[New] XWorkplace v1.0.9

[Rich Walsh]

I'm pleased to announce the release of XWP v1.0.9. It contains over
30 bugfixes and enhancements from Paul Ratcliffe, myself, and others.
Special thanks go to Mensys for sponsoring some of these improvements.

Among the changes:

- Split View is now fully functional. Both panes should update properly
and all of the menus should work.

- You can now (successfully) set the default view for any file or folder
from its 'Open as' menu using Shift+MB1 on the desired view.

- ACPI shutdown should not leave filesystems dirty any more.

- XFix has been thoroughly revised to make it safer and easier to use.
Handles are no longer deleted immediately and any problems caused
by a pending deletion are flagged so they can be corrected. A new
Auto-Protect feature prevents deletion of any handle the WPS might
require. XFix's help panels have also been completely revised.

The base package plus NLS support packages for German and Dutch can be
downloaded from:

ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9.exe
ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9-nls-de.exe
ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9-nls-nl.exe
or
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9.zip
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9-nls-de.zip
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9-nls-nl.zip

If you encounter any bugs in this release or wish to request new features,
please open a ticket in XTracker at:

http://xtracker.xworkplace.org/index.php?project=2

Thanks,

Rich Walsh

[Percival P. Cassidy]

Post by Rich Walsh
I'm pleased to announce the release of XWP v1.0.9. It contains over
30 bugfixes and enhancements from Paul Ratcliffe, myself, and others.
Special thanks go to Mensys for sponsoring some of these improvements.
- Split View is now fully functional. Both panes should update properly
and all of the menus should work.
- You can now (successfully) set the default view for any file or folder
from its 'Open as' menu using Shift+MB1 on the desired view.
- ACPI shutdown should not leave filesystems dirty any more.
- XFix has been thoroughly revised to make it safer and easier to use.
Handles are no longer deleted immediately and any problems caused
by a pending deletion are flagged so they can be corrected. A new
Auto-Protect feature prevents deletion of any handle the WPS might
require. XFix's help panels have also been completely revised.
The base package plus NLS support packages for German and Dutch can be
ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9.exe
ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9-nls-de.exe
ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9-nls-nl.exe
or
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9.zip
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9-nls-de.zip
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9-nls-nl.zip
If you encounter any bugs in this release or wish to request new features,
http://xtracker.xworkplace.org/index.php?project=2

I don't know whether this is a bug or whether I'm doing something wrong:
I installed over the existing feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately
on mouse click' no longer works; it did previously.

Perce

[Paul Ratcliffe]

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I installed over the existing feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately
on mouse click' no longer works; it did previously.

It works for me. That code hasn't changed in ages. What are you clicking
on?
"no longer works" - tell us what it DOES do, not what it doesn't.
"previously" - tell us with which version.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

Post by Paul Ratcliffe

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I installed over the existing feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately
on mouse click' no longer works; it did previously.

It works for me. That code hasn't changed in ages. What are you clicking
on?
"no longer works" - tell us what it DOES do, not what it doesn't.
"previously" - tell us with which version.

"What it DOES do" is nothing: the xCenter/eCenter does not hide
immediately when I click anywhere. What else could "no longer works" mean?

Perce

[Dariusz Piatkowski]

Post by Percival P. Cassidy

Post by Paul Ratcliffe

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I installed over the existing feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately
on mouse click' no longer works; it did previously.

It works for me. That code hasn't changed in ages. What are you clicking
on?
"no longer works" - tell us what it DOES do, not what it doesn't.
"previously" - tell us with which version.

"What it DOES do" is nothing: the xCenter/eCenter does not hide
immediately when I click anywhere. What else could "no longer works" mean?
Perce

....yeah, except in your original posting you did NOT explain any of the
above...so how is a developer supposed to guess just exactly where you are
attempting to use this function?

Sounds like Paul has some idea, great thinking on his part...me on the other
hand...I wish I could help, but I had no clue what the heck you were talking
about!

[Paul Ratcliffe]

Post by Dariusz Piatkowski

Post by Percival P. Cassidy

Post by Paul Ratcliffe

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I installed over the existing feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately
on mouse click' no longer works; it did previously.

It works for me. That code hasn't changed in ages. What are you clicking
on?
"no longer works" - tell us what it DOES do, not what it doesn't.
"previously" - tell us with which version.

"What it DOES do" is nothing: the xCenter/eCenter does not hide
immediately when I click anywhere. What else could "no longer works" mean?

It could mean "anything" really. He chose it to mean "nothing". How is
anyone supposed to know? "It doesn't work" is virtually guaranteed to
irritate most developers, as is lack of context.

