jaclaz

If you read the reply I posted above, the MBOOTPATH was used to create a valid HFSLIP.CMD (and setting the HFSLIP and HFSLIPSVC variables) but relatively recently Acheron re-wrote that part of script: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/158622-hfsvcpack-and-hdd-based-installation-bug-fix/ so that valid values are generated independently from the MBOOTPATH. But since the beginning the HFSLIP is for SLIPstreaming, not for making a multiboot CD, if you prefer the MBOOTPATH was a way to prepare a slipstreamed source suitable to be later processed following one of the mentioned guides without further editing. Like: Several original sources+Gosh's or Fliakite's guide=Multiboot CD or AIO with original filesSeveral original sources, each slipstreamed with HFSLIP +Gosh's or Fliakite's guide=Multiboot CD or AIO with HFSLIPped filesBoth guides use AFAICR, a pre-expanded $WIN_NT$.~BT for booting (which goes in the ROOT of the CD renamed to a 4 letter name that is hexedited into SETUPLDR.BIN and a "normal" \I386\ subdir, only, instead of this \I386\ being in ROOT, it is placed in the path to which SetupSourcePath is edited in txtsetup.inf). I seem to remember how CDRPACK by Bart was also not aimed to make AIO's with various versions of NT systems (but I may well be wrong). jaclaz PS: Yes, now I remember, at the time I used Wincdman: https://web.archive.org/web/20050306033922/http://www.tech-hints.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20041207094207/http://berns.cae.wisc.edu/pages/wincdman.asp

I think you need a special permit to be allowed to post oximorons on MSFN . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymoron jaclaz

Did a few tests, the CALL is slower than the second FOR loop , and variable expansion wins over the IF's, but not by much. I made a batch taking the time for the execution of the various versions 100 times repeating it for 10 times then took the average of each set of 100 executions. Excluded the (as expected much slower) WMIC snippet with an average of 9,21 seconds , the various versions I posted were all in a range of 1,59-1,62, whilst the snippet in post #19 averaged 1,54 and the one in post #21 1,53. So, we are talking anyway of hundredths of seconds difference over one hundred executions. Attached is the batch I used. jaclaz P.S.: The one in post #16 averaged 1,65 and the one in post #17 by bphlpt 1,64 run10times.zip

Yep, the question came out "badly" , AFAIK Lync is mainly (please read almost exclusively) used in the enterprise, as besides the client you have to use either a Lync Server or the Lync Online which is part of the MS "Cloud" of online services, if I remember right as part of Office 365. "Common" users tend to use other tools AFAIK. I posted: Which OS is it? but I actually meant to post: Which OS is it? XP? Are you sure? to express my surprise. However the possible issue is about the availability of cmdkey. I don't think that cmdkey runs on XP, and I don't know of a command line suitable tools to access Credentials Manager, the excellent Nirsoft thingy: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/network_password_recovery.html should be able to, but it is GUI only/has not a suitable command line parameter. One could use the built-in rundll32.exe keymgr.dll, KRShowKeyMgr but that is still GUI only. Which is good , since I also don't use it, and the combined effect is to further lessen chances that we will ever have a video conference. jaclaz

And if you want I can even give you a logical explanation for it. (you can use it as an excuse ) Somehow one of the pins (or socket) had a very thin layer of oxidation, just enough to act as insulator. By just disconnecting and reconnecting you "broke" it and everything worked after. jaclaz

The WMIC will surely slow down much the operation , but the script does look "simpler", and since all in all the "whole" original batch is "interactive" the overall time to execute will be much more dependent on the user response to the SET /P's. I interpreted the "optimize" more as "making it simpler" than as "making it faster". Versions "prior" that will execute a .CMD (not a .BAT) will mean either WIndows NT 4.00 or WIndows 2000 aka 5.00, adding a couple of labels as I did in post #18 won't do much harm, and IMHO if someone is running Windows Whistler Server, he/she has much more serious problems than these . I remember having noticed some time ago that IF's were actually slowing down execution, as well as CALLs, cannot really say how they compare with SETs and FORs loops. I will try putting together another small batch to time the execution of the various versions posted, possibly in a x100 or x1000 loop it will be possible to see which one is actually faster, though set apart the slower WMIC version I doubt that there can be much differences among the others. jaclaz

I would check some of the other alternatives, first. http://alternativeto.net/software/vlmc/ I am not at all into video editing, but last time I checked PiTiVi, it seemed to me like nice: http://www.pitivi.org/ (or does it need to be Windows?)

