Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
29th November 2014, 14:28 | #1081 | Link | |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Quote:
Good to know!
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ |
|
29th November 2014, 17:36 | #1082 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: california
Posts: 23
|
Avast problem
Today Avast deemed the LameXP Test-Build r1603 application a virus and killed it. I tried to download the zip file again and it would not permit the download. I cannot satisfy their demand for information on their false positive form . It is not clear if 'Lord Mulder' as publisher or 'LameXP' as program is deemed not clear enough. I will try to let them know the problem.
I submitted the ticket and hope they respond favorably.If you contact them directly perhaps they can resolve the problem for future iterations. Posted on: 29 November 2014 18:27 I downloaded from http://sourceforge.net/projects/lamexp/files/Snapshots (BETA)/ the LameXP-TEST.2014-11-29.zip yesterday. I extracted the files and scanned both the zip and extracted files folders and avast found no threat. I opened the beta application and used it. This morning when I opened the same application Avast identified it as a virus and put it in the chest. I went to the chest and right clicked on the file and chose restore and add to exclusions. I attempted to fill out a false positive form but either 'Lord Mulder' or 'Source Forge' as publisher or 'LameXP' as program was deemed insufficiently informative and form refused to submit. This is a beta program distributed in a zip file which Avast on second thought has labelled Win32:Evo-gen {Susp}. I know what I am doing, I trust Lord Mulder even though he is too stubborn to change his zip program. Please check this folder from http://hivelocity.dl.sourceforge.net...mexp/Snapshots (BETA)/2014-11-29/LameXP-TEST.2014-11-29.zip : LameXP-TEST.2014-11-29.zip < 16 hours ago 21.4 MB 66 weekly downloads i SHA1: 09c3216a2decb4f0c980026015b5e0f97c4cf842 MD5: aac1af01da9ba2ddbc9a76cf699ae70e Downloads (All-Time): 6 If you agree it is not in fact malware please find a way to recognize the false positive and allow me to receive the folder and use the beta application.v Last edited by lethedoom; 29th November 2014 at 18:40. Reason: more info |
29th November 2014, 22:30 | #1083 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 589
|
lethedoom, when LameXP starts it creates a temporary folder on your hard drive and extracts several applications into that folder.
One of those applications is called lxp_mpg123.exe and that's probably the file that's one of the reasons antivirus software may report it as virus. That's now the case with Avira and Ikarus as you can see here: https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e...is/1417295691/ (virustotal report for lxp_mpg123.exe). LameXP.exe itself is compressed with UPX, the same executable compressor that's used in lxp_mpg123.exe UPX is a legitimate compressor but the compression techniques it uses are often used in warez and trojans and dubious applications so it's normal that some antivirus software will do a false positive from time to time. Mulder, I personally really don't see the point of compressing the executables with UPX. upx says: 18203136 <- 16486912 90.57% win32/pe lame.exe So you've saved a bit fat 2 MB by compressing your executable but you added the risk of antivirus software detecting your application as malware. In the world of 1-4 TB hard drives people won't care that your application is 30-50 MB instead of 20 MB. There's also no point in compressing those external executables when you can already compress them inside your main executable. As a suggestion - and I'm not sure, didn't bother to check source code, probably this is how you already do it now - you could 7z the files and embed the 7z inside the executable and you have a free 7z decoder library to unpack the contents nice and fast. In addition, there's really no point in extracting all those files every time the application launches. Why not unpack the needed application when an encoding job is actually started? Also... nowadays it really doesn't matter that much but in the past people with SSD drives would probably have cared about programs writing stuff to their boot drive at every launch. And btw, I went into Advanced options and unchecked "Stored temporary files" and selected another folder and those executables are still unpacked there in the system default temp directory. Last edited by mariush; 29th November 2014 at 22:37. |
30th November 2014, 16:16 | #1084 | Link | ||
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Quote:
The job of an Antivirus is to block malware while not affecting legitimate software in any kind of way. If legitimate software is affected, this is a bug in the Antivurs software and needs fixing in the Antivirus software. Suspecting software of being malware, just because it uses an EXE packer, is just plain stupid! It's an invalid generalization, just like: "Since 99% of all terrorists had bread for breakfast the day they went on rampage, all people who eat bread for breakfast probably are terrorists". Antivirus software must be aware of "EXE packers", yes. But by analyzing the decompressed binary code in memory, not by analyzing the compressed code in the EXE file or, even worse, by stupid/invalid generalizations. If we are at the point where Antivirus companies decided which legitimate techniques may be used by software developers and which legitimate techniques have to be avoided, because otherwise you will be blocked, there is only one name for this: Blackmail. And this cannot (and will not) be tolerated. So, this alone, is more than enough reason to continue using UPX, until even that last intellectually challenged person at those Antivirus companies has finally understood it. Fortunately, Windows 8 ships with a (decent) free Antivirus software, so less and less people will pay for (crappy) Antivirus products. So, hopefully, most of the Antivirus companies will either change their field of business or go bankrupt... [/rant] Quote:
Extracting the tools "on demand" would be possible, but then errors would be much more difficult to handle. If anything goes wrong during extraction, it would probably happen in some background worker thread where the tool happens to be accessed for the first time. Propagating the error to our GUI/Main thread and finally having to stop all the other worker threads, before we can shut down "gracefully" would be much more complex and error prone than the current method... This option only controls where intermediate Wave files will be located. Extracting the tools happens in a much earlier stage of the initialization process, long before any user options are loaded.
