• Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    pacl900b-190606.exe (PACL 9.0 Beta 5) pacomp -r not working.
    Brian GregoryB

    I’m trying to backup the complete contents of a directory using:
    pacomp64 -parcz T:\BACKUP.PA C:\STUFF
    The contents of subdirectories of C:\STUFF isn’t getting backed up!
    The sub directories are just stored as empty directories!

    Tech Support
    When extracting 7z files extract only newer files
    B

    How do I achieve this ; show me a command line example !

    Tech Support
    Question Regarding License
    S

    Hello @Mili,

    thanks for your help in getting my PowerArchiver CommandLine license (Re: License Code Not Working / Missing) and sorry for my late reply. I do check my spam folder regularly and couldn’t find a mail from support. Also, there was no mail in my backups or any mention of it in my email logs.

    I have a question regarding my licenses in the hope you are able to help me:
    While my account lists “PowerArchiver Select - lifetime free upgrades and support for PowerArchiver Toolbox English - Count 2”, this does not apply for PACL, which was included with my purchase. My account shows only PowerArchiver Select - 12 months of upgrades and support for PowerArchiver Command Line - Single User License.

    Since PACL was included with PowerArchiver Toolbox, shouldn’t PACL also come with a lifetime license for 2 PCs?

    Thanks for your help in advance.

    Tech Support
    PACL 9.0 Beta 2
    spwolfS

    Version:
    PACL 9.00 Beta 2

    What’s New since version PACL 7:

    Updated to PowerArchiver 2017 engine Fully unicode interface RAR v5 (v4) support PAE2 support

    Latest format support and all the various engine updates done in PA 2017.
    Full support for .PA format with many different options and switches.

    Download:
    http://dl.powerarchiver.com/2017/PACL900-170429.EXE

    Due to the support of new PA format and all the changes needed for that support, we decided to move up version number to PACL 9. This is purely cosmetical - companies who purchased PACL8, have PACL9 now added to their orders. Users who have free upgrades for PACL8, now have PACL9 added as free upgrade (Business users with active select (pro/tbx), all personal users (pro/tbx).

    Since we are finalizing PA 2017, we can also now spend a lot more time on PACL9.

    Please check your bugs, and check .PA support as well.

    Thank you! @Alpha-Testers

    PA Team
    ConeXware, Inc.

    Tech Support
    The PACL does not extract files from the self-extracting archive
    Michael72M

    My OS: Windows XP Home Edition, SP3
    The version number and date of the program: PowerArchiver Command Line v9.00b [Feb 23 2019]

    The program not extracts one self-extracting file.

    How to reproduce the problem

    Download the SFX file by link: install.exe
    Copy the “install.exe” file into the same location as the program is located.
    Go to the DOS prompt. Make your PACL location the default drive.
    If it is on the E drive enter the command E: and press enter. Replace “E:” with the appropriate drive letter.
    Enter command cd e:<path name> to go to the location where the program resides.
    Enter command:

    paext32 -o+ -p"install" "install.exe"

    As a result, the “install” directory will not be created and no
    files will be extracted.

    The “install.exe” file may be damaged but if you use a program such as 7-Zip or PeaZip to extract the files, the extraction process is successful. I want the PACL to also unpack such a file.
    This problem is very critical for me. I often come across this. I do not want to resort to using other compression program.

    … Michael

    Tech Support
    PACompXX problem with file name syntax
    BigMikeB

    Hi,
    there’s a problem with PAComp and file names with a leading ".\ ".
    That’s nowadays a problem, since PowerShell auto complete will complete a file test.zip in the current directory to .\test.zip.

    0_1524826660985_pacomp.png

    The first command reports “All OK”, but test.7z is not created.
    The second command reports an error, but the error message isn’t helpful at all. VSS doesn’t help anything if a program fails to write to a file. It’s for reading locked files… And the problematic file isn’t mentioned at all. By the way, there’s a typo, it should be “open”, not “opet”.
    Only the third command (without ".\ ") works as expected.

    The problem exists in the x86 and x64 version, it doesn’t matter if the archive already exists (updating) or not (creating a new archive).

