Sleepingbeautiie writes:

All right, so. I've had GIMP ever since the latest version came out, and it hasn't been up to this very day that it's given me an error when loading, annnnd it's never happened before. Ever. It's some crud that tells me "Runtime/C++ Error" and that it needs to terminate. Sooooo... what the heck do I do? Am I not going to be able to use GIMP anymore? .__.

Are you using Windows?

And does it say anything more than "Runtime/C++ Error" ?

On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:14:27 +0100, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

And, yeah - that stuff's basically gone away since I've re-installed it again, but now it says it has to do something with the GIMP shortcut in my "bin" folder, so I thought 'Oh, okay...' and clicked on the GIMP 2.8 icon for it to load from there.. but it gave me the same error, the one that I just mentioned, and it always has something to do with "terminating in an unusual way", 'thanks' to Runtime. I'm looking through all my folders now, but there doesn't seem to be a problem.

Is your Windows set to use 16-bit colour mode? There's a known problem with GTK+ if that's the case - change Windows to 32-bit colours.

Sleepingbeautiie - forums@gimpusers.com wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:14:27 +0100, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

And, yeah - that stuff's basically gone away since I've re-installed it again, but now it says it has to do something with the GIMP shortcut in my "bin" folder, so I thought 'Oh, okay...' and clicked on the GIMP 2.8 icon for it to load from there.. but it gave me the same error, the one that I just mentioned, and it always has something to do with "terminating in an unusual way", 'thanks' to Runtime. I'm looking through all my folders now, but there doesn't seem to be a problem.

Is your Windows set to use 16-bit colour mode? There's a known problem with GTK+ if that's the case - change Windows to 32-bit colours.

How do you do that? I mean, do I go to control panel? I really don't know what the problem is, but if it helps I use Windows Vista/desktop.

Yes; from Windows Vista Control Panel: - from default view: "Adjust screen resolution" (under the "Appearance and Personalization" section) or
- from classic view: "Personalization" then "Display Settings"

Either will bring up the "Display Settings" where you can set the colour depth from the drop-down under "Colors". If you have multiple monitors, you might need to set it separately for each one.

After click "Apply" or "OK" to apply changes, you'll need to click "Yes" before the timer expired when prompted for whether to keep the new settings. If that seems a bit odd, there is a sensible reason - changing display settings incorrectly can prevent anything from being displayed at all, making it difficult to change them back, so if the screen does go blank or scrambled you just need to wait 15 seconds for the timer to expire and it should go back to how it was before.

Mark.

Seeing how you said it was running fine for a while... how full is your hard drive?
I did a google search on "gmem.c errors", and it would seem a lot of them had to do with high memory intensive operations being performed. Here is one specific to gimp:
http://www.gimptalk.com/index.php?/topic/51518-glib-error/

and if you scroll to the bottom you see where they talk about the amount of memory/cap allocated to gimp or system etc.

Here's one on the inflation of memory need in inkscape: http://www.inkscapeforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=10253

But I was thinking if your disk is pretty near full maybe there isn't enough room to create the swap space needed or preset by your settings to start up gimp? Just a thought.
Dan

On 11/2/12, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

Sleepingbeautiie - forums@gimpusers.com wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:14:27 +0100, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

And, yeah - that stuff's basically gone away since I've re-installed it again, but now it says it has to do something with the GIMP shortcut in my "bin" folder, so I thought 'Oh, okay...' and clicked on the GIMP 2.8 icon for it to load from there.. but it gave me the same error, the one that I just mentioned, and it always has something to do with "terminating in an unusual way", 'thanks' to Runtime. I'm looking through all my folders now, but there doesn't seem to be a problem.

Is your Windows set to use 16-bit colour mode? There's a known problem with
GTK+ if that's the case - change Windows to 32-bit colours.

How do you do that? I mean, do I go to control panel? I really don't know what the problem is, but if it helps I use Windows Vista/desktop.

Yes; from Windows Vista Control Panel: - from default view: "Adjust screen resolution" (under the "Appearance and Personalization" section) or
- from classic view: "Personalization" then "Display Settings"

Either will bring up the "Display Settings" where you can set the colour depth from the drop-down under "Colors". If you have multiple monitors, you might need to set it separately for each one.

