Indigo Rose Software
  #1  
Old 10-09-2007
NickSills NickSills is offline
Indigo Rose Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
File in use causing patch to fail

Hi All

I've noticed this log file entry for a customers failed patch:

Error Deleting original file (5): C:\Program Files\Macrium\Reflect\RefSched.exe (106)

This caused the patch to fail. I know that the (5) error code is 'Access Denied' but why should this cause the patch to fail? The patch was run by the machine Administrator and previous patches hadn't had problems with this file. This file is definitely in use and always will be during the patch process. I thought that files that couldn't be access were patched on the next reboot.

Any ideas?

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-09-2007
Lorne's Avatar
Lorne Lorne is offline
Indigo Rose Staff Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Indigo Rose Software
Posts: 2,588
Couple questions:
  1. Is that file marked as a key file?
  2. Is it a legacy file? (A file that existed in a previous version, but does not exist in the version you are patching to.)
__________________
--[[ Indigo Rose Software Developer ]]
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-09-2007
NickSills NickSills is offline
Indigo Rose Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Hi

I believe it was a key file at the time for both the existing and new version. The existing version was successfully found:

[10/07/2007 12:42:18] Success Located installed version 4.1.1895: C:\Program Files\Macrium\Reflect\

This hasn't caused a problem before. There may have been multiple occurrences of this file running from different accounts, but I can't see why that would make a difference.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-09-2007
NickSills NickSills is offline
Indigo Rose Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
[EDIT]

Sorry about this but our patch projects have been changed lately to overcome some problems; it definitely wasn't a key file.

Last edited by NickSills; 10-09-2007 at 11:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-09-2007
Lorne's Avatar
Lorne Lorne is offline
Indigo Rose Staff Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Indigo Rose Software
Posts: 2,588
Do you know whether the whole file was included for that file, or a binary difference was to be performed?
__________________
--[[ Indigo Rose Software Developer ]]
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-09-2007
NickSills NickSills is offline
Indigo Rose Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
I believe it was a 'forced' install, therefore the whole file would have been included.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-09-2007
Lorne's Avatar
Lorne Lorne is offline
Indigo Rose Staff Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Indigo Rose Software
Posts: 2,588
Hmmm, if it was a forced install it should have been set to be replaced on the next reboot then.

Could it be a permissions issue? (It might not have to do with the file being in use after all.)
__________________
--[[ Indigo Rose Software Developer ]]
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-09-2007
NickSills NickSills is offline
Indigo Rose Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
No, the file was installed by the same user who ran the patch, and that user was an administrator. Am I corect in assuming that unless the file is a key file then 'file in use' shouldn't cause the patch to fail? Because that's what seems to have happened... Multiple users had this file open, but I didn't think this was an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-09-2007
Lorne's Avatar
Lorne Lorne is offline
Indigo Rose Staff Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Indigo Rose Software
Posts: 2,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickSills View Post
No, the file was installed by the same user who ran the patch, and that user was an administrator. Am I corect in assuming that unless the file is a key file then 'file in use' shouldn't cause the patch to fail? Because that's what seems to have happened... Multiple users had this file open, but I didn't think this was an issue.
If the file wasn't deleted because it is in use, I would expect it to generate error 32 (ERROR_SHARING_VIOLATION), not error 5 (ERROR_ACCESS_DENIED).

I looked at the source code and if the file deletion reports ERROR_SHARING_VIOLATION then it will continue, but if the file deletion reports anything else (including ERROR_ACCESS_DENIED) it is considered a fatal error.

It might be worth checking the permissions on the file, just in case.

According to MSDN, the patch must be in the context of a user who belongs to the Administrator group or the LocalSystem account.

I suspect that write access to the following registry key would be required as well:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contro l\Session Manager\PendingFileRenameOperations

One possible workaround might be to use the g_OnFileProcessed function in Visual Patch (see Miscellaneous > Hidden Functions in the help file), and call Application.SetLastError() to override the error for that file.
__________________
--[[ Indigo Rose Software Developer ]]
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-09-2007
NickSills NickSills is offline
Indigo Rose Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Thanks for that information! I'll look into it and report back.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best way to share custom buttons with the group? mwreyf1 AutoPlay Media Studio 6.0 10 09-03-2009 05:01 AM
http://yourfilelink.com - 50MB max upload, free! Intrigued General Chat 14 09-26-2006 09:44 AM
Key Features of Visual Patch 2.0 Ted Sullivan Visual Patch 2.0 0 04-08-2005 03:56 PM
What's New in Visual Patch 2.0? Ted Sullivan Visual Patch 2.0 0 04-08-2005 03:53 PM
Frequently Asked Questions Ted Sullivan Visual Patch 2.0 0 04-08-2005 03:49 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 Indigo Rose Corporation. All rights reserved.
Indigo Rose Software