    Tech Support
    czip support
    D

    would be nice to have czip support

    Tech Support
    PACL 8.0 Beta 1
    spwolfS

    Version:
    PACL 8.00 Beta 1

    Whats New:

    Updated to PowerArchiver 2016 engine Fully unicode interface RAR v5 (v4) support PAE2 support Latest format support such as improved ZIPX, ISO, etc, etc, etc.

    Download:
    http://dl.powerarchiver.com/2016/pacl800b1.exe

    Please test it against your existing scripts and let us know. There will be some features added in future release as well as more testing.

    This is first release, please test. Thank you!

    Tech Support
    pacomp-exe-has-stopped-working)
    P

    I am Having Appcrash mid problem in my Pc.

    Tech Support
    PAConv.bat
    BigMikeB

    Hi,

    I’ve made changes to fix some problems with PAConv.bat:

    1. Replaced the “” by () in the first two lines, so that it’ll work with command line arguments in quotation marks
    2. Replaced deltree with rmdir, since deltree is unknown at least in Windows XP and later
    3. Also replaced the del command, which left an empty $PATEMP$ directory with rmdir
    4. Changed $PATEMP$ to “%TEMP%$PATEMP$.%time::=%”, so that no write privileges are needed in the current directory as the users Temp directory is used and that more operations will work simultaneous, as long as they are not started at the very same time.
    5. Changed %n to “%~n” to allow parameters with spaces and quotation marks

    if (%1)==() goto help if (%2)==() goto help SET PATMPDIR=%TEMP%\$PATEMP$.%time::=% if exist "%PATMPDIR%" rmdir /s /q "%PATMPDIR%" mkdir "%PATMPDIR%" paext -e -d -p"%PATMPDIR%" "%~1" echo. pacomp -a -r -p -w "%~2" "%PATMPDIR%\*.*" echo. rmdir /s /q "%PATMPDIR%" SET PATMPDIR=
    Tech Support

    PACL 8.0 Beta 1

    Tech Support
    5
    27
    43726
    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.
    • spwolfS
      spwolf conexware
      last edited by

      Version:
      PACL 8.00 Beta 1

      Whats New:

      • Updated to PowerArchiver 2016 engine
      • Fully unicode interface
      • RAR v5 (v4) support
      • PAE2 support
      • Latest format support such as improved ZIPX, ISO, etc, etc, etc.

      Download:
      http://dl.powerarchiver.com/2016/pacl800b1.exe

      Please test it against your existing scripts and let us know. There will be some features added in future release as well as more testing.

      This is first release, please test. Thank you!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • A
        adrianyujs
        last edited by

        Thank you!! Finally 4 years of waiting!

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

          When the archive is password protected, den extracting it it will ask for the password, den it’ll keep asking until completed extract it.

          Why not first time asking the password den it’ll complete extract the archive.

          I know I can use this argument -s<pwd>. But why not once asking password den the rest auto use the existing password?</pwd>

          spwolfS A 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • spwolfS
            spwolf conexware @adrianyujs
            last edited by

            @adrianyujs:

            When the archive is password protected, den extracting it it will ask for the password, den it’ll keep asking until completed extract it.

            Why not first time asking the password den it’ll complete extract the archive.

            I know I can use this argument -s<pwd>. But why not once asking password den the rest auto use the existing password?</pwd>

            if you would be kind enough to open a thread in wishlist part of pacl forums, we will take a look.

            Thing is - ZIP archive can have individual compression and password to every file. So by default, it is ask each time. Most people use PACL for .bat so nobody suggested it before.

            We can probably make it like in PA, where it keeps going with same password until error comes up.

            Thanks!

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • A
              adrianyujs
              last edited by

              Yup I understand that, overall is excellent ^_^

              A little suggestion, if something prompt user to enter password, shouldn’t it shown asterisk instead sensitive info?

              Anyway any timeline expected final version?

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

                @adrianyujs:

                Yup I understand that, overall is excellent ^_^

                A little suggestion, if something prompt user to enter password, shouldn’t it shown asterisk instead sensitive info?

                Anyway any timeline expected final version?

                do you mean filename? It is not encrypted inside zip archive, only inside pae2 archives.

