rasheed Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Well, just as topic title says, the "Optimise Duplicate Files" option got broken somewhere between version 2.3.0.0 and 2.3.2.0 (I do not have version 2.3.1.0, so I can not say exactly when it got broken). The bug itself manifests the following way: When the optimise duplicate files option is on, the contents of duplicate files are replaced with the contents of the ISO file being created. File sizes are not changed at all, just their content. for example, create two folders, lets say 01 and 02, with identical files in those folders (I have used files which vary in size form ~ 18 K to approx. 1.8 MB) Files which reside in folder 01 will be allocated normally, and their content will be exactly as it is on the hard drive. Content of the files which reside in folder 02 will be replaced by content of the ISO file that is being created, as if the ISO file is being created first, and then duplicate files get overwritten by copying content from the iso file up to duplicate file's size. I must note that images created by the two different versions of the program differ in size. I hope that this bug report was helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Thanks, I'll look into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Nope, sorry, I'm not seeing it. I built a few different ISO files, both with and without the option turned on. Everything looks fine if I examine the 2 folders containing duplicate files and note the files starting LBA address - I used IsoBuster for this. I also mounted the ISO I just made in DT and then did a binary compare between the files on the folders on the CD and the folders on my desktop that I'd just burnt. Everything checked out ok. Here are some pics to show you what I'm seeing... 1. 'Optimise Duplicate Files' - Off (Note the different LBA for the files, even though their content is the same) 2. 'Optimise Duplicate Files' - On (Note the same LBA for the files, because their content is the same) Even though these screenshots only show the Joliet filesystem, all 3 were identical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rasheed Posted April 24, 2007 Author Share Posted April 24, 2007 Thank you for reacting so quickly. I have just checked out things myself again. After fully uninstalling previous version, and then installing new version, everything works fine. I really double checked everything before posting here. I have no idea what was causing it, but it was there. It seems as if settings from the previous version were the cause of the bug. Thanks again, and thank you for such a great program. Sorry for the trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Most odd! Oh well, so long as it's ok for you now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weisborg Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 (edited) Took a while to find an existing thread until I realized optimize was spelled wrong in the options. I try to always post to existing instead of creating duplicate reports. I can confirm this bug report, although not to the extent of the iso data being in the 2nd file, etc. To make sure I'm understanding this properly, this feature is kind of like the original Age of Empires copy protection...although in its case backwards...where the one location of the file is pointed to multiple times to make the file too large to copy, so you can always tell the frauds on Ebay, etc when the game is said to "not play the video", etc. In your case you want files that have the same content to not take up space, so point all entries to the one location right? In my case I'm backing up my programs that I write and most directories have my standard license agreements and Readme files that contain the same content. So I check this option and it appears to be working- In the log it shows it found all the duplicates, etc...but when I open the ISO in ISO Buster as you did the 2nd+ duplicates all have an LBA of 0. When the disk is burned everything looks fine on the surface with file sizes and everything, but only the 1st/original files will open, all others freeze explorer. So far that is the only "bug" I've found. In fact your software has replaced my Nero 7 lately as in the last few versions for some reason it gets write errors on my CD Recorders...not to mention them cramming spyware down our throats and for some reason ignoring my speed setting all the time when I select to burn DVD at 8x and CD at 24x I add my files and select to burn and it puts them right back to the highest and creates coasters for me because the outer rings/tracks are fainter at higher speeds. If you had an easier way to add files/folders you'd put them out of business! Your Dual Layer support is awesome, you actually know what you are doing and how to do it, and even have funny error messages when we do something dumb! Nero's support is useless. All they ever want is a log file, then they forget the original question, feed you with FAQs till you are ticked off, then they pretend it is your fault or blame other software/hardware. Keep up the good work and come tax season my Nero 8 upgrade money will be coming your way(I wish I could do it sooner, but the wife would kill me). Edited December 4, 2007 by weisborg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 I speak 'British' English, there is no 'z' in my optimised. You can see from the screenshots above that the LBA isn't 0 on the duplicates, maybe something else is going wrong? I was only using 2.3.2.0 for those tests so it should be the same version you're on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blutach Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Ummm... British English is tautologous while US English is oxymoronic. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinningwheel Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Ummm... British English is tautologous while US English is oxymoronic. Regards Easy Ozzie.......... ...If I think I know what you meant when you wrote that I might become offended..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blutach Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 It's not an insult (well, perhaps a bit tongue in cheek). http://www.askoxford.com/results/?view=dic...earchtype=exact Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weisborg Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Only thing I can think of is my project is bigger than the examples tested with certain files being duplicates vs. whole folders. And, maybe even cases where the subfolder of one folder has files another folder has, etc. One project I made that didn't work either was a backup of all my Xara software to one disk instead of having a disk for Xtreme, 3D, XaraXone Tutorials, Videos, etc. Xara is in the UK too (Seems all the good stuff is ), so this may be something you have and can try too since sending you the ISO or attaching/pasting anything large here won't work...my file list is attached. Other than that my OS on my main box is Win2003, but that is stated as supported on the page. DIRLIST.zip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 make an iso that doesn't do it properly and then cut the first part of it off (with the file system data in it), then email that to the support address in the program's about box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weisborg Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) Sent. I was able to repeat it with my Xara files. I had repeated it twice before, so knew it would do it again. Counting the lines in the log file, there are 7,367 Duplicate Files. Here are a couple screens too (Both File System Types have LBA=0): Edited December 3, 2007 by weisborg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weisborg Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Did the email help any, or is there any other tests/files you need? I could trying burning directly maybe...now that I found the menu option I've been using it all this time up till a couple days ago thinking I always had to build ISO then burn. Does it still build a temp ISO, or burn direct? If it burns without a file it may help to test it and see if it is just the file build process.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 The output mode wouldn't make a difference. If it's listing it as a dupe I don't really know how it's getting the wrong LBA to be honest. I'm still playing with the function though so gimme some time...I'm quite busy at the moment but I'll do it as soon as I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 I did a (far) more complex build with almost 200,000 files, 150,000 of which were dupes. Found the problem and fixed it. Many thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weisborg Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Awesome, glad I could help. I figured it had to be something about the number of dups that would bring it to the surface. This feature will greatly help out my backups and let me fit more on my discs. You have so many things in this package that no one has. You ever think about writing DVD Authoring/Editing Software? We know you can handle DVD video and your burning is looking 10 times as good as the rest. You make a package with it all and you'd put them all out of business. Being one guy with I'm sure much more of a life than ImgBurn and still solving problems faster than the big companies. Great job on everything! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 It wasn't the number so to speak, it was the order in which/the way they're processed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts