|
|
Post by Stefan on Mar 18, 2021 10:18:58 GMT -5
George,
This affects both version 2.3 and 2.4. It doesn't cause a failure, but it is disconcerting...
Sequence:
(1) SPFLite is running, displaying the FM page. The current location for the CFG file is "C:\$User\SPFLite CFG\"
(2) I use Windows Explorer to copy the "SPFLite CFG\" folder and it's contents to "C:\$User" as "C:\$User\SPFLiteCFG\",
ie. the new folder is in the same path/place but it's name has no space between "SPFLITE" and "CFG"
(3) In the running SPFLite session I enter Options Config (4) At the very bottom of the dialog, I change the previous location "C:\$User\SPFLite CFG\" to the new folder name "C:\$User\SPFLiteCFG\" (5) I get the "You have altered how Config data is handled... pop-up advising immediate SPFLite restart. (6) I click <OK> and close SPFLite. (7) I re-start SPFLite and check via Options Config
The location shown for the CFG file is the OLD location, even though SPFLite is in fact using the CFG file in the NEW location.
(8) The situation is fixed if you now repeat the previous change from location "C:\$User\SPFLite CFG\" to the new folder name "C:\$User\SPFLiteCFG\"
(9) Same pop-up dialog, click <OK>, close and then restart SPFLite.
(10) Options Config will now refer to the correct folder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stefan on Mar 18, 2021 11:22:53 GMT -5
Sorry, Robert. I read your entry 3 times, but still don't know what you mean.
I do believe you completely misread my post, which as all about the folder/path name, not the config file's file name.
The SPFLITE.CFG file (along with any CFGMAINT logs, Exports etc) is kept in a folder described by path C:\$User\SPFLite CFG\. (Note the <blank> in the name) So the fully qualified name of the config file is C:\$User\SPFLite CFG\SPFLite.CFG
For reasons too boring to mention, I needed to change the pathname by removing the single <blank> (also known as space) between the words SPFlite and CFG in the folder name.
I had hoped the choice of blue and red might have helped understanding.
|
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 18, 2021 13:48:41 GMT -5
Stefan: I'll have to recreate the environment you used to check this out. What you did sounds correct, but obviously there's something weird. BTW how did you KNOW it was using the NEW location?
George
|
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 18, 2021 14:15:39 GMT -5
OK Guys: Corrected. My logic was ALMOST correct, but the problem is the HomeFolder and HomeData variables IN THE CFG file obviously can't be updated in the NEW CFG while we're still running using the OLD CFG file.
However, the Registry entries are properly updated, and the CFG entries should have been updated at the next start up to what is actually being used. They weren't.
This whole area is so tough to keep all the balls in the air while things underneath are swapped around.
George
|
|
|
|
Post by Stefan on Mar 19, 2021 6:58:50 GMT -5
George, (1) Yes! Thank you. Your description of the logic matches my observation entirely. Apologies for not realising this myself. (2) Re: "How did I realise?". I deleted the old folder and SPFLite still worked. I mean, SPFLIte is good, but it isn't THAT good!  Robert,
Re: What am I doing? Short Answer - making a mess, despite knowing better!  Long Answer - If you're testing different SPFLite versions, please see my latest post in the "General Board and News - Full version of 2.4 available" thread. Briefly, while George furnishes us with a new EXE name, eg SPFLITE24.EXE instead of just SPFLITE2.EXE, they all end up using the SAME SPFLITE.CFG file. Fine when you only switch from old version to new version and stick. But if you flip between versions, you can (a) start more than one instance and have both active at once (hopefully recently fixed) and/or
(b) the older SPFLite.EXE has to process a newer format SPFLite.CFG.
Plenty potential for OOPS!
===> So, I didn't fully understand the scenario at first, but I wasn't that wrong to ask what the heck you were doing. All I knew is that something didn't sound right, but I couldn't put my finger on it. -- R
|
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 19, 2021 10:39:02 GMT -5
Stefan: Robert: The latest release was switched back to using the normal CFG file as my own testing had shown that no significant problems arose by sharing it. Maybe that wasn't a super idea. What I was hoping for was: - Copy the old CFG for safekeeping.
- Run 2.4 and provide feedback. Did it handle the old CFG without complaint? Is it working OK for normal use? If no major problems hopefully it could just continue to be used for more 'exercise'.
- If problems, then swap back the saved CFG file and report the problems.
George
|
|