                Beta 2 is coming soon, if you have any other wishes or suggestions, please let us know… it is more likely than not that it will be included in beta 2 :-)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Brian GregoryB
                  Brian Gregory Alpha Testers
                  last edited by

                  This works:
                  J:>pacomp -a -r -p bin.7z c:\bin*

                  This seems to fail to produce any output file:
                  C:>pacomp -a -r -p j:\bin.7z \bin*

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Brian GregoryB
                    Brian Gregory Alpha Testers
                    last edited by

                    This:
                    C:>pacomp -a -r -p j:\bin.zip \bin*

                    Also behaves a a bit oddly if I do it twice.

                    The second time only a few files get re-added to the ZIP file.

                    Doing:
                    C:>attrib \bin*

                    reveals that the only files that get re-added are the ones showing the I attribute.

                    This is all under Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Brian GregoryB
                      Brian Gregory Alpha Testers
                      last edited by

                      J:>pacomp -a -r -p bin.zip c:\bin*
                      behaves the same as in previous meesage.

                      But this is a bit different:
                      J:>pacomp -a -r -p \bin.zip c:\bin*
                      PowerArchiver Command Line (PACL) Unicode Version 8.00 [Dec 21 2015]
                      Copyright© 1998-2015 ConeXware, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Registered Version
                      This product is licensed to: Brian Gregory
                      Archive Compression Utility – ZIP,ZIPX,7-ZIP,CAB,LHA,BH,JAR,TAR,GZIP,BZIP2
                      Internet: http://www.powerarchiver.com Email: support@conexware.com

                      Archive: \bin.zip
                      preparing to compress…
                      adding: Rar.exe --> Done. [20%]
                      adding: Rar.txt –> Done. [20%]
                      adding: RarFiles.lst –> Done. [20%]
                      adding: UnRAR.exe –> Done. [21%]

                      *** ERROR: Cannot opet file
                      Check that file is not in use, or use -uvss for VSS support

                      1 error(s) encountered

                      J:>

                      I will now double check everything by rebooting and if necessary re-installing PACL

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Brian GregoryB
                        Brian Gregory Alpha Testers
                        last edited by

                        Still the same after reinstalling PACL 8.00 Beta 1 and rebooting.

                        Including odd spelling “Cannot opet file”.

                        spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • spwolfS
                          spwolf conexware @Brian Gregory
                          last edited by

                          @Brian:

                          Still the same after reinstalling PACL 8.00 Beta 1 and rebooting.

                          Including odd spelling “Cannot opet file”.

                          thanks for testing, since PACL does not need installation and is self sufficient, usually re-install wont fix anything.

                          Brian GregoryB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • Brian GregoryB
                            Brian Gregory Alpha Testers @spwolf
                            last edited by

                            @spwolf:

                            thanks for testing, since PACL does not need installation and is self sufficient, usually re-install wont fix anything.

                            I was thinking maybe the files had got corrupted since the bugs seemed more extreme than I thought was likely.

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

                              We should have PACL 8.0 x64 beta 2 available for testing this month, i hope… it should not be much longer in any case. Just an heads up!

                              Thank you!

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

                                That’s cool~ Thank you!

                                @spwolf:

                                We should have PACL 8.0 x64 beta 2 available for testing this month, i hope… it should not be much longer in any case. Just an heads up!

                                Thank you!

                                BigMikeB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • BigMikeB
                                  BigMike @adrianyujs
                                  last edited by

                                  Hi, I’ve just tried to install PACL 8.0 Beta 1 and got the very misleading error message “Unknown compression type (currently only ZIP 2.0 is supported)” which suggests that the installer is corrupted.

                                  The real problem was, that the installer is not UAC aware and I tried to install PACL into my program files folder without explicitly running it with elevated privileges.

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

                                    @BigMike:

                                    Hi, I’ve just tried to install PACL 8.0 Beta 1 and got the very misleading error message “Unknown compression type (currently only ZIP 2.0 is supported)” which suggests that the installer is corrupted.

                                    The real problem was, that the installer is not UAC aware and I tried to install PACL into my program files folder without explicitly running it with elevated privileges.

                                    Mike, it is just an SFX… it does not know anything about UAC. Maybe we should make it UAC aware in the future. Thanks!

