Searching \ for '[OT]: Windows NT - changing files in use' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=windows+changing
Search entire site for: 'Windows NT - changing files in use'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]: Windows NT - changing files in use'
2001\11\01@174145 by David Huisman

flavicon
face
I am glad I do not have to be a mechanic to enjoy driving a motor vehicle
... but it seems I need to be a computer engineer to "drive" my PC.

It seems every time I want to run a new program that I am forced to research
the inner workings of Windows to get the application running.

This time I am wanting to run a piece of software that uses MSVDRT.DLL.

The version in my winnt\system32 directory is 6.0. The program requires
version 6.1 to run. The program writers have supplied version 6.1 but I
cannot copy it to the system directory.

At first I tried to simply copy the file but was denied access due to the
file being in use.

I then re-ran the latest service pack 6 for NT4 hoping it would update the
msvcrt.dll to a later version. (but it did not)

Next I went to the Microsoft support site and downloaded a program called
"inuse.exe".
I tried this several times and it kept reporting that the full pathname must
be used, I played around with various options and combinations of paths and
directories.
ie. inuse c:\msvcrt.dll c:\winnt\system32\msvcrt.dll,  c:\inuse.exe
c:\msvcrt.dll .....

I then searched for other options and found ms.exe, but this is only
available from the NT resource kit CD (which I do not have).

Next, I contacted the code supplier again and was informed to download IE6.
I did this but still no go...

I then thought I could boot to floppy and copy file without Windows running,
but the NTFS files system is not visible when I do this.

Would someone please advise how I can update this file without buying a new
PC, reformatting my hard drive, reinstalling Windows or using another
operating system BEFORE I loose the rest of my hair.

Thanks

Regards

David Huisman

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email spam_OUTlistservTakeThisOuTspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2001\11\01@175432 by Simon Stirley

flavicon
face
If it's only the one program that needs that DLL then copy the DLL into the
same folder as the EXE for the program in question. That should work as
Windoze stupidly searches the current folder by default, though you can
exploit this minor security problem to your advantage as in this case. The
software that I write for a living copies its support DLLs into the same
folder for exactly this reason, especially important when versions of those
DLLs are important (as in your case also)

If you need to update this file in general for all programs then the problem
is much harder. Something like 'inuse' would be required, but one that works
:)

HTH, Simon.

> {Original Message removed}

2001\11\01@175854 by Ned Konz

flavicon
face
On Thursday 01 November 2001 02:21 pm, David Huisman wrote:

> The version in my winnt\system32 directory is 6.0. The program requires
> version 6.1 to run. The program writers have supplied version 6.1 but I
> cannot copy it to the system directory.
>
> At first I tried to simply copy the file but was denied access due to the
> file being in use.
>
> I then re-ran the latest service pack 6 for NT4 hoping it would update the
> msvcrt.dll to a later version. (but it did not)

Assuming you have administrator rights, have you tried:
* rename the existing MSVCRT.DLL to something else (msvcrt.save for instance)
* copy the new one to the same directory
* rebooting

--
Ned Konz
currently: Stanwood, WA
email:     .....nedKILLspamspam@spam@bike-nomad.com
homepage:  http://bike-nomad.com

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2001\11\01@182805 by David Huisman

flavicon
face
Ned,

Windows will not let me delete or rename the file because it is in use by
Windows itself.

Regards

David Huisman

{Original Message removed}

2001\11\01@182809 by David Huisman

flavicon
face
Simon,

It already has the msvcrt.dll in the application folder and does not work.
If the install program was written correctly.
This is where I was getting the version 6.1 from.

When you run the application software, the dialog reports "Cannot find entry
point ... for msvcrt.dll". It was the vendor who suggested to copy the file
to winnt\system32 directory.

Regards

David Huisman

"
If it's only the one program that needs that DLL then copy the DLL into the
same folder as the EXE for the program in question. That should work as..."

