The support forum

Beta Release 35

Alex Pankratov :

Sep 30, 2013

Nothing new, mostly cosmetic and smaller fixes


1. Fixed an issue with upgrading when running as a service -- it was adding extraneous "--service" to the service command line with every upgrade. This didn't do it any bad, but didn't do it any good either.

2. Fixed minor flickring during some UI animations -- specifically, some text was flickering when sections in the Backup Config window were expanded.

3. Updating now doesn't use Windows temporary folder -- it was already saving the update package in bvckup's config folder, but it still used %LocalAppData%\Temp for the "relauncher" (see here for what it is if interested - https://bvckup2.com/wip/14022013)

4. Reworked "Comparing" section of the backup config UI -- got rid of the two choices, replaced them with a single checkbox and reworded things a little

5. Reworded the warning when destination already exists -- strengthened the warning to make it clearer that the destination contents will be either nuked or archived on the 1st run

Alex Pankratov :

Sep 30, 2013

And with this I am just 1 release away from the start of public beta. The one thing that's left is the monitoring of the source/destination presence. It is partly done, but it is only supported for "tracked" destinations (removable drives, etc). I need to extend this to work for all cases.

If you can think of any gaping holes or vital missing features that I'd better put in before inviting 2000+ people over, let me know.

Probably some sort of Quick Guide is not a bad idea, is it not?

Deipotent :

Sep 30, 2013

Current version should be shown on Bvckup update dialog, so you can immediately see what version you'll be going from and to.

Deipotent :

Sep 30, 2013

The update process just hung at 100% CPU when u[pdating from beta 33 to 35.

Deipotent :

Sep 30, 2013

- I ended up killing the update exe process, and attempts to restart service fail.

- Should update.exe be deleted from update folder after update, because it's not ?

Probably some sort of Quick Guide is not a bad idea, is it not?

Quick guide would be good, with usage scenario for each backup type.

missing features

Mentioned this before, but jobs which failed to run on last attempt should be run immediately on device arrival.

Deipotent :

Sep 30, 2013

The update process just hung at 100% CPU when u[pdating from beta 33 to 35.

Same happened when trying to update from 34 to 35.

Alex Pankratov :

Sep 30, 2013

The update process just hung at 100% CPU when u[pdating from beta 33 to 35.


Yep, I can reproduce this.

RussPa53 :

Sep 30, 2013

The update is not hung at 100% cpu, but mine is hung as well...

Alex Pankratov :

Sep 30, 2013

Alright, so the good news is that it hangs *after* completing the update.

The workaround is to kill the update process (and any other process that starts with "bvckup2-") and then just run bvckup2.exe. It will say that it is configured to run as a service, but the service isn't running. Then it will ask if you want to start the service. Say Yes and it's all back on track.

Alex Pankratov :

Sep 30, 2013

And the cause, as you can probably guess, was the fix for "an issue with upgrading when running as a service".

RussPa53 :

Sep 30, 2013

I was playing around, not watching this forum, and did things a bit differently – now, I’ve reproed that issue I told you about last week:
I uninstalled Bvckup, kept the config data when it asked, and rebooted. Reinstalled, had to start it manually. It noted that it was set to run as a service but that there were some settings missing (sorry for the paraphrase) and asked permission to run as a regular program. Once all the jobs were finished, I tried to switch it to run as a service, got the dialog box I’ve seen before (months ago,) when switching to a service failed – the one that says “please report this to the makers of Bvckup, this is pretty unusual.” I hit OK on that dialog, let it settle down for about a minute, and typed this up. Tried to switch it to a service again (so I could correct that phraseology) it worked correctly.
Rebooted, to watch the service start –got the dialog I reported last week that I said might be a one-time thing – “Bvckup is configured as a service, but did not start – would you like to try & start it?” – I click the OK button (maybe labeled TRY?) – got notice that it failed, and then when I checked task manager – there’s Bvckup! Rebooted again, and got a screen dump this time:
“Bvckup is configured to run as a system service and it doesn’t appear to be running. Would you like to start the service?”
I say yes, it says it failed, but the service is there in Task Manager. THis is just what I reported last week, but now, it happens every time I’ve rebooted this afternoon.

Alex Pankratov :

Sep 30, 2013

@RussPa53 : Oh, good one - uninstalling when it's set up to run as a service, but choosing to keep the config and reinstalling it back? Nice, very sneaky. This puts it squarely into the "undefined behavior" section. Let me think about it.

The "please report this to the makers" - this one I think I just fixed (in Beta 36). It was erroneously falling back to copying the entire /engine folder instead of (atomically) moving it - and the copying may take a looooong time if there's a larger backup configured.

Alex Pankratov :

Sep 30, 2013

- Should update.exe be deleted from update folder after update, because it's not ?


I wasn't sure, so I decided to keep downloaded updates, just for the reference.

RussPa53 :

Sep 30, 2013

Yikes - Sorry! :)

Deipotent :

Sep 30, 2013

I wasn't sure, so I decided to keep downloaded updates, just for the reference.

I would suggest keeping only the last update, so people can just run the previous installer to get back to the old version in case of problems with the current update, otherwise you can be sure people will complain about the updates folder getting bigger and bigger.

Jadag :

Sep 30, 2013

If you can think of any gaping holes or vital missing features that I'd better put in before inviting 2000+ people over, let me know.

As mentioned SEVERAL times before, a "Backup" and "Restore" feature would be nice for us non-technical users who are continually having to replace/reinstall their entire hard drives or have their laptops stolen (TWICE!!!).

I have data and configurations from all my apps and system files on C drive being saved (or bvcked-up) to 76 folders on my D drive - which are in turn bvcked-up to an external hard drive (bolted under my desk).

I shudder at the thought of having to restore all those bvckups both on my D drive and external HD again! (I know you once told me how to do it manually - you should've seen the mess I made.)
Regards - Jadag (aka Tony)

Alex Pankratov :

Oct 01, 2013

Mentioned this before, but jobs which failed to run on last attempt should be run immediately on device arrival.


For periodic backups, I still think this should be an option, not a default. If I have a backup set up to run at midnight, then it's probably to make it run in the off-hours and not interfere with a routine use of the computer.

For real-time backups - sure thing, it should run right away, but that's already how it is.

a "Backup" and "Restore" feature would be nice


Ok, will do.

Deipotent :

Oct 01, 2013

For periodic backups, I still think this should be an option, not a default.

The problem with not running immediately is that it could potentially never run if the device is not available when scheduled to run. I understand your counter-argument against it not interfering with routine usage of computer, so it should be optional, but as @WiseOldElf mentioned in the Exclusive Shared folder topic:

operating in a more 'defensive' way is going to cause less angst


and I think this applies here. Plus, even if it does start interfering, it's kind of a warning that something is not right with the backup, whilst keeping the data backed up.

New topic

Create
Made by IO Bureau in Switzerland
Support

Updates
Blog / RSS
Follow Twitter
Reddit
Miscellanea Press kit
Testimonials
Company Imprint

Legal Terms
Privacy