This appears to be UI related. On attempting to present the UI it crashes with a runtime error. The error message states "Visual C++ Runtime Library: This application has requested the runtime terminate in an unusual way."
This appears to be UI related. On attempting to present the UI it crashes with a runtime error. The error message states "Visual C++ Runtime Library: This application has requested the runtime terminate in an unusual way."
Sounds like an uncaught exception. Are you using any plugins?
Sounds like an uncaught exception. Are you using any plugins?
Not on this box, no.
This appears to be UI related. On attempting to present the UI it crashes with a runtime error. The error message states "Visual C++ Runtime Library: This application has requested the runtime terminate in an unusual way."
Here's the latest problem report:
Problem signature
Problem Event Name: APPCRASH
Application Name: foobar2000.exe
Application Version: 0.9.0.0
Application Timestamp: 444aa6e4
Fault Module Name: foobar2000.exe
Fault Module Version: 0.9.0.0
Fault Module Timestamp: 444aa6e4
Exception Code: 40000015
Exception Offset: 000888e9
OS Version: 6.0.5381.2.0.0.256.1
Locale ID: 1033
Additional Information 1: 6a00
Additional Information 2: 5a1e7a7eaab39b21122fe6f399091627
Additional Information 3: 8e89
Additional Information 4: d9ea8695de566f286042b62c370d81eb
Extra information about the problem
Bucket ID: 285980162
This is the same problems I've been having in this thread: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=44856 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=44856)
Sometimes, it just gives me the bad allocation error, other times, it includes the C++ runtime error.
Trying to troubleshoot this, I believe it is in the actual "adding of the file" that the problem occurs, foobar doesn't even manage to get to the 'playback' part of the command.
And no I don't use any plugins, and yes I have checked with different songs.
This is the same problems I've been having in this thread: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=44856 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=44856)
Sometimes, it just gives me the bad allocation error, other times, it includes the C++ runtime error.
Trying to troubleshoot this, I believe it is in the actual "adding of the file" that the problem occurs, foobar doesn't even manage to get to the 'playback' part of the command.
And no I don't use any plugins, and yes I have checked with different songs.
It's interesting, but I could get playback for 10-15 minutes (thanks to Foobar opening in minimized to tray mode and my previously set up global hotkeys) before getting the error, but can't display the UI at all. I can't get WMP 11 to play for more than 10-15 minutes, either. I got Zinf to play for more than 30 minutes, after rediscovering how much I dislike deliplayer. Zinf is no Foobar, but its better than no player...
No offence, but what about using an OS that has actually gone past development stage?
[deleted]
No offence, but what about using an OS that has actually gone past development stage?
What's the fun in that?
My reply is pretty much the same as the other Vista thread - you are using an unreleased operating system and foobar2000 obviously cannot be officially supported.
I would first go through your beta testing contacts or newsgroups at Microsoft and report a regression/third-party product incompatability and see if they have anything to recommend, either to you as an end user or to Peter as a developer.
All of the problem reports are filtering through the automated channels and I posted one problem report above. I'll be happy to post the other 11 and/or generate more. I don't expect this to be fixed today, but did think it worthy enough to point out in case it points to some obvious solution that might benefit everyone (since it does appear, at least to me, to be a UI bug, I think it may be something that has been around for a while and unfortunately gone unnoticed (ie, silent failure in the past)).
No offence, but what about using an OS that has actually gone past development stage?
To quote the requirements on the official homepage.
Supported operating systems: Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows XP 64-bit edition, Windows Vista
That would make one think it would work.
No offence, but what about using an OS that has actually gone past development stage?
What's the fun in that?
It works.
It works.
Isn't this a bit off topic now? Vista is supposed to be supported by Foobar2000 and then why shouldn't people report bugs when it doesn't work in Vista?
It works.
Isn't this a bit off topic now? Vista is supposed to be supported by Foobar2000 and then why shouldn't people report bugs when it doesn't work in Vista?
Because Vista is useless in it's current state!
Bugreports on betalevel OS is absolute crap and you don't know if it's removed for next fix or not.
In any case this is more likely a bug/error that lies on Vista's part.
In short: No more bugreports from Vista, it will be ignored.
In short: No more bugreports from Vista, it will be ignored.
