Navigation

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Search
    • Powerarchiver 2021 incorrectly extract tar.xz file

      E

      Configuration:
      Powerarchiver 2021 20.00.73
      Windows 10 Education 10.0.19042 Build 19042

      When extracting gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz , Powerarchiver wrongly thinks some .exe files have a length of zero:

      98773b3b-65c0-48fa-8cd4-d081b2e0adee-image.png

      Once extracted:

      D:\Temp\Powerarchiver\gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf\bin>dir *.exe Volume in drive D is DATA Volume Serial Number is 0E12-BCA2 Directory of D:\Temp\Powerarchiver\gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf\bin 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,391,599 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-addr2line.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ar.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-as.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,030,119 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,389,293 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++filt.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,027,513 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-cpp.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 4,040,503 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-dwp.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 391,769 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-elfedit.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-g++.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,026,926 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-10.2.1.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 609,607 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ar.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 609,607 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-nm.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 609,607 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ranlib.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 2,165,533 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-dump.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 2,343,605 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-tool.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 2,450,233 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov.exe 2020-11-20 07:54 PM 9,605,899 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gdb.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,028,997 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gfortran.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,412,943 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gprof.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.bfd.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.gold.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 25,546,567 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-lto-dump.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-nm.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objcopy.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objdump.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ranlib.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-readelf.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,393,083 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-size.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,392,464 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strings.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strip.exe 32 File(s) 67,465,867 bytes 0 Dir(s) 1,002,422,431,744 bytes free

      When the same archive is being extracted from a git bash session (after having installed git 2.30.1 for Windows 64 bit version from git-scm.com), the .exe files are extracted as expected:

      xz -k -d gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz tar xf gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf.tar cd gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf/bin ll *.exe -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1391599 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-addr2line.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1421598 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ar.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 2028927 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-as.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3030119 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1389293 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++filt.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 3027513 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-cpp.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 4040503 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-dwp.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 391769 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-elfedit.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3030119 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-g++.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3026926 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-10.2.1.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 609607 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ar.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 609607 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-nm.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 609607 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ranlib.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3026926 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 2165533 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-dump.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 2343605 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-tool.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 2450233 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 9605899 Nov 20 19:54 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gdb.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 3028997 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gfortran.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1412943 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gprof.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 4 User 197121 2572182 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.bfd.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 4 User 197121 2572182 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 4550029 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.gold.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 25546567 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-lto-dump.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1404945 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-nm.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1531656 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objcopy.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1991350 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objdump.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1421598 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ranlib.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1163376 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-readelf.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1393083 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-size.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1392464 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strings.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1531656 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strip.exe*

      The same archive file does extract properly under a native Linux Ubuntu 20.04 system, or under Windows 10 using the WSL2 Linux subsystem using xz and tar.

      Tech Support
    • Bugs I found and wanted to share with the team.

      B

      Hi I recently bought PowerArchiver and found some bugs and issues that I hit testing some of the features out.

      If you are doing a backup and on the compression options screen its default is compression format is PA with no option to change disk spanning. If you change to 7-zip you can change disk spanning. If you change the disk spanning then move back to PA format the field for disk spanning disables but the option stays set to what you changed it to. When you do a backup it will use PA with files spanning but PowerArchiver says that its not a valid format when you open it. If PA can’t really do file spanning then this screen is allowing it.

      I have attached an image where the progress bar is in the middle of the CD/DVD/BD Tools screen.

      alt text

      I have a 7-Zip file I created using the backup tools doing an increment backup. It opens and extracts just fine but if you using the Test option PowerArchiver locks up. Link to file: Backup-2021-02-05-20-35-36 TEST LOCKUP.7z

      On any Zip/PA/7-Zip process the pause and cancel buttons do not work. You have to hard kill the entire application to get out.

      Tech Support
    • Does PA supports Intel's zlib?

      G

      There would be many of us with Intel Processors.

      and they have their own optimized zlib algorithm, which can result in more efficiency if used combined with their hardware processor.

      Reference:
      https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/white-papers/zlib-compression-whitepaper-copy.pdf

      Can we get the same Functionality Under Hardware Acceleration Feature?

      Zlib is not the only feature that intel has included with their processor, there’s many, which if combined can result in efficient and better compression ratios.