Post by Dariusz Piatkowski
....yeah, except in your original posting you did NOT explain any of the
above...so how is a developer supposed to guess just exactly where you are
attempting to use this function?
Sounds like Paul has some idea, great thinking on his part...me on the other
hand...I wish I could help, but I had no clue what the heck you were talking
about!

Indeed. I struggled for a few moments to work out what he was on about.
I guess he might not have the XWP Hook enabled. If I was feeling charitable
I'd tell him exactly where to find the setting, but frankly I can't be
bothered.

[piesse]

If I was feeling charitable I'd tell him exactly where to find the setting, but frankly I can't be

bothered.


If I read correctly the original post "I don't know whether this is a
bug or whether I'm doing something wrong: I installed over the existing
feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately on mouse click' no longer
works; it did previously. ", it does not sound offensive or uninformative.

It says that, after upgrading, 'hide immediately on mouse click' (a
referenced feature of the program, mentioned even on
http://xworkplace.netlabs.org/en/site/news.xml) would not do anymore
whatever was supposed to do. The poster could reasonably expect that the
developers would know what the feature was about. Of course, you can
only be thanked for your work and there in no fault if you didn't know
or remember it, but I don't see as this can be turned to a fault of the
poster.

I don't know your precedents with the poster, but I think that you
overreacted

cheers

Piersante

[Paul Ratcliffe]

Post by piesse
If I read correctly the original post "I don't know whether this is a
bug or whether I'm doing something wrong: I installed over the existing
feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately on mouse click' no longer
works; it did previously. ", it does not sound offensive or uninformative.
It says that, after upgrading, 'hide immediately on mouse click' (a
referenced feature of the program, mentioned even on
http://xworkplace.netlabs.org/en/site/news.xml) would not do anymore
whatever was supposed to do. The poster could reasonably expect that the
developers would know what the feature was about.

If he'd said XCenter somewhere in there it would have helped. If he'd
told us which previous version he was using it would have helped. If he'd
told us where he was clicking it would have helped. He did none of these.

Post by piesse
but I don't see as this can be turned to a fault of the poster.

Lack of specific information is ALWAYS the fault of the poster. Then
they try and blame the person who's trying to answer the question and
start moaning about giving extra information that's been asked for (and
usually don't give it) - I've seen it countless times.
Do you or they ever wonder why people ask this sort of stuff? Put
yourselves in the position of the developer and see it from THEIR
point of view, without any knowledge of what exactly you are doing.

Post by piesse
I don't know your precedents with the poster, but I think that you
overreacted

I don't have any. Merely giving him a taste of his own medicine in an
effort to drive the point home. Whether that is successful or not I
do not know.

[Peter Flass]

Post by Paul Ratcliffe

Post by piesse
If I read correctly the original post "I don't know whether this is a
bug or whether I'm doing something wrong: I installed over the existing
feature in eCS 2.1, but 'hide immediately on mouse click' no longer
works; it did previously. ", it does not sound offensive or uninformative.
It says that, after upgrading, 'hide immediately on mouse click' (a
referenced feature of the program, mentioned even on
http://xworkplace.netlabs.org/en/site/news.xml) would not do anymore
whatever was supposed to do. The poster could reasonably expect that the
developers would know what the feature was about.

If he'd said XCenter somewhere in there it would have helped. If he'd
told us which previous version he was using it would have helped. If he'd
told us where he was clicking it would have helped. He did none of these.

Post by piesse
but I don't see as this can be turned to a fault of the poster.

Lack of specific information is ALWAYS the fault of the poster.

Sometimes the poster doesn't know what information might be important.
Admittedly "no longer works" might be a bit vague, but often posting a
vague question will elicit requests for information that might be
relevant, rather than just posting a lot of useless data.

[Rich Wonneberger]

I have to admit I have done this many times myself not thinking enough
about what to include.
Usually someone replies asking for details needed that I did not think
about including.

Rich W.

Post by Peter Flass
Sometimes the poster doesn't know what information might be important.
Admittedly "no longer works" might be a bit vague, but often posting a
vague question will elicit requests for information that might be
relevant, rather than just posting a lot of useless data.

[A.D. Fundum]

Post by Rich Wonneberger
I have to admit I have done this many times myself not
thinking enough about what to include.

No problem, the industry is aimed at that behaviour .

Post by Rich Wonneberger
Usually someone replies asking for details needed that I did not
think about including.

We already saw incident closure. That's skipping an impressive number
business opportinities to waist at least 40 minutes on management of
this incident, several incident recordings, incident classifications,
the incident investigation, incident ownership changes, incident
monitoring, incident tracking and incident communication ("What do you
mean by "it"?")..

The earlier annoyed, professional (!) developer plays no role at all,
and must hate the job. The industry is aimed at people using an
unclear "it", or at people asking for lovely pink characters on a
purple background.


