-
PA2023 Win10, (same problem with older releases but never reported)
PA Soft is installed on partition D. (exclusive for installed progs)
Then I created on my partition G: the folders as configured in PA Settings ‘Folders’.0fcf1b09-1b91-4b74-b250-f8cf908a3348-Ashampoo_Snap_maandag 20 maart 2023_11h54m34s.png
Screenshot 2023-03-20 121152.png
The problem : Any activity on PA is saved in these folders…
PA ignores them and still use the default settings. Whats wrong ? Regards, Pirrbe -
I am still using Powerarchiver 2022 and it does not show pdf markups in the preview. Is there a setting to get version 2022 to show pdf markups in the preview? If not, does this work in version 2023?
-
The question that I have about PA archives is what happens if say ConeXware, as a company, dies in the future? What happens to any PA files that are created today? Can these files be decompressed with a copy of a PowerArchiver that can no longer phone home to the mothership thus can’t be registered or activated?
I mean, I can understand that new PA files wouldn’t be able to be created if the program isn’t registered but what about an un-registered copy because well, the question that I posed above?
It’s questions like this that make me not want to store anything really valuable in PA files out of fear that I, at some point in the future, might lose access to said data inside those files. OK, 7ZIP might not be able to compress as heavily as PA but at least it’s open source and any 7ZIP files will still be able to be read and decompressed ten, twenty, or fifty years from now.
-
For some reason, the PowerArchiver functions in the Windows 11 context menu no longer work after the last Windows Update. Only the functions in the classic context menu function as they should.
I’ve tried uninstalling PowerArchiver and using RevoUninstaller to remove all bits and pieces that were left behind and did a clean install of PowerArchiver, it didn’t fix the issue. Other items in the Windows 11 context menu work.
-
Is this a known problem? Is there a fix coming? This is a primary reason I buy PA.
I’ve tried both methods I know to extract multiple zips at the same time. 1) Multi Extract feature in the GUI. 2) In Windows File Explorer, select multiple zips, right click, use PA context menu to Extract or Extract To…
Is there a setting I missed? Or maybe it really is processing in parallel, but I can’t detect it? Nothing tells me in the Processes in Task Manager that multiple PA extracts are running. And my CPU, memory and disk resources do not look like a lot of extracts are running.
I’m using PA 2022 Standard version 21.00.18 on Windows 11 Pro version 10.0.22621 Build 22621.
-
In the latest version of PA, on W11 (latest build/SP) when you try to use the first level context menu - NOTHING HAPPENS (particularly when you do this from Downloads or Documents folders) - however I noticed that it DOES WORK when you use the context menu from the Desktop. Going to the second level context menu does work however.
-
Is the version Preview 2023 also considered to be tested by the testteam ? In the past we got messages in the forum for testing out version x.x, to be downloaded by fastring, or I missed the one for 2023. (I discovered 2023 on the official web…)
CU, Pirrbe.
-
PA 2023 22.00.08
Long time no seeing. So I start up the new year with a first problem : the virtual driver cannot be installed. Reason : it is missing in the Fast Ring PatchBeam Update Service…
Virtual driver PA 2023-01-28 152607.png
It seems a standard problem with new releases :-)
Can I have a link or can it be fixed. Thank you. CU later -
Hi there, been a user since 13 years now and in past whenever I had a problem or question I could email, however since 3 weeks it seems like everybody is dead?
Anyway, as kind of a last resort, I post this email a 4th time but in this forum instead now, in the hope for help:
"This is the 3rd time I am emailing you guys as I am missing a working code for the preview of Power Archiver 2023Can you please help me? I am a 13 years lasting customer of yours, and I am shocked thatr for whatever reason my support tickets are ignored now, why?
thanks in advance!
All the best!
Joerg" -
Re: Explorer.exe Crash on right click
This appears to be happening again with the Power Archiver 2022 shell extensions.
When I have Use Explorer Shell Extensions enabled in Power Archiver Configuration and right-click on c:\Users\username\Start Menu, (hidden Junction file), File Explorer crashes.
I have version 21.00.15 (03/2022) 64-bit installed in Windows 10 Version 21H2 (Build 19044.1826).
-
PA 21.00.18 running on Windows 7 64 bit.
I made a big .PA file and thought I’d check it was made correctly with Menu / Actions / Test.
Discovered:
a) PA always issues a UAC prompt to do this!
b) PA always says there are many errors in PA files. -
When the function for testing archives is invoked via the shell context menu (PowerArchiver > Test) then all the files in the archive get extracted to the current folder.
The test dialog reports as many errors as there are files in the archive but it fails to give any hint as to which files are supposed to be erroneous or what the nature of the problem might be. Comparing the extracted files to the originals shows no differences at all.
