SCANREG /OPT ?

Kentiguous wrote:
Bill in Co. wrote :
}OK, I lose the bet!

I hope it wasn't too steep... g

}At any rate, I think your idea might compact it better, but it may be a
}bit overkill - why not just use the more recommended, "scanreg /opt" a
}couple of
}times, and see how much that works for ya. I do this on occasion:
}"scanreg /opt /fix" (I run two or three times), and it usually compacts
it
}a fair bit. And I think it would be faster (and perhaps safer), than
the
}export/import (like if there was a power failure in the middle, or
}whatever).

Thanks for the info., Bill. Yes, I would like to try "/opt", but I
wanted to check first, for possible danger(s). Heretofore, all my
compacting's been manually done, on my Win95 machine (I wonder if

I think you HAD to do it that way with Win95. (I don't think the scanreg
options I just mentioned were even available on Win95).

SCANREG would work on it, too?), in conjunction with a program called
FIXREG. I've been doing it this way since 1999, without a hitch (still
running the previous owner's install of 95, here). Here's what its
registry looks like, after all these years:

USER.DAT 188,448
SYSTEM.DAT 1,667,228

That seems pretty damn small to me!!

My USER.DAT is about 1000 KB (or 1 MB), and my SYSTEM.DAT is about 7000 KB
(or 7 MB), and I don't really have all that much on this Win 98SE machine
(admitedly it's Win98SE, instead of Win 95)

It's worked so well in '95; hence my reluctance to change. But, if
"/opt" is, indeed, reliable, it would be nice to let the software do the
work. g

Yup - and I think it's safer.

A couple of questions, though; if you're using "/fix", wouldn't "/opt"
be redundant?

No. /fix supposedly fixes any serious errors encountered in the registry
(that it can), and / opt shrinks the registry (if it can). Two different
things entirely.

And, can you actually see additional shrinkage, after each subsequent run?

Sometimes it will reduce the size a bit further when you've run it more than
once.

If that's the case, perhaps the 'old fashioned'
way would be better, after all (if so, would FIXREG still be needed, in
98SE?).

I've never used FIXREG.

The only "fix registry" I know that works is either using a good registry
backup (there are 5 created in Win98, automatically), or a new, fresh
install of windows. Relatedly, I don't place much faith in the so called
registry cleaner programs, although I have played with them a little bit -
but very cautiously, and NEVER automatically.

Power outage restores would be enabled by my mandatory prior backup.

Ken

--
Remove the '4' to reply via email


}Kentiguous wrote:
} Bill in Co. wrote :
} What do you mean by a "manual compact" of the registry?
}
} A "REGEDIT /E myreg.reg", followed by a "REGEDIT /C myreg.reg" (from
} a
} DOS boot; after making a backup, of course g).
}
} Kentiguous wrote:
} Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
} compact
} of the registry?

In that scanreg makes a registry back up on the first boot (or reboot) of
every day, I think (based on observations with my machine) that once the
back up is made, it will run optimize if it detects 500 kb of space. I know
of no way to change the parameters for the amount of space.

--
Regards

Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
Knowledge Base Info:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo

"Kentiguous" wrote in message
...
Ron Badour wrote :
}Yes, when Scanreg detects there is 500 kb of space, it automatically
}compacts the registry.
}http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/registry.html for details on the
}registry

Thanks for the additional info., Ron. Do you know if SCANREG will make a
backup, before it 'auto-optimizes'?

I see that SCANREG.INI's "Optimize" parameter can be used to control
'auto-optimization', but I didn't see a parameter that would allow
control over the amount of 'wasted space', after which an
'auto-optimization' will occur. Am I missing something, or, if not, is
there, perhaps, an 'undocumented' parameter that would do so?

Ken

--
Remove the '4' to reply via email


}"Kentiguous" wrote in message
...
} Ron Badour wrote :
} }In that it runs automatically without user intervention, I think
that
} }suggests that it is pretty reliable.
}
} Do you mean that there's a mechanism via which SCANREG
'auto-optimizes'?
}
}
} }"Kentiguous" wrote in message
} ...
} } Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
compact
} } of the registry?
} }
} } Ken

Is there a reason why you would want to change the parameters?

