_-0-_

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    19

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by _-0-_

  3. Posted

    Beta2 crashed in case of stress (after). F.e. after searching...

    Once more:

    Code: c0000005 (Access violation)

    Version: 1.0.0B2 (2007-04-10)

    Major: 5

    Minor: 1

    Build: 2600

    SP: 2

    Type: 1

    Time: 2007-04-10 23:56:00

    TTH: CWLBR24QOCVAJHKKX2A6KQORSW4IRCWPJH36EYA

    ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection

    ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\client\user.h(114): Identity::getNick

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\hubframe.cpp(693): HubFrame::onSpeaker

    OTHER d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\hubframe.h(74): HubFrame::ProcessWindowMessage

    d:\program files\microsoft visual studio 8\vc\atlmfc\include\atlwin.h(3078): ATL::CWindowImplBaseT<WTL::CMDIWindow=0x013BF968,ATL::CWinTraits<1456406528=0x00000000,64> >::WindowProc

    USER32!0x7E368734: GetDC

    USER32!0x7E368816: GetDC

    USER32!0x7E3689CD: GetWindowLongW

    USER32!0x7E368A10: DispatchMessageW

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\includes\wtl\atlapp.h(584): WTL::CMessageLoop::Run

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\main.cpp(431): Run

    0x01350262: ?

    ApexDC!0x0044E2A2: MainFrame::FileListQueue::`scalar deleting destructor'

    ApexDC!0x00469A57: [thunk]:MainFrame::`vector deleting destructor'

    kernel32!0x7C830000: CreateFiberEx

    0x009A840F: ?

    I AM SO SORRY... BUT - APEXDC IS BETTER DC CLIENT, PREVIOUS VER HASN`T COMPETITIVE REPLACEMENT BETWEEN OTHER DC CLIENTS.

  5. Posted

    NEW ONE CRASH AFTER SEARCHING:

    Code: c0000005 (Access violation)

    Version: 1.0.0B2 (2007-04-10)

    Major: 5

    Minor: 1

    Build: 2600

    SP: 2

    Type: 1

    Time: 2007-04-10 23:34:33

    TTH: CWLBR24QOCVAJHKKX2A6KQORSW4IRCWPJH36EYA

    ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection

    ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\client\user.h(114): Identity::getNick

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\hubframe.cpp(693): HubFrame::onSpeaker

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\hubframe.h(74): HubFrame::ProcessWindowMessage

    d:\program files\microsoft visual studio 8\vc\atlmfc\include\atlwin.h(3078): ATL::CWindowImplBaseT<WTL::CMDIWindow=0x035B2718,ATL::CWinTraits<1456406528=0x00000000,64> >::WindowProc

    USER32!0x7E368734: GetDC

    USER32!0x7E368816: GetDC

    USER32!0x7E3689CD: GetWindowLongW

    USER32!0x7E368A10: DispatchMessageW

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\includes\wtl\atlapp.h(584): WTL::CMessageLoop::Run

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\main.cpp(431): Run

    0x01300262: ?

    ApexDC!0x0044E2A2: MainFrame::FileListQueue::`scalar deleting destructor'

    ApexDC!0x00469A57: [thunk]:MainFrame::`vector deleting destructor'

    kernel32!0x7C830000: CreateFiberEx

    0x009A840F: ?

  7. Posted

    Hi,

    previous version was without crashes, 1.1.0.B is malfunctions on my computer :-(

    Code: c0000005 (Access violation)

    Version: 1.0.0B (2007-04-09)

    Major: 5

    Minor: 1

    Build: 2600

    SP: 2

    Type: 1

    Time: 2007-04-10 09:38:16

    TTH: TKIC3A5ZDYMVOAH5PD722A77JWZ6AGMKBK6OQWA

    ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection

    ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\client\user.h(114): Identity::getNick

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\hubframe.cpp(695): HubFrame::onSpeaker

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\hubframe.h(74): HubFrame::ProcessWindowMessage

    d:\program files\microsoft visual studio 8\vc\atlmfc\include\atlwin.h(3078): ATL::CWindowImplBaseT<WTL::CMDIWindow=0x0353A480,ATL::CWinTraits<1456406528=0x00000000,64> >::WindowProc

    USER32!0x7E368734: GetDC

    USER32!0x7E368816: GetDC

    USER32!0x7E3689CD: GetWindowLongW

    USER32!0x7E368A10: DispatchMessageW

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\includes\wtl\atlapp.h(584): WTL::CMessageLoop::Run

    d:\cvs\apexdc++\trunk\windows\main.cpp(431): Run

    0x00060090: ?

