I hate the error+limitations due to violating cmpt; how to know which?
Reply #8 – 2012-02-17 22:50:49
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.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*