"Ron Badour" wrote in message
...
: In that scanreg makes a registry back up on the first boot (or reboot) of
: every day, I think (based on observations with my machine) that once the
: back up is made, it will run optimize if it detects 500 kb of space. I
know
: of no way to change the parameters for the amount of space.
:
: --
: Regards
:
: Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
: Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
: Knowledge Base Info:
: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo
:
: "Kentiguous" wrote in message
: ...
: Ron Badour wrote :
: }Yes, when Scanreg detects there is 500 kb of space, it automatically
: }compacts the registry.
: }http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/registry.html for details on the
: }registry
:
: Thanks for the additional info., Ron. Do you know if SCANREG will make a
: backup, before it 'auto-optimizes'?
:
: I see that SCANREG.INI's "Optimize" parameter can be used to control
: 'auto-optimization', but I didn't see a parameter that would allow
: control over the amount of 'wasted space', after which an
: 'auto-optimization' will occur. Am I missing something, or, if not, is
: there, perhaps, an 'undocumented' parameter that would do so?
:
: Ken
:
: --
: Remove the '4' to reply via email
:
:
: }"Kentiguous" wrote in message
: ...
: } Ron Badour wrote :
: } }In that it runs automatically without user intervention, I think
: that
: } }suggests that it is pretty reliable.
: }
: } Do you mean that there's a mechanism via which SCANREG
: 'auto-optimizes'?
: }
: }
: } }"Kentiguous" wrote in message
: } ...
: } } Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
: compact
: } } of the registry?
: } }
: } } Ken
:
:
:
:

Me, no. The original poster, I don't know. When I was using W98, I did not
run scanreg /fix or /opt as there is no reason to do so unless I was trying
to fix a registry problem. About the only thing I used scanreg for was an
occasional special back up and when I did a registry restore.

--
Regards

Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
Knowledge Base Info:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo

"Dan" wrote in message
...
Is there a reason why you would want to change the parameters?

"Ron Badour" wrote in message
...
: In that scanreg makes a registry back up on the first boot (or reboot)
of
: every day, I think (based on observations with my machine) that once the
: back up is made, it will run optimize if it detects 500 kb of space. I
know
: of no way to change the parameters for the amount of space.
:
: --
: Regards
:
: Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
: Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
: Knowledge Base Info:
: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo
:
: "Kentiguous" wrote in message
: ...
: Ron Badour wrote :
: }Yes, when Scanreg detects there is 500 kb of space, it automatically
: }compacts the registry.
: }http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/registry.html for details on the
: }registry
:
: Thanks for the additional info., Ron. Do you know if SCANREG will make
a
: backup, before it 'auto-optimizes'?
:
: I see that SCANREG.INI's "Optimize" parameter can be used to control
: 'auto-optimization', but I didn't see a parameter that would allow
: control over the amount of 'wasted space', after which an
: 'auto-optimization' will occur. Am I missing something, or, if not, is
: there, perhaps, an 'undocumented' parameter that would do so?
:
: Ken
:
: --
: Remove the '4' to reply via email
:
:
: }"Kentiguous" wrote in message
: ...
: } Ron Badour wrote :
: } }In that it runs automatically without user intervention, I think
: that
: } }suggests that it is pretty reliable.
: }
: } Do you mean that there's a mechanism via which SCANREG
: 'auto-optimizes'?
: }
: }
: } }"Kentiguous" wrote in message
: } ...
: } } Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
: compact
: } } of the registry?
: } }
: } } Ken
:
:
:
:

Thanks Ron. I thought that it was not necessary to change the parameters and
I also wonder why the original poster wants to change them. Perhaps the
original poster will respond to tell us why.

