Bad Archive Detection for DriverPacks - Help!

no... we provide file sizes and md5 hash values so you can verify the files.

please verify your downloads to avoid this problem in the future

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!

The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

Just as a small explanation.

This is how I work.
I download the file. And copy it then to USB stick,
so that I can put it to the other computer, where no Internet is linked,
and here has wrongly gone.

then I the file to the usb copy't.that not well, and thereby
resistant error has stored into the file to the pc. has come.

On this pc.I make then the installation but gave to this no errors to driverpack base,
only then I the file therefore wanted open with winrar got I therefore these errors.

!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\LG\l1512s.cat is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\LG\l1515s.cat is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\LG\l1951sq.cat is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\LG\n2200p.cat is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\S\sm940t.cat is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\P\170C8.icm is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\H\920D.ICM is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\V\E75-2.icm is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: CRC niet correct. Het bestand D\3\MO\D\P991.icm is beschadigd
!   C:\DriverPacks_Maart08\Bewaar_Packs\DP_Monitor_wnt5_x86-32_07111.7z: Fout - handeling mislukt
and 500 more................

OverFlow said this:
we provide file sizes and md5 hash values so you can verify the files

That is not it therefore,the errors came by copying,by myzelf.

perhaps it is this way something more clear.

I can test it for you guys,if there is a version DPBase 8.07 or 8.08 ready

Last edited by Babyboy (2008-07-12 20:22:32)

Just an idea, wouldn't it be possible to implement a feature similar to QSC where a once scanned file gets tagged somehow so that it won't be scanned again?
This is assuming that 7-Zip's archive tester takes longer to test an archive than it takes to calculate its MD5 sum.
On a newly-loaded file, 7-Zip is told to scan the archive (surely such a command line paramtre does exist ), then, when successful, the MD5 hash is being calculated and written into a folder (just like QSC).
Next time base is run, the previously calculated hash file is being compared to the file's actual hash (if it still has the same name) and if this they don't match, an error message will occur.

This saves us from having to provide MD5 hashes with the files (as it, not on the website but in the filename or some other way so BASE can automatically check them with no user input) while maintaining an equal level of file integritiy verification (I presume 7Z's file check matches actual hashes with what has been stored inside the archive and is not just a dumb "can it be extracted or not" test) and user comfort (traded for a bit of waiting time for MD5 calculation each time).

Just waht my mind came up with right now...
Whaddaya think?

Anyway, could be an optional feature in BASE for those that cannot wait...

Coming up next - useful links:
• If you like this project, please support it with your donation!      • Grab your HW info (HWIDs) here!     
• If you are a newbie, be sure to check out the DriverPacks tutorial!     • Here's how to create your own DP!

sounds impossible to me.
it is like a re-iteration?

Suppose you have a 7z file, you calculate its hash, then write that hash as txtfile (or whatever, with standardised naming) and include the hash in the new 7zip, with a new extention (BTX), so that the DriverPacks BASE has to unpack hash and real DP, check hash txt against file hash..

huh?
pop a warning when the file was edited by user..

I have nothing against posting the hash, but I think coding strict file hash safety in DriverPacks BASE is not easy.

Last edited by Jaak (2008-07-13 12:08:27)

I thought the idea of a "check once" sounded good, but really I think if you're having problems with corrupt files that the "check once" won't be much better than a check every time.

I personally don't see the need for it, but it's very simple to implement and could be optional so it might be worth a try.

I did a quick test on this machine (2ghz), and it took 8 seconds to do a  7z.exe t *.7z on LAN/WLAN/Chipset/MassS

well it is certainly a lot more appealing to me personally as an option (waste my time / or not)

should i offer a third choice...  "let me see your CD/DVD after you burn it so i can check them again?"
IE what happens if it gets corrupted after base is run? (like during the burn process)

since base copies them to a destination folder i guess i would have to check them twice before and after the copy?
at what point can we agree that corrupt files are rare and wasting time doing checks multiple times on every run is silly...
furthermore i often just substitute one pack for another and don't even run base. what about people like me?
I just don't see a ROI on this... if you guys do then i will concede

I am sorry, there is no way for us to verify files. it is up to the user, especially since the files are copied and burned after base is run. the only way it can be made to be reliable is if i add the feature to burn a disk from base. at that point then i can do an integrity check from 7zip before and after the burn.  This way is the only way that a test would be valid or useful.

edit..............

I just wrote a script for you guys so you can check them at any time...

@echo off & color 1f & Cls & ECHO. & ECHO.
rem last edit 2:10 PM 7/13/2008 - Author Overflow - FileName  Verify.cmd
Title 7Zip Archive tester

:Input
echo Cut and Paste the path to the 7-zip files you would like to have validated & echo.
call SET /P SourceFiles=Path? & echo.
SET _result=%SourceFiles:~-1% & IF [%_result%]==[\] Set SourceFiles=%SourceFiles:~0,-1%
IF Exist "%SourceFiles%\*.7z" goto Test
echo Are you sure the 7-zip archives are in that folder? 
goto Input

:Test
FOR %%i IN (%SourceFiles%\*.7z) DO call :Sub1 %%i
goto exit

:Sub1
7z t "%1" > nul
IF %errorlevel%==0 echo %1 	Passed Integrity check
IF NOT %errorlevel%==0 color cf & echo. & echo %1 Failed Integrity check & echo.
goto :eof

:exit
echo Testing complete & pause

if you run the script above from the bin folder in base (where 7z.exe is) it will report a bad archive and turns the window red.

Sorry this will not be a feature unless we also add burning as a feature - file validity checking is up to the user.

I will continue to think about this idea and how it may be grown into something effective and useful

PS M1 will report a bad archive every time

Last edited by OverFlow (2008-07-14 05:29:49)

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!

The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

bump edited my last and cross posted with you Helmi

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!

The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

yeah... if it really only added 30 seconds (to check it twice) it would be more appealing...

however, i just ran my script above on just the 10 main packs and it took 1min 45sec x 2 = 3.5 minutes
so currently i can slipstream a m2 install in about 5 min so almost twice as long to run base as normal
And more than twice as long if i have third party DriverPacks too. (run on a P4 2.8 HT)

I personally would like it to take less time than 5 minutes
and each time i update base i do look for ways to streamline the code towards that end.
if the archive checks are implemented then making the check optional is guaranteed.

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!

The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.

Very clever script...I like it!

Read BEFORE you post.  HWID tool   DriverPacks Tutorial   DONATE!

Not all heroes wear capes, some wear Kevlar!

so that would prove that the file was good (or not) before we use it.

it would not tell us if we got a good copy on the destination folder.
What good is a validity check if it would allow for a bad copy to the destination?
if we say we are verifying files then we must check it again after the copy too...

this is my point - do it right or dont do it

i really don't see the point in doing it when it will cost me an extra five minutes every run and i have yet to have a bad pack in three years. so it will cost me five minutes every run and once in one hundred runs will i have a bad file.

so i waste 500 minutes (one 8 hour day) on the off chance i will burn one bad disk in three years.
i consider this a huge waste of time - if you cant figure out you have a bad file on your own you need a new job...

PS if you always test in a VM first then you test ALL (not just DriverPacks) the files at one time

DP BartPE Tutorial   DP_BASE Tutorial   HWID's Tool     Read BEFORE you post    UserBars!

The DriverPacks, the DP_Base program, and Support Forum are FREE!.