I see that someone was smart enough to remove Vista from the requirement page now....
edit: I understand your point in why it's no point in trying to support Vista at this stage but it didn't make much sence when you still said that it was supported.
In short: No more bugreports from Vista, it will be ignored.
I see that someone was smart enough to remove Vista from the requirement page now....
edit: I understand your point in why it's no point in trying to support Vista at this stage but it didn't make much sence when you still said that it was supported.
Well maybe we should add "common sense" to the requirements page
[deleted]
No offence, but what about using an OS that has actually gone past development stage?
Beta 2 is fairly solid on my Frankenstein PC. Still bugs to be worked out, but let's not forget that Vista release is not far off. Also let's not forget that XP Beta 2 and XP RC1 were very similar.
I don't know whether it is arrogance or ignorance being displayed in this thread but I find it very hard to believe that HydrogenAudio is going to wait until Vista is actually released before trying to get foobar working on that OS.
In fact, Foobar is the ONLY Win2k/XP software I have come across that does *not* work on Vista.
This should be a concern to the developers. I'd like to see them get it working rather than posting excuses on message forums.
I don't know whether it is arrogance or ignorance being displayed in this thread but I find it very hard to believe that HydrogenAudio is going to wait until Vista is actually released before trying to get foobar working on that OS.
HydrogenAudio will not do anything about this - ever. HydrogenAudio merely provides hosting for the foobar2000 forum and website.
In fact, Foobar is the ONLY Win2k/XP software I have come across that does *not* work on Vista.
(Added emphasis.) Other people have: example (http://www.iexbeta.com/wiki/index.php/Windows_Vista_Build_5381_Software_Compatibility_List).
This should be a concern to the developers. I'd like to see them get it working rather than posting excuses on message forums.
Let's see what trying to fix this now implies:
Advantages- No more complaints from a few adventurous users that are running a beta version of Vista which has known problems
Disadvantages- Spending time and possibly money to acquire and install a copy of a beta version of Vista which has known problems
If this is a problem with foobar2000 itself, it will depend on Peter to investigate it. But face it: not everyone can justify jumping happily on the beta OS bandwagon.
In fact, Foobar is the ONLY Win2k/XP software I have come across that does *not* work on Vista.
(Added emphasis.) Other people have: example (http://www.iexbeta.com/wiki/index.php/Windows_Vista_Build_5381_Software_Compatibility_List).
The vast majority of those programs that are listed as not working are not pure user mode applications like foobar. And of those that are comparable, many seem to fail due to crappy installers, not due to the application itself.
"HydrogenAudio will not do anything about this - ever. HydrogenAudio merely provides hosting for the foobar2000 forum and website."
Sorry, I'm a newbie here.
I'm glad that one person was able to get Foobar to work and made an entry at Wikipedia.
I'm interested in hearing if anybody from this forum can also get it working with a fresh install. The app loads but fails when a media file is loaded.
"No more complaints from a few adventurous users that are running a beta version of Vista which has known problems"
Adventurous, maybe. But Vista is as inevitable as the coming of Winter, and it's silly to argue about it. Chances are that whatever is causing Foobar to crash in Beta 2 will still be around in the final Windows product. I do not see how it would hurt the developers to grab a copy of Vista Beta 2 and find out what is causing the problem.
Waiting for Vista to launch before fixing Foobar is like Electronic Arts not developing Playstation 3 games until it hits the market. Your logic in this regard is very curious.
Apparently you have enough time to toy around with Vista beta, but not enough to read and understand my previous post, so I see little sense to continue this discussion with you.
Nobody disputes that Windows Vista will come. It even has some interesting new features, though as far as I am concerned the new glassy look is not among them. The new audio stack with user mode drivers on the other hand is interesting and promises to increase system stability. However, even Microsofts seems to trust the current version enough to call it a release candidate, instead they call it a beta. There are people who do not bother with beta versions of foobar2000 for whatever reasons, and people who do not bother with beta versions of Windows for equally good reasons.
Your comparison with Electronics Arts fails because they sell games, while we do not make money with foobar2000, so we have less incentive to have it working on the new platform as soon as possible. As far as I can predict, we will deal with Vista issues as soon as it is generally available and good enough for everyday use (read: release candidate or final).
