So the images below were originally a vb files. I have just opened it and it looks like this and the compiler won't run it. I am unsure whether this is a compiler error or whether it may have become corrupt because the project is stored on an external drive. It is just these two forms that have broken like this; I have one other form and a module in the same project that are okay but the project can't run because of the two that are broke.
Broken Login Form
Broken Diary Form
If it changes anything, the designer files for the forms are intact it is just the scripting for the forms elements that is broken.
Also, if I can't identify the cause, is there a way to revert it back to the last working version in visual studio to get my code back? Just because I put a lot of time into it.
The data in those files is most likely gone.
IMPORTANT: Do not write anything to that disk drive unless you find that you cannot recover those files.
If you are using a version control system then you can revert to an earlier version.
If you are using Windows 10 and you happen to have stored those files in a location included in what File History saves, you can recover them from that.
If you use some other form of backup, retrieve the files from that.
If you have a separate disk drive with at least as much free space as the one with the corrupted files, you could try running file recovery software as it might be that the zeroed-out file was written to a different place on the HDD.
TinTnMn pointed out in a comment that if you previously compiled the code, you should have executable files in the "obj" and "bin" folders that can be decompiled to recover most of your work
It could be quicker to re-write the code while it is still fresh in your mind.
Related
I have a fairly large application (~750k LOC) that I distribute using the Package and Deployment Wizard. I fully understand that it would be nice to migrate to .NET (that ain't happening - see the code size above), and that the PDW is deeply flawed. However, for the most part I've made it work well for my end users, by customizing the Setup1 application, writing a menu-driven wrapper for the Setup application, and by running it in silent mode. (Note that the problem I'm about to describe occurred even before I started using silent mode.)
The issue I'm having is that my application requires quite a few auxiliary files, which I've added to the PDW project in the "Included files" section. When a user does a clean installation (either from scratch, or after un-installing a previous installation), everything works fine. However, if they simply run the installer to update the existing installation, the executable file and any OCXs I've updated get copied over the previous versions just fine, but my auxiliary files don't - I have to have the user manually delete them, and then the Setup1 program will re-install them as it should.
I've checked in the Setup.lst file, and all of the files are listed there, with their current date stamps. In fact, in my "BuildAll.bat" file, I do the Windows equivalent of a "touch" (copy /b "TheFile.dat" +,,) to force the date stamp to be current. However, if the file exists on the target machine, it won't be over-written even though it's older. There are no errors reported, either visibly or in the .LOG file (which is required if using the silent option).
A couple of additional points: Some of the auxiliary files are themselves VB6 applications - just the .exe files. Those do get copied correctly if they're newer than the existing files. Other than being files with internal versioning information, there's no difference between them and the other auxiliary files (which are things like media files, or text-based .txt or .dat files).
So, what's going on, and how do I fix it (besides moving to Inno or some other solution that won't work for me...)? Thanks in advance for any help!
~~
Mark Moulding
Coming from a Unix background and used to working with the Makefileto build stuff, I now have to find my way through the maze of twisty little passages known as Visual Studio 2017.
Basically: I just want to save a solution that I've imported into Visual Studio 2017 (e.g. to move it to another machine) to some sensible structure. I am unable to figure out how to do that!
The solution I work with comes from GitHub and the package is about 590 Kbyte and consists of 32 files. (I downloaded the .zip and unpacked it, then opened in the IDE by clicking on the .sln-file.
After running it (unchanged) in Visual Studio, it has ballooned to 4 Mbyte and 134 files. Obviously a lot of temporary files has been created as a result of me running it. Making a copy of this bloated directory structure is not practical - and some other way (i.e. the method for saving used by the guy who shared his solution on GitHub) must exist.
I want to save it with all those temporary files removed.
There is Build » Clean Solution – but it does not seem to get get rid of the temporary files.