After click "Apply" or "OK" to apply changes, you'll need to click "Yes" before the timer expired when prompted for whether to keep the new settings. If that seems a bit odd, there is a sensible reason - changing display settings incorrectly can prevent anything from being displayed at all, making it difficult to change them back, so if the screen does go blank or scrambled you just need to wait 15 seconds for the timer to expire and it should go back to how it was before.

Mark.

All right, thanks, I'll try that when I get the time; if it doesn't work, I'll come back and see if there's any other kinda solution.

It didn't work. The first message I'm always receiving now is "(gimp-2.8.exe:2408):GLiB-ERROR**: gmem.c: 165: failed to allocate 17660160 bytes", and THEN it does the whole "Windows Visual C++ Library" thing. Any ideas?

--
Sleepingbeautiie (via gimpusers.com) _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On 11/03/2012 10:31 AM, Daniel Smith wrote:

Seeing how you said it was running fine for a while... how full is your hard drive?
I did a google search on "gmem.c errors", and it would seem a lot of them had to do with high memory intensive operations being performed. Here is one specific to gimp:
http://www.gimptalk.com/index.php?/topic/51518-glib-error/

and if you scroll to the bottom you see where they talk about the amount of memory/cap allocated to gimp or system etc.

Here's one on the inflation of memory need in inkscape: http://www.inkscapeforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=10253

But I was thinking if your disk is pretty near full maybe there isn't enough room to create the swap space needed or preset by your settings to start up gimp? Just a thought.

Low available memory and swap space can cause problems but in my experience they don't show up until working on large images. The GIMP slows way down while you are working and may eventually hang or crash. In these cases it is helpful to open the undo history dialog and periodically clear the undo cache. It is also helpful to pay attention to the content of layers in large images that have multiple layers, and crop (not mask) layers to include only the 'visible' parts when/as it is practical to do so. Needless to say, save as .xcf early and often.

But the problem at hand does not seem to be related to this - especially since Microsoft's specification for a "Vista Ready" machine includes way more than enough memory and hard drive speed to enable GTK+ and the GIMP to operate normally under a heavy load.

If I had to troubleshoot this, I would start by uninstalling the GIMP, and looking for a stand-alone GTK+ installation and/or any other programs that may have included GTK+ in their installer package, and remove those as well.

I would run a "registry cleaner" like Wise or something similar, delete all orphaned keys, then start regedit and search for "GIMP" and "GTK" just to make sure all the bits and pieces are gone. If any are found, I would delete all these keys manually then restart the machine. Then I would download the current stable version of the GIMP from Sourceforge, install it normally, cross my fingers, and try starting it up.

All of the above, because from what we have been told so far, it sounds like a corrupted or incompatible version of GTK might be on board, and/or keys left over in the registry from previous installation of God-knows what might be pointing to missing or incorrect resources.

If all else fails, I would try the previous version of the GIMP, 2.6. The latest & greatest version is still new-ish and it is likely that a few obscure bugs are still lurking here and there - probably not the kind of show stoppers reported here, but ya never know. The first Windows version of GIMP 2.8 at Sourceforge came out five months ago, and the current stable version less than one month ago.

:o)

Steve

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:22:52 -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:

I would run a "registry cleaner"

Don't. Just don't. At best, they do nothing, and at worst they screw up the machine (had to fix too many machines that "registry cleaners" and "optimizers" left in unusable state).

start regedit and search for "GIMP" and "GTK" just to make sure all the bits and pieces are gone.

The only GIMP-related things in Registry are file associations and an AppPaths entry, neither of which would have an effect here.

Any 3rd-party GTK+ install should also not interfere with GIMP itself, since the main GIMP executable resides in the same directory as GTK+ itself (though such an install could interfere with the plug-ins, but it doesn't look like that's the problem here).

On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 22:46:03 +0100, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

It didn't work. The first message I'm always receiving now is "(gimp-2.8.exe:2408):GLiB-ERROR**: gmem.c: 165: failed to allocate 17660160 bytes", and THEN it does the whole "Windows Visual C++ Library" thing. Any ideas?

This is an interesting error - since the number is quite small (a bit less than 17 MB), GIMP seems to actually be running out of memory.

Is your Windows 32 or 64-bit? How big is the image you're working on (both it's dimensions, and the number of layers it has are important)? And, how much memory and swap does the machine have?

