[Fixed]HFS error while updating

MarkV · **on:** May 03, 2007, 12:41:19 AM

OK, with my main desktop PC update went through just fine. But now with my notebook, it's another story:

- New version is downloaded
- A command line window opens and executes START /WAIT hfs.new.exe -q

The response from HFS is

Code: [Select]

Access violation at address 74DD0CC2. Read of address 74DD0CC2.The error pops up twice, then the update finishes normally. But this error is annoying.

The only difference of both systems is, the notebook has an AMD Turion 64bit processor (but 32bit WXPHome) and the desktop AMD Athlon XP.

MarkV

edit: If I enter the command hfs.exe -q manually, the exact same error occours. It has nothing to do with update, but with quitting via command line parameter.

rejetto · **Reply #1 on:** May 03, 2007, 12:42:32 AM

did the error come up using your computer through VNC ?

MarkV · **Reply #2 on:** May 03, 2007, 12:45:07 AM

No not VNC, directly.

MarkV

rejetto · **Reply #3 on:** May 03, 2007, 12:46:50 AM

#build number?

MarkV · **Reply #4 on:** May 03, 2007, 12:51:57 AM

I must admit, the problem bugged me for many builds now, but I always ticked away the error messages too fast - sorry.

But it is definitely still occouring with #097. And it's only with this machine. Strange.

MarkV

rejetto · **Reply #5 on:** June 11, 2007, 06:30:53 PM

can you give me address (of the violation) and build number?
the address is useful only with the build number.
since i lost sources for some builds, the #102 and #103 are good for sure.

MarkV · **Reply #6 on:** June 12, 2007, 03:29:00 PM

2.2 build #103 experimental

Code: [Select]

Access violation at address 74DD0CC2, Read of address 74DD0CC2.
Occours everytime HFS is started a second time, be it for autoupdate (hfs.exe -q), or manually. Only 1 instance option is ENABLED. If I switch it off, NO error occours. But then autoupdate doesn't work anymore I guess.

Highest build the autoupdate offers is #97. Time for an update I think...

edit: Could it be something with DEP (Data Execution Prevention) function of the CPU?

rejetto · **Reply #7 on:** June 16, 2007, 08:08:00 PM

ok, i tried, and sadly that number is useless.

Quote

Occours everytime HFS is started a second time, be it for autoupdate (hfs.exe -q), or manually.

this is good, because it's easy to reproduce the problem.
what if you use the "add to hfs" command while hfs is running?

Quote

Could it be something with DEP (Data Execution Prevention) function of the CPU?

no idea

MarkV · **Reply #8 on:** June 16, 2007, 10:35:02 PM

Quote from: rejetto on June 16, 2007, 08:08:00 PM

ok, i tried, and sadly that number is useless.

Quote
Occours everytime HFS is started a second time, be it for autoupdate (hfs.exe -q), or manually.

this is good, because it's easy to reproduce the problem.
what if you use the "add to hfs" command while hfs is running?

Same thing. This error always pops up twice.

Quote from: rejetto on June 16, 2007, 08:08:00 PM

Quote
Could it be something with DEP (Data Execution Prevention) function of the CPU?

no idea

This is the only machine with a 64bit CPU (but 32bit OS) and hardware DEP support. But it is not enabled for HFS...

Well, as the numbers are useless and it's only this computer I'm gonna blame the system itself. To be clear, this error does not prevent anything, that means, the update IS done correctly, HFS is not started a second time and even Add to HFS does what it should. I'll just ignore this error from now on.

I'll leave this thread open in case someone else has a similar problem. Meh...

MarkV · **Reply #9 on:** June 19, 2007, 06:20:22 PM

Well, update from #103 to #104 did not show any AV, but the error sound was to hear. Dr. Watson recorded an error c00000fd (stack overflow) in HFS. The rest of the file is useless as I have no symbols installed.

As I said, I'll ignore this error from now on, just thought I should mention it...

rejetto · **Reply #10 on:** June 20, 2007, 07:17:15 AM

better than nothing

MarkV · **Reply #11 on:** July 21, 2007, 12:57:37 AM

Sorry to revive this, but, with the update from build 119 > 120, the AVs are back. Ouch...

rejetto · **Reply #12 on:** July 23, 2007, 08:42:40 AM

same address?

it may be a Delphi problem with 64bit CPU

MarkV · **Reply #13 on:** July 23, 2007, 08:39:19 PM

Yeah, it's always the same address. To me it looks very high up in the address space.
I have one last thing to test: To opt-out of DEP and try again. Can I still fake an update with the special file? Else I would have to wait for the next update, which could be a while...

edit: stupid typo

rejetto · **Reply #14 on:** July 23, 2007, 09:53:48 PM

yes, you can edit this file in the same folder of hfs.exe