ProFox

profox@leafe.com

2704 discussions

VFP9 Screwed - HELP!
by Dave Crozier 29 Mar '18

29 Mar '18

Fellow Gurus. Any input welcome as to why my VFP9 all serviced packed to date and working no problem on Win 10, 64 bit has suddenly died and won't come back to life. Not worried about why it went wrong, I just want a working VFP system. For some reason VFP remembers the old projects I had loaded at the time it died (C5 error...) and no won't forget the projects that were loaded. First I tried a repair option and still C5's on opening and then tried a n uninstall, reboot then install and it still c5's on opening my old projects which I assumed it would have forgotten but obviously not. Removed all traces of FoxUser.* to no avail. Running VFP 9.exe /regserver or vfp9 /a has no effect on loading the old projects despite saying it should ignore any registry settings an primarily unregistering VFP. Any ideas how I get a simple no projects loaded VFP application loaded? Of course it would happen on Year End stocktake day wouldn't it!! Grrrrrrrrrr! Dave Crozier Software Development Manager Flexipol Packaging Ltd. --------------------------------------------------------------- This communication and the information it contains is intended for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. Its contents are confidential and may be protected in law. If you have received this e-mail in error you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unauthorised use, copying or disclosure of any of it may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone or email. Flexipol Packaging Ltd. has taken every reasonable precaution to minimise the risk of virus transmission through email and therefore any files sent via e-mail will have been checked for known viruses. However, you are advised to run your own virus check before opening any attachments received as Flexipol Packaging Ltd will not in any event accept any liability whatsoever once an e-mail and/or any attachment is received. It is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that they have adequate virus protection. Flexipol Packaging Ltd. Unit 14 Bentwood Road Carrs Industrial Estate Haslingden Rossendale Lancashire BB4 5HH Tel:01706-222792 Fax: 01706-224683 www.Flexipol.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------------- Terms & Conditions: Notwithstanding delivery and the passing of risk in the goods, the property in the goods shall not pass to the buyer until the seller Flexipol Packaging Ltd. ("The Company") has received in cash or cleared funds payment in full of the price of the goods and all other goods agreed to be sold by the seller to the buyer for which payment is then due. Until such time as the property in the goods passes to the buyer, the buyer shall hold the goods as the seller's fiduciary agent and bailee and keep the goods separate from those of the buyer and third parties and properly stored protected and insured and identified as the seller's property but shall be entitled to resell or use the goods in the ordinary course of its business. Until such time as the property in the goods passes to the buyer the seller shall be entitled at any time

8 14

Re: [ADMIN] Testing
by Man-wai Chang 29 Mar '18

29 Mar '18

CONTACT.... Got this one.... On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Ken Dibble <krdibble(a)stny.rr.com> wrote: > Not receiving my own posts? -- .~. Might, Courage, Vision. SINCERITY! / v \ 64-bit Fedora 25 Server Spin /( _ )\ http://sites.google.com/site/changmw ^ ^ May the Force and farces be with you!

1 0

Wonder if this ransomware attack in Atlanta was involving any VFP files?
by mbsoftwaresolutions＠mbsoftwaresolutions.com 28 Mar '18

28 Mar '18

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/city-of-atlanta-still-crippled-six-days-a… Makes you wonder, since government had a lot of Fox apps over the years (and maybe many still do).

3 2

Re: [ADMIN] Testing
by AndyHC 28 Mar '18

28 Mar '18

Well gMail always blocks them - I just set Thunderbird to copy them to my inbox On 28-Mar-2018 1:00 AM, Ken Dibble wrote: > Not receiving my own posts? > > [excessive quoting removed by server]

2 1

Re: [ADMIN] Testing
by Gene Wirchenko 28 Mar '18

28 Mar '18

At 13:05 2018-03-27, Ken Dibble <krdibble(a)stny.rr.com> wrote: [snip] >Somebody will probably say "email is not guaranteed to be >instantaneous, yadda yadda, who knows what could be wrong with all >the newfangled filtering, yadda yadda, it's probably at your end, >yadda yadda... > >I've been subscribed to ProFox since I still had some red hair. In >EVERY SINGLE CASE where a message I sent to ProFox did not show up >in under a minute, the problem has been, in EVERY SINGLE CASE, a >problem at the ProFox server. :) It has NEVER been anything else. > >So, Ed, please take a look and see what happened to my messages. Ed, I am having similar problems. I E-mailed you twice about this, and I have not received a reply. What is going on? Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko

2 1

Thread Start Test
by Gene Wirchenko 28 Mar '18

28 Mar '18

Hello: I do not appear to be able to originate threads on ProFox. If you are reading this, I am wrong. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko

