Nagarsoft's Tech Support

General Discussion :: RE: Running beta problem

Author: nagar
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 9:49 pm (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

Hello,

I'm sorry there has been some confusion.
The problem you mentioned happens when you are running both v.1.66 and v.19.7 BETA of Direct Access.

You can keep the two versions installed on the system but you must be careful if you run the new version and the old one.

The first thing you should do is create a backup of your old DirectAccess.dat file (as it was suggested in the email).

The location of the data file (which is called DirectAccess.dat in v.1.6 and DirectAccess.vdb3 in Direct Access 2.0) is stored into the registry.

When you run v.2.0 for the first time, it reads the value in the registry and if it founds a .dat file, it converts it automatically in the new format (the old file is not modified) creating a DirectAccess.vdb3 file which contains all your data.

If, afterward, you run DA 1.6 again, it tried to open that file in the new format, it doesn't detect the format and creates a new DirectAccess.dat file in the default directory, thus overwriting the old file.

So my suggestion is to create a backup of your old commands file before doing anything with the new beta.

So, if you decide to restore v.1.6, you just need, in the Options window, to choose the proper DirectAccess.dat file.

If I can be of further help, please let me know.

General Discussion :: RE: Running beta problem

Author: msteph
Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:13 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

Ben, thanks for your reply - I'm glad to see I'm not completely overlooking the obvious and that someone else had the same problem.

I ended up uninstalling beta 1.9.7 and pulling a copy of directaccess.dat off my most recent image of my system partition and manually putting it in the application data folder.

I still don't understand what the "...backup.dat" and the ".vdb3" files are - they match each other in filesize (about 90k) but they are much bigger than my 4k actual directaccess.dat file so if they are backups there is a conversion process going on that I am clueless about.

In any case I got 1.6.6 working again - lucky I had a backup .dat - but I'm not taking any more chances with DA betas unless Andrea can tell me what is going on.

General Discussion :: RE: Running beta problem

Author: AlphaAI
Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:06 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

Hello,

Im surprised he hasnt fixed that problem yet.
The first beta came with that problem. Did exactly what you did and got exactly what you got.

Since then the new beta 1.9.7 is available but I am very reluctant to use it until this problem is fixed.

I have spoken to Andrea about this a few times and was advised that my old directaccess.dat file has been overwritten.

That would be the case in ur circumstance. The only way I know how to fix that problem is to have an old copy of your directaccess.dat

I was once made a copy of the directaccess.dat and rename it directaccess.xml to another folder. Luckily I had that copy i overwrited the new one which was only 271 bytes with my old one which filesizr was bigger.

So im back in action. If you dont have an old copy then your out of luck.

MY EMAIL:

Hello Andrea,

Luckily for me I have a copy of the directaccess.dat converted to
directaccess.xml
I made a copy of it earlier.
so renamed it to directaccess.dat and most of my commands are back.
That should keep me going for now.

I think the directaccess.dat is automatically overwritten when I try
to load directaccess normal version.

Ben
- Show quoted text -

ANDREAS RESPONSE:

Hello Ben,

I see what happened. The name of the data file is stored into the registry. When installing Direct Access 2.0 that name has changed to the .vdb3 file. When you reinstalled Direct Access 1.6, it detected that the filename was invalid and created a new DirectAccess.dat file overwriting your old file.
I'm glad to hear you had a backup of your previous commands.
Thanks.
Andrea

MY ADVISE: Dont Use the BETA in your main machine if this is your main machine
Run it under a Virtual Machine if you want to test it.
I know this cos I nearly lost all my work.

Ben

General Discussion :: Running beta problem

Author: msteph
Subject: Running beta problem
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:02 pm (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

I'm confused with what is probably a simple oversight on my part.

I installed beta 1.9.7 alongside (but in its own folder) my existing 1.6.6.

Ran the beta and got an 'error copying data file - a new data file has been created (or similar wording). But none of my commands show up. I closed the beta and ran 1.6.6 and they're not there anymore either.

Apparently my commands are backed up in the Application Data\Direct Access folder since I see several '...backup.vdb3' files (from each failed attempt to load).

In addition to the backup files there is a "DirectAccess.vdb3" file that is the same as the last two backup files (in bytes at least) and a tiny "DirectAccess.dat" file that is only 271 bytes.

In 1.6.6, TOOLS\OPTIONS\GENERAL\SAVE DATA IN, the program is looking at the "DirectAccess.dat" file which is small, as I said, and apparently contains none of my commands. In 1.9.7 the program is looking at "DirectAccess.vdb3" which is 90k and apparently the same as the backups that get created but if my commands are in there it is not displaying them.

Obviously I'm doing something wrong - I usually don't deal with betas and now I'm reminded why.