I do not see how it would hurt the developers to grab a copy of Vista Beta 2 and find out what is causing the problem.
Windows Vista Beta 2 is now available for IT professionals and developers with MSDN and TechNet subscriptions.
Those subscriptions cost money in case you have not noticed.
n the coming weeks, Microsoft will start the Windows Vista Customer Preview Program (CPP) for developers and IT professionals who are not members of the subscription services.
So by waiting a few weeks, one could a Vista preview version for free. However, one then still needs a non-production system (yes, some people actually require their PCs to do useful work) that is capable of running Vista, and a significant amount of time to prepare the system and install Vista.
There may be ways to get illegal versions of Vista at the moment, but not everyone is sufficiently lacking in morals to seriously consider this.
foobar2000 0.8.3 works flawlessly by the way.
disable the "execution prevention" system. adding foobar to the exception list will not do.
bcdedit.exe /set {current} nx AlwaysOff
reboot
There may be ways to get illegal versions of Vista at the moment, but not everyone is sufficiently lacking in morals to seriously consider this.
I'm not terribly worried about foobar not running on Vista at the moment. However, for the hell of it, I'd like to point on M$ is currently doing a free public beta of Vista. Free for download, and 100% legal.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/preview.mspx (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/preview.mspx)
I don't expect it matters much, but incase availability was the only thing stopping the devs this would clear up that issue.
I don't expect it matters much, but incase availability was the only thing stopping the devs this would clear up that issue.
As I already pointed out, it is neither the only nor the most important reason.
As far as good news go, Peter has a suspicion about a particular runtime function that might have a bug in Vista. He plans to add more specific error messages to test this theory in the next beta.
disable the "execution prevention" system. adding foobar to the exception list will not do.
bcdedit.exe /set {current} nx AlwaysOff
reboot
I tried this with the latest version of foobar and it did not work.
But I did then try 0.8.3 and foobar now works. Now I just need to figure out how to use this thing (where is the frickin' volume control?).
Thanks everybody!
I tried this with the latest version of foobar and it did not work.
I can confirm that. As I'm currently under XP I cannot check it, but it may be related to one or more of the 3rd party components. Let me explain:
Before deactivating DEP I tried a fresh installation of foobar2000 0.9.2. It started properly but caused an error when trying to start playback. After deactivating DEP I only tried my old installation of the same version which had many 3rd party components installed. Now a crash occured during each start of the program. I will check on this later in more detail.
Okay, the startup error doesn't occur when only stock components are loaded. But the playback error persists even when only minimal components are active (foo_input_std, foo_ui_std) and null output is used.
glad i found this thread. i'm happy enough to use 0.83 & vista. also the freedb tagger for 0.83 is much better than foo_freedb2 too....
Sorry to dust off an old thread but I was playing around and it appears that Foobar2000 v0.9.3b3 (maybe even b1 & b2 I dunno I didnt test them) is working for me under Windows Vista, public Beta2 build 5384.
Foobar2000 v0.9.2 would crash any time I tried to access a file, but v0.9.3b3 appears to be working for me with the default configuration.
[deleted]
Just to throw in my 2 cents, Peter himself has done some fixes to make it works better on vista following some tests myself and other foobar IRC users performed. So far it seems to work rather well for all the components that were compiled since the SDK was updated (most official components).
I think it is admirable that the developer(s) even bothered to fix these issues now. Kudos.
I found out for myself, that the "typical Vista crash" only happens, when I migrate my old configs to Vista. If I delete the index.dat file in the playlists folder, and let Foobar itself recreate it, I don't get any crash anymore.
Maybe this will help some of you.
I found out for myself, that the "typical Vista crash" only happens, when I migrate my old configs to Vista. If I delete the index.dat file in the playlists folder, and let Foobar itself recreate it, I don't get any crash anymore.
Maybe this will help some of you.
Foobar doesn't crash for me but I get this error on startup everytime. "Bad Allocation"
Some songs also cause this error but it will then play them fine after displaying it.
Any ideas?
That means some of your components weren't compiled with newer (Vista-supporting) SDK of foobar. Make sure you have the latest versions of your components. If the problems wont go away, Try removing them one by one to see which is the problematic one and ask the author to recompile it against the latest SDK.