10 13

Re: [ADMIN] Testing
by Ed Leafe 28 Mar '18

28 Mar '18

On Mar 27, 2018, at 3:20 PM, Ken Dibble <krdibble(a)stny.rr.com> wrote: > > Ed, if you see any of my messages, please see if my original one is stuck in the filter. Yes, it was marked as spam. I’ll send the first and delete the dupes. -- Ed Leafe

2 1

Re: Get Method Issue with Hidden Property
by Fernando D. Bozzo 27 Mar '18

27 Mar '18

Hi Ken: Sometimes, for unknown reasons, VFP have trouble with hidden properties, and when this happens one of the fixes is unhidding the property, making it public. May be not the best solution, but it's better a bad solution than no solution at all. 2018-03-27 20:21 GMT+02:00 Ken Dibble <krdibble(a)stny.rr.com>: > VFP 9 SP 1, running on Win 7 Ultimate SP 1. > > I know that there can be issues with hidden object properties; that's why > I give the base class "Set" and "Get" methods to deal with them. That's > always supposed to work, right? > > So today somebody's software blew up on the "Get" method for a Shape > object: > > This is in my resize code (I created this long before VFP had Anchors, and > I haven't bothered to change it; the cause of the problem is not that I'm > not using Anchors, and the correct solution for the actual problem cannot > be to ditch my code and use Anchors instead, even though some people may > suggest that.) > > This seems to have happened because of some bizarre anomaly where a user > was previewing a report using the standard VFP report preview window. That > report was called from a window that was opened by another window, both of > which are In-Desktop windows inside my custom-made main window (I don't use > _SCREEN). She closed the preview window, whereupon a shape that is ON THE > MAIN WINDOW, not on the window that should have gotten focus, somehow > executed its Resize() method--so she probably nudged the border of the main > window somehow while playing with the report preview. > > My shape subclass did this: > > thepercent = THIS.ObtainAValue("PercentWidth") > > * PercentWidth is a hidden property of the baseclass. The baseclass code > is this: > PROCEDURE ObtainAValue > LPARAMETERS cTheProperty > > IF PEMSTATUS(THIS,cTheProperty,5) = .T. > * Property exists; the IF statement just said so... > RETURN THIS.&cTheProperty && Error 1734 "Property PERCENTWIDTH > is not found" > ELSE > RETURN 0 > ENDIF > ENDPROC > > That's all of the code involved; I'm not leaving anything out. > > I can't reproduce this myself. > > Needless to say, various users have resized their various forms bazillions > of times, thereby running this code bazillions of times *times* the number > of times Resize() gets called when you're messing with the borders of a > form, without having this happen. This is the kind of stuff that just irks > me. I've seen it before; built-in VFP functions just flat-out lie, leaving > my code with nothing to trust--but it only happens once in a blue moon. > > Any thoughts (other than "Use anchors instead"?) > > Thanks. > > Ken Dibble > www.stic-cil.org > > [excessive quoting removed by server]

1 0

RE: [ADMIN] Testing
by Tracy Pearson 27 Mar '18

27 Mar '18

It's a setting of the list-serve. If I remember right, it's off by default. -----Original Message----- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Ken Dibble Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 3:31 PM To: profoxtech(a)leafe.com Subject: [ADMIN] Testing Not receiving my own posts? [excessive quoting removed by server]

3 2

Re: [ADMIN] Testing
by Ken Dibble 27 Mar '18

27 Mar '18

No, it's some peculiarity in my text and/or subject line that some filter's RegEx code did not anticipate, I'm sure. Around Christmas I sent a long email to my brother with about 20 links to Christmas songs on YouTube pages, interspersed with commentary. His email server kept rejecting the message. I eventually broke it down to one of those links by sending them to him one at a time. The one that didn't go through was not immediately distinguishable from any of the others, just another string of random characters, but his ISP insisted on rejecting it, over and over and over. It was a legitimate YouTube link like all the others; click it, the song played, without any unintended or unexpected other results. This is what we have come to in our quests to defeat spam--and the longer this type of strategy is followed--the higher the percentages of legitimate messages that won't be delivered, eventually rendering email useless. Ah well... Ed, if you see any of my messages, please see if my original one is stuck in the filter. Thanks. Ken >I, otoh, am seeing my posts, so it's probably not a global change in >maillist behavior. > >On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Ted Roche <tedroche(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Ken Dibble <krdibble(a)stny.rr.com> wrote: > >> Not receiving my own posts? > >> > > > > Well, you already know what they say, right? > > > > > > -- > > Ted Roche > > Ted Roche & Associates, LLC > > http://www.tedroche.com > > > >-- >Ted Roche >Ted Roche & Associates, LLC >http://www.tedroche.com > [excessive quoting removed by server]

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

ProFox