|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Darren New
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen in Linux)
Date: 19 Sep 2009 16:15:27
Message: <4ab53bdf$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> The best uninstallers ask you whether you want to also remove save files
> and such, giving you the option of preserving them or removing them safely.
> That's how all programs should do it, but unfortunately not many do.
Exactly. A lot of the cruft left behind is due to the fact it's commercial.
Was it worth *their* time to add that question to the uninstaller? Sucks,
but what are you going to do?
But the crap like caching java applets forever is hellishly annoying, I
find. That grows forever. I can remember to clean up junk the thrice a year
I uninstall something.
Now I have a bat file that deletes all the crap I can find I run before backups.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Chambers
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 04:13:35
Message: <4ab5e42f@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I'm still wondering why no OS has yet come up with the idea of
> seperating "documents" from "settings", but hey...
?
It's called the "registry", and it's one of the most complained about
"features" of Windows.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: clipka
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 08:20:38
Message: <4ab61e16$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 schrieb:
> Heh. On Monday, I've got to see if a Windows 2.0 program works OK under
> Windows XP. The fun part? To run it, you must replace SERIAL.SYS with a
> custom modified version. (!!)
Uh - Windows TWO-point-zero?? Sure it isn't 3.1 at least? Who on earth
used 2.0?
> It still amuses me that this program can't print on any network printer
> who's name is more than 8 characters long...
Comes as not much of a surprise. It's rather a miracle that it can
access networked printers at all...
> Oh, sure, it could put the installer file in
>
> %profile%\Local Settings\Temp
>
> But it doesn't. It puts it in
>
> %profile%\Application Settings\Adobe\Acrobat\Updater
>
> The Java installer does something similarly retarded for some reason.
> Maybe it's an IE quirk of some kind?
I'd presume it's a safety measure to not end up with a crippled
installation: Files in %profile%\Local Settings\Temp can be recycled by
Windows' disk cleanup assistant. If the updater is designed using a
multi-step approach, and there's a serious possibility that the steps
may be run at very distinct points in time, you'll want those files to
still exist when the second step commences.
If the updater cleans up after work, there shouldn' be a problem. If it
fails to do, it somehow defies the exact purpose of the disk cleanup
assistant, and would therefore need to be called poor design.
> You can't put, for example, the Word "normal" template in the registry.
> But then, I guess it depends on what you consider to be "settings" and
> what is "documents"...
Indeed, a clear line cannot always be drawn; for instance, are POV-Ray
.ini files settings for POV-Ray, or are they part of the scene?
> FWIW, I think the registry actually works quite well for what it's
> supposed to be for. You can lock it down with security, it's got
> seperate user and system sections, and so on. The only real flaw is that
> it's more or less impossible to do manual things like copy one user's
> preferences to another user account, but only for one specific
> application. (Because you will never, ever determine which keys to copy...)
Most software is pretty sane about this, storing /user/-specific
settings in HKCU/Software/CompanyName/ProgramName, so the biggest
obstacle is figuring the users' IDs.
Plus the fact that some software may not be using the registry to store
settings, but files in one of the many %profile% subfolders instead.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: clipka
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 08:25:19
Message: <4ab61f2f$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New schrieb:
> clipka wrote:
>> I don't think Linux package managers will automatically un-install
>> those if you uninstall that image processing package
>
> Actually, Windows will do this, too. The problem is that not every
> installer will mark what dependencies it uses, so you'll often get the
> question "Hey, the DLL called <incomprehensible>.DLL looks unused,
> should I uninstall it?"
BTW, does Linux provide such a feature as well? If so, where does the
"use count" live there?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: clipka
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 08:40:32
Message: <4ab622c0$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis schrieb:
> clipka wrote:
>> in addition. I don't think Linux package managers will automatically
>> un-install those if you uninstall that image processing package (it
>> would be ill-advised, as I might have installed other,
>> non-package-managed software that also relies on that library).
>
> Non-package-managed software installed by hand is of no concern to the
> package manager. It will uninstall swiftly.
>
> I'm used to compile up-to-date libs required by some hand-compiled
> up-to-date software and install it to my ~/lib. It's only annoying to
> do the usual "LD_LIBRARY_PATH=~/lib foo" everytime, but, hey!, that's
> why bash history is for. :)
I have no idea what you're talking about here, nor do I know whether you
understood my point.
What I mean is this: Suppose I install a package-managed piece of
software (let's name it "FooPNG" for now) that needs the libpng package.
Of couse the package manager will recognize, and ask me whether I want
to install the package as well. (Sure I do, yes please, go ahead.)
