Problems after upgrading to 7.4

[NewsArchive]

Hi Friedrich,

after I upgraded my SB instance from 7.3 to 7.4 via web update, my setup
doesn't start on WIN 7 SP1.

There are two error messages (see attached screen shots). The strange
thing is, that the first reports "Setubuilder 7.3" and the second
"Setupbuilder 7.4".

Should I reinstall Setupbuilder?

Thanks for your help.

Markus

[NewsArchive]

Hi Markus,

> after I upgraded my SB instance from 7.3 to 7.4 via web update, my setup
> doesn't start on WIN 7 SP1.
>
> There are two error messages (see attached screen shots). The strange
> thing is, that the first reports "Setubuilder 7.3" and the second
> "Setupbuilder 7.4".
>
> Should I reinstall Setupbuilder?

The "Setubuilder 7.3" item is correct in this case. Well, not really <g>.
But the loader did not change and so we did not change it to "SetupBuilder
7.4".

This error means that it was not possible to unpack all resources into the
temporary Windows folder. Perhaps your virus-scanner (Trend Micro?)
"blocks" this process?

Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

BTW, if you start your setup.exe with the \E command line option then it's
possible that you'll see which file your anti-virus product does not like or
where it is "blocked".

Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

Hi Friedrich,

the sbevents.txt (attached) is nearly empty. I have make a few more tests:

1.) The problem occurs on Win7 64 bit SP 1, but not on Win XP 32 bit.
2.) The problem occurs although avira antivir is disabled.
3.) The logfile form procmon (sysinternals) shows some strange things -
see screenshots and attached log.

What should I try next?

Markus

[NewsArchive]

Markus,

> the sbevents.txt (attached) is nearly empty. I have make a few more tests:
>
> 1.) The problem occurs on Win7 64 bit SP 1, but not on Win XP 32 bit.
> 2.) The problem occurs although avira antivir is disabled.
> 3.) The logfile form procmon (sysinternals) shows some strange things -
> see screenshots and attached log.
>
> What should I try next?

I have no idea :-( Are you sure that you have a "valid" executable and that
it's not caused by some kind of a transmission error? Is the code-signature
valid? If yes, what happens if you rollback to SB73 and recompile?

I don't see any modification in the runtime that could cause this. And we
did not receive any similar report. According to our web server log, about
60% of all customers updated to SB74.

Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

BTW, the log tells us that the first temporary file already failed. Nothing
changed in this process since version 7.0. Even the decompression routine
is the same.

Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

We compared all source code modifications from SB73 to SB74 and we do not
see any runtime change that would cause such a problem :-(

Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

Hi Friedrich,

I still don't know, what the problem is, but it seems to be related to
one specific administrative user account. So I close this issue as
"Einzelschicksal".

Thanks.

Markus

[NewsArchive]

Hi Markus,

> I still don't know, what the problem is, but it seems to be related to one
> specific administrative user account. So I close this issue as
> "Einzelschicksal".

Thanks for the information. This is wired. It seems to me that the
temporary folder is "locked" (or not writable all the time) on this machine.
I have never seen this before.

Friedrich