"Ron Badour" wrote in message
...
: Me, no. The original poster, I don't know. When I was using W98, I did
not
: run scanreg /fix or /opt as there is no reason to do so unless I was trying
: to fix a registry problem. About the only thing I used scanreg for was an
: occasional special back up and when I did a registry restore.
:
: --
: Regards
:
: Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
: Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
: Knowledge Base Info:
: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo
:
: "Dan" wrote in message
: ...
: Is there a reason why you would want to change the parameters?
:
: "Ron Badour" wrote in message
: ...
: : In that scanreg makes a registry back up on the first boot (or reboot)
: of
: : every day, I think (based on observations with my machine) that once
the
: : back up is made, it will run optimize if it detects 500 kb of space. I
: know
: : of no way to change the parameters for the amount of space.
: :
: : --
: : Regards
: :
: : Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
: : Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
: : Knowledge Base Info:
: : http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo
: :
: : "Kentiguous" wrote in message
: : ...
: : Ron Badour wrote :
: : }Yes, when Scanreg detects there is 500 kb of space, it automatically
: : }compacts the registry.
: : }http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/registry.html for details on the
: : }registry
: :
: : Thanks for the additional info., Ron. Do you know if SCANREG will
make
: a
: : backup, before it 'auto-optimizes'?
: :
: : I see that SCANREG.INI's "Optimize" parameter can be used to control
: : 'auto-optimization', but I didn't see a parameter that would allow
: : control over the amount of 'wasted space', after which an
: : 'auto-optimization' will occur. Am I missing something, or, if not,
is
: : there, perhaps, an 'undocumented' parameter that would do so?
: :
: : Ken
: :
: : --
: : Remove the '4' to reply via email
: :
: :
: : }"Kentiguous" wrote in message
: : ...
: : } Ron Badour wrote :
: : } }In that it runs automatically without user intervention, I think
: : that
: : } }suggests that it is pretty reliable.
: : }
: : } Do you mean that there's a mechanism via which SCANREG
: : 'auto-optimizes'?
: : }
: : }
: : } }"Kentiguous" wrote in message
: : } ...
: : } } Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
: : compact
: : } } of the registry?
: : } }
: : } } Ken
: :
: :
: :
: :
:
:
:
:

Ken or anyone else, are there problems that are known of with the 98SE
registry, registry tool or use of the scanreg/anything command -- refers to
all possible variables?

"Kentiguous" wrote in message
...
: Bill in Co. wrote :
: }Kentiguous wrote:
: } Bill in Co. wrote :
: } }OK, I lose the bet!
: }
: } I hope it wasn't too steep... g
: }
: } }At any rate, I think your idea might compact it better, but it may
: }be a
: } }bit overkill - why not just use the more recommended, "scanreg /opt"
: }a
: } }couple of
: } }times, and see how much that works for ya. I do this on occasion:
: } }"scanreg /opt /fix" (I run two or three times), and it usually
: }compacts
: }it
: } }a fair bit. And I think it would be faster (and perhaps safer),
: }than
: }the
: } }export/import (like if there was a power failure in the middle, or
: } }whatever).
: }
: } Thanks for the info., Bill. Yes, I would like to try "/opt", but I
: } wanted to check first, for possible danger(s). Heretofore, all my
: } compacting's been manually done, on my Win95 machine (I wonder if
: }
: }I think you HAD to do it that way with Win95. (I don't think the
: }scanreg
: }options I just mentioned were even available on Win95).
:
: SCANREG's not in this version (4.00.950) of Win95; that's why I was
: wondering if the Win98 version would work with Win95.
:
: } SCANREG would work on it, too?), in conjunction with a program called
: } FIXREG. I've been doing it this way since 1999, without a hitch
: (still
: } running the previous owner's install of 95, here). Here's what its
: } registry looks like, after all these years:
: }
: } USER.DAT 188,448
: } SYSTEM.DAT 1,667,228
: }
: }That seems pretty damn small to me!!
:
: Lean and mean; this machine! And, pretty darn reliable, too.
:
: }My USER.DAT is about 1000 KB (or 1 MB), and my SYSTEM.DAT is about 7000
: }KB
: }(or 7 MB), and I don't really have all that much on this Win 98SE
: }machine
: }(admitedly it's Win98SE, instead of Win 95)
: }
: } It's worked so well in '95; hence my reluctance to change. But, if
: } "/opt" is, indeed, reliable, it would be nice to let the software do
: } the work. g
: }
: }Yup - and I think it's safer.
:
: Thanks for you opinion, WRT reliablility, Bill; it's my prime concern,
: here.
:
: } A couple of questions, though; if you're using "/fix", wouldn't
: }"/opt"
: } be redundant?
: }
: }No. /fix supposedly fixes any serious errors encountered in the
: }registry
: }(that it can), and / opt shrinks the registry (if it can). Two
: }different
: }things entirely.
:
: The documentation I have on the /FIX parameter says:
:
: "Repairs any damaged portions of the registry, and
: optimizes it by rebuilding it without unused space."
:
: I can't remember the doc's source, though (it may not be from
: Microsoft). Do you think it's incorrect?
:
: } And, can you actually see additional shrinkage, after each subsequent
: } run?
: }
: }Sometimes it will reduce the size a bit further when you've run it more
: }than
: }once.
: }
: } If that's the case, perhaps the 'old fashioned'
: } way would be better, after all (if so, would FIXREG still be needed,
: } in 98SE?).
: }
: }I've never used FIXREG.
:
: Win95 Gold's version of REGEDIT is quite buggy, WRT whole-registry
: imports, so I grabbed the Win95C version, and modified the version
: check. Even so, there are known problems importing values that
: are terminated with the carriage return/linefeed sequence, when using
: the manual export/import in Win95. FIXREG can find and optionally fix
: any problems of this ilk (it's fixed a few things here, over the years).
:
: }The only "fix registry" I know that works is either using a good
: }registry
: }backup (there are 5 created in Win98, automatically), or a new, fresh
: }install of windows. Relatedly, I don't place much faith in the so
: }called
: }registry cleaner programs, although I have played with them a little
: }bit - but very cautiously, and NEVER automatically.
:
: I've never been able to trust a registry cleaner, either. I've
: downloaded a couple of the recommended ones, over the years, but never
: did wind up trying them.
:
: Ken
:
: --
: Remove the '4' to reply via email
:
:
: } }Kentiguous wrote:
: } } Bill in Co. wrote :
: } } What do you mean by a "manual compact" of the registry?
: } }
: } } A "REGEDIT /E myreg.reg", followed by a "REGEDIT /C myreg.reg"
: (from
: } } a
: } } DOS boot; after making a backup, of course g).
: } }
: } } Kentiguous wrote:
: } } Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
: } } compact
: } } of the registry?
:
:

Not that I've heard about, or experienced (I run that "scanreg /opt /fix"
command every so often over here, and have for some time). It is in a
TOTALLY different category than using ANY "registry cleaner" utility!
TOTALLY different. As in - SAFE.

But no one has yet (to my recollection) explained EXACTLY what the scanreg
/fix option actually fixes in the registry (and I mean *specifics* here),
and how it checks and does it. I've read what some web sites say about
it, but it's all vague hooey. I would be curious to know what it's exact
algorithm is - what *specifically* it looks for in the keys, and what
*specifically* it checks in the registry keys and resolves.


Dan wrote:
Ken or anyone else, are there problems that are known of with the 98SE
registry, registry tool or use of the scanreg/anything command -- refers
to
all possible variables?

"Kentiguous" wrote in message
...
Bill in Co. wrote :
}Kentiguous wrote:
} Bill in Co. wrote :
} }OK, I lose the bet!
}
} I hope it wasn't too steep... g
}
} }At any rate, I think your idea might compact it better, but it may
}be a
} }bit overkill - why not just use the more recommended, "scanreg /opt"
}a
} }couple of
} }times, and see how much that works for ya. I do this on occasion:
} }"scanreg /opt /fix" (I run two or three times), and it usually
}compacts
}it
} }a fair bit. And I think it would be faster (and perhaps safer),
}than
}the
} }export/import (like if there was a power failure in the middle, or
} }whatever).
}
} Thanks for the info., Bill. Yes, I would like to try "/opt", but I
} wanted to check first, for possible danger(s). Heretofore, all my
} compacting's been manually done, on my Win95 machine (I wonder if
}
}I think you HAD to do it that way with Win95. (I don't think the
}scanreg
}options I just mentioned were even available on Win95).

SCANREG's not in this version (4.00.950) of Win95; that's why I was
wondering if the Win98 version would work with Win95.

} SCANREG would work on it, too?), in conjunction with a program called
} FIXREG. I've been doing it this way since 1999, without a hitch
(still
} running the previous owner's install of 95, here). Here's what its
} registry looks like, after all these years:
}
} USER.DAT 188,448
} SYSTEM.DAT 1,667,228
}
}That seems pretty damn small to me!!

Lean and mean; this machine! And, pretty darn reliable, too.

}My USER.DAT is about 1000 KB (or 1 MB), and my SYSTEM.DAT is about 7000
}KB
}(or 7 MB), and I don't really have all that much on this Win 98SE
}machine
}(admitedly it's Win98SE, instead of Win 95)
}
} It's worked so well in '95; hence my reluctance to change. But, if
} "/opt" is, indeed, reliable, it would be nice to let the software do
} the work. g
}
}Yup - and I think it's safer.

Thanks for you opinion, WRT reliablility, Bill; it's my prime concern,
here.

} A couple of questions, though; if you're using "/fix", wouldn't
}"/opt"
} be redundant?
}
}No. /fix supposedly fixes any serious errors encountered in the
}registry
}(that it can), and / opt shrinks the registry (if it can). Two
}different
}things entirely.

The documentation I have on the /FIX parameter says:

"Repairs any damaged portions of the registry, and
optimizes it by rebuilding it without unused space."