Now I compile this strange piece of software called POV-Ray, which
obviously isn't package managed. But it needs the libpng nonetheless. No
problem here, as the libpng is already there, so it compiles (and
installs) fine.
Now I decide to uninstall FooPNG.
Will the package manager uninstall libpng as well, figuring that only
FooPNG should rely on it? Will it leave libpng alone, figuring it
/might/ be used by /some/ other app? Or will it actually have any way of
/knowing/ that POV-Ray relies on it?
(I really don't care whether the package manager will uninstall
/swiftly/ or /slowly/, I care /what/ it uninstalls :-))
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Orchid XP v8
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 09:57:06
Message: <4ab634b2$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> It still amuses me that this program can't print on any network
>> printer who's name is more than 8 characters long...
>
> Comes as not much of a surprise. It's rather a miracle that it can
> access networked printers at all...
I'm guessing Windows does a sufficiently good job of pretending they're
actually local. ;-)
We have another program that goes with this one. It's written in QBASIC.
It requires a laser printer that understands PCL to be mapped to LPT2:.
(I'm not sure what I could add to this description that would make it
sound any worse...)
>> Oh, sure, it could put the installer file in
>>
>> %profile%\Local Settings\Temp
>>
>> But it doesn't. It puts it in
>>
>> %profile%\Application Settings\Adobe\Acrobat\Updater
>>
>> The Java installer does something similarly retarded for some reason.
>> Maybe it's an IE quirk of some kind?
>
> I'd presume it's a safety measure to not end up with a crippled
> installation: Files in %profile%\Local Settings\Temp can be recycled by
> Windows' disk cleanup assistant. If the updater is designed using a
> multi-step approach, and there's a serious possibility that the steps
> may be run at very distinct points in time, you'll want those files to
> still exist when the second step commences.
>
> If the updater cleans up after work, there shouldn' be a problem. If it
> fails to do, it somehow defies the exact purpose of the disk cleanup
> assistant, and would therefore need to be called poor design.
It downloads the installer, runs it, and then JUST LEAVES IT THERE. So,
yeah, poor design.
But then again, as Warp pointed out, Java likes to cache every applet
you've ever run, and provides no easy way (that I can discover) to
remove this cache...
> Most software is pretty sane about this, storing /user/-specific
> settings in HKCU/Software/CompanyName/ProgramName, so the biggest
> obstacle is figuring the users' IDs.
>
> Plus the fact that some software may not be using the registry to store
> settings, but files in one of the many %profile% subfolders instead.
The really fun thing is that you can't edit a user's registry chunk
without loading it first...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Orchid XP v8
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 10:01:28
Message: <4ab635b8$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Now I have a bat file that deletes all the crap I can find I run before
> backups.
I had that.
Then I discovered that it can't delete the IE web cache. (Due to some
kind of weirdness with it being system and hidden or something like
that.) So I switched to a Tcl script. Even built a little Tk GUI for it,
so you can see how much longer it's going to take. (Deleting 0.8GB of
web cache takes a while...)
And then I switched it to Haskell, so I could more precisely control the
file deletion algorithm. And I added logging. And I ran it as a service,
scripted to run on the profile server every 300 seconds...
And then HQ IT decided that roaming profiles were too efficient, and
disabled them. Now every...single...time...I set up a new PC, I have a
stream of people asking me to come over and configure their email
settings. And people whining that they have to adjust their Word
settings manually for every PC they use. *sigh*
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Fredrik Eriksson
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen in Linux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 11:09:55
Message: <op.u0j9qsh77bxctx@e6600>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:15:24 +0200, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> But the crap like caching java applets forever is hellishly annoying, I
> find. That grows forever.
Are you talking about the deployment cache? If so, you can change that in
the Java control panel. Alternatively, CCleaner can clear it for you.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: clipka
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 12:11:43
Message: <4ab6543f$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 schrieb:
> The really fun thing is that you can't edit a user's registry chunk
> without loading it first...
You could generate a registry patch (I think .reg is the extension) that
would be written to the HKCU tree, and somehow make sure that thing
executed next time the user logs in.
(The only thing which is a real nuisance there is that this doesn't
allow you to /delete/ registry keys.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Fredrik Eriksson
Subject: Re: An annoying thing in Windows (which mostly doesn't happen inLinux)
Date: 20 Sep 2009 12:27:37
Message: <op.u0kdca2o7bxctx@e6600>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:11:27 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> You could generate a registry patch (I think .reg is the extension) that
> would be written to the HKCU tree, and somehow make sure that thing
> executed next time the user logs in.
>
> (The only thing which is a real nuisance there is that this doesn't
> allow you to /delete/ registry keys.)
Of course it does. What makes you think otherwise?
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|