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email .....listservKILLspamspam.....mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2001\11\01@183831 by Dal Wheeler

flavicon
face
Check out a boot disk called ultimate boot disk --for nt/2000.  It has an
NTFS dos driver on it.

get it here, as the UBD site seems down...
http://www.min.net/~jsjr/Web2/ubd/menu.htm
{Original Message removed}

2001\11\01@195202 by Ashley Roll

flavicon
face
Hi David.

First off, blame the people that wrote the installer, there is no excuse for
this not working correctly, especially on NT.

you could try to manually do what the installer does for updating system
files.

In the registry there is a key called
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce. To
open the registry, Start->Run->"Regedit".

If you create a new string value under this key, call it what ever amuses
you, and place the command:

C:\WINNT\System32\xcopy.exe C:\msvcrt.dll C:\WINNT\System32\msvcrt.dll /Y

as its value. (replace C:\msvcrt.dll with the source file name)

Then when you reboot the machine it will execute the commands in the run
once key before the system gets running enough to be locking system files.
It will automatically remove the key.

Good luck.
Ash

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
http://www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718




> {Original Message removed}

2001\11\02@035900 by info

flavicon
face
Ashley,

I have done as you suggested and version 6.0 is still in the system32
directory.
I also tried changing CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager
(as per Microsoft Support).

I will now try downloading the utility that allows me to make an NTFS
bootable floppy and try to
copy the file manually.

Any other suggestions.

Regards

David Huisman

{Original Message removed}

2001\11\02@071748 by Gerhard Fiedler

flavicon
face
At 09:21 11/02/2001 +1100, David Huisman wrote:
>This time I am wanting to run a piece of software that uses MSVDRT.DLL.

From the following I assume this is msvcrt.dll

>The version in my winnt\system32 directory is 6.0. The program requires
>version 6.1 to run. The program writers have supplied version 6.1 but I
>cannot copy it to the system directory.

Well, generally, if you buy accessories for your car and mount them by
yourself, and the accessories don't come with a well thought-out mounting
procedure, you may very well have to get out a mechanic's handbook for your
car and your tool chest and try diggin around the innards of your car
:)  In this case, the program could have come with an installer and you
wouldn't have these problems. Also, few people would try to mount an
accessory that requires them to exchange one of the pistons of the car for
a newer model... :)

>At first I tried to simply copy the file but was denied access due to the
>file being in use.

Are you sure that it's because of the file being in use? This should work
in a clean boot, or after you closed all your applications (also those tray
apps). If it still doesn't, try to boot into safe mode.

ge

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu


2001\11\02@082049 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
You are rapidly finding out why I was strongly recommended to make the boot
volume as a FAT partition :) The problem is that MS installs so much junk in
it these days that you rapidly run out of space.

The solution to your problem is to set up another minimal copy of NT as a
debug system on the same disk. With the system up and running on the
original copy of NT, run the 32 bit version of the install program from the
I386 directory (on your hard disk if it is there, else off the NT CD) and
create a new copy of NT in another directory, don't "update" the existing
copy. This will put some new entries in the boot record file, and now when
the system is booting, run the "debug" copy, and copy the desired file to
the system32 directory of the original copy of NT.

This is also a good way of getting into the system if you manage to totally
screw up the system when updating a vital driver. Always keep the "debug"
copy as absolutely bog standard minimalist system, updated only using
service packs.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu


2001\11\02@092047 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
> The solution to your problem is to set up another minimal copy of NT as a
> debug system on the same disk. With the system up and running on the
> original copy of NT, run the 32 bit version of the install program from the
> I386 directory (on your hard disk if it is there, else off the NT CD) and
> create a new copy of NT in another directory, don't "update" the existing
> copy. This will put some new entries in the boot record file, and now when
> the system is booting, run the "debug" copy, and copy the desired file to
> the system32 directory of the original copy of NT.

This is an excellent suggestion, in fact.  I recently upgraded my work
laptop from NT to Win2K.  Of course after the upgrade it refused to
boot... in the end, I found an Ethernet card driver that was hanging
during loading.  To get around it I installed a second copy of W2K "clean"
in a new directory, booted into it, deleted the offending drivers...
Presto!  End of problem.  Once the first install was working I jsut
deleted the new W2K directory I had created.  Worked like a charm, and
prevented an awful lot of hair-pulling an teeth-gnashing.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu


2001\11\02@153516 by info

flavicon
face
Maybe I need to set up every known operating system to man and have a couple
of different hardware platforms, take a MSCE course and become a proficient
computer engineer so that
I can run software programs.