I'd like to try out the beta but this is frustrating and I would be satisfied getting 1.6.6 to work again and dumping the beta till it's official.

DirectAccess is a tremendous program, one of my essentials so I'd appreciate help in getting it working again!

General Discussion :: RE: BUG: Direct Access Import Error

Author: nagar
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:17 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 1

Thanks. I'm working on the error that sometimes happen when you import commands.

General Discussion :: RE: Direct Access 1.66 Support to Continue?

Author: nagar
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:31 pm (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 2

Hello Jim,

I see Direct Access 2.0 as an evolution of v.1.66 so I don't understand when you say that some users will prefer the feature set of v.1.66.
Although the product is not completely stable (as it's still in BETA testing) I believe it's a major improvement over the past version offering a better integration and more functionalities that have been requested by our customers.

To answer your questions, v.1.66 will no longer be supported after the release of v.2.0 (that's kind of natural in the software world).

General Discussion :: RE: Create commands Wizard

Author: nagar
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:40 pm (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll change the wording.

General Discussion :: RE: Create commands Wizard

Author: psychris
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:09 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

Ah, yes! I see now. This wasn't clear when I looked at the dialog. I thought it was going to add shortcuts to the folders, not to the contents of the folders.

Perhaps rename the "Folders:" label as "Folder contents:" and rename the dropdown option "Folder contents..." to "Other folder..."? Just a suggestion but this slight change would have made it obvious to me.

Thanks.

General Discussion :: RE: Command maintenance

Author: nagar
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:33 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 1

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm adding it into the todo list for future releases.

General Discussion :: RE: Create commands Wizard

Author: nagar
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:30 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

This option is already present in the Create Commands Wizard

General Discussion :: Create commands Wizard

Author: psychris
Subject: Create commands Wizard
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:50 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 3

Hi,

The "Import / Create commands Wizard" could have an option to import command(s) from the Start menu shortcuts. This could potentially be very useful for a new user where a "Start menu" group could be populated with all of the applications in the Start menu.

Thanks,
Chris.

General Discussion :: Command maintenance

Author: psychris
Subject: Command maintenance
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:47 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 1

Hi,

Occasionally, I have broken commands where I have uninstalled applications. Perhaps these could be marked as broken rather than just displaying an error message when used? Perhaps a "cleanup wizard" to move broken shortcuts into an orphaned group or simply delete them?

Thanks,
Chris.

General Discussion :: RE: Direct Access 1.66 Support to Continue?

Author: psychris
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:35 am (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 2

Hi Jim,

I dislike bloat but enjoy trying out new features.

I've found version 2.0 beta to be a logical improvement over 1.66. On my PC it is faster and more stable with both overall usability and speed. Editing commands is now much quicker and I've yet to see a crash with the latest beta. I would encourage you to give version 2.0 a try when it is final.

Obviously, this is just my opinion but is intended to be helpful. Just my 2 cents.

Chris.

General Discussion :: Direct Access 1.66 Support to Continue?

Author: J-Mac
Subject: Direct Access 1.66 Support to Continue?
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:45 pm (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 2

Hi Andrea.

I imagine that you are pretty well preoccupied with the new DA beta. However I am steering clear of it for now. For years I performed a heck of a lot of beta testing for many developers. After wrecking my main personal-use computer a few times I finally wised up and started using an older computer with a virtual machine installed for all beta testing. Much safer that way! However that computer finally died late last year and I decided to not perform beta testing anymore on my main desktop. Unless, of course, the beta is very stable. Initial repots from your beta forum dissuaded me from installing the DA beta for now.

In the meantime, I will continue using V. 1.66 of DA until I see the final release of DA 2, unless the program changes drastically feature-wise, in which case I amy decide to stck with 1.66. I really like it when developers stick with the primary purpose of their software and use development to make it work better, faster, etc. I don't quite like it when they add a lot of bloat in order to try to match competition and add features before having fixed others. (Not that I am saying you're doing this - I have o idea yet what 2 will do).

My real question is: Will you continue to support 1.66 after the release of 2 for users who decide they prefer the feature set of 1.66?

Also, will reported issues in 1.66 ever be corrected? Or will 1.66 stand as is, bugs and all? Specifically I am concerned about the frequent unexplained crashes that DA 1.66 experiences, and the problem with not being able to type in any open dialog from any other program until I either close and restart DA, or right-click the tray icon and then click Shift+Esc, as I reported in this thread and this one.

Thanks.

Jim

General Discussion :: BUG: Direct Access Import Error

Author: boc
Subject: BUG: Direct Access Import Error
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:31 pm (GMT 1)
Topic Replies: 1

I have emailed the log file. Error occurred when importing commands from current version.