Calibre 2.0 Crashing at start up

[JSWolf]

To the moderators:

Please keep all the different threads about Calibre 2.x and Windows XP down to one thread. Thanks.

[eschwartz]

Basically, Here Be Dragons if you use calibre 2.x on Windows XP. But some people have not had anything happen to them.

If you don't mind running unstable software configurations, you can run calibre from source and edit the code that exits calibre on XP.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Stay with calibre 1.48 for as long as you want to stay on XP. Pretend that I have decided to take a year long vacation from calibre and there are no more updates, for anybody. calibre 1.48 is a perfectly fine, stable and functional piece of software.

I hope you are not foreshadowing anything. People on Windows 7+ also have calibre update OCD, you know

While I can't program a rat's behind in Python (mostly because I don't know Python's libraries/frameworks nor PyQT), I'll faithfully update each Saturday evening (if no exceptionally weird behaviour is reported in the forums) and post any bugs I encounter

[Khan-Dam]

My Experience about XP and Calibre 2.1.0

I Use XP for 10 Years on a XP Server, with a lot of process which run 24h a day 7 day a week 52 week by year without any trouble. Can't have to migrate to vista 7 or 8 ( my second server work fine with NT 5 ).

I use calibre to integrate ebook in database, change metadata and eventualy convert format and use calibre_server to obtain internaly the book i want.

My network is private network not on the internet just intranet. I use calibre for long time and very happy for all thing i can made with it.

i load and use calibre 2.0 without any bug or trouble.

So as i can't try or use the calibre v 2.1, i decide to follow the way of modify sources, there is my experence about that :

- Try to obtain git sources -> more than 12 hours to get source ( add 2 try before, the first one, i break it after 5 hours think the process was in infinite loop, the second try was break by an internet shutdown ).
- because process very long i Try to obtain archive -> it's ok a obtain it rapidly but untar it was long process about 3 or 4 hours.

- According this thread i change source, fix ifxp and try to start manualy calibre, every thing ok it's work perfectly if i use calibre_debug -g after defining %CALIBRE_DEVELOP_FROM%.

so the question is why you make solution for using version 2.1 with source way and don't allow normal way eventualy with some warning or with an environement variable to unlock xp test ?

i understand you don't want to support xp version, but don't understand the difference between the to methods.

What you do if i find a bug with my xp version 2.1 runing with source. And what you do if i find a bug in version 1.48 ?

The Migration of XP to other version is not my question i dont want to change OS ( my hardware certainly don't support that ). So if release of calibre is the same as before one version a week the time to obtain and make calibre running increase considerably the time spend to change version.

I think it's very domagable for calibre to leave all calibre user on xp alone

i don't think user chage os just for 1 programme that don't run !

You tell to stay on version 1.48 is very strange if this version so stable and unbuggy why release to version 2.x.

So there are my reflections, not agressive message and i respect the decision of the kovidgoyal. But in this way i use an older version without have the chance to use new things.

The last thing is can i use version 2.x working with another machine running on Win7 to chnge a network database and use calibre server 1.48 on server machine on XP ?

sorry for my poor english but it's not my native language.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Khan-Dam

My Experience about XP and Calibre 2.1.0

I Use XP for 10 Years on a XP Server, with a lot of process which run 24h a day 7 day a week 52 week by year without any trouble. Can't have to migrate to vista 7 or 8 ( my second server work fine with NT 5 ).

I use calibre to integrate ebook in database, change metadata and eventualy convert format and use calibre_server to obtain internaly the book i want.

My network is private network not on the internet just intranet. I use calibre for long time and very happy for all thing i can made with it.

i load and use calibre 2.0 without any bug or trouble.

So as i can't try or use the calibre v 2.1, i decide to follow the way of modify sources, there is my experence about that :

- Try to obtain git sources -> more than 12 hours to get source ( add 2 try before, the first one, i break it after 5 hours think the process was in infinite loop, the second try was break by an internet shutdown ).
- because process very long i Try to obtain archive -> it's ok a obtain it rapidly but untar it was long process about 3 or 4 hours.

Hmm, I don't know why it took you so long, it only took about 10 minutes when I downloaded the git repo, a couple months ago. Possibly something to do with your network?

- According this thread i change source, fix ifxp and try to start manualy calibre, every thing ok it's work perfectly if i use calibre_debug -g after defining %CALIBRE_DEVELOP_FROM%.

so the question is why you make solution for using version 2.1 with source way and don't allow normal way eventualy with some warning or with an environement variable to unlock xp test ?

i understand you don't want to support xp version, but don't understand the difference between the to methods.

What you do if i find a bug with my xp version 2.1 runing with source. And what you do if i find a bug in version 1.48 ?

Ignore bugs on 1.48, report if on 2.x. The first step in reporting bugs is to verify the bug exists on latest version. If you're using 1.48, there will be no updates anyway.