I've also tried: File » Save all. I do no understand how this commend is supposed to work. It does not ask where to save tings, but just says "Item(s) saved" at the status bar at the bottom of the screen. Looking at things in the file system, I am unable to located anything saved. To me, it looks like this command does nothing.
I've searched, but so far found nothing for Visual Studio 2017 (recipes for older versions does not seem to work anymore.)
Saving a solution is something developers do a lot, so there must be something obvious I've missed.
There is not really the concept of "Save As..." for a solution. If you want to copy the whole solution elsewhere you would usually just copy the whole folder it's in to somewhere else.
The reasons you have many extra files are:
There will be a .git sub-folder which contains the Git repository. If you don't need to retain any link to this, you can delete / avoid copying this. Depending on how much history is in the Git repo this folder can even be much larger than the solution itself.
VS will create a .vs sub-folder for various housekeeping activities; you can usually avoid copying this.
In each project's folder, after you've built the solution, there will be obj and bin sub-folders. These are recreated as needed at build time and are not needed for a copy.
If you copy everything ignoring the above, you will probably find the size of the target is more as you were expecting.
This is not a work-stopper in any way, but I thought I should ask anyway because it is a little annoying. Let's say I create a new project and start putting source files in a directory other than the default that shows up the first time. Afterwords, whenever I open the project, I have to navigate to the source directory once during that session. Like I said, not a big deal (but if solvable, then it's icing on the cake). Quite a few times I absentmindedly put the source file in the default directory and end up committing that file to the SVN and if I am lucky, going through all the files, removing them, then adding them again.
So my question is, is there any way to specify the default source directory on a per project basis?
I have run into the same nuisance. I like to put the public interface header files for a library in a separate directory, but end up with file directory typos because I forget to navigate to the correct directory when saving a new file. Unfortunately, Visual Studio does not offer a setting to change the default directory for new C++ source files.
I had the same problem when I started using build systems (CMake, Premake) which requires me to keep my project files separate from my source files, which hampered my workflow.
Although changing the default source directory seems impossible, if you aren't afraid to spend money, the workaround I found was to use the Visual Assist extension.
You can bind a shortcut of your choise to the Create File command which creates
a new file relative to the directory or your open file.
I'd also recommend to base one's workflow around the wonderful
Create from Usage command (which I think greatly boosts
productivity) which almost eliminates the need to manually create files.
The extension is great, albeit a bit costly. I would love to see Microsoft incorporate these features directly in the IDE eventually as they are found vanilla in a lot of other IDEs e.g. Eclipse, Intellij.
There might be some free extensions available that does the same thing, but I haven't found any.
Changing the Default Project Folder may help. This page demonstrates how to change the default for Visual Studio 2005, and it should be the same for later versions.
In my working folder of a VSS project, is it alright if I make all the files/folders writable? i.e. not readonly?
It is ok, but why should you?
The read only state is a safeguard so you can't change code that is not locked. Avoiding possible merge troubles in the near future.
Edit: Ok in the comment you said that the build failed because the file was not writable. If so, then it is very strange. Especially if the error message said something about not able to access the file.
It was probably still locked by another process and changing the readonly flag removed the lock (or it just needed the delay). But as far as I know, compilers do work excelent with read only source files.
Possible problems:
Files on network drives. If the network is slow, the compiler can have trouble accessing the file.
File still open in (an other) editor. Normally this shouldn't be a problem, but you may never know.
Some code files are generated during the build. In this case they don't belong in the version system, their source (if any) does.
Are there any VC++ settings I should know about to generate better PDB files that contain more information?
I have a crash dump analysis system in place based on the project crashrpt.
Also, my production build server has the source code installed on the D:\, but my development machine has the source code on the C:\. I entered the source path in the VC++ settings, but when looking through the call stack of a crash, it doesn't automatically jump to my source code. I believe if I had my dev machine's source code on the D:\ it would work.
"Are there any VC++ settings I should know about"
Make sure you turn off Frame pointer ommision. Larry osterman's blog has the historical details about fpo and the issues it causes with debugging.
