rejetto forum

Software => HFS ~ HTTP File Server => Beta => Topic started by: rejetto on June 18, 2007, 11:59:23 PM

Title: Testing build #104
Post by: rejetto on June 18, 2007, 11:59:23 PM: www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs104.exe

what's new
+ smarter bandwidth division (between connections)
+ specific warning messages on some limits
- problems with the "always on top"
- "no download" broken in #103
- no "not found" page was given for unexistant URLs
- problem with "confirm exit" and windows shutdown
- download got corrupted if resumed after 2GB
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: Garphy on June 19, 2007, 05:35:26 AM: still corrupts vfs while cancel loading on startup...
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: Wasserfloh on June 19, 2007, 06:42:07 PM: Quote from: rejetto on June 18, 2007, 11:59:23 PM
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs104.exe
Why is Build 104 three times as large as the previous?
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: MarkV on June 19, 2007, 07:48:39 PM: Quote from: Wasserfloh on June 19, 2007, 06:42:07 PM
Quote from: rejetto on June 18, 2007, 11:59:23 PM
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs104.exe
Why is Build 104 three times as large as the previous?

build #103 is compressed with UPX, build #104 is not.
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: rejetto on June 20, 2007, 07:18:39 AM: UPX compression is not compatible with the debug symbols.
every stable/official relase is compressed, test versions may not be.
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: User on June 20, 2007, 06:13:25 PM: Please pack all beta's in archive (if this not problem for you) , it's saving traffic and money for testers :)
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: rejetto on June 21, 2007, 12:27:55 AM: would anyone actually save time/money if the beta is 0.5 instead of 1.5MB ?
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: maverick on June 21, 2007, 04:38:39 AM: Quote from: rejetto on June 21, 2007, 12:27:55 AM
would anyone actually save time/money if the beta is 0.5 instead of 1.5MB ?

The only ones that "may" save time/money would be those using a 56k or lower dialup modem connection. I doubt there would be many that would use such a connection running a server like HFS.

Are you again including debug code within HFS like you used to? If so, that would explain the file size difference.
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: rejetto on June 21, 2007, 07:15:56 AM: sure, i said it above
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: Garphy on June 21, 2007, 02:40:00 PM: bug report:
~nodefault unavailable in 104...
Title: Re: Testing build #104
Post by: rejetto on June 21, 2007, 04:03:31 PM: fixed from next build