On 11/03/2012 09:02 PM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:22:52 -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:

I would run a "registry cleaner"

Don't. Just don't. At best, they do nothing, and at worst they screw up the machine (had to fix too many machines that "registry cleaners" and "optimizers" left in unusable state).

The first thing a registry cleaner does - if it's a decent one like the Wise cleaner - is back up the existing registry files to a location where they won't be overwritten during the OS-native registry backup rotation. Then it conducts a scan and removes orphaned keys that point to non-existent files and directories, redundant keys, etc. In some cases, I have seen processes that access the registry frequently, i.e. complex application start-up routines - run 2x faster after cleaning. Usually the result is not quite that impressive.

In a hypothetical worst case where damage is done by the cleaning process - something I have never seen happen in a few hundred practical cases - the saved registry can be restored with a single command and, in effect, "nothing happened at all." Any problems that need repair are the same ones that were there before the registry cleaner was tried.

Progressive registry bloat is a feature, not a bug. It makes a computer with a Microsoft operating system appear to be "getting old and slowing down," which is a Good Thing if you are selling computers or operating systems. Not so good if you are the user who owns the machine in question.

The best repair for any Microsoft operating system is to replace it with an operating system that works, or, failing that, reinstall the one that came with the machine. But sometimes that's not an option, alas.

:o/

Steve

I really have grown fond of avg's pc tuneup. Normally I in the past didn't use such utilities, but I tried (and paid!) for it once, and love it. Still use the free avg antivirus though.
I would have recommended to upgrade to Win 7 and wipe the whole drive. Never really liked Vista that much. Seemed like only a little better than that old Longhorn beta there was going around for a while. But I would also just take at least a glance at the drive to see how much free space there is on it. Dan

On 11/3/12, Steve Kinney wrote:

On 11/03/2012 09:02 PM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:22:52 -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:

I would run a "registry cleaner"

Don't. Just don't. At best, they do nothing, and at worst they screw up the
machine (had to fix too many machines that "registry cleaners" and "optimizers" left in unusable state).

The first thing a registry cleaner does - if it's a decent one like the Wise cleaner - is back up the existing registry files to a location where they won't be overwritten during the OS-native registry backup rotation. Then it conducts a scan and removes orphaned keys that point to non-existent files and directories, redundant keys, etc. In some cases, I have seen processes that access the registry frequently, i.e. complex application start-up routines - run 2x faster after cleaning. Usually the result is not quite that impressive.

In a hypothetical worst case where damage is done by the cleaning process - something I have never seen happen in a few hundred practical cases - the saved registry can be restored with a single command and, in effect, "nothing happened at all." Any problems that need repair are the same ones that were there before the registry cleaner was tried.

Progressive registry bloat is a feature, not a bug. It makes a computer with a Microsoft operating system appear to be "getting old and slowing down," which is a Good Thing if you are selling computers or operating systems. Not so good if you are the user who owns the machine in question.

The best repair for any Microsoft operating system is to replace it with an operating system that works, or, failing that, reinstall the one that came with the machine. But sometimes that's not an option, alas.

:o/

Steve

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Because (left out) a Vista machine means it's probably about five years old or so, meaning that it could possibly be filled, and or replace the drive as well. It's gonna go sometime soon. Just thoughts. And they're so cheap now.
Dan

On 11/3/12, Daniel Smith wrote:

I really have grown fond of avg's pc tuneup. Normally I in the past didn't use such utilities, but I tried (and paid!) for it once, and love it. Still use the free avg antivirus though.
I would have recommended to upgrade to Win 7 and wipe the whole drive. Never really liked Vista that much. Seemed like only a little better than that old Longhorn beta there was going around for a while. But I would also just take at least a glance at the drive to see how much free space there is on it. Dan

On 11/3/12, Steve Kinney wrote:

On 11/03/2012 09:02 PM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:22:52 -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:

I would run a "registry cleaner"

Don't. Just don't. At best, they do nothing, and at worst they screw up the
machine (had to fix too many machines that "registry cleaners" and "optimizers" left in unusable state).