I can't remember the doc's source, though (it may not be from
Microsoft). Do you think it's incorrect?

} And, can you actually see additional shrinkage, after each subsequent
} run?
}
}Sometimes it will reduce the size a bit further when you've run it more
}than
}once.
}
} If that's the case, perhaps the 'old fashioned'
} way would be better, after all (if so, would FIXREG still be needed,
} in 98SE?).
}
}I've never used FIXREG.

Win95 Gold's version of REGEDIT is quite buggy, WRT whole-registry
imports, so I grabbed the Win95C version, and modified the version
check. Even so, there are known problems importing values that
are terminated with the carriage return/linefeed sequence, when using
the manual export/import in Win95. FIXREG can find and optionally fix
any problems of this ilk (it's fixed a few things here, over the years).

}The only "fix registry" I know that works is either using a good
}registry
}backup (there are 5 created in Win98, automatically), or a new, fresh
}install of windows. Relatedly, I don't place much faith in the so
}called
}registry cleaner programs, although I have played with them a little
}bit - but very cautiously, and NEVER automatically.

I've never been able to trust a registry cleaner, either. I've
downloaded a couple of the recommended ones, over the years, but never
did wind up trying them.

Ken

--
Remove the '4' to reply via email


} }Kentiguous wrote:
} } Bill in Co. wrote :
} } What do you mean by a "manual compact" of the registry?
} }
} } A "REGEDIT /E myreg.reg", followed by a "REGEDIT /C myreg.reg"
(from
} } a
} } DOS boot; after making a backup, of course g).
} }
} } Kentiguous wrote:
} } Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
} } compact
} } of the registry?

Good luck, bg.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User

"Bill in Co." wrote in message
...
But no one has yet (to my recollection) explained EXACTLY what the
scanreg
/fix option actually fixes in the registry (and I mean *specifics*
here),
and how it checks and does it. I've read what some web sites say
about
it, but it's all vague hooey. I would be curious to know what it's
exact
algorithm is - what *specifically* it looks for in the keys, and what
*specifically* it checks in the registry keys and resolves.

If you discover the information, I would like to know Bill too. I agree with
Gary, may fortune smile upon you in discovering what it does. : aka Good
Luck!