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 30th November 2014 at 17:35. |
||
30th November 2014, 17:36 | #1085 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 589
|
So what are you really trying to do, are you on a crusade against antivirus software, or are you simply trying to write good software?
At some point, you drop the idealism and put your "customers" first, the people using the software. Your small application with maybe a few thousand active users is a drop in the ocean, you're not a priority for antivirus software makers. But you may be alienating people with your choices. You have a large variety of users using your software, and not all of them are smart. Some may be so stupid they won't even understand what the error messages say, they'll just see the antivirus say it's a virus and they'll remove the application and stop using it for ever. Once trust is broken, they may never use it again. In this particular case, using that compressor only has downsides. It's a poor use of technology. (but then again, it's not the only thing you're using just because you can, like those sounds in the license agreement and about screens) You're compressing your application to 90%, so you're not saving significant disk space... you basically saved about 2 MB. You're increasing the load time of your application because any antivirus software will have to load those 20 MB in memory, decompress it, scan for viruses and then allow the process to start. I would also say you're making your own software harder to update but I guess this (how you update your software) is entirely your choice. For example, since you're embedding all those files inside the executable, I would take advantage of this and change the update mechanism to either download the full setup (20 MB or something) or choose to download a "binary patch" that you can simply create using a software like xdelta ( http://xdelta.org/ open source, you can easily incorporate the patch functionality in the app). So instead of downloading 20 megs, the update can download 1-2 MB of diff, create a new .exe from the old one and the information in the patch file and then replace the old executable. Lots of people still download with 50-100 KB/s (as you can see for yourself if you check the download logs) so spending just 10-15 seconds to download a patch instead of 5 minutes would only benefit and would be less annoying to users. Using upx simply screws this up, because even a single byte change would change the whole executable after compression and prevent you from making a proper binary diff between two executables. Quote:
Maybe I run my Windows from a 64 GB SSD and I only have 300-500 MB free on the SSD. I wouldn't like to kill write cycles in those 300-500 MB of free space with 20-30 MB of tools. I know, it's unlikely, but you never know. Also consider that you may want to make a "portable" version of the application, in which case having the files extracted in a subfolder would make it easy for you to just set some flags inside your application to just check for existence of those files at start instead of trying to unpack them from the executable each time. |
|
30th November 2014, 17:45 | #1086 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: california
Posts: 23
|
Well, even if your cause is just since I use Windows 7 and thus require some anti-virus program, all of which read the test files as suspected virus, I will not be able to acquire and try the betas under present circumstances. Fortunately the LameXP v4.10 Setup (21.0 MB) download and 4.10 final zip download are not blocked today by Avast and hopefully neither will final 4.11 be blocked. Thanks again for your generous provision of this freeware tool. In my view the free anti-virus program providers are internet public health workers and not bad guys. My problem with Avast is it will not let me override their 'suspect' label and are slow to test and certify as safe files that are submitted for reconsideration.
|
30th November 2014, 17:59 | #1087 | Link | |
Life's clearer in 4K UHD
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 12,219
|
Quote:
When I had Windows 7 installed, I ran Microsoft's own Security Essentials anti-virus software. Same too with Windows 8, Windows 8.1 and now with Windows 10. I've never seen a virus warning when installing LameXP.
