Skip to main content

Topic: I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which? (Read 2978 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • Athenium
  • [*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
You have reached this page because some of the components you have installed are known to violate the foobar2000 SDK license:

It is illegal to use this SDK as a part of foobar2000 components that operate outside of legally documented programming interfaces (APIs), such as using window procedure hooks to modify user interface behaviors. We believe components doing so to be harmful to our userbase by introducing compatibility issues and dependencies on undocumented behaviors of our code that may change at any time without any notice or an update to the SDK which would reflect the change.

Troubleshooting and problem reporting features of your foobar2000 installation have been disabled.
----

This is oh so helpful...

Um... Maybe this piece of ** help message that someone idiot came up with could say what to do next?  Like what component to uninstall that is offending? 

It's NOT like I wrote any of them!!  The one component that it told me was out of date a ui_panel thing, I uninstalled, as it's author seemed to have closed up shop and taken his toys and gone home in a huff -- though his reason was the friendly attitude of some people on here -- and given the above message, I can see his point.

So what's the point in just saying you've installed some random component that is bad, so we are disabling any trouble shooting or ways to find out what it is and not gonna tell ya, so there!  Sounds like someone with a serious 'pout-on' wrote that error page.. 

I'm just trying different components to see what the do and trying to configure something fun and snazzy as I've gotten disgusted with songbird's constant crashing.

This player has good configurability, BUT a really poor editing interface (no UNDO?!?!?!)  ARG!!...  (yes I know about backups, but I just wanna under that last keypress!... (or similar...) oh well ...

So maybe someone coudl fix that error page to be a bit mroe helpful and explain which of the 50+ extensions I've installed is "illegal" (could they also cite a legal statute -- as to what law is being violated?  and in what jurisdiction?  ("we don't need to stinkin jurisdiction!"  -- er, wrong movie!)...


  • mudlord
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #1
It's NOT like I wrote any of them!!  The one component that it told me was out of date a ui_panel thing, I uninstalled, as it's author seemed to have closed up shop and taken his toys and gone home in a huff -- though his reason was the friendly attitude of some people on here -- and given the above message, I can see his point.


So you like broken crap?

  • ExUser
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Read-only
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #2
Post a list of your components here.

  • Kohlrabi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #3
Maybe this piece of ** help message that someone idiot came up with

His name is Peter, and you're not making much friends here with that attitude.

it's author seemed to have closed up shop and taken his toys and gone home in a huff -- though his reason was the friendly attitude of some people on here -- and given the above message, I can see his point.

To my knowledge the author was unwilling or unable to fix his component to adhere to the SDK rules.

So what's the point in just saying you've installed some random component that is bad, so we are disabling any trouble shooting or ways to find out what it is and not gonna tell ya, so there!

This kind of message will only show up if you deliberately install broken components. You could just not do it to avoid it.

I'm just trying different components to see what the do and trying to configure something fun and snazzy as I've gotten disgusted with songbird's constant crashing.

You can find "safe", useful components here at the forum or a whole list at the official components page.

So maybe someone coudl fix that error page to be a bit mroe helpful and explain which of the 50+ extensions I've installed is "illegal"

This was implemented to prevent the bug tracker being spammed by crashes by already known horribly broken components. Users installing these known broken components are on their own, hence the disabling of bug reporting and troubleshooting.


I recommend that you do a clean install using the official installer, and add those components you deem useful from the official components page. If you install a broken component from somewhere else along the way, you should be easily be able to identify it, after restarting the player.
It's only audiophile if it's inconvenient.

  • mudlord
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #4
To my knowledge the author was unwilling or unable to fix his component to adhere to the SDK rules.


Which means, the developer forfeited all rights and should go to hell for making horrid code that can and will break crap in the player.

  • Zao
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #5
People typically do not install "50+" components at the same time. They tend to install one or a few when they happen to find them.

Even if you install 50+ components, you ought to find the offender in less than a handful splits of your set of components.

Your usage pattern of "50+" components implies that you're probably using some component pack authored by someone who doesn't disclaim enough that it's bundling known broken components. Rant at them, they are probably quite aware of the horror they're inflicting on the world.
Zao shang yong zao nong zao rang zao ren zao.
To, early in the morning, use a chisel to build a bathtub makes impatient people hot-tempered.