I did manage to finally get the file updated by installing Windows 2000 and
copying the file.

But... when I boot to NT4, my C compiler did not work any more. No problem,
just reinstall the
C compiler and it goes again. But.. I have yet to learn what else does not
go now.

I recently purchased a digital video camera with still shot capability to
take product photos for data sheets and found almost all models use USB. I
check my machine and it has a USB port.

Great, get home and run NT4 and no provision for USB port. I ring a computer
tech and are advised that NT4 will not run USB. Gotcha... OK, then a friend
supplies some software that WILL get USB going under NT4. Gotcha again..
only works on printers and certain hardware devices but not my camera.
hmm, so now we install Windows 2000, add the new hardware and yipee.. we
have transfer capability.
But.. gotcha again, each time I boot to Windows 2000, I have to reinstall
the USB driver to talk to the camera.

The sequence now is..
Boot to Windows 2000
Reinstall USB driver with camera connected
Download pics
reboot machine to NT4
Process pics.

Then I go to use serial ports and find some extra ports appear. ohh... this
was due the the USB driver that didn't work.

Obviuosly, a variety of you out there will know better than I do and offer
all kinds of work arounds etc to get a better solution. My point is WHY
should I need all this information to get pics from my camera or run a piece
of software. I purchased the PCs as tolls to do a job, not to endlessly
fiddle with and consume huge amounts of time and money. Simply speaking, I
would buy a shovel to dig and would not want to become a mechanical engineer
to get it to work as expected.

I must admit, it does feel a whole lot better having a moan about this.

Regards

David Huisman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
KILLspampiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu



---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.292 / Virus Database: 157 - Release Date: 26/10/01

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.292 / Virus Database: 157 - Release Date: 26/10/01

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestTakeThisOuTspammitvma.mit.edu


2001\11\02@154150 by info

flavicon
face
Gerhard,

I then fail to see why "plug and play" would be implemented by a software
company if they design a system that needs engineers to add the accessories.

Do children then buy games and have engineers commissions to install them ?

I am trying to run a piece of software. The software has instructions. When
the instructions are followed, the software still does not run.

It is not my idea that the files was "in use", this was the message reported
in the Windows
dialog box.

I sure hope you do not require a builder each time you buy a new piece of
furniture for your house.

Regards

David Huisman

{Original Message removed}

2001\11\02@161830 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Orbit Communications wrote:

> The sequence now is..
> Boot to Windows 2000
> Reinstall USB driver with camera connected
> Download pics
> reboot machine to NT4
> Process pics.

Lucky you...  I have an IBM laptop (company owned, not mine thank heaven)
with a USB port.  NT won't support USB, we have a USB CD burner...  no
problem, upgrade to W2K.  It supports USB, right?  OK< so why do my USB
devices notshow up?  Ah!  On my lapto, the USB hardware is only supported
under Win98.  Not NT, not 2K.  What's that you say?  Paid $3500+ less than
two years ago for that machine?  Tough luck, ancient history, it's too
old, no more software support forthcoming.  Why not just buy a new one?
After all, that *IS* why manufacturers drop all support for two year old
products, right?  Why buck the system, just pull out the credit card.
Sorry, not me.

Crap.  Maybe Linux will talk to the bloody thing.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonespammitvma.mit.edu


2001\11\03@075648 by Gerhard Fiedler

flavicon
face
At 06:47 11/03/2001 +1100, Orbit Communications wrote:
>Do children then buy games and have engineers commissions to install them ?

Children should not install programs on NT, IMO -- unless they have system
engineer equivalent knowledge. There is a reason why NT has all these
security settings and different user groups, for example. And there is a
reason why consumer systems don't have something like this.

>I am trying to run a piece of software. The software has instructions. When
>the instructions are followed, the software still does not run.