"Bill in Co." wrote in message
...
: Not that I've heard about, or experienced (I run that "scanreg /opt /fix"
: command every so often over here, and have for some time). It is in a
: TOTALLY different category than using ANY "registry cleaner" utility!
: TOTALLY different. As in - SAFE.
:
: But no one has yet (to my recollection) explained EXACTLY what the scanreg
: /fix option actually fixes in the registry (and I mean *specifics* here),
: and how it checks and does it. I've read what some web sites say about
: it, but it's all vague hooey. I would be curious to know what it's exact
: algorithm is - what *specifically* it looks for in the keys, and what
: *specifically* it checks in the registry keys and resolves.
:
:
: Dan wrote:
: Ken or anyone else, are there problems that are known of with the 98SE
: registry, registry tool or use of the scanreg/anything command -- refers
: to
: all possible variables?
:
: "Kentiguous" wrote in message
: ...
: Bill in Co. wrote :
: }Kentiguous wrote:
: } Bill in Co. wrote :
: } }OK, I lose the bet!
: }
: } I hope it wasn't too steep... g
: }
: } }At any rate, I think your idea might compact it better, but it may
: }be a
: } }bit overkill - why not just use the more recommended, "scanreg /opt"
: }a
: } }couple of
: } }times, and see how much that works for ya. I do this on occasion:
: } }"scanreg /opt /fix" (I run two or three times), and it usually
: }compacts
: }it
: } }a fair bit. And I think it would be faster (and perhaps safer),
: }than
: }the
: } }export/import (like if there was a power failure in the middle, or
: } }whatever).
: }
: } Thanks for the info., Bill. Yes, I would like to try "/opt", but I
: } wanted to check first, for possible danger(s). Heretofore, all my
: } compacting's been manually done, on my Win95 machine (I wonder if
: }
: }I think you HAD to do it that way with Win95. (I don't think the
: }scanreg
: }options I just mentioned were even available on Win95).
:
: SCANREG's not in this version (4.00.950) of Win95; that's why I was
: wondering if the Win98 version would work with Win95.
:
: } SCANREG would work on it, too?), in conjunction with a program called
: } FIXREG. I've been doing it this way since 1999, without a hitch
: (still
: } running the previous owner's install of 95, here). Here's what its
: } registry looks like, after all these years:
: }
: } USER.DAT 188,448
: } SYSTEM.DAT 1,667,228
: }
: }That seems pretty damn small to me!!
:
: Lean and mean; this machine! And, pretty darn reliable, too.
:
: }My USER.DAT is about 1000 KB (or 1 MB), and my SYSTEM.DAT is about 7000
: }KB
: }(or 7 MB), and I don't really have all that much on this Win 98SE
: }machine
: }(admitedly it's Win98SE, instead of Win 95)
: }
: } It's worked so well in '95; hence my reluctance to change. But, if
: } "/opt" is, indeed, reliable, it would be nice to let the software do
: } the work. g
: }
: }Yup - and I think it's safer.
:
: Thanks for you opinion, WRT reliablility, Bill; it's my prime concern,
: here.
:
: } A couple of questions, though; if you're using "/fix", wouldn't
: }"/opt"
: } be redundant?
: }
: }No. /fix supposedly fixes any serious errors encountered in the
: }registry
: }(that it can), and / opt shrinks the registry (if it can). Two
: }different
: }things entirely.
:
: The documentation I have on the /FIX parameter says:
:
: "Repairs any damaged portions of the registry, and
: optimizes it by rebuilding it without unused space."
:
: I can't remember the doc's source, though (it may not be from
: Microsoft). Do you think it's incorrect?
:
: } And, can you actually see additional shrinkage, after each subsequent
: } run?
: }
: }Sometimes it will reduce the size a bit further when you've run it more
: }than
: }once.
: }
: } If that's the case, perhaps the 'old fashioned'
: } way would be better, after all (if so, would FIXREG still be needed,
: } in 98SE?).
: }
: }I've never used FIXREG.
:
: Win95 Gold's version of REGEDIT is quite buggy, WRT whole-registry
: imports, so I grabbed the Win95C version, and modified the version
: check. Even so, there are known problems importing values that
: are terminated with the carriage return/linefeed sequence, when using
: the manual export/import in Win95. FIXREG can find and optionally fix
: any problems of this ilk (it's fixed a few things here, over the years).
:
: }The only "fix registry" I know that works is either using a good
: }registry
: }backup (there are 5 created in Win98, automatically), or a new, fresh
: }install of windows. Relatedly, I don't place much faith in the so
: }called
: }registry cleaner programs, although I have played with them a little
: }bit - but very cautiously, and NEVER automatically.
:
: I've never been able to trust a registry cleaner, either. I've
: downloaded a couple of the recommended ones, over the years, but never
: did wind up trying them.
:
: Ken
:
: --
: Remove the '4' to reply via email
:
:
: } }Kentiguous wrote:
: } } Bill in Co. wrote :
: } } What do you mean by a "manual compact" of the registry?
: } }
: } } A "REGEDIT /E myreg.reg", followed by a "REGEDIT /C myreg.reg"
: (from
: } } a
: } } DOS boot; after making a backup, of course g).
: } }
: } } Kentiguous wrote:
: } } Is SCANREG /OPT reliable, or would it be safer to do a manual
: } } compact
: } } of the registry?
:
:

No visual cue, just a little longer boot and some drive thrashing which
could be an optimization or something totally unrelated. How's that for a
weasel answer? G

--
Regards

Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
Knowledge Base Info:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo

"Kentiguous" wrote in message
...
Ron Badour wrote :

}In that scanreg makes a registry back up on the first boot (or reboot)
}of
}every day, I think (based on observations with my machine) that once
}the
}back up is made, it will run optimize if it detects 500 kb of space. I
}know
}of no way to change the parameters for the amount of space.

Thanks, Ron; does the user have any indication that the
'auto-optimization' is occurring?

Ken

--
Remove the '4' to reply via email


}"Kentiguous" wrote in message
...
} Ron Badour wrote :
} }Yes, when Scanreg detects there is 500 kb of space, it automatically
} }compacts the registry.
} }http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/registry.html for details on the
} }registry
}
} Thanks for the additional info., Ron. Do you know if SCANREG will
} make a
} backup, before it 'auto-optimizes'?
}
} I see that SCANREG.INI's "Optimize" parameter can be used to control
} 'auto-optimization', but I didn't see a parameter that would allow
} control over the amount of 'wasted space', after which an
} 'auto-optimization' will occur. Am I missing something, or, if not,
} is
} there, perhaps, an 'undocumented' parameter that would do so?