--

[piesse]

As I said, I don't think that what the details that the poster gave or
not are so important. What the poster failed to recognize, in my
opinion, is that he was not asking a close friend or a commercial
customer service. Even if, reporting a problem, he could think that he
was helping the development, a few thanking words wouldn't have been
undeserved, and would have helped the relationship a lot.

Piersante

Post by Rich Wonneberger
I have to admit I have done this many times myself not thinking enough
about what to include.
Usually someone replies asking for details needed that I did not think
about including.
Rich W.

Post by Peter Flass
Sometimes the poster doesn't know what information might be important.
Admittedly "no longer works" might be a bit vague, but often posting a
vague question will elicit requests for information that might be
relevant, rather than just posting a lot of useless data.

[Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz]

Post by Rich Wonneberger
Usually someone replies asking for details needed that I did not
think about including.

I'd be surprised if you didn't also get asked about details that you
had already provided :-(

[Peter Flass]

Post by Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz

Post by Rich Wonneberger
Usually someone replies asking for details needed that I did not
think about including.

I'd be surprised if you didn't also get asked about details that you
had already provided :-(

That would be microsoft.

[Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz]

Post by Peter Flass

Post by Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
I'd be surprised if you didn't also get asked about details that you
had already provided :-(

That would be microsoft.

Among others. M$ may have refined the art of poor support, but they
didn't invent it.

[Barry Landy]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Rich Walsh wrote:

:>
:>I'm pleased to announce the release of XWP v1.0.9. It contains over
:>30 bugfixes and enhancements from Paul Ratcliffe, myself, and others.
:>Special thanks go to Mensys for sponsoring some of these improvements.
:>
:>Among the changes:
:>
:>- Split View is now fully functional. Both panes should update properly
:> and all of the menus should work.
:>
:>- You can now (successfully) set the default view for any file or folder
:> from its 'Open as' menu using Shift+MB1 on the desired view.
:>
:>- ACPI shutdown should not leave filesystems dirty any more.
:>
:>- XFix has been thoroughly revised to make it safer and easier to use.
:> Handles are no longer deleted immediately and any problems caused
:> by a pending deletion are flagged so they can be corrected. A new
:> Auto-Protect feature prevents deletion of any handle the WPS might
:> require. XFix's help panels have also been completely revised.
:>
:>The base package plus NLS support packages for German and Dutch can be
:>downloaded from:
:>
:> ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9.exe
:> ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9-nls-de.exe
:> ftp://ftp.netlabs.org/incoming/xwp-1-0-9-nls-nl.exe
:>or
:> http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9.zip
:> http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9-nls-de.zip
:> http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=xwp-1-0-9-nls-nl.zip
:>
:>If you encounter any bugs in this release or wish to request new features,
:>please open a ticket in XTracker at:
:>
:> http://xtracker.xworkplace.org/index.php?project=2
:>

Thanks very much for this new version

Please could you explain one thing to help with debugging:

what module does extended shutdown call when doing a reboot to named
partition?

Using Airboot I have obeyed SETABOOT /XWP to set the partitions and I
notice that XWP write
SETABOOT /iba:"name"
to to (now blank) screen.

Does it call SETBOOT.EXE from the path or some version of SETABOOT as
that would seem to suggest?

[Paul Ratcliffe]

Post by Barry Landy
what module does extended shutdown call when doing a reboot to named
partition?

Whatever you specify in the dialog.

Post by Barry Landy
Using Airboot I have obeyed SETABOOT /XWP to set the partitions and I
notice that XWP write
SETABOOT /iba:"name"
to to (now blank) screen.

I struggle to parse that sentence, let alone understand what you are
saying. I've no idea about SETABOOT anyway, but presumably you need to
replace "name" with a real partition name.

Post by Barry Landy
Does it call SETBOOT.EXE from the path or some version of SETABOOT as
that would seem to suggest?

Whatever you specify in the dialog. Please read the help on the Reboot
Actions page.

[Barry Landy]

On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:

:>On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:40:33 +0000, Barry Landy <***@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
:>
:>> what module does extended shutdown call when doing a reboot to named
:>> partition?
:>
:>Whatever you specify in the dialog.
:>
:>> Using Airboot I have obeyed SETABOOT /XWP to set the partitions and I
:>> notice that XWP write
:>> SETABOOT /iba:"name"
:>> to to (now blank) screen.
:>
:>I struggle to parse that sentence, let alone understand what you are
:>saying. I've no idea about SETABOOT anyway, but presumably you need to
:>replace "name" with a real partition name.

Sorry about the parsing. My current environment (PS/2 keyboard and mouse
connected to USB via a PS2 to USB converter) seems to have a strange
side effect of doubling, omitting and/or chaning the order of characters
which makes getting emails correct and correcting them afterwards very
hard.

