Difference between the evaluation and the registered version of PACL 6.02
 

Hi!
I have now begin testing PACL 6.02. In one of the threads I asked what's the difference between the evaluation and the registered version of PACL.

Well, after testing 6.02 I can see now a clear difference between the evaluation and the registered version of PACL. This is exacly what I've been asking for. Now the user have a small limitation in the unregistered version but still able to test it and evaluate the functionality.

Here's the results after these tests.

PACOMP
Shareware Version
Registered Version
PAEXT
Shareware Version
Registered Version
PASPAN
Shareware Version
Registered Version
PAFIX
Shareware Version
Registered Version
PAENCODE
Shareware Version
Registred Version
PACRYPT
Shareware Version
Registered Version
Bugs found in these tests
When running PACOMP without any parameters, there's no remainder message saying the program is unregistered as the other programs have (i.e PAEXT, PASPAN, PAFIX, PAENCODE, PACRYPT). PACOMP should work the same as the others when no parameters are used.

The file PACONV.bat says version 6.01, but it should say 6.02.

I get back with more results after I have tested my other reported issues.

Kind Regards
Micke

thanks!
 

thanks!!

so Micke... what else do you want improved/fixed in 6.02?

Hi!
Well, in this thread PACOMP doesn't behave like the others when using the 6.02 unregistred version, because there's no remainder to register the program. So if you could fix the small thing with PACOMP in 6.02 that would be great.

From what I have read, you want one wish in each thread to keep tracking of them. When I use PACL I have these things I would like to be fixed/improved in priority

1) Remove many files from one archive in one command. This is something I would appreciate a lot and I have also describe why this is a problem with no support for it in this thread. I have tested in 6.02 but it's not working properly yet.

2) Support for creating SFX archives using PACL. Today I'm dependent on PA to create SFX archive, but it would be great if I could create it directly when using PACL and also add a predefined path of where the archive is to be extracted to when the user open it. This has been discussed in this thread and in this thread to.

3) Support for \\machinename\sharename when creating archives. Discussed in this thread and tested for 6.02 here.

Kind Regards
Micke

Point 3) is the real killer for me. If this can be fixed then I can replace my 4.01 version.

Cheers,
Badders

Is there any news on a 6.03 with the above fixes?

we are adding one large feature to the zip engine, so as soon as this is done, we will be doing next release of PACL as well.

Any idea on timescales?

Once again, 4 months later, any idea on timescales now PA 2011 V12 is out?

we will start looking Now at moving new features/code to PACL 6.x, from PA 12.x.

This includes FIPS, zip x509 decryption, VSS and more.

Yay!

That indeed is good news but would it be possible to produce an interim version with the issues already identified fixed?

this should not take a long time, we have to update engines to what we use in PA 12.xx for other issues/improvements.

OK - thanks for the update.

Hi again, any news on an update to PACL? Thanks

Here is updated PACL 7.00 BETA 1:
http://www.powerarchiver.com/test/al.../pacl700b1.exe

Thanks spwolf - I'll give it a test this week.

please do - we didnt do much testing here, but there were huge changes in the compression engines.

Point 3) doesn't seem to work still. Is this intended to be fixed?

still logged in Badders, thanks for testing again!

I haven't done too much unfortunately. Very busy at the moment. The time taken to compress seems a hell of a lot quicker though. :) I'll try and do a time comparison shortly. Most of my archiving is for backup purposes using the \\<machine>\<share> syntax which worked in 4.01 but hasn't worked since. I'm using 6.01 for any non-share archiving so will compare with 7 later.

PACL 7.00 RC1 http://www.powerarchiver.com/test/alpha120/pacl700.exe

please check it out.

"-PP" wow, looking good after initials tests:) Thanks for implementing this. I'll give it a bash on my production boxes..

Hi!
Made som more tests with PACL 7.00 [May 11 2012] and noticed one small thing.

When running PACOMP without any parameters, no remainder pop up to tell the user that the program is unregistred. However if I run the PACOMP with parameters and a file to create the remainder will pop up.

This is inconsistant behaviour as
PACLREG.exe
PACRYPT.exe
PAENCODE.exe
PAEXT.exe
PAFIX.exe
PASPAN.exe

all have the pop up remainder to register the program when running it without any parameters.

It's really not a big issue, just noticed that PACOMP don't behave the same as the other program when running unregistred without any parameters.

Kind Regards
Micke