View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0005481SUMoBugpublic2019-05-13 20:29
ReporterwolfAssigned ToKyle_Katarn 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityhave not tried
Status acknowledgedResolutionopen 
PlatformOSWindows 10OS Version1809 (64 bit)
Product Version5.9.1 
Target VersionShort termFixed in Version 
Summary0005481: multiple instances of SUMo running leads to loss of registration
DescriptionThe situation reported in the related issue has even further effects. I repeat that the situation is
1) installed SUMo Pro 5.9.1.421 running with no action
2) portable SUMo subcomponent 5.8.7.409 of SUMo Portable of PortableApps framework started via command line out of its folder on the same computer but different storage device.
3) SUMo Portable of PortableApps framework started with resulting popup window asking to repeat after closing the other running instances.

As shown in the screenshots of the related issue, in this situation, I wasn't able to consult the about window of the SUMo Portable due to this popup window and the other two instances of SUMo reported being SUMo Pro in the corresponding version as mentioned above.

After closing all these instances as asked by SUMo Portable, all three reported to be unregistered !

As I didn't enter a registry for those tools in the PortableApps framework, I didn't wonder about this change. But what wondered me is why the installed version 5.9.1.421 lost its registration state. How did this happen?
Additional InformationWhen I use the GUI of PortableApps to start SUMo Portable, I couldn't start it because it detected that other instances of SUMo are already running and asking in a popup window to close the other instances before restarting SUMo Portable in the PortableApps framework again.

When I took a closer look of the instance of SUMo started via command line, I was wondering several other aspects:
* It didn't show the button to acquire the Pro edition although I never entered a license key for that old version nor that path of SUMo.
* When looking into its about section, it reported it as registered with the registration information of the already running instance of the installed SUMo Pro version of different path, drive and location although I never entered a license key for that old version nor that path of SUMo.
* When looking into its configuration, I expected its default configuration as I never started SUMo of that file location before, neither via command line nor via PortableApps GUI. What I saw cannot be the default configuration. Instead it reused the configuration of the installed and running instance of SUMo Pro. Why?

I did not yet check if this happens also on the older device with older operating system.
TagsNo tags attached.

Relationships

related to 0005479 acknowledged command line mode with standard help switch doesn't work as expected 
related to 0005480 acknowledgedKyle_Katarn Please extent the command line mode with the reporting and the scanning feature distinguished by different switches 

Activities

Kyle_Katarn

2019-05-12 09:47

administrator   ~0003277

Do you confirm that the problem only occurs with multiple instances ... of multiple versions ? If yes, that's as per design but may be optimized.
Should not happen so frequently (I see no use case for this)

wolf

2019-05-13 01:55

reporter   ~0003282

I observed it in this context (multiple instances of multiple versions). And this context has always to appear just after an update of SUMo. I didn't check yet if the same phenomen appears with multiple instances of same version.

SUMo Portable in the PortableApps framework needs always adaption in order to get integrated. And due to a past and longer health case in the team of PortableApps, this delay has increased considerably.

How works determination of Pro edition?

Due to some other problems yesterday evening with drivers, I had to restore the operating system image as of yesterday noon. And voila SUMo detects itself back as Pro edition.

And what reasons lead to such a bad design decision of losing Pro edition prematurely without violating usage constraints?

Kyle_Katarn

2019-05-13 20:29

administrator   ~0003287

It's no a bad reason, it's a protection against known cracks for SUMo that we want to make less likely to be successful.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2019-05-11 20:23 wolf New Issue
2019-05-11 20:23 wolf Issue generated from: 0005479
2019-05-11 20:23 wolf Relationship added related to 0005479
2019-05-12 09:45 Kyle_Katarn Relationship deleted related to 0005479
2019-05-12 09:46 Kyle_Katarn Relationship added related to 0005479
2019-05-12 09:47 Kyle_Katarn Assigned To => Kyle_Katarn
2019-05-12 09:47 Kyle_Katarn Status new => acknowledged
2019-05-12 09:47 Kyle_Katarn Note Added: 0003277
2019-05-12 09:47 Kyle_Katarn Target Version => Short term
2019-05-12 09:50 Kyle_Katarn Relationship added related to 0005480
2019-05-13 01:55 wolf Note Added: 0003282
2019-05-13 20:29 Kyle_Katarn Note Added: 0003287