-
Configuration:
Powerarchiver 2021 20.00.73
Windows 10 Education 10.0.19042 Build 19042When 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 freeWhen 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.
-
Its a long time since people reported bugs like converter bug still no fix yet
-
Hi,
I just saw, that on the Website, PowerArchiver 2021 20.00.73 is advertised as latest version. (Actually, the downloaded version says, it’s 20.00.70 in the about dialog)
But it still comes with the “red icon set” for preview versions and has some known unfixed bugs, as I read here.Is it sufficiently stable to be used on production systems?
Kind regards
-
This happens in Archive and Explorer Mode:
Navigate to a folder, which is UAC protected (for example C:\Program Files) Right click -> New -> Folder (or any other item)
=> Nothing happensExpected behaviour: UAC prompt is triggered and a new folder (or file) will be created
PowerArchiver 19.00.57
-
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.
-
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.pdfCan 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.BorquePA2021_73.png PA2021_58.png
-
Hello,
PowerArchiver Command Line 7 support file greater than 2 Go ?
Thanks
-
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/archivesupgraded to 20.0.73
-
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 ! :)
-
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! -
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.
-
When you select “Deflate (.zip, compatible)” as the method, it still converts the archive to a ZIPX format.
-
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
-
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
-
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.jpgUsing the “Store” method sometimes creates a .zip file; I have seen it happen just now, but I cannot reproduce it.
-
patchbeam a waste of time never updated with latest version
PA compatible with Vista x64?
-
Just checking before I take the plunge :)
-
yes, PowerArchiver supports Windows Vista x64 including 64 bit shell extensions.
-
Fully compatible! but you don’t need to take our word for it you can try the product for free 1st then take the financial plunge if you are happy with it ;)
-
I am not so sure about SP1…
-
I am not so sure about SP1…
Ok, Vista SP 1 has not been released yet (RTM is avaiable to MSDN Subsribers only)… We have some time to test it ;)
-
for less headaches overall, i do reccomend 32bit edition… many hardrive companies still dont have drivers for 64bit OS’s.
-
for less headaches overall, i do reccomend 32bit edition… many hardrive companies still dont have drivers for 64bit OS’s.
but if you have more then 3 gb RAM installed, using 64 bit OS is the only way to use it. If your CPU supports x64 features, why not to use them? Also why not to use extra security features avaiable only in Vista x64 (Patch Guard, signed-only driver installation…)?
-
I purchased a PA lic long ago. Just wanted to make sure it was going to work with Vista 64-bit before I bothered to install it. BTW, I have access to a slipstream ISO of SP1 so it will be SP1 thats installed.
-
I purchased a PA lic long ago. Just wanted to make sure it was going to work with Vista 64-bit before I bothered to install it. BTW, I have access to a slipstream ISO of SP1 so it will be SP1 thats installed.
as I said, dont do it, yet :-).
-
@NTFS:
but if you have more then 3 gb RAM installed, using 64 bit OS is the only way to use it. If your CPU supports x64 features, why not to use them? Also why not to use extra security features avaiable only in Vista x64 (Patch Guard, signed-only driver installation…)?
i understand that… but many hardware components will not work with 64bit Vista because of the nature of cut-throat hardware business. Most companies, even large ones, simply take designs from Taiwanese companies who then dont ever bother with releasing 64bit drivers.
-
Not sure if I can resist. All my hardware is supported with x64 drivers and I don’t use any of the programs on MS’s list of problem applications :D
-
PA stil compatible with Vista Sp 1 for x86 & x64. I’ve tested it. Got the Vista SP 1 from μsoft OEM Partner site.
-
Just finished installing everything tonight and PA seems too be fine. Running a slipstreamed ISO (direct from MS) of Vista Business SP1 64-bit. Was a bit suprised that it installed into the x86 program files Dir though.
-
It’ll do that for programs that aren’t native 64-bit for backwards compatibility. I have found one problem on Vista Ultimate x64 SP1: shell extensions don’t show up when right-clicking associated files in Total Commander. They do when right-clicking associated files in Windows Explorer though.
-
It’ll do that for programs that aren’t native 64-bit for backwards compatibility. I have found one problem on Vista Ultimate x64 SP1: shell extensions don’t show up when right-clicking associated files in Total Commander. They do when right-clicking associated files in Windows Explorer though.
thats because shell extensions are actually 64bit… probably why it doesnt work in TC.
-
Ok, so I would need to be using a 64-bit version of TC for the shell extensions to show up there is what you’re saying right…
-
Ok, so I would need to be using a 64-bit version of TC for the shell extensions to show up there is what you’re saying right…
i would guess so - you need to ask at TC forums/support.
-
thats because shell extensions are actually 64bit… probably why it doesnt work in TC.
spwolf, did you mean PA’s shell extensions are 64bit, or just shell extensions in general when running on 64bit OS?
Is PA 32bit or 64bit?
Since TC is 32bit, I need to install 32bit version of PA for its shell extensions to show up in TC. Is it possible to install 32bit PA on a 64bit Vista, or is the installer detecting 64bit OS and installing a 64bit version of PA?
-
It seems that on 64bit Windows, 32bit applications can install 32bit or 64bit shell extensions (or both). These shell extensions are then accessible by programs running within the same architecture as the shell extension.
It seems that on 64bit Vista, PA installs 64bit shell extensions. Can you have it install the 32bit shell extensions as well?
-
It seems that on 64bit Windows, 32bit applications can install 32bit or 64bit shell extensions (or both). These shell extensions are then accessible by programs running within the same architecture as the shell extension.
It seems that on 64bit Vista, PA installs 64bit shell extensions. Can you have it install the 32bit shell extensions as well?
I am pretty sure that you can only have 64bit shell extensions, since they are loaded by system itself and not by PowerArchiver.
If you installed 32bit extensions, they would not work in Windows. Otherwise we would not go through all the trouble of writing 64bit extensions.
-
The work accomplished in writing the 64bit extensions is not wasted, it helped to add compatibility for 64bit programs on 64bit Windows. Windows Explorer falls under this category (although apparently there is a 32bit as well as a 64bit version of that program on 64bit Windows that run from different directories). However, there are also 32bit programs running on 64bit Windows and compatibility for those programs is currently broken. Here we’re talking about most of the Windows Explorer shell replacements.
Please read the part about Avast antivirus installing 32bit and 64bit extensions here http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=14948&highlight=64bit+shell+extension+windows
…and then read the part about WinRAR’s steps towards full compatibility here http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=9153&highlight=64bit+shell+extension+windows
Note that the WinRAR thread was made in 2005, WinRAR has fixed this problem at this point (not making a comparison, just showing that it is possible to have full compatibility with 32bit/64bit apps on 64bit Windows).
Thanks for your time.
-
I know… i would have preffered for explorer shell replacements to do it properly, instead of us doing the work, for them.
can you please create an wishlist for that in wishlist forums? thanks a lot.
-
Done. Thank you so much…
http://www.powerarchiver.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13927#post13927