Sounds to me as if the instructions were wrong, misleading or incomplete :)

>I sure hope you do not require a builder each time you buy a new piece of
>furniture for your house.

But do you blame the architect/builder of the house if you buy a piece of
furniture and the assembly instructions for it don't work out?


I agree with much of the general criticism about Windows/Microsoft software
in all its variants. But still, if a software or installer doesn't run,
it's not always (and probably not even mostly) the fault of the system,
it's usually a problem of the application, a failure to deal with uncommon
(or even common) situations. One of the problems with most real world
Windows systems is the high quantity of poorly written or flat out
unfriendly applications installed on them, which create all kinds of
problems for other apps.

In your case, it is evident that the installation instructions were written
for someone who is a Windows systems engineer and knows how to deal with
all the possible complications -- because the instructions fail to mention
them and fail to give further instructions how to deal with them. A program
that is written to be installed by a consumer must have an install program
that handles these difficulties. And with a program that I pay for, I
require sufficient support to get the program installed -- from the
manufacturer of the program, not from Microsoft. Requiring to update system
files manually is not a general consumer procedure. If I presented such an
"installation procedure" to any of my clients, they would throw me out the
back door, without payment... :)

ge

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\11\03@123726 by wzab

flavicon
picon face
On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 10:32:19AM -0200, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> At 06:47 11/03/2001 +1100, Orbit Communications wrote:
> >Do children then buy games and have engineers commissions to install them ?
>
> Children should not install programs on NT, IMO -- unless they have system
> engineer equivalent knowledge. There is a reason why NT has all these
> security settings and different user groups, for example. And there is a
> reason why consumer systems don't have something like this.

Well, if you have to share the PC with your children, I'm sure you'll need
at least different users and access control. Otherwise your brave 4 years
old boy will destroy all your work just playing with mouse and icons...

On my Linux box my son may only srew up his account and nothing else. If I
had no Linux, probably I'd need to buy at least NT...
So I don't agree that consumer systems do not need users, group etc,
at least there in Poland where we still have less than 1 PC/person ;-).
--
                                    Regards
                             Wojciech M. Zabolotny
       http://www.ise.pw.edu.pl/~wzab  <--> TakeThisOuTwzabEraseMEspamspam_OUTise.pw.edu.pl

http://www.gnupg.org  Gnu Privacy Guard - protect your mail & data
                     with the FREE cryptographic system

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\11\03@133333 by Gerhard Fiedler

flavicon
face
At 18:35 11/03/2001 +0100, Wojciech Zabolotny wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 10:32:19AM -0200, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> > At 06:47 11/03/2001 +1100, Orbit Communications wrote:
> > >Do children then buy games and have engineers commissions to install
> them ?
> >
> > Children should not install programs on NT, IMO -- unless they have system
> > engineer equivalent knowledge. There is a reason why NT has all these
> > security settings and different user groups, for example. And there is a
> > reason why consumer systems don't have something like this.
>
>Well, if you have to share the PC with your children, I'm sure you'll need
>at least different users and access control. Otherwise your brave 4 years
>old boy will destroy all your work just playing with mouse and icons...

I also have a shared computer here, with a completely separate partition
for each of the users (and all other partitions hidden). Is even better
IMO... because I can allow them to install programs, but if they screw it
up, it's only their own system that they screw up.

>On my Linux box my son may only srew up his account and nothing else. If I
>had no Linux, probably I'd need to buy at least NT...
>So I don't agree that consumer systems do not need users, group etc,

This is exactly my point. You don't let your son install Linux system
files, do you? You let a person who knows what he does do this, I assume.
This was the original poster's point: he wanted a system so easy to use
that _everybody_ could mess around with system files. Linux is not such a
system, and NT isn't either -- even though some have the opinion it should
be. (It's not for nothing hat the priviledges for such a user account are
called "administrator"... :)

With "consumers" I mean the general, non-techincal user that makes 90% of
Microsoft's clientele. Most of them don't want to know about user
permissions etc., because this is more than they want to learn in order to
being able to operate a computer. I didn't say they don't need it or could
not make good use of it if they knew about it, but I know that most don't
want to learn about it.