What I meant to say was (clarifications added in beackets)


Using Airboot (ie for booting and for setting up the reboot options of
extended shutdown)

(To set the reboot partitions) I have obeyed SETABOOT /XWP to set the
partitions.

(When using extended shutdown to reboot) I notice that (after all the
other closedown activity) XWP writes
SETABOOT /iba:"name" to the (now blank) screen.
(where "name" is the actual name, in "", of the partition to be booted
after closedown)

And the question actually was asking how extended shutdown does the
reboot which I think you have answered.

:>
:>> Does it call SETBOOT.EXE from the path or some version of SETABOOT as
:>> that would seem to suggest?
:>
:>Whatever you specify in the dialog. Please read the help on the Reboot
:>Actions page.
:>

[Dariusz Piatkowski]

Hi Rich, Paul & the update team!

Post by Rich Walsh
I'm pleased to announce the release of XWP v1.0.9. It contains over
30 bugfixes and enhancements from Paul Ratcliffe, myself, and others.
Special thanks go to Mensys for sponsoring some of these improvements.

...

Thanks so much for the update...the Split View missing '+' was annoying me quite
a bit...strangely enough, the SMP configuration had a lot to do with it...since
booting in a uni-processor configuration allowed the old version to work
correctly. Long story short, it now works no matter what!!!!

Anyways...I'm curious: is anyone reporting any problems with the file 'copy'
functionality?

I'm having major problems attempting to copy files, especially the EXE
types...basically, even though the replacement dialog pops up and asks me to
confirm (which I select, as opposed to a re-name operation) the EXE never
actully gets copied over. The process fails even if the TARGET directory is
completely empty...for each EXE file I get a pop-up msg box telling me that
'...Drive G: is currently in use...', even though nothing that I can see has
access to the non-existing EXE file.

In addition to this, for other file types, the copies stuff gets the
latest&greatest date/time-stamp, as opposed to retaining the original file's
date/time stamp.

I am thinking it's best to file a ticket...but I was curious if anyone else
reported seeing this?

Thanks!

[Lars Erdmann]

Maybe it's a problem with the underlying subsystem (filesystem, drivers).
What is drive G: on your system ? A partition on a USB stick ? A network
drive ?
Are you using the AHCI driver for harddisk access ?
I would rather look into this. And I would try to do the copy from the
commandline.
If it works ok from a commandline you can then look into any GUI issues.

Lars

Post by Dariusz Piatkowski
Hi Rich, Paul & the update team!

Post by Rich Walsh
I'm pleased to announce the release of XWP v1.0.9. It contains over
30 bugfixes and enhancements from Paul Ratcliffe, myself, and others.
Special thanks go to Mensys for sponsoring some of these improvements.

...
Thanks so much for the update...the Split View missing '+' was annoying me quite
a bit...strangely enough, the SMP configuration had a lot to do with it...since
booting in a uni-processor configuration allowed the old version to work
correctly. Long story short, it now works no matter what!!!!
Anyways...I'm curious: is anyone reporting any problems with the file 'copy'
functionality?
I'm having major problems attempting to copy files, especially the EXE
types...basically, even though the replacement dialog pops up and asks me to
confirm (which I select, as opposed to a re-name operation) the EXE never
actully gets copied over. The process fails even if the TARGET directory is
completely empty...for each EXE file I get a pop-up msg box telling me that
'...Drive G: is currently in use...', even though nothing that I can see has
access to the non-existing EXE file.
In addition to this, for other file types, the copies stuff gets the
latest&greatest date/time-stamp, as opposed to retaining the original file's
date/time stamp.
I am thinking it's best to file a ticket...but I was curious if anyone else
reported seeing this?
Thanks!

[Paul Ratcliffe]

Post by Dariusz Piatkowski
Anyways...I'm curious: is anyone reporting any problems with the file 'copy'
functionality?

Not that I've heard.

Post by Dariusz Piatkowski
I'm having major problems attempting to copy files, especially the EXE
types...basically, even though the replacement dialog pops up and asks me to
confirm (which I select, as opposed to a re-name operation) the EXE never
actully gets copied over. The process fails even if the TARGET directory is
completely empty...for each EXE file I get a pop-up msg box telling me that
'...Drive G: is currently in use...', even though nothing that I can see has
access to the non-existing EXE file.

Sounds to me like your WPS is completely screwed up.
Presumably you mean XWP's 'Replace "File Exists" dialog'?
Have you tried seeing what happens if you turn it off?

Post by Dariusz Piatkowski
In addition to this, for other file types, the copies stuff gets the
latest&greatest date/time-stamp, as opposed to retaining the original file's
date/time stamp.

No idea. What filesystem format for a start?