__________________
| I've been testing hardware media playback devices and software A/V encoders and decoders since 2001 | My Network Layout & A/V Gear |
|
|
30th November 2014, 18:04 | #1088 | Link | ||
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Quote:
So what can be done? Educate people! If somebody is a paying customer of a so-called "Antivirus" software and that software doesn't work correctly, he or she must contact the support team and file a bug report. That's the one and only way to get the bugs fixed. Also, if the manufacturer doesn't fix bugs (in time), it's up to the paying customer to cancel his contract and get his or her monkey back. You certainly don't have to stick with a product that is a buggy mess... Quote:
And it's also clear why: Microsoft decided to give away Security Essentials for free, so it doesn't need to continuously scare the user with (alleged) "virus alters", in order to legitimize the subscription fees... (It's safe to assume that in other Antivirus companies it's the marketing department who tells their programmers how often, e.g. at least once per week, each customer must see a virus alert)
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 30th November 2014 at 19:21. |
||
30th November 2014, 19:12 | #1089 | Link | |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Quote:
See here: http://muldersoft.com/docs/lamexp_faq.html#3d6684e9
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ |
|
30th November 2014, 22:07 | #1090 | Link |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
LameXP Test-Build r1608
New build. This should fix a few bugs introduced in the previous build(s). So if you encountered strange crashes, this will fix it, hopefully.
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 25th December 2014 at 14:31. |
1st December 2014, 07:29 | #1091 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: california
Posts: 23
|
re Avast blockade
Avast is blocking LameXP Test-Build r1608 too. I thought about accepting the suggestion to change to Security Essentials, but the reviews deem it so weak I will not. For what it is worth I followed my support request to Avast asking them to agree their label is a false positive with a forum posting. I hope it will get some response.
Last edited by lethedoom; 1st December 2014 at 07:32. Reason: attach file |
1st December 2014, 16:23 | #1092 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: california
Posts: 23
|
Avast now clear
I received an email from Avast acknowledging that their decision had been a false positive. I was able to download the newest Test version, so they have updated their virus definitions to fulfill their stated intention. fyi:
Hello Thank you for contacting our support center with your concerns.Thank you for your message.It's false positive. The detection will be fixed in the next VPS.We are sorry for the inconvenience.If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me again. Best regards, Lukas Havel Technical Support Specialist www.avast.com Ticket Details Ticket ID: YXL-216-11481 Department: Virus and FP reports Type: FalsePositive Status: On Hold Priority: Normal Support Center: https://support.avast.com/index.php? I converted two groups of .shn files to .mp3 without any problems with this test version. Last edited by lethedoom; 1st December 2014 at 19:40. Reason: addition info |
6th December 2014, 01:34 | #1093 | Link |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
LameXP Test-Build r1624
More refactoring has been done. But, most important, I tracked down and fixed (hopefully) a long-standing problem in the worker thread creating code, which caused an unnecessary slow-down of the "worker" process creation and also made the GUI less responsive than it should be. Things appear to run quite a bit more smoothly now, especially when you crank up the number of parallel encoder instances! Limit for the number of parallel instances has been raised to 32 too...
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 25th December 2014 at 14:31. |
13th December 2014, 23:51 | #1094 | Link |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 25th December 2014 at 14:31. |
14th December 2014, 01:02 | #1095 | Link |
Life's clearer in 4K UHD
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 12,219
|
Jeez... That looks fast
__________________
| I've been testing hardware media playback devices and software A/V encoders and decoders since 2001 | My Network Layout & A/V Gear |
|
14th December 2014, 01:58 | #1097 | Link | |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Quote:
Anyway, it should be clear that the longer the individual files are, the more time each encoding task takes to complete - and thus the "freeze" that did happened on the creation of each new task will become less apparent. Conversely, with an increasing number of CPU cores the problem increases! I have report from one person who ran a test with ~1200 regular audio files on a 20 cores machine that there was a huge speed up.
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ |
|
14th December 2014, 05:14 | #1098 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: california
Posts: 23
|
Thanks--terrific improvement
I have downloaded and used the test builds provided on 2014-12-13, 2014-12-08, 2014-12-06, 2014-12-05,2014-11-30 since my antivirus program stopped blocking the zips. Taking your point that more instances are better I use 32 on my i5 dual core Win 7 PC with the test builds and I find the increase in speed quite substantial compared to LameXP v.4.10 final. I download trade friendly artist live concerts (usually flac) with Deluge and convert them to mp3 with LameXP almost daily. Thanks again for your very useful tool which you share as a gift.
|
14th December 2014, 14:42 | #1099 | Link | |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Quote:
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 14th December 2014 at 16:06. |
|
15th December 2014, 02:47 | #1100 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Qetchua mountains in Peru, and Klingon battlecruiser D'Mar
Posts: 393
|
@ LoRd_MuldeR
Can you, please, give me all changelogs from 4.11 beta 1 to newest beta 8 ? Thanks in advance. Another question for you : What if someone have 18-core beast Xeon ? Is then running more instances in parallel much better ??? Or on 8-core 5960X, for example ? How good is your latest optimisations ?
__________________
Live long and prosperLive long and prosperLive long and prosper |
Tags |
aac, aotuv, flac, lame, lamexp, mp3, mp4, ogg, oggenc, opus, vorbis |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|