Jump to content

my2cents

Members
  • Content Count

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by my2cents

  1. Hello all, This customization technique via an ini file is not suited for most users. Moreover, it could lead to a disater for those untrained individuals who attempt to deploy it. This is definitely a step in the wrong direction IMHO. Moreover, this ini file will require continual updating based on the installed program changes. For example, what happens if a specific program provides a major update and moves things around? If so, how is one supposed to know how to tailor this new ini file to clean the new locations properly? Now, since there are already programs that attempt such remedial actions, and since they only require a checkbox to be ticked, I would say they are well ahead of this ini initiative; however, even those programs fail frequently because it is difficult to keep up with all the popular program rewrites and updates. I have used CCxxxxxxx in the past and it has continually broken unique programs due to specific programs being updated and the cleaner program lagging behind (or not knowing about) the updated program locations. Now, if programmers can't keep up with the changes, do you think the average user will succeed? Again, this is not a good idea IMHO. my2cents
  2. A 2nd test: 1. Did a clean install of Win 7 Home Premium with all options left at defaults. 2. Ran WDC and it does show both the language and sample options available for removal (see attached): 3. Closed WDC (without removing anything) and deleted all sample folders manually. 4. Ran SFC /SCANNOW and no errors were reported. 5. Ran WDC again and it still showed all samples available for removal (along with languages). My conclusion: If I attempt any of the language or sample removal options (offered by WDC), SFC might fail again so I'm leaving them "as is." Just some more food for thought when developing the next WDC release. Cheers! my2cents
  3. Hello WisecleanerPress, Thank you for your acknowledgement and attention to this (possibly) obscure issue and thank you for all the great products too! my2cents
  4. OK, I figured it all out (I think). So in summary: All the sample removals were caused by me turning off Win 7 Media Features. Apparently SFC expects all default features to be enabled. The SFC language errors were caused by WDC's optionally executed removal; however, SFC did restore their availability after the first run. FYI, I have attached the second SFC error log to substantiate the above. Thank you, my2cents sfcdetails2.txt
  5. Additional information for your consideration: So, after running sfc /scannow, and leaving the uncorrectable errors untouched, I ran WDC again, and it appears the language options have reappeared as optional removals again. Not sure how or why but FYI: Screenshot attached:
  6. Hello all, Just consider this an FYI; however, if the admins feel any corrective action might be appropriate, then please have at it! Anyway, I just did a clean install of Window 7 SP1 and applied all Windows Updates to current. Once done, I immediately made the following adjustments: Removed (e.g., unticked) the following Win 7 features: Internet Explorer 8 Media Features (all) Windows Gadget Platform I aslo removed all unnecessary options (as advised by WDC) which primarily included additional languages and sample pictures, music, and videos. So, after all of the above was completed, I decided to run sfc /scannow and the results were very specific about finding uncorrectable errors in the language and samples areas and those areas are exactly where the WDC optional removals reside. In summary, I can see where this might cause an issue for those who use and rely on scf /scannow for troublrshooting purposes; however, for me, it is not an issue and I have no desire to take any corrective action myself. Also, I have attached a dump of my sfc scan results for your review and consideration, just in case the admins feel some corrective action might be warrranted at this point. I am currently using WDC 7.89.520. Thanks and good luck to all! my2cents UPDATE: I forgot to mention how much I enjoy using all of your products so thank you for making them available! sfcdetails.txt
  7. Hi again xilolee, The ability to select "multiple ignores" at the same time would be a wonderful option if considered; however, until that option is available, I'll just plod trough the list and add them "one at a time." A great suggestion BTW.
  8. Perfect! Thanks to xilolee for working with me on my issue and a big thank you to admin for the future fix too! my2cents
  9. Hello admin, OK, yes I noticed that it was a conditional and automatic function; however, even though I would prefer to have an option to disable it, I can certainly understand you concern for the general safety of all users, so I can accept that logic and just continue to disable it after a slimming function. Thank you for your explanation and you have a great product line BTW! my2cents
  10. hello again xilolee, Great observation and I was just getting ready to update this thread when I noticed your last response. Thanks for that. So, I have no doubt in my mind that this issue was somehow caused by WRC itself. Let me explain a bit further. I have been using WRC on Win 8.0,, Win 8.1 Preview, Win 8.1 RTM, and now Win 8.1 RTM (fully authenticated). And, all, I repeat ALL have been clean installs of the operating system. Now, I just did a clean install of the last OS about one week ago and, sure enough, this issue popped up again. However, since xilolee stirred up my interest a bit, I decided to investigate further and here's what I found: So, as xilolee correctly identified the discrepancies between the two views above, I found that the "reported entries" were actually entries created by WRC and placed in the "actual registry" under the WRC folder itself. So, in essence it some how generated those entries and then discovered them on all subsequent scans and incorrectly placed the wrong pathname in its own exclusion list. The fix for me was to go in and actually delete those invalid WRC entries in the actual registry and they were never recreated again. In summary, I have no idea how this got hosed up but history has repeated itself throughout 4 different clean installs so I will leave this in the hands of others to figure out why. Also, thank you to xilolee for the suggestions and interest but I am personally done with this issue as I now see what is happening and I now know how to manually fix the invalid entries that were created by WRC (and then subsequently mis-identified in the exception list). Please understand that I appreciate the guidance but I can no longer work on this issue because it is no longer an issue for me. Thanks, my2cents
  11. Hi xilolee, Yes, they are on the list and are being ignored as exceptions. Moreover, they are the only exceptions (on a long list) that are being ignored. They have been there for quite some time but the issue remains. Thanks for your suggestion. Hoping support will look into this and respond as well. Here are those entries on the exclusion list: Thanks, my2cents
  12. Hello all, The right-click "ignore this entry" function works for every category except shared dlls. I have 14 entries that I try to manually set to ignore but they come right back on the next scan. So, is there a fix in the works for this issue? Thanks, .
  13. Hello all, Since I do not use System Restore points, is there any way to disable WDC from automatically creating one before attempting file removals under certain conditions. I always go back in and disable System Restore and delete the newly created restore point but it seems like an option should be made available for those of us that rely more on a System Image restoral to fix our issues. A great product BTW! Thanks, my2cents
×
×
  • Create New...