                                    BigMikeB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • BigMikeB
                                      BigMike @spwolf
                                      last edited by

                                      Hi spwolf,

                                      an UAC aware SFX module would be great, but at least the error message should point the user into the right direction

                                      spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • Brian GregoryB
                                        Brian Gregory Alpha Testers
                                        last edited by

                                        I don’t think a UAC aware SFX module makes much sense, unless it’s optional and you choose UAC aware or not UAC aware when creating the SFX archive. You normally don’t want a self extractor to be able to elevate itself in the hands of inexperienced users who might extract documents in to inappropriate places.

                                        The error message just needs to correctly state the nature of the problem. “Insufficient privileges to write to …”

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

                                          @BigMike:

                                          Hi spwolf,

                                          an UAC aware SFX module would be great, but at least the error message should point the user into the right direction

                                          as usual, problem with error messages is that module has to be aware of user permissions and uac in this case… so thats long way into actually making it work, not just show error message.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • spwolfS
                                            spwolf conexware @Brian Gregory
                                            last edited by

                                            @Brian:

                                            I don’t think a UAC aware SFX module makes much sense, unless it’s optional and you choose UAC aware or not UAC aware when creating the SFX archive. You normally don’t want a self extractor to be able to elevate itself in the hands of inexperienced users who might extract documents in to inappropriate places.

                                            The error message just needs to correctly state the nature of the problem. “Insufficient privileges to write to …”

                                            for regular SFX I agree… but it would be nice addition to our SFX that delivers PACL.

                                            We have to build new SFX that takes advantage of .pa format anyway.

                                            Brian GregoryB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • Brian GregoryB
                                              Brian Gregory Alpha Testers @spwolf
                                              last edited by

                                              @spwolf:

                                              for regular SFX I agree… but it would be nice addition to our SFX that delivers PACL.

                                              We have to build new SFX that takes advantage of .pa format anyway.

                                              Then why not go the whole way and make a proper install program.

                                              spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                              • spwolfS
                                                spwolf conexware @Brian Gregory
                                                last edited by

                                                @Brian:

                                                Then why not go the whole way and make a proper install program.

                                                you mean for PACL? It does not need it. It never writes anything to the registry, it is self sufficient. Am I too old school for thinking it should not be “installed”?

                                                BigMikeB Brian GregoryB 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                • BigMikeB
                                                  BigMike @spwolf
                                                  last edited by

                                                  I don’t know how much work writing an installer and creating an UAC aware SFX module are.

                                                  • Having an UAC aware SFX module would be nice for all people distributing software in SFX archives, as the target directory is mostly C:\Program Files<afolder>. So not only PACL would benefit from this.
                                                  • I understand your point that this is probably unneeded and unwanted for inexperienced users and archives which don’t contain programs. But a better error message like “insufficient write privileges” would be extremely helpful in this case.</afolder>
                                                  spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                  • Brian GregoryB
                                                    Brian Gregory Alpha Testers @spwolf
                                                    last edited by

                                                    @spwolf:

                                                    you mean for PACL? It does not need it. It never writes anything to the registry, it is self sufficient. Am I too old school for thinking it should not be “installed”?

                                                    I agree.

                                                    And that’s why I myself would never put it in a out of site folder under “C:\Program Files” where I might forget about it and would need elevated privileges to put it there.

                                                    I always put PACL somewhere else like C:\PACL so that I know it wasn’t “installed” in the usual sense and therefore I will always know what to do should I need to remove it later.

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

                                                      @BigMike:

                                                      I don’t know how much work writing an installer and creating an UAC aware SFX module are.

                                                      • Having an UAC aware SFX module would be nice for all people distributing software in SFX archives, as the target directory is mostly C:\Program Files<afolder>. So not only PACL would benefit from this.
                                                      • I understand your point that this is probably unneeded and unwanted for inexperienced users and archives which don’t contain programs. But a better error message like “insufficient write privileges” would be extremely helpful in this case.</afolder>

                                                      BikMike, I was thinking about PACL installer, which is an SFX… not actually creating an installer software in general :-).

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

                                                        new version:
                                                        https://forums.powerarchiver.com/topic/5754/pacl-9-0-beta-2

                                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                        • A
                                                          Arynews @adrianyujs
                                                          last edited by Arynews

                                                          @adrianyujs Thanks you can also check ! https://arynews.tv/en/category/pakistan/

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