Yep, this is also - sometimes - because of "commissions" or "collective design". Just in case, there is a site that helps making your own Tree Swing Cartoon or "How Projects Really Work" http://www.projectcartoon.com/ Of course, ironically, the originally version 1.0: http://www.projectcartoon.com/cartoon/3 was updated to 1.5: http://www.projectcartoon.com/cartoon/2 and to 2.0: http://www.projectcartoon.com/cartoon/1 jaclaz

I am not sure to understand. You mean this? http://www.voip-connections.com/howto/how-to-purge-lync-temporary-cache-files/ That would involve a batch (or *whatever* script) that: deletes some files deletes some Registry entries uses *something like* cmdkey http://technet.microsoft.com/it-it/library/cc754243(v=ws.10).aspx to remove data from credential manager and (possibly ) add the *fake* Which OS is it? jaclaz

Point #5 of the read-me-first: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/143880-seagate-barracuda-720011-read-me-first/ further expanded here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/128807-the-solution-for-seagate-720011-hdds/page-121#entry932258 jaclaz

Sure. But the idea in my snippet was to remove any "IF". And also any "SET" can be removed: @ECHO OFFSETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONSFOR /F "tokens=2,3,4 delims=[.]" %%A IN ('ver') DO CALL :Maj_min %%A %%BGOTO :EOF:Maj_minGOTO W%2.%3GOTO :EOFor: @ECHO OFFSETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONSFOR /F "tokens=2 delims=[" %%A IN ('ver') DO CALL :Maj_min %%~nAGOTO :EOF:Maj_minGOTO W%2GOTO :EOFand if we are allowed WMIC, there is also: @ECHO OFFSETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONSFOR /F "skip=1" %%A IN ('wmic os get version') DO GOTO :W%%~nAGOTO :EOFwhich removes also the "CALL" jaclaz

Well, if you want to play that game, it could possibly be further optimized as: @ECHO OFFSETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONSFOR /F "tokens=2,3,4 delims=[.]" %%A IN ('ver') DO CALL :Maj_min %%A %%B %%CGOTO W%Maj_min%:Maj_minSET Maj_min=%2.%3ECHO %Maj_min%GOTO :EOF:W6.3ECHO Win_81.cmdGOTO :EOF:W6.2ECHO Win_8_2K12.cmdGOTO :EOF:W6.1ECHO Win_7_2K8R2.cmdGOTO :EOF:W6.0ECHO Win_Vista_2K8.cmdGOTO :EOF:W5.2:W5.1ECHO Win_XP_2K3.cmdGOTO :EOF:W5.00:w4.00ECHO Earlier NT OSjaclaz

Good. : I had expected that you would have contributed to the tradition of old gamblers on trains bound for nowhere http://www.lyricsfreak.com/k/kenny+rogers/the+gambler_20077886.html Otherwise, how would the kids learn something on the matter? jaclaz

No , the part under the bering strait is the WHOLE tunnel, the rest is a "normal" surface railroad. From the same (already posted by me) site hosting that image: http://www.interbering.com/index.html jaclaz P.S.: Oops, cross-posting with LostInSpace2012 P.P.S.: BTW, since I learned recently the expression "selling snake-oil", I would like to point out how LostInSpace2012, by not believing in the project may be losing a great opportunity : http://www.interbering.com/InterBering-investment-funding.html bolding is mine.

Yep , this is actually my job in "real life" (constructions). I will give you something more to ponder about. In the last (very,very short by these metrics) tunnel construction I was involved in, during construction ventilation was assured by means of (BIG) electric fans, two for each bore, 160 Kw each (we are talking here of a tunnel less than 3 km in length). The amount of airflow was enough to guarantee fresh air to people and machines working inside the gallery. By using entirely electrically powered machinery, one can possibly reduce the amount of needed fresh air to 1/2 or 1/4 (the example tunnel I am talking about was excavated with "conventional" diesel machinery). But the amount of power needed to provide fresh air at some 30 km (or 50 Km ) from the outside would be anyway impressive . Everything gets very complex when these kind of lengths are involved. To give you another simple example, in the "conventional" tunnel, cars/pickups traveled in the excavated part at no more than 30 km/h (for security reasons), which means that a shift of workers was carried from the outside to the actual excavation site on average in 2-3 minutes (and in case of any problem that was the time for the emergency squad to get there) and carried out at the end of the shift in the same time. If the same speed limit applies (in these type of tunnels access is on rails) the train carrying personnel will take 1-2 hours to do the same. This in practice means that you won' t be having anymore the "normal" 3 shifts/day, 8 hours each, but 4 by 6 hours each for a large part of the excavating process, and then possibly 5 shifts by 4:45 hours. jaclaz

Yes, you got it right , and that adapter should be fine (the PL2303 should use the "lower" TTL level) . BTW this is explained in read-me-first: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/143880-seagate-barracuda-720011-read-me-first/ points #6 and #10 which you really should READ FIRST (ALL of it). BUT, for the record, it is not particularly "difficult" to find which wire is what on a CA-42. The FGA #6 deals with it: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/147532-fga-for-the-seagate-720011-drives/ jaclaz

@Mhz My guess is that the batch exits/terminates before that. @ghosttracer I would also test this snippet: SET "_OSV="FOR /F "TOKENS=1* DELIMS=[" %%A IN ('VER') DO (SET "_OSV=%%B"CALL SET "_OSV=%%_OSV:* =%%" & CALL SET "_OSV=%%_OSV:~,3%%")IF %_OSV% LSS 5.1 GOTO :EOFIF %_OSV% LSS 6.0 (ECHO= Installing Internet Explorer 8IE8-WindowsXP-x86-ENU.exe /passive /update-no /no-default /norestart) ELSE (ECHO= Internet Explorer 8 Not Required & ECHO= Disabling HibernationPOWERCFG -h off)after having modified it in such a way that you understand what actually happens, like (example): And, I would start the batch with: jaclaz