Neither Linux nor NT is written for such people. So if you want ot use
Linux or NT, you better see yourself as some kind of sys admin or get
yourself one, because the system needs some kind of administration. (Which
makes both different from the "consumer" systems that are supposed to work
without an administrator.) You obviously are the sys admin of your system,
and you do it because you see the benefit of it. Which is exactly my point...

ge

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\11\03@133343 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Wojciech Zabolotny wrote:

> On my Linux box my son may only srew up his account and nothing else. If I
> had no Linux, probably I'd need to buy at least NT...
> So I don't agree that consumer systems do not need users, group etc,
> at least there in Poland where we still have less than 1 PC/person ;-).

True.  I use NT at home, simply because Win9x is incapable of handling
multiple users without screwing it up.  I've tried, and I know what I'm
doing - it simply doesn't work.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\11\03@135754 by Gerhard Fiedler

flavicon
face
At 12:15 11/03/2001 -0600, Dale Botkin wrote:
>I've tried, and I know what I'm doing - it simply doesn't work.

Of course not... :) Win9x is not designed to have user security, no access
rights administration and so on. Win9x/Me users are nothing more than some
preference settings.

As a matter of fact, no system is safe from screw-ups. That's the reason
why systems like Unix and NT have access rights and usually reserve the
right to install system files for the administrator -- who supposedly knows
what he does, and hopefully knows how to fix it if he screws it up :)

ge

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\11\03@171142 by cdb

flavicon
face
Ok, here's my 2p worth for recalcitrant win2K files.

First it important that regedt32 is used NOT regedit; both come with Win2K.
Run regedt32 from the \Start\Run menu option. Then from Regedt32 select the
H_Keylocal machine hive so-

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager

2.

Create a new value called;  PendingFileRenameOperations Data type

3. When the 'String Value' box pops up write in; Value data:
\??\c:\folder\file_name!\??
on a seperate line write in; \c:\winnt\system32\file_name

where FOLDER is the FOLDER/DIRECTORY where the file you want lives and
FILE_NAME is the name of the file. On some systems WINNT might say WINDOWS
however it's the folder that contains all the O/S files

the complete entry should look thus;

PendingFileRenameOperations Data type : REG_MULTI_SZ Value data:
\??\c:\folder\file_name!\??\c:\winnt\system32\file_name

4. Close Regedt32 and reboot Windows.

5. Pray like mad to your God

6. Curse Mr Windoze himself

7. All should be well.
FYI. The reason this should work over the suggestion by Ashley Roll is that
the RUNONCE key gets processed after the system security system is up and
running in actual fact it runs just after user log in. It can be seen
working when you install something and as you log in Windows flashes up a
message installing -- whatever and then goes chunking around for the next 7
hours. Also regedt32 seems to keep better correlation between the copy of
registry in memory and that on the hard drive possibly because its designed
for the hive style architecture of Win2K.

The good news is XP is easier in this respect and LINUX doesn't have this
problem

Colin

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\11\04@030835 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

> At 12:15 11/03/2001 -0600, Dale Botkin wrote:
> >I've tried, and I know what I'm doing - it simply doesn't work.
>
> Of course not... :) Win9x is not designed to have user security, no access
> rights administration and so on. Win9x/Me users are nothing more than some
> preference settings.

Even those don't work.  They will, for a little while, but I guarantee
setting up seven user profiles (yes, I have five kids and a wife), no
matter how carefully done, is all for naught within two weeks.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2001\11\04@053237 by Gerhard Fiedler

flavicon
face
At 01:43 11/04/2001 -0600, Dale Botkin wrote:
>Even those don't work.  They will, for a little while, but I guarantee
>setting up seven user profiles (yes, I have five kids and a wife), no
>matter how carefully done, is all for naught within two weeks.

Even though I had it working here, for a year or so, with four users,
without a glitch, I wouldn't dare to say "it works" :)  What brought me to
the separate partition solution is also the fact that it ended the
struggles for disk space ("who's eaten the 4 gig?" :)

ge

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2001 , 2002 only
- Today
- New search...