OCDB versus NAV & DCOM98

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Anders Petersson's Freeware Forum : One Thread

The program is called "Offline CDDB Browser"; filename: "ocdbrowser30_dep.exe"; file size: 2.822Mb; homesite: http://hem.spray.se/anders.peterson/index.html .

The problem is that it forces the installation of "oleaut32.dll" that is *completely incompatible with Norton Antivirus*.

After installing OCDB, everything was running fine until I went to run Norton's LiveUpDate (LUD) to get the latest version of the NAV DAT files...

"LUD can't find any associated programs to update on your computer. Please verify that you have any Symantec products installed, or that their installation hasn't been corrupted."

"Corrupted" is putting it nicely... LUD won't work & NAV won't scan the system? (Low groan of horror)

Norton's forums were no help, and despite following all their instructions to the letter for two weeks -including, but not limited to, reinstalling a copy of the original oleaut32.dll (ver 2.40.4518) available by getting a copy of DCOM98.exe from Microsoft- nothing was fixing the issue...

Two weeks of registry checking / tweaking, two weeks of trying to find the little tendrils of code that might be incompatible, two weeks of the hair I hadn't ripped-out-already turning a pasty shade of grey, & still no dice - despite having tried to "over-install" to correct version, the "newest version" (corrupt?) oleaut32.dll was still screwing up my system & killing the LUD functionality of NAV!

In the end, I had to *completely reformat my system & reinstall the OS* to fix the issue.

There is a newer version (3.1) but the History / Versions list mentions *nothing* about such an error, so it's doubtfull it's been fixed...

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2002


Hi Uber.

First of all I'm sorry about the two weeks I've spoiled for you, and about the hair. I've gotten about two reports like this one before; and I can't say I'm absolutely sure what to do about it. But, earlier this year I tried really hard to understand the DLL hell of Windows and on June 1 2002 I rebuilt the installation package to make the problem you describe more unlikely to happen. Web site quote:

"This update makes the installation process more friendly to earlier versions of Windows. I have changed the date stamps of the system files in the setup package so that the system files on the destination (your computer) won't be overwritten that easy."

So I changed the date stamps - not a failsafe solution I presume, but I don't think all this would have happened if you'd used the later package. Regrettably I have to keep the old links alive. I understand that this does you little good; but I think I can say that this error is very unlikely to happen again. I have had no report of if from the new package.

Again, Iím very sorry.

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2002

Though I'd let you know that I've now corrected also the older links to make them also less harmful to Windows. ocdbrowser30_dep.exe should now safe.

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2002

Truly odd that the setup program didn't let you install. Well, it has been fixed now anyway, and the 3.1 should not behave like that. Thanks for reporting, Uber.

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2002

Thank you, but it's not the file date that will make the difference, but the fact that the software checks the dll, finds it to be an "older version", and *refused* to install unless you allow it to replace the other version...

If you've taken care of that, then by all means I'll check out your program again...

(It was an *excellent* program except for that one issue...)

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2002

Moderation questions? read the FAQ