The channel tunnel was made possible by a number of "coincidences". Among others, the geology of the area (which is mainly a constant layer of chalk marl) and the low depth of the actual channel. Length is an issue, and it depends also on the difference of levels, the "chunnel" is only around 75 m deep. The actual underwater part of the tunnel is around 38 km, but the overall length is around 50. A train (and particularly high speed ones) cannot deal very well with slopes. The normal slope of railway is 1%, high speed one tend to have 0.5%. This means that to go down or up 1m you need a 100 to 200 m of length ramp. However (among the many) issues with length of a tunnel is the time it takes to go through it, as there are speed limits that you simply cannot break, as the train itself acts like a piston inside a bore,and there are are "relief valves" to stabilize air pressure in the two train tunnels. In "normal" tunnels there are usually (vertical) wells/shafts that connect the tunnels to the surface to allow for air intake and exhaust. The current max speed in the Channel tunnel is 160 Km/h and though this can be increased a bit, to actually make it sensibly higher one would need to make a much bigger tunnel in diameter. However, the idea is not entirely new, JFYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bering_Strait_crossing and: http://www.interbering.com/index.html The studied tunnel in the above would be around 120 Km, which is a little more than twice the chunnel length, much better than four times , and, since it will "cross" two small islands: http://www.interbering.com/Bering-Tunnel-Cross-Section.html it allows for the ventilation shafts, and each "completely" underwater stretches are each not much longer than the current channel tunnel. Luckily enough there are also no real issues connected with depth, though the different geological situation may cause some problems. Overall, the tunnel construction seems technically feasible. The biggest problems as I see it will be the actual climate in the areas, that may limit severely the construction times (increasing construction times and costs) and also the maintenance costs to keep the railway operational that may reveal to be prohibitive, we are talking of -20° to -50° C, operating (particularly electrically powered and "high-speed") railways in these climates is not easy. jaclaz

Sure, but the good things about numbers are that they can be expressed in so many ways. I would define 200 km as "more than 5 times the length of the longer undersea tunnel ever built" : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel The diameter of the Earth implies that it is roughly spherical, something that is still debated : http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm http://theflatearthsociety.org/ jaclaz

@bphlt Actually, there are several reasons why an EULA itself may be partially or totally illegal (or void) in itself, but if an Author (for whatever reasons) decides to NOT release the Sources of his/her code as "Open Source" or as "Public Domain", the sources remain UNavailable, so the matter is not about an EULA, but rather on the legality of decompiling/disassembling binaries (and using such derivative work which is illegal because of "generic" Laws, not necessarily because of the EULA). The known issues (which maybe were even a bit overhyped) about ReactOS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReactOS and clean-room (or Chinese wall) reverse engineering: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReactOS#Internal_audit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean-room_reverse_engineering#Reverse_engineering should have teached us something on the matter. jaclaz

Hmm but how about this little thing called out of any support. Would that apply to presto engine too. Dont mean to double ask this, but I think this might be a key. Sure , ask anyone with an even minimal familiarity with Copyright, software and intellectual property related Laws about the validity of this (anonymous/apodictic - with all due respect to vinifera ) sentence: in an actual Court (in any of the countries that do have such Laws). jaclaz

The MBOOTPATH does not contribute to forming the HFSLIP and HFSLIPSVC variables anymore: Like: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/158622-hfsvcpack-and-hdd-based-installation-bug-fix/ Or maybe the above mod introduced a form of "regression bug" for multiboot CD's, if this is the case, try the version immediately before that mod. It's a lot of time I don't use HFSLIP and possibly I never used it in/for a multibootCD, but maybe you are expecting by the MBOOTPATH something different from what was in the intention of the Author: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/80426-feature-request-bounty-better-multi-boot-support/ (and that the new code has now made "automatic") If you check this (german, but google translate is not that bad) guide: http://cypressor.twoday.net/stories/2597337/ you will see how you slipstream each source and then copy the SOURCESS folder AS the \I386\ in the various DVD folder structure. Maybe you were expecting HFSLIP to do that for you? jaclaz

I have rarely seen such a Wise (pun intended ) statement. jaclaz

No, it is not a "special field" (and it is right that is not "dynamic" as, if you open the same worksheet on another PC/another instance of Excel with a different user name all comments would change accordingly ), it is a sort of "quick template". But still, you can use VBA to change the values in the comments: http://www.extendoffice.com/documents/excel/678-excel-change-comment-author.html Please understand that this is basically a "replace" function, so hopefully in your case you won't have anything except you initials JD actually containing "JD" or "jd". By default what you should actually have in the comment is "JD:", I would add the ":" colon sign in both the "search" and "replace" fields. Of course test on a copy of the file, first. jaclaz

Maybe I can try translating submix8c post in the way I understood it. HTH jaclaz