      Tech Support
    • PA Batch Archive post completion error

      G

      Hi,

      After the batch archiving is complete, and if I click on whitespace of the PA app, I get this error.

      PA Batch.png

      I did check for ongoing process and ensured no archives were corrupt, It seems like activity did complete successfully but the error is shown for no reason, and only after clicking the whitespace.

      Please see if this can be removed.

      Tech Support
    • PA and conflict with Antivirus

      G

      I’m using the Kaspersky Total Security.

      I have configured PA as exclusion as followed:

      PA Exclusion.png

      and also is set us trusted application

      PA Trusted Application.png

      Scenario:

      My Antivirus likes to scan for everything, and it’s safeguarding behavior is to prevent the access to the file until the file is properly scanned for.

      The issue:

      PA when losses the access to file, it is stuck, consumes Resources, and never completes the process or throws any error

      Recommendation:
      PAStarter should also work as PAMonitor:
      There should be a monitoring process, at least if I’m using queuing feature, that should check for never ending compression processes and terminate them so the queue can be little bit automated.

      Also,
      There should be multiple attempts at retrying if PA loses access to or is denied, instead of having to see process was stuck for longer duration.

      Or, better, save the parameters I used for keeping the files in compression, and automatically restart the whole compression process after termination the same, of same folders and files set, this should happen in case if compression was stuck.

      Tech Support
    • Using the Queue Feature affects Compression Ratio negatively

      G

      If you use Queue Feature, you are not saving on space, you are just squeezing less.

      Here’s explaination:

      https://youtu.be/XcxG2wxyink

      I did test the same on multiple files, and of different types.

      It does have large difference for each large file you are trying to squeeze.

      Folders with multiple files, just have no benefits if you use Queue Feature

      Tech Support
    • Problems with Color-scheme after upgrade to build 73

      A

      Hello!
      I am using the portable version of PA2021. After switching from build 58 to 73 I have problems with the color-scheme:
      While 58 behaves like expected and showed everything in light or dark colors according to the settings, 73 always shows the lower part of the window in dark colors, no matter whether I select automatic, light or dark.
      This happens on a clean installation of 73 as well as on an update from build 58. I have attached two images generated on the same machine at the same time with the same settings. The upper shows build 73, the lower 58. Is it a bug or some changed setting I miss?
      Thanks for help!
      A.Borque

      PA2021_73.png PA2021_58.png

      Tech Support
    • Command line

      L

      Hello,

      PowerArchiver Command Line 7 support file greater than 2 Go ?

      Thanks

      Tech Support
    • PA shows incorrect archive properties

      G

      If you have tabbed archive browsing(reuse same window for all archive opening)
      and if you open two archives, and right click on older one to view properties it will only show of the recent archive that was opened, on all tabs/archives

      upgraded to 20.0.73

      Tech Support
    • Can I activate PowerArchiver on 2 devices with 1 license?

      2

      Hi.

      I currently own the PowerArchiver Select - lifetime free upgrades and support for PowerArchiver Toolbox English license.

      This license is active on 1 device. Does the license allow me to activate PowerArchiver on a second device that I own? Or do I need a separate license for that?

      Thank you ! :)

      Tech Support
    • No updates for portable version?

      A

      Hello!
      While the installable version of PA 2021 has already received two updates and is at version 20.0.73 the portable version still remains at the initially released build 58. Are there plans to update that version, too?
      Thanks for a reply!

      Tech Support
    • PowerArchiver shell extensions possibly crashing windows explorer.exe

      U

      I’ve been dealing with an intermittent explorer.exe crash for 5-6 years now. It happens randomly and will usually occur multiple times within a single session of an hour or two on my machine when manipulating files through Windows Explorer. explorer.exe is the only thing that ever crashes, so it’s not hardware IMO. I’ve done all hardware diagnostics and RAM is good. I’ve even swapped out motherboards with different brand and even the exact same one and it still crashes. sfc /scannow indicates system files are fine. I’ve done multiple reinstalls of the OS with no positive results. This crashing has happened on Windows 7 64-bit and Windows 10 64-bit. It seemed to get more frequent with Windows 10 after upgrading last year. I’ve also been using PowerArchiver throughout that time period (upgrading over time with new releases). I recently disabled all non-Microsoft extensions via ShellExView and saw no crashes for about 10 days, which is really unusual. I turned back them all back on after 10 days and saw another explorer.exe crash within the hour. So I disabled all 32-bit extensions and saw another crash. Following that I disabled all the PowerArchiver shell extensions and haven’t seen a crash after a day of heavy usage manipulating files within Windows Explorer, which doesn’t happen for me. The crash dumps I’ve captured don’t seem to indicate PowerArchiver is involved but I have a hunch it has something do with PowerArchiver shell extensions. The system even feels smoother with the PA extensions disabled. Windows 10 reliability monitor always has the same type of problem:

      Description Faulting Application Path: C:\WINDOWS\explorer.exe Problem signature Problem Event Name: BEX64 Application Name: explorer.exe Application Version: 10.0.17134.165 Application Timestamp: 4031a9f8 Fault Module Name: StackHash_e78e Fault Module Version: 0.0.0.0 Fault Module Timestamp: 00000000 Exception Offset: PCH_8D_FROM_ntdll+0x000000000009AA54 Exception Code: c0000005 Exception Data: 0000000000000008 OS Version: 10.0.17134.2.0.0.256.48 Locale ID: 1033 Additional Information 1: e78e Additional Information 2: e78e327659b46c9a0c6916396b253cbf Additional Information 3: cebf Additional Information 4: cebf952c5db535ae7880488aafce55d9 Extra information about the problem Bucket ID: 1a57e4e784fbc735c231c68bd88581a9 (1311047270476906921)

      I know this is a very nebulous explanation but is there any way to link this up to PA shell extensions as the cause? I can provide the crash dumps and additional information if necessary.

      Tech Support
    • Bug in Archive Converter

      T

      When you select “Deflate (.zip, compatible)” as the method, it still converts the archive to a ZIPX format.

      Tech Support
    • UHA support

      D

      Would like to see uha archives supported compression as well as extraction. I use this all the time and it is a very good compression format

      Tech Support
    • Right-Click Compression

      Z

      In windows 10 you can right-click and select send to and the compressed zipped folder and the zip folder will contain the name of the last selected file.

      Does PowerArchiver have a similar function?

      Tom

      Tech Support
    • Cannot convert archive to .zip, always creates .zipx

      C

      Converting an archive to .zip (using both the “Deflate (.zip, compatible)” and “Store” compression methods) always creates a .zipx file instead.

      pa-convert-zip-1.jpg
      pa-convert-zip-2.jpg

      Using the “Store” method sometimes creates a .zip file; I have seen it happen just now, but I cannot reproduce it.

      Tech Support
    • patch beam waste of time

      D

      patchbeam a waste of time never updated with latest version

      Tech Support
    • UI Issue moving between different monitors

      G

      I have just installed 2021, but seems to have similar issues to 2019. If you move the app between differen monitors (with different resolutions) the app does not automatically adjust accordingly, so on one monitor I have the app is too big for the screen, whereas on another monitor it only takes up a small fraction of the screen.
      This was worse with 2019, where the fonts were totally screwed up, making the app unusable. This seems better in 2021, but still not working properly.

      Tech Support
    • "The specified account already exists" error

      S

      Hi! I came across an issue when I tried to uninstall PowerArch 2013. I got an error “The specified account already exists” which broke the process. I got the same error when I tried to install the current version, without uninstalling the previous one.
      So I can’t uninstall and I can’t install PowerArchiver. Any suggestions? OS Windows 8.1 x64.

      Dariusz

      Tech Support
    • Self-extracting archive creation too messy!

      A

      Good morning,
      I have been using all compression programs for over 20 years, I have always found Winrar very easy to use when I create a self-extracting archive, even 7-zip is simple, “right click” and “create self-extracting archive”, because on powerarchiver it must be like this confused ?
      It doesn’t just create the archive, it opens a page where I have to select the file again, what kind of archive, which folder to create it, etc … you should learn from your competitors how to make life easier!

      Tech Support

    Poor interface

    Tech Support
    3
    11
    8423
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • A
      Aioneru last edited by

      I was very excited to hear that PA2K7 is out, but after testing it I’m very disappointed. There are few new interesting features but its all nothing when it comes to the interface. It’s the worst interface in PA ever, and I’m using PA since it version 3.5 so belive me that I know what I’m talking about.