The first thing a registry cleaner does - if it's a decent one like the Wise cleaner - is back up the existing registry files to a location where they won't be overwritten during the OS-native registry backup rotation. Then it conducts a scan and removes orphaned keys that point to non-existent files and directories, redundant keys, etc. In some cases, I have seen processes that access the registry frequently, i.e. complex application start-up routines - run 2x faster after cleaning. Usually the result is not quite that impressive.

In a hypothetical worst case where damage is done by the cleaning process - something I have never seen happen in a few hundred practical cases - the saved registry can be restored with a single command and, in effect, "nothing happened at all." Any problems that need repair are the same ones that were there before the registry cleaner was tried.

Progressive registry bloat is a feature, not a bug. It makes a computer with a Microsoft operating system appear to be "getting old and slowing down," which is a Good Thing if you are selling computers or operating systems. Not so good if you are the user who owns the machine in question.

The best repair for any Microsoft operating system is to replace it with an operating system that works, or, failing that, reinstall the one that came with the machine. But sometimes that's not an option, alas.

:o/

Steve

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On 11/03/2012 11:28 PM, Daniel Smith wrote:

Because (left out) a Vista machine means it's probably about five years old or so, meaning that it could possibly be filled, and or replace the drive as well. It's gonna go sometime soon. Just thoughts. And they're so cheap now.
Dan

Ubuntu 10 has worked great for me but alas, Canonical has gone the way of the "dedicated touchscreen interface". I will be bailing out when the version I am using reaches "end of life" next year. Can't sit a very computer illiterate user in front of the "Unity" desktop, and expect them to figure it out and use it without problems. Can't expect me to toss 20 years of reasonably efficient workflow habits out the window either...

I have been very impressed with Mint - the other day I had occasion to use the Live DVD in conjunction with a printer/scanner on a random PC on a random office LAN, and the thing "just worked" all around.

Running an OS that works for not against the user is a very addictive thing. Token on-topic reference: The GIMP was the first major gateway drug that started me down the path to a 100% Free Software world. Ubuntu stopped including the GIMP in its default installation package, and that's another strike against Canonical... sure it's stupidly easy to install, but dang it, GNU/Linux is supposed to include the GIMP right out of the box, is all!

:o)

On 11/3/12, Daniel Smith wrote:

I really have grown fond of avg's pc tuneup. Normally I in the past didn't use such utilities, but I tried (and paid!) for it once, and love it. Still use the free avg antivirus though.
I would have recommended to upgrade to Win 7 and wipe the whole drive. Never really liked Vista that much. Seemed like only a little better than that old Longhorn beta there was going around for a while. But I would also just take at least a glance at the drive to see how much free space there is on it. Dan

On 11/3/12, Steve Kinney wrote:

On 11/03/2012 09:02 PM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:22:52 -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:

I would run a "registry cleaner"

Don't. Just don't. At best, they do nothing, and at worst they screw up the
machine (had to fix too many machines that "registry cleaners" and "optimizers" left in unusable state).

The first thing a registry cleaner does - if it's a decent one like the Wise cleaner - is back up the existing registry files to a location where they won't be overwritten during the OS-native registry backup rotation. Then it conducts a scan and removes orphaned keys that point to non-existent files and directories, redundant keys, etc. In some cases, I have seen processes that access the registry frequently, i.e. complex application start-up routines - run 2x faster after cleaning. Usually the result is not quite that impressive.

In a hypothetical worst case where damage is done by the cleaning process - something I have never seen happen in a few hundred practical cases - the saved registry can be restored with a single command and, in effect, "nothing happened at all." Any problems that need repair are the same ones that were there before the registry cleaner was tried.

Progressive registry bloat is a feature, not a bug. It makes a computer with a Microsoft operating system appear to be "getting old and slowing down," which is a Good Thing if you are selling computers or operating systems. Not so good if you are the user who owns the machine in question.

The best repair for any Microsoft operating system is to replace it with an operating system that works, or, failing that, reinstall the one that came with the machine. But sometimes that's not an option, alas.

:o/

Steve

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

2012/11/4 Steve Kinney

Ubuntu 10 has worked great for me but alas, Canonical has gone the way of the "dedicated touchscreen interface". I will be bailing out when the version I am using reaches "end of life" next year. Can't sit a very computer illiterate user in front of the "Unity" desktop, and expect them to figure it out and use it without problems. Can't expect me to toss 20 years of reasonably efficient workflow habits out the window either...

