Jump to content

Winapp2.ini additions


Winapp2.ini

Recommended Posts

With all due respect to Piriform; they don't own the syntax of the winapp files. Technically you cannot hold copyright over a means of expressing information- only the information itself. Not to mention that the "ini" format; despite any minor adaption Piriform have made, is a longstanding invention of Microsoft.

 

That wouldn't be significant except for the fact that Piriform didn't actually write any of the entries. They have no legal basis for telling BleachBit that they cannot use a file that Piriform don't actually hold any rights over.

I'm Shane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Modified entry:

Updated for new Conceiva Mezzmo v3.0.0.0 release

[Conceiva Mezzmo*]
LangSecRef=3023
Detect=HKLM\SOFTWARE\Conceiva
Default=False
FileKey1=%ProgramFiles%\Conceiva\Mezzmo|*.txt
FileKey2=%ProgramFiles%\Conceiva\Mezzmo\Third\OGMDemuxer\doc|*.*|REMOVESELF
FileKey3=%ProgramFiles%\Conceiva\Mezzmo\Third\MKVToolNix|*.txt
RegKey1=HKCU\Software\Conceiva\Mezzmo\General|LastWatchFolder

- Added FileKey2 and 3

- Edited RegKey1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

That wouldn't be significant except for the fact that Piriform didn't actually write any of the entries.

 

True, but it's on their dotcom site so they can do what they want rather that be in "favour" of the community or not. Personally I use both programs, however I also know it would benefit Andrew to use his own format that's far enough away from the winapp2.ini (file) to never again catch Piriforms eye's, that and along with making it easier to write entries for. The only thing is there's allot more cleaning tools that also use winapp2.ini and did long before BleachBit ever did.

Edited by Andavari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

but it's on their dotcom site

 

Irrelevant. There is no "we retain full rights to any content you publish on our website" disclaimer on the signup form (just checked).

 

I also know it would benefit Andrew to use his own format that's far enough away from the winapp2.ini

He does. Worst case scenario: he has to convert winapp2.ini to CleanerML on each update. A script could easily be created to automate this process.

 

The only thing is there's allot more cleaning tools that also use winapp2.ini

Agreed.

I'm Shane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not about what it is (its a toolbar installer or something added by the uTorrent installer,) its weather it should be added to winapp2.ini in order to clean it

 

Edit: may not be smart to add *.exe (uTorren.exe may be installed in the same dir,) maybe best to specify the installer.exe's full name

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://bleachbit.sourceforge.net/news/winapp2ini-issue-piriform-resolved#utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=tweet

 

My initial reaction seems to have been correct: The original article misstated the way winapp2.ini works (calling it "the source of all of CCleaner's rules," etc) and the issue was not the inclusion of winapp2.ini support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

the thing is is that if it can read and intigrate winapp2, it can also integrate the items in the files created with cmd line switch /export which piriform has created so we can customize ccleaner even more. I'd rather the ability to wjnapp2 and view/edit in built rules not be removed, just because another company, whose software is already well known and well regarded, felt it was ok to "bend" the rules.

 

ADVICE FOR USING CCleaner'S REGISTRY INTEGRITY SECTION

DON'T JUST CLEAN EVERYTHING THAT'S CHECKED OFF.

Do your Registry Cleaning in small bits (at the very least Check-mark by Check-mark)

ALWAYS BACKUP THE ENTRY, YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU'LL BREAK IF YOU DON'T.

Support at https://support.ccleaner.com/s/?language=en_US

Pro users file a PRIORITY SUPPORT via email support@ccleaner.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather the ability to wjnapp2 and view/edit in built rules not be removed, just because another company

 

I tend to agree with that. If Piriform are so worried about people using their internal rules, they should remove the 'export' feature. Instead, they should allow a user to add an entry with the same name in winapp2.ini, and CCleaner should override the internal one. (of course, any one with a resource hacking tool could easily get around it)

 

Side note: BleachBit is an open source project, not a company. That sort of mischaracterization warrants a brutal lynching in some forums... open source contributors can be a nasty bunch.

I'm Shane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

wait, you tend to agree but then provided a counter argument against not losing the ability.

 

re "company": Autocorrect made me do it, I meant "competitor".

 

For those unaware, one feature of the export command is it allows a user to rename the resulting file from win*.ini to win*1.ini and create their own, replacing, primary rules.

 

ADVICE FOR USING CCleaner'S REGISTRY INTEGRITY SECTION

DON'T JUST CLEAN EVERYTHING THAT'S CHECKED OFF.

Do your Registry Cleaning in small bits (at the very least Check-mark by Check-mark)

ALWAYS BACKUP THE ENTRY, YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU'LL BREAK IF YOU DON'T.

Support at https://support.ccleaner.com/s/?language=en_US

Pro users file a PRIORITY SUPPORT via email support@ccleaner.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you've misunderstood my alternative.

 

The user should be able to override individual entries without needing to replace the entire file. For example; if I added [Adobe Flash Player] to my winapp1.ini (or winapp2.ini) file, the one used internally should be disabled and replaced. That would allow Piriform to disable the export feature, without actually losing the functionality it provides.