The .7z in question was produced with maximised compression settings in 7zip (taking forever but resulting in smaller archives than .7z produced by PowerArchiver with maximised settings). Therefore I wanted to see whether PowerArchiver can at least test .7z that it produced itself. Hence I had PowerArchiver convert a .pa with the same contents to .7z. There weren’t any errors reported but the resulting .7z contained fewer than half of the files contained in the .pa (137 of 366), so I scratched that test.
Performance is abysmal when testing via the context menu (e.g. almost 2 minutes for testing a .7z that 7zip tests in 4 seconds), but that is most likely due to the fact that the extracted files are written to disk. Testing the same .7z in the PowerArchiver GUI takes only 8 seconds but causes the mysterious appearance of a UAC dialog, as reported elsewhere.
The testing function is vital because PowerArchiver has a history of producing archives that it cannot unpack without errors or that do not conform to the respective file format standards (e.g. ZIP) so that other programs report them as erroneous.
The point of creating archives is that the files in them will most likely have to be extracted at some point. If the extraction cannot be guaranteed to produce correct results then the whole program is absolutely pointless. Actually, worse than pointless - it causes data loss and hence damage.
Problems with backup up network disk
-
I am trying to back up a network disk (Samba) to my XP machine. It is about
1 Gb, 80,000 files, about 10 directory levels max.If I try to schedule a backup job (to zip) using PA, it runs, but only archives about 15% of it all. No error messages. If I try to directly zip from PA, using deflate 64, it does much the same thing. There does not seem to be anything special where it stops.
If I back up the drive using the pacomp command line utility, I do not get errors, and it seems to put all or almost all files in the archive. paext and info-zip unzip do not seem to see anything wrong with this archive, and the number of files is in the ballpark.
However, if I open the same archive with PA, it only sees about 15% of the files and storage. No error messages. If I run test from the menu, it finds no errors, though it still only sees about 15%.
I tried earlier to back this drive up with zipbackup, which seemed to work, but zipbackup could not read the archive it had created, and info-zip said it was bad, though it could read at least some of it. When I opened this same archive in PA, PA did not see anything wrong with it, and apparently saw all 80,000 files.
What is going on here? It is self-evident from the archive sizes that the backups created within PA are incomplete, but is there any way to check whether the one created by pacomp is? Paexp test sees no
problems. -
Hi,
What version of PA are you using? PACL does not support extended zip specs, so it wont be fine for sure.
-
Hi,
What version of PA are you using? PACL does not support extended zip specs, so it wont be fine for sure.
I use the latest version of PA and PACL, downloaded wednesday. I did some more poking around and think I now have a good idea what is going on.
The PACL command line utilities seem to handle zipping and unzipping this disk fine, with two minor problems that you may want to look at:
- pacomp.exe with the -w switch will
backup hidden files, but it does not back up hidden folders. I have to explicitly add the hidden directory names to the command line to get them backed up, like
PACOMP -r -w …. Z:*.* Z:.mutt*.*
-
paext.exe with the -l switch will also redirect the prompt whether or not to overwrite files to the log file. Of course this prompt must still go to the terminal, the file is not going to answer. Or at least note into manual.txt that an overwrite option should be specified.
-
The problem with PA seems to have been that I had a subfolder folder “MD”, as well as a subfolder “md” in the same folder. This is perfectly OK under Unix, but not possible under Windows. Unix-aware utilities like info-zip, and also pacomp, have no issue with that, but my guess is that both zipbackup and PA use a Windows Explorer engine to process the files and that the engine crashes on it without returning an error code. In any case, after I renamed one of the two subfolders, I was able to make a correct backup from PA (or rather from the context menu,) using deflate 64.
My idea is to stick with pacomp, because it is faster than PA, but should I worry that I have more than 65,000 files? I expanded all files with paext and compared them to the orginals (PC Magazine’s Window Match will actually do 80,000 files; I was surprised) and there were no differences. Will there be a warning if a limit is exceeded?
Leon
- pacomp.exe with the -w switch will
-
Yeah, I definetly would not do anything out of zip specs with PACL.
There will be no error since the whole engine does not understand anything out of spec.Using PA 2006 will be much safer. I suggest that you disable deflate 64, since it is only extra compression strenght (zip 4.5 compatible “unlimited” archive will be created anyway), and PA 2006 should be quite fast actually, even possibly faster than PACL.
-
Yeah, I definetly would not do anything out of zip specs with PACL.
There will be no error since the whole engine does not understand anything out of spec.Using PA 2006 will be much safer. I suggest that you disable deflate 64, since it is only extra compression strenght (zip 4.5 compatible “unlimited” archive will be created anyway), and PA 2006 should be quite fast actually, even possibly faster than PACL.
Thanks, I was indeed thinking that deflate was needed to get the 4.5. Since the pbs script seems to run fine from a batch file, I will use that then. Also, PA has no problems with the hidden directories.
Leon
Leon