You don't need to do that. Using Ubuntu 12.04 with the look and feel of

Ubuntu 10.04 is rather easy. Of course, it needs a little work, but nothing complicated. I'm using that on all my computers and on all the computers I manage. The major visible differences is that I cannot use any more the theme I liked (but probably still a little more work probably would do that, if it was so important), and the System global menu is now hidden in the Applications menu.

I did not yet try version 12.10, and Ubuntu Gnome Remix 12.10 seems promising, but it uses Gnome 3, which some people consider as much offending as Unity...

I have been very impressed with Mint - the other day I had occasion

to use the Live DVD in conjunction with a printer/scanner on a random PC on a random office LAN, and the thing "just worked" all around.

Mint is very pleasant and refreshing indeed, and I'll shift to it if

combining Ubuntu 12.10 with Gnome 2 is impossible.

Running an OS that works for not against the user is a very addictive thing. Token on-topic reference: The GIMP was the first major gateway drug that started me down the path to a 100% Free Software world. Ubuntu stopped including the GIMP in its default installation package, and that's another strike against Canonical... sure it's stupidly easy to install, but dang it, GNU/Linux is supposed to include the GIMP right out of the box, is all!

:o)

The only problem, in my opinion, is that Ubuntu still insists on fitting on a CD instead of a DVD, for reasons I don't know.

Wow, thanks to both (all) of you! I'll have to taste the mint, so to speak. I was running Ubuntu 11 till my latest machinicide. I thought though when I installed it that Linux has come incredibly far in ease of use since when I used to use it back in the old Red Hat 4, 7 etc command line startup days. Of course, I just did it with an ubuntu cd I bought off of ebay for 4 bucks. So no size worries for me.
But I did notice when I was searching that error above, or different combinations of its terms included, that it seemed cross-OS, that different #s (gmem.c: 165, 135, etc) of it occurred in various linux and windows versions that people had reported bugs or complained of. Except for, notably, on Macs. Don't know fer sure about that though. On second search through it seemed a lot had to do with corrupted or unmanageably large conversion files etc. crashing memory. This is a very similar error:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/846389 Dan

On 11/4/12, Olivier wrote:

2012/11/4 Steve Kinney

Ubuntu 10 has worked great for me but alas, Canonical has gone the way of the "dedicated touchscreen interface". I will be bailing out when the version I am using reaches "end of life" next year. Can't sit a very computer illiterate user in front of the "Unity" desktop, and expect them to figure it out and use it without problems. Can't expect me to toss 20 years of reasonably efficient workflow habits out the window either...

You don't need to do that. Using Ubuntu 12.04 with the look and feel of

Ubuntu 10.04 is rather easy. Of course, it needs a little work, but nothing complicated. I'm using that on all my computers and on all the computers I manage. The major visible differences is that I cannot use any more the theme I liked (but probably still a little more work probably would do that, if it was so important), and the System global menu is now hidden in the Applications menu.

I did not yet try version 12.10, and Ubuntu Gnome Remix 12.10 seems promising, but it uses Gnome 3, which some people consider as much offending as Unity...

I have been very impressed with Mint - the other day I had occasion

to use the Live DVD in conjunction with a printer/scanner on a random PC on a random office LAN, and the thing "just worked" all around.

Mint is very pleasant and refreshing indeed, and I'll shift to it if

combining Ubuntu 12.10 with Gnome 2 is impossible.

Running an OS that works for not against the user is a very addictive thing. Token on-topic reference: The GIMP was the first major gateway drug that started me down the path to a 100% Free Software world. Ubuntu stopped including the GIMP in its default installation package, and that's another strike against Canonical... sure it's stupidly easy to install, but dang it, GNU/Linux is supposed to include the GIMP right out of the box, is all!

:o)

The only problem, in my opinion, is that Ubuntu still insists on fitting on a CD instead of a DVD, for reasons I don't know.

-- Olivier Lecarme

2012/11/4 Steve Kinney

Mint is very pleasant and refreshing indeed, and I'll shift to it if combining Ubuntu 12.10 with Gnome 2 is impossible.

I run Ubuntu 11.04 which came with Unity but I was able to remove all Unity packages and install Gnome 2. The one bug I found in Gnome 2 was the inability to do session snapshots.