I'm Shane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Entry:

 

[Windows 7/8 Search (Windows.edb)*]

LangSecRef=3025

DetectOS=6.1|

Warning=Checkmark this entry to remove file Windows.edb ONLY if you have Windows Search service disabled. Windows.edb can be several hundred megabytes in size and is not needed if Search is disabled.

Default=False

FileKey1=%ProgramData%\Microsoft\Search\Data\Applications\Windows\|Windows.edb

 

NOTE: This entry MAY be applicable to Windows Vista and XP; however, I have no way of testing it on these systems. I suspect that if search/Indexing is disabled on Windows Vista and XP, then Windows.edb can be removed.

Windows 10 x64 Pro on ASUS Maximus VIII Extreme motherboard, i7-6700k CPU,H220 X2 Liquid Cooler, 64 gbyte RipJaws DDR4 3200 RAM, Samsung 970 Pro NVMe M.2 500 gbyte SSD + Samsung 850 Pro 512 gbyte SSD, EVGA RTX 3060 Titan graphics card (Home Built System);  Windows 11x64 Pro on 512 gigabyte Dell XPS 15 2-in-1 Laptop/tablet and Dell XPS 8940 PC.  ASUS RT-AC88U router, 14 tbyte WD My Cloud PR2100 NAS Server, 200 Mbps cable Internet, MS Edge Chromium, MS Office 2021 (Local), Casper 11, DisplayFusion (3 Flat Panel Displays per system):   Latest Bitdefender Internet Security, Quicken, Weather Watcher Live, ThumbsPlus 10, Sticky Password 8, WD Smartware, CyberLink PowerDVD23, MSI AfterBurner, Rainmeter, 8GadgetPack, and many more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning=Checkmark this entry to remove file Windows.edb ONLY if you have Windows Search service disabled. Windows.edb can be several hundred megabytes in size and is not needed if Search is disabled.

If the user does checkmark the entry whilst the service is enabled,

OR IF the service is subsequently enabled,

WHAT is the consequence ?

 

It may be acceptable if the consequence is that a search instantly results in zero results,

but not acceptable if the system locks up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Entry:

 

[MS Office 2013 SkyDrive (setup logs)*]

LangSecRef=3021

Detect=HKCU\Software\Microsoft\SkyDrive

Default=False

FileKey1=%LocalAppData%\Microsoft\SkyDrive\Setup\Logs\|*.*

Windows 10 x64 Pro on ASUS Maximus VIII Extreme motherboard, i7-6700k CPU,H220 X2 Liquid Cooler, 64 gbyte RipJaws DDR4 3200 RAM, Samsung 970 Pro NVMe M.2 500 gbyte SSD + Samsung 850 Pro 512 gbyte SSD, EVGA RTX 3060 Titan graphics card (Home Built System);  Windows 11x64 Pro on 512 gigabyte Dell XPS 15 2-in-1 Laptop/tablet and Dell XPS 8940 PC.  ASUS RT-AC88U router, 14 tbyte WD My Cloud PR2100 NAS Server, 200 Mbps cable Internet, MS Edge Chromium, MS Office 2021 (Local), Casper 11, DisplayFusion (3 Flat Panel Displays per system):   Latest Bitdefender Internet Security, Quicken, Weather Watcher Live, ThumbsPlus 10, Sticky Password 8, WD Smartware, CyberLink PowerDVD23, MSI AfterBurner, Rainmeter, 8GadgetPack, and many more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the user does checkmark the entry whilst the service is enabled,

OR IF the service is subsequently enabled,

WHAT is the consequence ?

 

It may be acceptable if the consequence is that a search instantly results in zero results,

but not acceptable if the system locks up.

 

If Search is re-enabled, Windows.edb is rebuilt automatically. Google Windows.edb delete shows several results such as:

 

http://windows7themes.net/what-is-windows-edb-can-i-delete-it-or-change-its-location.html

Windows 10 x64 Pro on ASUS Maximus VIII Extreme motherboard, i7-6700k CPU,H220 X2 Liquid Cooler, 64 gbyte RipJaws DDR4 3200 RAM, Samsung 970 Pro NVMe M.2 500 gbyte SSD + Samsung 850 Pro 512 gbyte SSD, EVGA RTX 3060 Titan graphics card (Home Built System);  Windows 11x64 Pro on 512 gigabyte Dell XPS 15 2-in-1 Laptop/tablet and Dell XPS 8940 PC.  ASUS RT-AC88U router, 14 tbyte WD My Cloud PR2100 NAS Server, 200 Mbps cable Internet, MS Edge Chromium, MS Office 2021 (Local), Casper 11, DisplayFusion (3 Flat Panel Displays per system):   Latest Bitdefender Internet Security, Quicken, Weather Watcher Live, ThumbsPlus 10, Sticky Password 8, WD Smartware, CyberLink PowerDVD23, MSI AfterBurner, Rainmeter, 8GadgetPack, and many more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://bleachbit.sou...tm_medium=tweet

 

My initial reaction seems to have been correct: The original article misstated the way winapp2.ini works (calling it "the source of all of CCleaner's rules," etc) and the issue was not the inclusion of winapp2.ini support.

 

It's a shame they felt the need to go public and blacken Piriform's name BEFORE getting that clarification <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.