Beta 3 Bug (Auto-Organize limit of 89) and Auto-Leveling Bug

Beta Testing for Windows Products and plugins

Moderator: Gurus

M3wThr33
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Beta 3 Bug (Auto-Organize limit of 89) and Auto-Leveling Bug

Post by M3wThr33 »

2.3.1.831?
Anyways:
If you highlight 90 or more tracks and choose Auto-Organize, it'll give an access violation. I tried this with multiple albums of large sizes.

Also:
When determing the leveling of a song, the program halts on wav files. It doesn't lock up or stop. It just goes to 100% CPU and never goes anywhere while everything works fine. Halting the operation doesn't work until I get Windows to manually close it.
Graham

Re: Beta 3 Bug (Auto-Organize limit of 89) and Auto-Leveling

Post by Graham »

[quote="M3wThr33"]2.3.1.831?
Anyways:
If you highlight 90 or more tracks and choose Auto-Organize, it'll give an access violation. I tried this with multiple albums of large sizes.

Not confirmed. I've auto-organised my entire collection (1500 tracks) without a problem
Graham
M3wThr33
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Post by M3wThr33 »

After more testing, I guess he's right, but it seems right around there it messes up.
"Access violation at address 005FFEC5 in module 'MediaMonkey.exe'. Read of address 00000000."
Any "ALL" folder can go above 89 just fine, but if I try to organize in the Album-Folders with 90 tracks, it'll give the error.
jiri
Posts: 5429
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Post by jiri »

Please generate a debug log of this an e-mail it to me, that should clarify what's going on there.

Thanks,
Jiri
M3wThr33
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Post by M3wThr33 »

I was going to post one initially and JUST discovered there's a seperate version for the debug. Email sent.
jiri
Posts: 5429
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Post by jiri »

M3wThr33,

thanks, you were right, there was an error that could have caused described problems in some cases. It will be ok in the next release.

Jiri
Post Reply