      I belive that you were working on that Vista-like bells and whistles, but no one tested this version under classical windows style (or simply pre-XP version of Windows). Look at attached screenshots.

      What’s wrong with the shot 1 ? Everything. This fancy gadget on the left doesn’t look to good with the current color scheme, actually it will not look good under any other color scheme or even under normal XP (a.k.a. bonzo the clown) theme. Can’t you simply use normal listbox or treeview if you really can’t stand those standard tabs and need to have dot net-like options dialog ? Another thing. What’s wrong with all that checkboxes/groupboxes background ? Is it so hard to make them use system colors or make them transparent (this would be important for XP/clown theme lovers), only one property in Delphi (Transparent set to true) and that’s it.

      Second shot. What the hell has happened to the toolbar ? It has that stupid line on the top that makes it looking like it has sunked edges, and that’s totally wrong (compare with shot 3 or any other normal application). Who ask you to increase size of main listview header ? It’s way to big, plus the list view is using XP-like sorted-column-highlighting system (not even talking that the color its using is wrong). And on the last shot you have a real tragedy. The selection colors is blending to background like in Office 2K/XP ?!? Even worse, selection rectangle for ich item overlaps other items which makes it look totally broken.

      Now look at the 3rd shot. This is how a plain, nice applcation looks a like. No bels and whistles (if you turn them off) and a 100% system look.
      attachment_t_2296_0_shot.png
      attachment_t_2296_1_shot3.png
      attachment_t_2296_2_shot5.png
      attachment_t_2296_3_shot4.png

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • TBGBe
        TBGBe last edited by

        Most of your “problems” seem to be a skin issue to me.
        Except for the Options Screen / Menu List appearance which is a simple “I like it” vs “I don’t like it” discussion;
        the other things you mention either don’t appear at all for me or at least don’t seem anywhere near as “wrong” with (Classic View / Frostbite Skin).

        P.S. It’s not clear which picture you are referring to as the “3rd shot - This is how a plain, nice applcation looks a like.” Do you really mean shot5.png :eek:

        A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • spwolf
          spwolf conexware last edited by

          10.01 will have more standard options interface if you use Classic toolbar.

          Now we will wait for someone to complain about that one :-).

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • A
            Aioneru @TBGBe last edited by

            @TBGBe:

            Most of your “problems” seem to be a skin issue to me.

            The problem with toolbar being draw incorrectly isn’t a skin problem, the same goes to XP-like view of ListView control (blended selection, different background for current column etc.). It’s rather a problem of using too many custom controls not tested in different configurations. Normal system controls always adapt to the color scheme and/or visual style just fine, but custom controls often has a problem with it forcing XP-like, Office2003-like etc. look. E.g. normal ListView control under 9x/2000 or XP with classical visual style doesn’t have thet blending stuff while it does with visual styles enabled. SO it fits classical style and XP-lovers. The most importing thing is the choice - I don’t like it so I should be able to disable it, forcing custom look of applications seems very MS-like, just look at each Office version - 2007 looks very, very ugly under Win 2000 with all that gradients and silly colors. Yuck. Well, maybe some people like it, so I wouldn’t mind that if there would add an option to turn it off.

            Except for the Options Screen / Menu List appearance which is a simple “I like it” vs “I don’t like it” discussion;

            It’s not a case of taste - it’s a common bug. Simply there was a collor called clWindow used as a background color for checboxes etc. which is simply white under most color schemes. Most doesn’t mean all. Just use clWhite instead and it will match the bitmaped background. It’s a very common bug, it’s hard to belive but even big companies (like e.g. Ahead) are still ignoring color scheme problems so that e.g. all button’s background isn’t transparent but in the common gray-like style which looks poor under everything else than default visual style of Win XP. And again, what is wrong with a TreeView/ListBox so that you have used a custom control (tabs would be fine too) ?

            P.S. It’s not clear which picture you are referring to as the “3rd shot - This is how a plain, nice applcation looks a like.” Do you really mean shot5.png

            Yes, that’s the one. I have upload them in strange order but mentioned them in the right order in text.