The Migration of XP to other version is not my question i dont want to change OS ( my hardware certainly don't support that ). So if release of calibre is the same as before one version a week the time to obtain and make calibre running increase considerably the time spend to change version.

If you use git, updating the source code will be very fast. If you use static archives, you have to redownload a lot of stuff that didn't change.

I think it's very domagable for calibre to leave all calibre user on xp alone

i don't think user chage os just for 1 programme that don't run !

You tell to stay on version 1.48 is very strange if this version so stable and unbuggy why release to version 2.x.

Speed improvements. MTP (android devices) support for OSX users. Running the command-line calibre-server on headless linux servers no longer requires a virtual x server, so it runs faster. Various long-standing bugs with the ebook-viewer, like fallback fonts with mismatched names, and hyphenation (not usually seen, in other words).

So there are my reflections, not agressive message and i respect the decision of the kovidgoyal. But in this way i use an older version without have the chance to use new things.

The last thing is can i use version 2.x working with another machine running on Win7 to chnge a network database and use calibre server 1.48 on server machine on XP ?

sorry for my poor english but it's not my native language.

You can use both 1.48 and 2.x to open/edit the calibre library. The database is compatible with both.

Beware of using libraries on a NAS. http://manual.calibre-ebook.com/faq....rked-drive-nas

If you sync to/from the NAS using FreeFileSync or similar, or login to a domain on both XP and Win7, the library is on the local disk, so this shouldn't be a problem.

[PeterT]

If you just want the source to the current version, why not just use the link present on http://calibre-ebook.com/get-involved The current source is available from http://status.calibre-ebook.com/dist/src and downloads in next to no time.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by PeterT

If you just want the source to the current version, why not just use the link present on http://calibre-ebook.com/get-involved The current source is available from http://status.calibre-ebook.com/dist/src and downloads in next to no time.

Redownload that every week?

git checkouts take maybe a minute, no unzipping required. Khan-Dam says it takes 3-4 hours to extract the sources. Dunno why something fishy there, maybe needs a better extracter??? In any event, it definitely isn't "next to no time" when redownoading a lot of stuff that didn't change. git is much better if you plan on updating weekly.

[Khan-Dam]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

If you use git, updating the source code will be very fast. If you use static archives, you have to redownload a lot of stuff that didn't change.

for next release with git does i use

git pull --no-edit

or

git clone git://github.com/kovidgoyal/calibre.git

or another command ?

i don't know why it's so slow but my connection have only 2Mo or maybe i write it on an external USB2 disk ?

i use 7zip to extract calibre-2.1.0.tar.xz -> calibre-2.1.0.tar
i use winrar to extract calibre-2.1.0.tar

maybe i extract it on an external USB2 disk ?

thanks for your answer i stay tune to improved this process

[eschwartz]

"git clone" will create a new cloned repo. "git pull" will update the one you already have.

--no-edit just accepts the default commit message if you are merging other code in from a deviating branch. It is unnecessary if you are just pulling new commits from the same branch, but it won't hurt. Leave it in or take it out, as you will.

7-zip is a good unarchiver unlike the default windows unzip. You should be able to extract the tar.xz directly as a folder, play around with the options. (It's been a while, I usually use the linux command-line.)

The problem may be extracting to an external drive especially USB2.0 -- much slower to write than the internal hard drive. Even USB3.0 would do much better.

[PeterT]

Also there should be no need to use both 7zip and winrar. In my case winrar does both steps.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by PeterT

Also there should be no need to use both 7zip and winrar. In my case winrar does both steps.

Should've been more clear about that myself.

7-zip does too. You should have an option somewhere about what to extract it as, so you can choose between merely decompressing into a tar file, or untaring into a directory structure as well. The intermediate step requires writing the tarfile to disk also, which costs time, especially on slow drives like external USB2.0 ones.

[JSWolf]

This thread is in the wrong place. It belongs in the Calibre general forum. This thread is not about a device. A device is a tablet, Reader, phone, etc that you use to put content on. This is just about Calibre not working on XP. There is noting about a device here.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

This thread is in the wrong place. It belongs in the Calibre general forum. This thread is not about a device. A device is a tablet, Reader, phone, etc that you use to put content on. This is just about Calibre not working on XP. There is noting about a device here.

Windows XP on a PC is a device.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Windows XP on a PC is a device.

If you go with that illogic, then there should not be a Calibre general forum and ALL the messages there should be moved here every instance of Calibre mentioned there is using a computer. So given your logic that a computer is a device, get to getting all those threads moved into Calibre Devices.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If you go with that illogic, then there should not be a Calibre general forum and ALL the messages there should be moved here every instance of Calibre mentioned there is using a computer. So given your logic that a computer is a device, get to getting all those threads moved into Calibre Devices.

The devices forum is officially defined as:

Troubleshoot installation and connection issues specific to your [device or] OS, [...]

I have no problem with it being in either forum. (Mostly because I enjoy disagreeing with absolutes like you are so fond of saying. )