I was trying to reinstall Anaconda on my Windows machine but have been running into a lot of issues. The installation gets stuck at extracting packages.
I have tried multiple time with available recommendations but to no avail. Prior to installation, I've always cleaned the entire path and directories but I end up on with the same issue. The installer gets stuck at various points at different install instances.
Another thing that I noticed is that although I am using a 64 bit installer, Task Manager lists it as 32 bit. I am attaching a few screenshots too.
Thank you for the help.
Current Scenario
Related
I am trying to install the CUDA toolkit in order to be able to use Thundersvm in my personal computer.
However I keep getting the following message in the GUI installer:
"You already have a newer version of the NVIDIA Frameview SDK installed"
I read in the CUDA forums that this most probably results from having installed Geforce Experience (which I have installed). So I tried removing it from the Programs and Features windows panel. However I still got the error, so my guess is that the "Nvidia Corporation" folder was not removed.
In the same question, they also suggested performing a custom install. However I could not find any information on how to do a custom install of the CUDA toolkit. I would really appreciate if someone could explain how to do this custom install or safely remove the previous drivers. I thought of using DDU but I read that sometimes it may actually lead to trouble.
I had the same problem while I was trying to get TensorFlow to use my NVIDIA GTX1070 GPU for calculations. Here's what allowed me to perform the CUDA Toolkit installation on my Windows 10 machine.
As the error message in the installer says - you already have a newer Frameview SDK installed. It was the case for me.
Go to Settings/Uninstall or modify programs.
Remove the NVIDIA Frameview program. It should be there with GeForce Experience, PhysX, etc.
Uninstalling only this NVIDIA program didn't cause any driver problems for my machine and I was able to progress through the CUDA Toolkit installation.
I just met the same problem and fixed it now.
This problem occurred because you chose the default installation configuration, which might contain many installed parts. In my situation, I have installed NVIDIA Nsight Compute, which is the culprit during the first few installs.
Unchecking the redundant parts should be helpful.
I have had basic tests for meteor on a Windows7 PC.
But there the application crashed too often.
Before this, I tested meteor on PC running Windows8. There, crashes happened much less often and generally they were recovered when I shutdown and rebooted the meteor.
Is Meteor unstable on windows7?
Or is there any way to avoid this?
The version packaged to the MSI installer that can be found on win.meteor.com is not official. If you want a more stable, try the virtualized option I've described on the site. I've been using that for a month without issues.
Please could you be specific about what problems you are seeing, for example, what do you mean by 'crash'.
You can certainly raise issues on SO, but if they appear to be specific to the windows port, please raise a ticket at: https://github.com/sdarnell/meteor
The only difference between Win7 and Win8 meteor, is that the installer sets the Win7 compatibility mode for the node.exe executable on Windows 8.
There are also relatively few differences between the windows port of meteor and the official linux/mac release. So there is a possibility that the issue is either environmental (e.g. you have different things installed on the two machines), or it may even be a core issue that just happens to appear more often Win7 due to timing issues (there was a case of this in 0.6.3).
I am developing an application that works fine on many versions and variants of Windows, but fails on others, and I haven't been able to tell why, yet.
What information should I try to find out? The full version number and variant of their OS, for sure, and possibly environment variables. Is there a way to get information about patch levels (perhaps beyond which service packs are installed)? Should I try to get a list of active processes?
Is there an application or script they could run, and then send me a file to diff to try to figure out how their system differs from mine? (Barring that, does anyone has a list of instructions on how to obtain this information)?
[I have so far identified that my application runs fine on 32 bit versions of Windows -- tested on XP and 7 -- and works fine on Win 7 SP1 64-bit for me (Enterprise edition), but some of my users, using Win-7 64 bit (don't know the variation yet -- Home, Pro, Ultimate?) have trouble running a 32-bit JDK included with my program (which in turn accesses 32-bit drivers)].
I am trying to install Sheridan controls (ActiveThreed 2.01) on Win7 64-bit, but evidently it is a 16-bit installer so it won't execute.
What would be the best way to get round this problem?
Can anyone comment on whether http://homepage3.nifty.com/takeda-toshiya/msdos/index.html would be helpful?
It took me months of googling to find a solution for this issue. You don't need to install a virtual environment running a 32-bit version of Windows to run a program with a 16-bit installer on 64-bit Windows. If the program itself is 32-bit, and just the installer is 16-bit, here's your answer.
There are ways to modify a 16-bit installation program to make it 32-bit so it will install on 64-bit Windows 7. I found the solution on this site:
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=10988
In my case, the installation program was InstallShield 5.X. The issue was that the setup.exe program used by InstallShield 5.X is 16-bit. First I extracted the installation program contents (changed the extension from .exe to .zip, opened it and extracted). I then replaced the original 16-bit setup.exe, located in the disk1 folder, with InstallShield's 32-bit version of setup.exe (download this file from the site referenced in the above link). Then I just ran the new 32-bit setup.exe in disk1 to start the installation and my program installed and runs perfectly on 64-bit Windows.