  • prateek88
  • [*][*][*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #6
No doubt i once got this error stuff on my screen due to foo_w7shell plugin. Then i removed it.
  • Last Edit: 03 February, 2012, 02:50:22 PM by db1989

  • Athenium
  • [*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #7
It's NOT like I wrote any of them!!  The one component that it told me was out of date a ui_panel thing, I uninstalled, as it's author seemed to have closed up shop and taken his toys and gone home in a huff -- though his reason was the friendly attitude of some people on here -- and given the above message, I can see his point.


So you like broken crap?

No, I don't -- how do you read that I like broken crap, into "I don't like abusive error messages that further abuse users by taunting them with things they know nothing about and give no information?"

Explaining that module XYZ *is* the cause of a specific problem  that is known to cause error like they just experienced, is fine.  Being abusive because of perceived vague acts by another, and then  further punishing the user is very poor form.



  • Athenium
  • [*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #8
People typically do not install "50+" components at the same time. They tend to install one or a few when they happen to find them.

Even if you install 50+ components, you ought to find the offender in less than a handful splits of your set of components.

Your usage pattern of "50+" components implies that you're probably using some component pack authored by someone who doesn't disclaim enough that it's bundling known broken components. Rant at them, they are probably quite aware of the horror they're inflicting on the world.

Sorry, but I installed them all myself I had installed the limit of the few available official components (few of which are actually 'generally' useful, but more akin to 'codecs' -- if you have a particular form of audio, it' decode it, but for general playback/usage, if you don't have those forms, they shouldn't even be counted as plugins but put into an adapter section where one could have format and device adapters.  I'd have to review that section again for more comments, but I put together the standard stuff and wondered where the example themes were.

So started searching on the web for theme examples -- ran into some that referenced other extensions -- ran into no no attractive themes that work with today's working set of components. 

But for some I tried finding the components they listed they need -- like any programmer, you look for the components that something says it needs to run and you try it out.

To have the base code be setup to be abusive when you 'tinker', is draconian and unhelpful.

So -- sorry, didn't install a pre-put together pack.... but this rude and unhelpful message has gone beyond the scope of my initial post -- there I was commenting on a worse-than-microsoft error page that I thought particularly inappropriate -- to the point that it felt like a personal attack.

But now, after having removed or disabled any module I felt I didn't really need -- I have no better an idea of why that error message keeps cropping up.

In the past few days, with no changes to foo, it's reliability as dropped from near 100% to about 50%...  An on each error -- I only get the standard "we insult you for having used a module that we won't name and refuse to allow you any aid or assistance to find out which module offends us.."...

Seems like you also turned off even MS's debugging support to prevent users from finding out what the problem is -- isn't that illegal computer cracking?

Now I frequently get crash notes in the log, but all the details have been zeroed out.
Code: [Select]
Faulting application name: foobar2000.exe, version: 1.1.10.0, time stamp: 0x4ed8e9b8
Faulting module name: unknown, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x00000000
Exception code: 0xc0000005
Fault offset: 0x051a0f3f
Faulting process id: 0x1028
Faulting application start time: 0x01cced6877a44a1f
Faulting application path: C:\Program Files (x86)\foobar2000\foobar2000.exe
Faulting module path: unknown
Report Id: 13d55e9b-59b4-11e1-aea4-001517cb877d

---
Even there, doesn't tell me the module ... is this a result of deliberate a violation of federal anti-hacking laws (notice i'm being specific about what jurisdiction and which laws), or is this a 'co-incidence'.  If it is the former, there have already been cases that went bad for the defendant, who was using a program that.

I probably should repost this problem in the tech form as this has now become a tech problem rather than on the more 'general' rude message aspect...

*sigh*



  • Ouroboros
  • [*][*][*][*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #9
But now, after having removed or disabled any module I felt I didn't really need -- I have no better an idea of why that error message keeps cropping up.

It keeps cropping up because one of the components you believe you "really need" is one of the offending components.

Here's an idea. Start with a clean copy of foobar, then add the components you "really need", one at a time, until you get the error message. Repeat until you have only proper, working components, and have discarded all of the broken ones. Then you'll know which component(s) not to add, and you can look at the official component list to try to find feasible alternatives.

It really isn't complicated, and if you stopped being indignant about the fact that a piece of extremely good, free software works in a way that you don't like, and instead concentrated on solving the underlying problem, you'd have had it fixed by now.

  • Kohlrabi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #10
Here's an idea. Start with a clean copy of foobar, then add the components you "really need", one at a time, until you get the error message. Repeat until you have only proper, working components, and have discarded all of the broken ones. Then you'll know which component(s) not to add, and you can look at the official component list to try to find feasible alternatives.