Symbols are loaded successfully. It shows the callstack, but double clicking on an entry doesn't bring me to the source code.
What version of VS are you using? (Or are you using Windbg?) ... in VS it should defintely prompt for source the first time if it doesn't find the location. However it also keeps a list of source that was 'not found' so it doesn't ask you for it every time. Sometimes the don't look list is a pain ... to get the prompt back up you need to go to solution explorer/solution node/properties/debug properties and edit the file list in the lower pane.
Finally you might be using 'stripped symbols'. These are pdb files generated to provide debug info for walking the callstack past FPO, but with source locations stripped out (along with other data). The public symbols for windows OS components are stripped pdbs. For your own code these simply cause pain and are not worth it unless you are providing your pdbs to externals. How would you have one of these horrible stripped pdbs? You might have them if you use "binplace" with the -a command.
Good luck! A proper mini dump story is a godsend for production debugging.
If your build directly from your sourcecode management system, you should annotate your pdb files with the file origins. This allows you to automatically fetch the exact source files while debugging. (This is the same proces as used for retrieving the .Net framework sourcecode).
See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163563.aspx for more information. If you use subversion as your SCM you can check out the SourceServerSharp project.
You could trying using the MS-DOS subst command to assign your source code directory to the D: drive.
This is the procedure I used after some trouble similar to yours:
a) Copied to the production server all the EXE & DLL files that were built, each with its corresponding PDB to the same directory, started the system, and waited for the crash to happen.
b) Copied back all the EXE, DLL & PDB files to the development machine (to a temporary folder) along with the minidump (in the same folder). Used Visual Studio to load the minidump from that folder.
Since VS found the source files where they were originally compiled, it was always able to identify them and load them correctly. As with you, in the production machine the drive used was not C:, but in the development machine it was.
Two more tips:
One thing I did often was to copy an EXE/DLL rebuilt and forget to copy the new PDB. This ruined the debug cycle, VS would not be able to show me the call stack.
Sometimes, I got a call stack that didn't make sense in VS. After some headache, I discovered that windbg would always show me the correct stack, but VS often wouldn't. Don't know why.
In case anyone is interested, a co-worker replied to this question to me via email:
Artem wrote:
There is a flag to MiniDumpWriteDump()
that can do better crash dumps that
will allow seeing full program state,
with all global variables, etc. As for
call stacks, I doubt they can be
better because of optimizations...
unless you turn (maybe some)
optimizations off.
Also, I think disabling inline
functions and whole program
optimization will help quite a lot.
In fact, there are many dump types,
maybe you could choose one small
enough but still having more info
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms680519(VS.85).aspx
Those types won't help with call stack
though, they only affect the amount of
variables you'll be able to see.
I noticed some of those dump types
aren't supported in dbghelp.dll
version 5.1 that we use. We could
update it to the newest, 6.9 version
though, I've just checked the EULA for
MS Debugging Tools -- the newest
dbghelp.dll is still ok to
redistribute.
Is Visual Studio prompting you for the path to the source file? If it isn't then it doesn't think it has symbols for the callstack. Setting the source path should work without having to map the exact original location.
You can tell if symbols are loaded by looking at the 'modules' window in Visual Studio.
Assuming you are building a PDB then I don't think there are any options that control the amount of information in the PDB directly. You can change the type of optimizations performed by the compiler to improve debuggabilty, but this will cost performance -- as your co-worker points out, disabling inline will help make things more obvious in the crash file, but will cost at runtime.
Depending on the nature of your application I would recommend working with full dump files if you can, they are bigger, but give you all the information about the process ... and how often does it crash anyway :)
Is Visual Studio prompting you for the
path to the source file?
No.
If it isn't then it doesn't think it has symbols
for the callstack. Setting the source
path should work without having to map
the exact original location.
Symbols are loaded successfully. It shows the callstack, but double clicking on an entry doesn't bring me to the source code. I can of course search in files for the line in question, but this is hard work :)