You can also repackage this modified installation, so it can be distributed as an installation program, using a free program like Inno Setup 5.
You can't run 16-bit applications (or components) on 64-bit versions of Windows. That emulation layer no longer exists. The 64-bit versions already have to provide a compatibility layer for 32-bit applications.
Support for 16-bit had to be dropped eventually, even in a culture where backwards-compatibility is of sacred import. The transition to 64-bit seemed like as good a time as any. It's hard to imagine anyone out there in the wild that is still using 16-bit applications and seeking to upgrade to 64-bit OSes.
What would be the best way to get round this problem?
If the component itself is 16-bit, then using a virtual machine running a 32-bit version of Windows is your only real choice. Oracle's VirtualBox is free, and a perennial favorite.
If only the installer is 16-bit (and it installs a 32-bit component), then you might be able to use a program like 7-Zip to extract the contents of the installer and install them manually. Let's just say this "solution" is high-risk and you should have few, if any, expectations.
It's high time to upgrade away from 16-bit stuff, like Turbo C++ and Sheridan controls. I've yet to come across anything that the Sheridan controls can do that the built-in controls can't do and haven't been able to do since Windows 95.
I posted some information on the Infragistics forums for designer widgets that may help you for this. You can view the post with the following link:
http://forums.infragistics.com/forums/p/52530/320151.aspx#320151
Note that the registry keys would be different for the different product and you may need to install on a 32 bit machine to see what keys you need.
I am mostly posting this in case someone comes along and is not aware
that VB2005 and VB2008 have update utilities that convert older
VB versions to it's format. Especially since no one bothered to
point that fact out.
Points taken, but maintenance of this VB6 product is unavoidable. It would also be costly in man-hours to replace the Sheridan controls with native ones. Simply developing on a 32-bit machine would be a better alternative than doing that. I would like to install everything on Win7 64-bit ideally. – CJ7
Have you tried utilizing the code upgrade functionality of VB Express 2005+?
If not,
1. Make a copy of your code - folder and all.
2. Import the project into VB express 2005.
This will activate the update wizard.
3. Debug and get the app running.
4. Create a new installer utilizing MS free tool.
5. You now have a 32 bit application with a 32 bit installer.
Until you do this, you will never know how difficult or hard it
will be to update and modernize the program.
It is quite possible that the wizard will update the Sheridan controls
to the VB 2005 controls. Again, you will not know if it does
and how well it does it until you try it.
Alternatively, stick with the 32 Bit versions of Windows 7 and 8.
I have Windows 7 x64 and a program that will not run. However,
the program will run in Windows 7 32 bit as well as Windows 8 RC 32 bit.
Under Windows 8 RC 32, I was prompted to enable 16 bit emulation
which I did and the program rand quite fine afterwords.
I had 32-bit software with a 16-bit installer that I couldn't unzip. I solved it with otvdm which allows you to run windows 1.x, 2.x, 3 programs on win64. In fact, otvdmw allows you to select the program to run (otvdm is command-line).
16 bit installer will not work on windows 7 it's no longer supported by win 7 the most recent supported version of windows that can run 16 bit installer is vista 32-bit even vista 64-bit doesn't support 16-bit installer....
reference http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946765
Bottom line at the top: Get newer programs or get an older computer.
The solution is simple. It sucks but it's simple. For old programs keep an old computer up and running. Some times you just can't find the same game experience in the new games as the old ones. Sometimes there are programs that have no new counterparts that do the same thing. You basically have 2 choices at that point. On the bright side. Old computers can run $20 -$100 and that can buy you the whole system; monitor, tower, keyboard, mouse and speakers. If you have the patience to run old programs you should have the patience to find what you are looking for in want ads. I have 4 old computers running; 2 windows 98, 2 windows xp. The my wife and I each have win7 computers.
I have build a my own credential. I Installed it on 64 bit systems with Windows 7 home and it's ok. I tried to install it on 3 different machines with windows 7 64 pro and my provider is not shown.
I didn't know that there were differences in windows 7 version about credential provider.
I don't know what to try to solve problem. I tried to install a commercial Provider (aloaha, rohos) and they are ok, I tried to install microsoft samples ( 64 bit compiling) but they are not shown.
In windows 7 home premium 64 bit all is ok.
Did you build it with the debug options? If so you are probably missing debug runtime libraries on your other machines.
Here are some things for you to try
Load into dependency walker see what libraries are linked to your CP. Do this on both the machine where it loads ok and the machine where it doesn't load. Don't be alarmed if it can't find some LogonUI related libraries, this is normal.
Try looking at logonui with WinDBG to make sure that it really the case that it doesn't load and there is not anything else is at play. Look here for instructions.
The most comprehensive way to debug those is to use setup the debugging as described here. Download the ZIP file and read the document especially the debugging section. It is pretty involved and you need to setup either a serial connection or do it with the VM. But this way you will be able to set a breakpoint right when logonui starts up, you will be able to see the loading sequence of the credential providers and will see the exact error message when something fails.