    ApexDC!0x0044E2A8: MainFrame::FileListQueue::`scalar deleting destructor'

    ApexDC!0x00469BAC: [thunk]:MainFrame::`vector deleting destructor'

    kernel32!0x7C830000: CreateFiberEx

    0x009A840F: ?

  8. Posted

    ...Net Limiter can cause crashes ...I wanted to see if there was a safer alternate for what I use it for.

    DU Super Controler (not with double l in controller) - if is not detected in Apex string, or better idea (hardware solution): bandwidth shaping throught router (f.e. Asus WL 500g with Oleg`s last firmware).

  9. Posted

    No, we want users to upload what they download. ...Only leechers complain about this feature...If you want it turning off, disable segment downloading....

    Please, look at my text once more - your view is very simplified. Leech is declinated upload, or size of share... Both is not problem (with methot, that is difficult to recognise by OP`s), but it is not my purpose.

    I want possibility of choice only...

    Turning off segment downloading, like mothod of suspending sharing fragments is not solution. In EU is changing author`s law state by state, everyone must adapt (find compromise between risk and gain). Several pre-setting possibilities increases chance for effective defence.

  12. Posted

    Question has been this: Is possible to remove the NetLimiter string from connection type? Startup warning is not interesting, but NetLimiter string (any limiter string) is unacceptable for some HUBs...

  13. Posted

    You are never sharing .dctmp, not by the full meaning of the word anyway... (as they never come up on search results, nor filelist)

    and there really is no specs for partialing, not in official level anyway, as only very limited ammount of mods support this...

    Partialing clients (that do it without kad): StrongDC, LDC, PWDC, IceDC, ApexDC. you guys know any more?

    I understand, but for court is sufficient proof part of relevant file / time / IP (data from "enemy organisation`s client and from providers`s log), proxy using is problematic...

    In my coutry was case this type...

    BMHO is better to decrease probability of "problems". Not suggesting sharing is not good way. Fact, if is this type of sharing in "full meaning of the word" is not substatial. Important is one fact only - if is sanction more likely, or not.

    Please, speculate about it.

    For me is only one resoultion at the present time - disuse segment downloading.

    My proposal is easy: make possible to choice sharing of partial files (exact determination of shared files or parts of shared files). Better way is choice "switch off sharing partian files". (I know, that not "in the full meaning of the word" :-)))

  14. Posted

    they are...

    You meen not NetLimiter only, but NetLimiter and DU SuperController in all...

    O.K., I will reduce upload trough my router - it`s safe :-)))

    Thanks for answer.

    Notice: Should be been possible to separate identification string from Apex :-))) Not every one have router with bandwidth shaping...

  16. Posted

    Yes - and it makes good sense. It is the same type of file sharing system as BitTorrent where you start sharing the files you download even before they are finished.

    The partial files are obviously only shared with other people using other clients who support this feature. The users would know if they read the specifications for the client before downloading it, because it is stated there.

    Solution: Use another client to download porn.

    Your answer and "solution" is stupid... In my country is relative complitaced author`s law, simply (inexact) tell: download of music and videos is not criminal, download of SW and upload of SW and audio/video files is criminal. But - is possible to find videos and music, that is not protected by our author`s law (not necessarily uninteresting or old things - it`s question of relative complicated law`s interpretation).

    By many cases I can download files without law violence - but i must have possibility of choice my shared files.

    I understand, that is needful set up balance between download and upload, but it`s possible by compensatinon increment of download streams by automatic increment of upload slots for choiced share (e.g.).

    In the time of BSA, FBI and police activities and increasing pressure of distributing corporations is necessary "model of intelligent behaviour".

    Notice: Can you quote part of specifications, where is writen, that in case of segment downloading you are sharing *.dctmp ?

  17. Posted

    1) Why is not possible switch on checking TTH ending download? (It`s replace by checking of TTH fragments?)

    2) IN CASE OF SEGMENT DOWNLOADING ARE PARTIAL FILES SHARED? If yes, it`s very dangerous option - users don`t know it. In any states with strict law is problematical impossibility choice of files to share.

    StrongDC have this bug from time of segment downloading implementation. Exist one help only - disconnecting of segment downloading.

  19. Posted

    In StrongDC++ is built-in NetLimiter detector, BigMuscule written on his board, that in 2.0 ver will be built-in DU SuperController detector (including his often crashs in case when is NetLimiter instalated).

    Two questions:

    1) Are this detectors built-in Apex?

    2) If yes, how to disconnect it?

    It is important for peoples with assymetrical connections (f.e. in my case 4 Mbps/512 kbps, upload is degreed download and my stupid provider`s monthly down/up (together) limit is 20 GB only).