I have looked at Mint and tried a live CD of it. I would like to do a test install in to a spare partition but the installer won't let me choose an option to *not* install a boot loader. I'm happy with the boot loader I have and 3 lines added to a config file would let me add Mint to my list of boot options. At least Mint 13 now recognizes the RAID 1 configuration of my hard drives.

The other option I'm considering is Debian. I haven't checked to see if there is a live CD of it that I can use to some initial testing.

On 04.11.2012 16:39, Kevin Cozens wrote:

2012/11/4 Steve Kinney

Mint is very pleasant and refreshing indeed, and I'll shift to it if combining Ubuntu 12.10 with Gnome 2 is impossible.

I run Ubuntu 11.04 which came with Unity but I was able to remove all

Sorry to interrupt, but could you at least change the subject line of if you change the subject of the sub-thread?

Thanks.

P.S. on any reply to this message, the [was: ... ] part should be removed; do it manually if your mail client doesn't.

Yeah, it's ok. Give it about ten years, you'll know what to do... :)

On 11/4/12, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

On 11/03/2012 11:28 PM, Daniel Smith wrote:

Because (left out) a Vista machine means it's probably about five years old or so, meaning that it could possibly be filled, and or replace the drive as well. It's gonna go sometime soon. Just thoughts. And they're so cheap now.
Dan

Ubuntu 10 has worked great for me but alas, Canonical has gone the way of the "dedicated touchscreen interface". I will be bailing out when the version I am using reaches "end of life" next year. Can't sit a very computer illiterate user in front of the "Unity" desktop, and expect them to figure it out and use it without problems. Can't expect me to toss 20 years of reasonably efficient workflow habits out the window either...

I have been very impressed with Mint - the other day I had occasion to use the Live DVD in conjunction with a printer/scanner on a random PC on a random office LAN, and the thing "just worked" all around.

Running an OS that works for not against the user is a very addictive thing. Token on-topic reference: The GIMP was the first major gateway drug that started me down the path to a 100% Free Software world. Ubuntu stopped including the GIMP in its default installation package, and that's another strike against Canonical... sure it's stupidly easy to install, but dang it, GNU/Linux is supposed to include the GIMP right out of the box, is all!

:o)

On 11/3/12, Daniel Smith wrote:

I really have grown fond of avg's pc tuneup. Normally I in the past didn't use such utilities, but I tried (and paid!) for it once, and love it. Still use the free avg antivirus though.
I would have recommended to upgrade to Win 7 and wipe the whole drive. Never really liked Vista that much. Seemed like only a little better than that old Longhorn beta there was going around for a while. But I would also just take at least a glance at the drive to see how much free space there is on it. Dan

On 11/3/12, Steve Kinney wrote:

On 11/03/2012 09:02 PM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:22:52 -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:

I would run a "registry cleaner"

Don't. Just don't. At best, they do nothing, and at worst they screw up
the
machine (had to fix too many machines that "registry cleaners" and "optimizers" left in unusable state).

The first thing a registry cleaner does - if it's a decent one like the Wise cleaner - is back up the existing registry files to a location where they won't be overwritten during the OS-native registry backup rotation. Then it conducts a scan and removes orphaned keys that point to non-existent files and directories, redundant keys, etc. In some cases, I have seen processes that access the registry frequently, i.e. complex application start-up routines - run 2x faster after cleaning. Usually the result is not quite that impressive.

In a hypothetical worst case where damage is done by the cleaning process - something I have never seen happen in a few hundred practical cases - the saved registry can be restored with a single command and, in effect, "nothing happened at all." Any problems that need repair are the same ones that were there before the registry cleaner was tried.

Progressive registry bloat is a feature, not a bug. It makes a computer with a Microsoft operating system appear to be "getting old and slowing down," which is a Good Thing if you are selling computers or operating systems. Not so good if you are the user who owns the machine in question.

The best repair for any Microsoft operating system is to replace it with an operating system that works, or, failing that, reinstall the one that came with the machine. But sometimes that's not an option, alas.

:o/

Steve

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

...And how did all this shift into Unbuntu, whatever it is?...

