I'm looking for a straightforward way to watch the contents of a folder using Win32 (minimum target is XP). If possible, it would be nice to use an event-driven approach rather than a polling-type approach. To complicate things, the watched folder may be a network share.
I'm really only interested in capturing "new files". I don't care if I am not informed of renamed or removed files.
Is there an event-driven way, or is polling my only choice when dealing with Win32?
Have you tried out FindFirstChangeNotification and FindNextChangeNotification .
Download an example source code from here
FindFirstChangeNotification is the right API here, as Suraj says. I did however find when using this (many years ago), that it sometimes failed if used it to watch a network share with an infinite wait on the handle it returns. I simply applied a timeout and re-issued the FFCN every so often, which solved the problem.
I don't know if later OS updates solved this problem, we never went back and checked :-).
Related
I wrote a download manager (in the AutoHotKey language) for a client and it gets flagged by a minority of virus scanners (11% of the scanners used on VirusTotal) as being a trojan, malware, dropper, data stealer, etc. Since my software is none of those things I'd like to correct the erroneous flagging by these scanners. Has anyone dealt with this sort of problem before?
The real complication here is that since this is a download manager the actual signed binary I am delivering is different for each of thousands of downloads, so it's not practical that I could request each and every unique version be white listed or something.
I'd prefer not to try and use actual cloaking techniques to try and fool the anti-virus companies when I really have nothing to hide, but I'm not sure there is another choice (and I'm not sure I'd be successful). Any advice?
Trik has provided the following answer on the forums:
In the AutoHotkey folder (Held in
ProgramFiles) there is a sub folder
named 'compiler' in that folder is a
file named 'upx.exe' rename that to
something like upx.old (or any other
file extension). That should solve the
problem.
Please comment on whether this worked or not.
I'm answering my own question here, and sadly providing a less than satisfactory answer, but it seems the only one available...
From what I've found there is no way to prevent some anti-virus programs from falsely flagging Auto Hot Key, AutoIt, and other scripted/interpreted code. I tried numerous approaches and nothing worked.
The best approach seems to be to avoid using Auto Hot Key, AutoIt, etc. if you can, and if you must then use VirusTotal on the setup file you're planning to release in order to understand what warnings your potential users will receive. In my experience of the 40+ virus scanners that are used by Virus Total only 1-4 generally see an Auto Hot Key included code as suspicious, and those are typically unpopular, unfamiliar virus scanners which likely err on the side of caution because doing so requires fewer resources (in terms of their own manpower, in coding and signature use).
I have to write a litle app that will process files saved in a given dir. I doesn´t pleases me the idea of writing infinite loops, timers and that kind of stuff.
I´d like to know if there if (I would bet a finger that there is!) there is any windows API that would send my app a message for any file saved in that given dir.
ReadDirectoryChangesW is non-trivial to use correctly. There is a working sample here. I have worked with production code closely derived from this, and I've found no better sample to work from.
Note that there are known issues with the API (admittedly corner cases that may not affect you) that are described here and here, and further suggestions on usage here.
The function you're looking for is ReadDirectoryChangesW.
you can use the FindFirstChangeNotification funciton too. Exist an component called TJvChangeNotify from the JEDI JVCL collection wich encapsules this function which makes it easier to use.
OK, the Windows dev platform I have is a Windows XP box and a copy of Visual C++ 6.0. I'm trying to create or modify security descriptors for a service. My initial thought from other answers (and some reading) was that I should use ConvertStringSecurityDescriptorToSecurityDescriptor to setup my security descriptor.
Except...my install of VC++ 6.0 lacks the headers for this function (sddl.h according to MSDN).
Can anyone point me to other APIs for creating/modifying Security Descriptors? I'd be happy if I could walk through an existing one (I can QueryServiceObjectSecurity) and just eliminate certain users, but I can't figure out how to do that just looking at MSDN.
Alternately, if someone could point me in the direction of how to call this function without proper headers, that would be fine.
Obvious answer rebuttal: I can (and will) make an attempt to get IT to install a newer version of VC++ on my system, but the last time I asked IT about anything significant it took 7 weeks for them to respond. Since I'd like to get this done in the next week or two, I think IT is not going to fix this question for me in a timely manner.
In theory, you don't need a newer compiler, just an updated SDK. In reality, VC++ 6 is old enough that it may have trouble parsing the headers for a current SDK though.
As an alternative to that, you could declare pointers to the correct types of functions in your code, then use LoadLibrary and GetProcAddress to get the addresses of the correct functions, then call the functions via those pointers.
As an aside, however, I'd point out that I doubt what you've envisioned will work. I've never tried to do exactly what you're trying, so it's always possible I'm wrong, but every time I've done anything manipulating security descriptors, DACLs, SACLs, or anything similar in Windows, the code's ended up considerably longer and more complex than it initially seemed like it should. Even something extremely trivial generally requires at least a couple hundred lines of code...
You could check out the DCOMPerm sample, it has handles the DACL/ACE and other structures you are going to run into - thats where i started when i created a set of classes to handle this for our COM installations - and as #jerry coffin said it ended up being a lot of code.
You'll have to download the SDK to get the sample.
At work I use ClearCase and SourceSafe, but have found some time to do some time to code for myself enroute thanks to a disposable laptop.
However, I wish I had a lightweight VCS on my system using which I would be able to make changes to my code during the commute and then push/grab them from my Linux systems.