            TBGBe 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • TBGBe
              TBGBe @Aioneru last edited by

              Welcome back, nice that you didn’t just complain and leave :D
              @Aioneru:

              The problem with toolbar being draw incorrectly isn’t a skin problem …

              Sorry, but the toolbar is totally a property of the skin.
              All I can tell/see from your screenshots is that you are not using a default skin.
              If you try different skins, you wil see that the toolbar appearance does change (not just the icons).
              Can you expand on what you consider to be the “drawn incorrectly” problem - I can’t see it from your screenshots.
              @Aioneru:

              … visual style … MS-like …

              Sorry I don’t understand any of this. I am just a user -not a GUI expert. As I said, using Frostbite skin, the “background problems” in your “shot.png” don’t appear.
              @Aioneru:

              … And again, what is wrong with a TreeView/ListBox so that you have used a custom control (tabs would be fine too) ?

              This is not a treeview - it is an alternate way of displaying the selection of “screens”. Either as standard tabs or a column of “buttons”.
              @Aioneru:

              Yes, that’s the one. I have upload them in strange order but mentioned them in the right order in text.

              OK. I cannot see the appeal/improvement that you are referring to - but as I said, I am not a GUI expert.:(

              I wonder if GUIDO will comment on all this :D

              A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • A
                Aioneru @TBGBe last edited by

                So, were there any corrections in the classical interface for non visual-styles users, as suggested before ? I don’t want to download version 10.01, so that it mess up again with my nice, old 9.6x version ;). I hope it looks like on the shot5 (see above) and not shot 4, or else I’ll start looking for other compression utility with the same possibilities as PA but with a normal UI (WZ finally started to evolve in that way)…

                TBGBe 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • spwolf
                  spwolf conexware last edited by

                  some changes yes - looking exactly like PA 2006, no…

                  A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • TBGBe
                    TBGBe @Aioneru last edited by

                    @Aioneru:

                    So, were there any corrections in the classical interface for non visual-styles users, as suggested before ? …

                    Here’s how mine looks
                    Windows XP Style Silver
                    PA 2007 skin Frostbite

                    Note File/Edit/View moved to bottom (just because I can).
                    attachment_p_11395_0_pa2007-1.png

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • A
                      Aioneru @spwolf last edited by

                      @spwolf:

                      some changes yes - looking exactly like PA 2006, no…

                      I don’t mean it to look like PA 9, but rather as any other Windows application when skinning of PA and Vissual Styles are not active (so just like PA 9 did, but it’s only a coincidence).

                      I belive that you did not play enough with Easy Listview properties after switching to it too much. Look at Shot1, it’s still wrong. Things to fix IMO are:

                      • height of header (Header.Height): change from default 21 to 17 (default value for header height under Win 9x and later) or get it from the system via the metrics API (I don’t really belive that anybody would change this, but you might want to get it and not simply set it to a constant value),
                      • blended selection highlighting: if you really need this blending with background you could make this an option in configuration, or at least set this properly to - Selection.Color := clHighlight and Selection.BorderColor := clNone or something similiar so that selection rectangles for each items does not overlap,
                      • there’s something wrong with the full row highlighting, it’s not highligthing full row but only part of it, I can’t figure out what property can be wrong but I’m sure it’s not as it should be,
                      • current sorted column highlighting should be optional too, plus the color used for highlighting is wrong it should be calculated form the clWindow (I’m not sure, since I’m not using XP but AFAIR it’s not any system color but rather 20% lighter/darker version of clWindow),
                      • tooltips (hints) are now gray (it’s clSilver or clWindow) and not clInfoBk, why ?

                      Shot2:

                      • buttons are much better than this thing used last time but you could use SpeedButton with grouping because now you can not tell which page is active,
                      • background color of each page is wrong, it’s clSilver or clWindow while it should be clBtnFace (plus Transparent set to True on all Checkboxes and Labels).
                        attachment_p_11396_0_shot1.png
                        attachment_p_11396_1_shot2.png
                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • spwolf
                        spwolf conexware last edited by

                        • full row highlighting is bug in this case, we will take an look.

                        We will also adjust colors a bit for some screens but we can not add any options until bigger update.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • spwolf
                          spwolf conexware last edited by

                          check with b1 and see if it is any better for you.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • First post
                            Last post