/Anyways/, re-downloading 2.6 didn't help, and I got the same error message as before. I'm afraid of following whatever Steve suggested (no offense), since I think it might screw up my computer's system. I don't know. -Shrugs.- Should I just wait for updates for 2.8., or? Because this is the only computer system I actually have, and I can't just roll off and buy PS, since that costs like craploads of money (for me), so... Gimp's the best I have :/ And if I'm not able to even edit my own sites anymore, then.... I'll wait til the problem's solved, I suppose. And to tell the truth, I know that people usually don't insert this into their problems here, but I'm just really confused and a little frustrated with all the suggestions, I can only process so much. Not trying to be mean or anything, just... frustrated. One said that Gimp's memory is failing, and another said I could try a re-load 2.6., which I did, but failed. Might just be the computer, or Gimp itself. Not sure, so... might not reply to this discussion for a bit :/

- Bee.

-- Sleepingbeautiie
_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On 04.11.2012 03:00, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

I have no idea... and running out of memory? ._____." That's... a bad thing, isn't it?

I'm not working on any images - I haven't been able to access GIMP for three, four days, now, so...

Patterns might be another cause for this problem. Fonts, too.

I mean, I'll try and follow what
Steve said, but.. then again I might just save my brushes into a folder and then revert back to 2.6 to see if that works.

You should move any brushes that didn't come with GIMP itself. If you've done this already, did anything change?

Note that blindly (re-)installing any version of GIMP won't solve the problem if anything you have added is causing this.

On 11/04/2012 10:52 AM, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

...And how did all this shift into Unbuntu, whatever it is?...

It looks like your problem is something wrong with MS Vista more than with the GIMP. I made a remark to the effect that the "right" way to fix that is to install "an operating system that works" and Ubuntu is an example of that. The Cinnamon version of Mint is more so, lately. Both are free to download and install.

/Anyways/, re-downloading 2.6 didn't help, and I got the same error message as before.

Reinstalling the previous version of the GIMP really should have worked, and since it did not, this tends to rule out a bug in the newer version as the source of the problem. This looks like the operating system, not the GIMP that's causing the problem.

There are too many tings that could be going wrong, for us to make any more useful suggestions about how to get the GIMP running on your system.

Should I just wait for updates for 2.8., or? Because this is the only computer system I actually have, and I can't just roll off and buy PS, since that costs like craploads of money (for me), so... Gimp's the best I have :/ And if I'm not able to even edit my own sites anymore, then.... I'll wait til the problem's solved, I suppose.

There is no reason to believe that the next version of the GIMP will work for you, until the computer itself has been repaired.

And to tell the truth, I know that people usually don't insert this into their problems here, but I'm just really confused and a little frustrated with all the suggestions, I can only process so much. Not trying to be mean or anything, just... frustrated. One said that Gimp's memory is failing, and another said I could try a re-load 2.6., which I did, but failed. Might just be the computer, or Gimp itself. Not sure, so... might not reply to this discussion for a bit :/

Fixes that involve installing an operating system are normal for some of us, but if you don't have the experience to do that it's not a practical answer. Since you seem to really need an image editor, the best thing I can suggest at this point is to start looking for an honest repair shop.

:o/

Steve

On 12-11-04 11:13 AM, Olivier wrote:

Unfortunately, Debian, which now has a live CD, also now comes with Gnome 3...

Oh, nuts. Thanks for the info. I might still try a live CD just to see what Debian is like but looks like I'm back to Mint once they fix their install.

You know, I used to think abut that, like letting the computer rest. That's very funny. But other than replacing the hard drive or the operating system, which you probably couldn't do either by yourself, here's what you really need to consider. I wish I had thought of it earlier.
On Windows Vista you can use the restore feature to return it to an earlier version
of the computer's setup. Preferably before whatever software changes occurred to make Gimp run badly, or even perhaps before you ever installed Gimp.
However, remember, this feature will totally wipe any changes made to your computer back to the point you choose, so any files, images, contacts, bookmarks etc you wish to save you will have to extract and burn to a disk, ie get off the machine, before you do this process, because it's likely they won't be there anymore. Here's a web page about using it, and i'd research it more if I were you:

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/using-windows-vista-system-restore/

The other thing, is that I believe that the restore function does by itself set up points to return the system to, even if you have never initiated it and established such points yourself. But I am not sure about that, I only used restore in Win 7. So you'll have to see what possibilities, time periods or points, it offers you to travel back to. And remember, I believe this will delete any installed security patches for Vista as well, so you will have to reinstall those again, though I have the feeling you may have not been doing that faithfully unless it's set on automatic.
Don't you have a friend or a local shop that you could affordably (or for free) take it to?
It sure would make it easier for you. Dan

On 11/4/12, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

On 04.11.2012 03:00, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

I have no idea... and running out of memory? ._____." That's... a bad thing, isn't it?