I use git on my home system, but I can't really get it working on Windows. I don't want all that cygwin hack.
If it does not run natively on Windows, it just won't do.
What have you guys tried on your Windows system? Something that YOU use.
The big player at the moment seems to be Mercurial?
What would be best for a one (or maybe two) man team?
I just need to maintain :
Versioned copies of source code.
Checking in and out should be as less obtrusive as possible.
I am looking forward to a multiple Undo kind of feature (like that in an EMacs buffer) but persistent.
I really like the way git keeps track of lines moving between files in a source code set
I should be able to move part(s)/sub tree(s) of the source tree (each sub tree implies a module/plugin to my the main software I am building) to an archival system either completly or partially and restore them back from the archive as and when required and the system should track any changes to this tree as well.
I actually want to experiment with my code as much as possible without me manually keeping track of what I modified and what I need to undo once I try out some idea, so that I am back to where I want to continue from.
Notes : A similar topic came up a year ago : DVCS Choices - What's good for Windows?
I hope things have changed, and I really want people to share their own, real life experiences. Not something they recommend without using it or they think will work.
Bazaar and Mercurial both work very well on Windows. I posted in the question you linked, and since then, both have improved their Windows support even more. Using them is easy and flawless, and they even have GUIs if you swing that way.
I for one have switched from bazaar to git, and I've been pleased.
If you've a Clearcase background, why don't you take a look at Plastic SCM? Check this link, it will show you how it works on a distributed setup (and of course all the basic operations) http://codicesoftware.blogspot.com/2010/03/distributed-development-for-windows.html.
You won't miss any of the "good" clearcase features but all the shortcomings are simply gone (faster, installs on 45seconds, no cumbersome setup to use on a mixed Win/Linux scenario, built-in ACLs, excellent branching and merging, much better common ancestor algorithm, visualizations, better GUI, and you still have "selectors" in case you miss config_specs, but not being mandatory)
Despite primarily being a windows user, I am a huge fan of rsync. Now, I don't want to argue the virtues of rsync vs any other tool...this is not my point.
The only way I've ever found of running rsync on windows is via a version that is built to run on top of Cygwin, and as Cygwin has issues with Unicode, so does rsync.
Is anyone familiar enough with the workings of rsync to say if there are any real technical programming hurdles to porting rsync to a native Win32 binary?
Or is it maybe that there has just never been enough interest from windows users to care to port it over?
Partly I ask because I'm am considering trying to take on the task of starting a port, but I want to make sure there's not something I'm missing in terms of why it may not be possible.
The way that windows locks open files might cause an issue requiring you to hook into the Volume Shadowcopy Service.
About two years ago this fellow ported the algorithm to C#. I haven't taken a look at the code (or the provided binary), but it might be a place to start looking or someone to try contacting.
http://www.russiantequila.com/wordpress/?p=8
I've been evaluating an effort to undertake a win32 port as well. I don't believe anything major would block it, but evidence from both the rsync mailing list and another discussion points to a heavy reliance on unix fork() system calls. Using threads appears the way to go for win32.
Threads vs. Fork discussion
(disclaimer: i promise, i don't google myself, but google analytics brought me here)
i went through porting rsync to .net (sig11's link is my blog). there are no technical hurdles, just practical ones. as was already said, the code is rather... dense. difficult to follow, and complete lack of comments. i'm more than happy to make my work available, but unfortunately, since it was part of a commercial effort, it's not in significantly better shape.
i have, on a number of occasions, messed around with the idea of reverse-engineering the protocol and doing a ground-up implementation that's wire-compatible with the existing one, but ... a bit cleaner to work with. i've even started a wiki to that effect, but... as you can see from the lack of contents there, other item have taken priority. if anyone would like to work with me on this, that may be the impetus i need to get going.
the concept of the tool is great, as is the functionality it offers, however it's rather limited outside the *ix space, and could definitely benefit from an api.
wiki link for reference:
http://www.russiantequila.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
Have you seen this:
http://www.itefix.no/i2/taxonomy/term/39
I have used cwrsync without any problem (and with the much of the usual cygwin misery), but I haven't had any need for unicode filenames, so I've not seen that problem.
I don't really know why there isn't a native Win32 port, but I did look at the source a while back because I implemented a similar delta-copy system in C#. As one would expect from the world of brilliant *nix hackers, the source is largely single-character variable names and a total absence of comments, which isn't terrible helpful and might be rather off-putting to would-be porters.
I would really appreciate a port of rsync to MS-Windows such that it can be built using Visual Studio. I am encountering various protocol errors at random, somewhat intermittently. I am using rsync to distribute sw to a grid of around 200 machines and typically get around a a dozen failures. I am using GCC 4.4.2 and the latest cygwin to build rsync v3.0.7. It would help me alot if I could experiment with a version that does not require cygwin. This is because the machines in the grid already have another cygwin-based app running that is a different version to the one I have.
Having spent some time on the rsynv mailing list opinion seems to be divided as to cause of protocol errors on MS-Windows. Some say it is a bug in rsync where it failed to do a clean socket shutdown, a bug that was fixed a while ago. Others say that it is a fundamental protocol error in rsync where the client does not tell the server that it is finished, it just shuts down, causing MW-windows servers to get a RST signal on the socket, something that does not happen on Unix.