I recommend that you do a clean install using the official installer, and add those components you deem useful from the official components page. If you install a broken component from somewhere else along the way, you should be easily be able to identify it, after restarting the player.

He apparently ignored my suggestion for two weeks already, but maybe if enough people propose the same thing...

It's only audiophile if it's inconvenient.

  • mudlord
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #11
It's NOT like I wrote any of them!!  The one component that it told me was out of date a ui_panel thing, I uninstalled, as it's author seemed to have closed up shop and taken his toys and gone home in a huff -- though his reason was the friendly attitude of some people on here -- and given the above message, I can see his point.


So you like broken crap?

No, I don't -- how do you read that I like broken crap, into "I don't like abusive error messages that further abuse users by taunting them with things they know nothing about and give no information?"


Utterly broken components ie. "crap" cause those. Hence allowing them to continue to happen, seems to imply a complacency in very badly coded components. I've been guilty of sometimes having crash reports in my component, but those are fixed: because I feel end users deserve bug free stuff. Other developers should also aim for decent code, instead of abusing API interfaces, etc.

  • ExUser
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Read-only
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #12
He ignored my helpful suggestion for even longer...

I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #13
Seems like you also turned off even MS's debugging support to prevent users from finding out what the problem is -- isn't that illegal computer cracking?


Even there, doesn't tell me the module ... is this a result of deliberate a violation of federal anti-hacking laws (notice i'm being specific about what jurisdiction and which laws), or is this a 'co-incidence'.  If it is the former, there have already been cases that went bad for the defendant, who was using a program that.






but atleast im heading back to mars with a good laugh.
  • Last Edit: 18 February, 2012, 08:23:11 PM by diceman2037

  • mudlord
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #14
He ignored my helpful suggestion for even longer...


Person is a troll?

I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #15
For sure he is a troll! But one question remains i asked myself too: why aren't the sdk-violating components mentioned? Is there a meaningful reason for? Or why doesn't offer the dialog a button that starts the deleting of all offending components?
german support forum: www.foobar-users.de / user: qwert73

  • Athenium
  • [*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #16
He ignored my helpful suggestion for even longer...


He?  I assume you mean me?

I did post my list of modules in the technical support forum where I asked for support and got another warning.

I was under the impression that this forum wasn't the place for asking about support, so didn't want to turn this into a support question..  It was intended as a general complaint about the quality and helpfulness (or lack there-of) of the error message I got when I tried to run any diagnostic. I wasn't, at the time asking for support but, more generally, "helpful" error messages -- not ones that appear to be written as the result of some past feud that I know nothing about.






  • Athenium
  • [*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #17
Here's an idea. Start with a clean copy of foobar, then add the components you "really need", one at a time, until you get the error message. Repeat until you have only proper, working components, and have discarded all of the broken ones. Then you'll know which component(s) not to add, and you can look at the official component list to try to find feasible alternatives.

I recommend that you do a clean install using the official installer, and add those components you deem useful from the official components page. If you install a broken component from somewhere else along the way, you should be easily be able to identify it, after restarting the player.

He apparently ignored my suggestion for two weeks already, but maybe if enough people propose the same thing...

You think not having an instant response= ignoring?

I have this forum setup to email me when I get a response.

I never got an email indicating any response.

I find your response as helpful as when microsoft says, in response to windows crashing -- just reformat your hard disk and reinstall all the components and tell us when you can duplicate the problem.


Your suggestion was one of many, I can't answer all at once, and those that are the most work should expect the least fast turnaround, since I can't quickly (or maybe at all) compose an answer sufficiently politely for the sensitivities of many here.




  • Athenium
  • [*]
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #18
For sure he is a troll! But one question remains i asked myself too: why aren't the sdk-violating components mentioned? Is there a meaningful reason for? Or why doesn't offer the dialog a button that starts the deleting of all offending components?



If they are a troll then so are you -- since you just asked the same question as the original.  Over a dozen posts talking about anything other than what the subject of the original post was... your's was the first that was 'on topic' for the note.

I notice no one has responded to re-iteration of the the question.

Also, given the age of my account -- most sane people would realize that
it likely precludes the application of the term troll.  But it's easier to think of someone as a 'thing' and dehumanize them, before you do inhumane things to them.




  • db1989
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #19
But it's easier to think of someone as a 'thing' and dehumanize them, before you do inhumane things to them.

Oh, get over yourself.

What is it with people on the internet and having self-righteous victim-complexes?

In no way is there anything “inhumane” about anything in this thread. To say there is only belittles those who actually have been treated inhumanely. And most of them don’t have the luxury of complaining about it on some website.