I'm not working on any images - I haven't been able to access GIMP for three, four days, now, so...

Patterns might be another cause for this problem. Fonts, too.

I mean, I'll try and follow what
Steve said, but.. then again I might just save my brushes into a folder and then revert back to 2.6 to see if that works.

You should move any brushes that didn't come with GIMP itself. If you've done this already, did anything change?

Note that blindly (re-)installing any version of GIMP won't solve the problem if anything you have added is causing this.

Well, yeah, I have moved all brushes that never came with gimp into an entirely diff. folder, so... I mean, what do you think? Would it work if, say, I uninstalled GIMP entirely, waited about a month or two (I can cope) and then try again?

--
Sleepingbeautiie (via gimpusers.com) _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Olivier writes:

2012/11/4 Steve Kinney

[...]

Running an OS that works for not against the user is a very addictive thing.  Token on-topic reference:  The GIMP was the first
major gateway drug that started me down the path to a 100% Free Software world.  Ubuntu stopped including the GIMP in its default installation package, and that's another strike against Canonical...
sure it's stupidly easy to install, but dang it, GNU/Linux is supposed to include the GIMP right out of the box, is all!
:o)

The only problem, in my opinion, is that Ubuntu still insists on fitting on a CD instead of a DVD, for reasons I don't know.

off-topic, but
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/11/ubuntu-on-the-mongol-steppe-carving-paths-into-emerging-markets (last part) gives one very good reason.

On 06.11.2012 22:26, Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

All right, so. I've had GIMP ever since the latest version came out, and it hasn't been up to this very day that it's given me an error when loading, annnnd it's never happened before. Ever. It's some crud that tells me "Runtime/C++ Error" and that it needs to terminate. Sooooo... what the heck do I do? Am I not going to be able to use GIMP anymore? .__.

I kinda think the reason for the error has to do something with GTK2

Why?

On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 22:26:25 +0100 Sleepingbeautiie wrote:

All right, so. I've had GIMP ever since the latest version came out, and it hasn't been up to this very day that it's given me an error when loading, annnnd it's never happened before. Ever. It's some crud that tells me "Runtime/C++ Error" and that it needs to terminate. Sooooo... what the heck do I do? Am I not going to be able to use GIMP anymore? .__.

I kinda think the reason for the error has to do something with GTK2 :/ Thoughts?

What platform?

All right, so. I've had GIMP ever since the latest version came out, and it hasn't been up to this very day that it's given me an error when loading, annnnd it's never happened before. Ever. It's some crud that tells me "Runtime/C++ Error" and that it needs to terminate. Sooooo... what the heck do I do? Am I not going to be able to use GIMP anymore? .__.

I'm having the same issue and I've tried cleaning my pc, deleting a LOT of my art, re-installing the program, pretty much any "answer" I've seen. I have Windows 7...I just want my gimp back :(

Considering you said GIMP's been working up until today, I assume you upgraded to 2.8.8, right? If so, it could just be a bug that made its way into the stable release. You could just go back to 2.8.6 until the issue is resolved.

Other than that, I'm not really sure what could be going wrong. Maybe reinstall the Microsoft Visual C++ Redistributable Package?

Best of luck!

Sent from my iPod

On Nov 3, 2013, at 9:38 PM, jessessessica wrote:

All right, so. I've had GIMP ever since the latest version came out, and it hasn't been up to this very day that it's given me an error when loading, annnnd it's never happened before. Ever. It's some crud that tells me "Runtime/C++ Error" and that it needs to terminate. Sooooo... what the heck do I do? Am I not going to be able to use GIMP anymore? .__.

I'm having the same issue and I've tried cleaning my pc, deleting a LOT of my art, re-installing the program, pretty much any "answer" I've seen. I have Windows 7...I just want my gimp back :(

Attachments: * http://www.gimpusers.com/system/attachments/77/original/Gimp_Not_Working.bmp

-- jessessessica (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
List address: gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list