think many users still want to see this overlarge Windows-XP-like blue&pink chart. And, you are hopefully not serious about refusing to use the program because of the looks of the pie chart, are you? Mike

I can't quite follow what you are saying. What do you mean by 'off-center'? The aspect ratio of the pie depends on the available window space given to the Properties frame. The less space you give it, the more squished it looks. Or maybe you are irritated by the fact that the free space is drawn transparent. Honestly, in the picture you attached I can see nothing wrong. regards, Mike

Try that: FileKey1=k:\.|Thumbs.db|RECURSE FileKey2=k:\.|Checklist.ms|RECURSE The searchpath (the part before the first |) is supposed to not end on a backslash. For some reason just k:|Thumbs.db|RECURSE does not work but the syntax above does the job. I did some testing on that issue and as far as I could figure it is fully implemented now. Thanx to the devs and bug fixers! regards, Mike

Eg.: Adobe Premiere leaves a "CG Cache" folder and "video previews" next to any video file that was opened in Premiere. Steinberg Cubase creates a whole lot of folders for decompressed mpeg files and other stuff wherever you open a project (Cubase can delete those files automatically but it leaves the folders behind). TMPGEnc creates a temp folder. My C compiler creates "bin" and "obj" folders, that I want to remove from time to time. etc. They don't write randomly, but they leave folders wherever you open a data file. They are like a dog, dropping everywhere you take it. Of course I know, where my data files are and I could delete those folders manually. But it is tedious. After all, a cleaner program is intended to remove left over stuff (files and folders) that reappears regularly in an automatic fashion (at least in my view). True, mostly those folders are left empty. But what is the point in leaving empty folders all over your data drive? Well, as you say, everyone has different needs. In this view I think a tool as flexible and versatile as possible would cover more people's needs. As I said in my OP, there are keys for removing registry entries and files. So I think it is only natural to ask: why not folders?

I wasn't talking about left-over folders after uninstalling an application. I was talking about folders created by applications during normal operation (see my next post).

As far as I can tell, the feature works correctly now. REMOVESELF only removes the folder, if the folder was empty after deleting the corresponding files. I suppose, that is the way it was intended. Good job! Mike

I tried (of course ) to press the "Show Details". If your computer gets stuck like that, you start pressing everything, don't you? I don't have a screen shot, but afair the text frame pops up but stays blank. Then the whole installer is dead as a doornail. BTW: I had the issue on my real machine (XP Pro SP3) as well as on a virtual machine (same OS). I think, I uninstalled Defraggler v1.10 before trying to install v1.15. Then, as I mentioned above, after some desperate measures the installer suddenly worked. However, yesterday I had the same problem again on a freshly installed virtual machine.