Sigil-0.9.10 Released

[KevinH]

Okay I just pushed a "fix" to master to handle this case a bit better. If and only if the contents of a file are changed by Mend or Mend and Prettify, the cursor will now be positioned to the start of the tag that enclosed the previous cursor position instead of being moved to the very end of the document. Otherwise the cursor position is untouched.

That said, if M or M & P need to "fix" things by inserting or changing tags in the html tag hierarchy, the position may end up higher up the html tree or in the wrong place.

Hope this helps.

Originally Posted by KevinH

No promises but I might be able to get the tag path to the block element that contains your current position and then try to get back at least to the block tag (assuming mend does not remove that tag and does not insert any new tags between the html tag and it) within the updated html file.

[RbnJrg]

Originally Posted by KevinH

Okay I just pushed a "fix" to master to handle this case a bit better. If and only if the contents of a file are changed by Mend or Mend and Prettify, the cursor will now be positioned to the start of the tag that enclosed the previous cursor position instead of being moved to the very end of the document. Otherwise the cursor position is untouched.

That said, if M or M & P need to "fix" things by inserting or changing tags in the html tag hierarchy, the position may end up higher up the html tree or in the wrong place.

Hope this helps.

Many thanks! I use M&P mainly to prettify the code so your fix will help a lot.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by RbnJrg

I think I found the cause of the issue. I had already installed the lasted C++ VS 2015 runtime library. When I installed Sigil 0.9.10, I don't know why, it installed again the Visual C++ Redistributable para Visual Studio 2015. And with that distribution, Sigil didn't run. Then I did the following:

1. I uninstalled Sigil 0.9.10
2. I unistalled MS Visual C++ 2015 Redistributale (x64)
3. I installed again vc_redist.x64.exe
4. I installed again Sigil 0.9.10 and when Sigil wanted to install the C++ runtime library, I aborted the installation and this time, Sigil worked.

It seems that Sigil want to install MS Visual C++ 2015 Redistributale (x64) even when this package is present and updated.

I'm doing some testing to find the best solution for this, and I still can't, for the life of me, figure out why the Sigil installer would try to install its included version of the VC++ 2015 Runtime over top of a newer version you have have installed. The only thing I can come up with is that your Spanish version of the runtime must appear to be an older version than the one included with the Sigil installer (or it doesn't use the standard registry locations where Sigil looks to check if the 14.X.XXXXetc runtime is installed (and what version it is).

Could you please tell me: 1) what version of Windows you're using, and 2) what the exact version of the runtime you have installed is?

As for the latter, look at the list of the installed applications in Add/Remove, Apps & Features (whathaveyou) and see what the version string is for the "Microsoft Visual C++ 2015 Redistributable"? You may need to click on the entry to see the exact details.

I'd appreciate it. Adding an option to skip the VC++ runtime install in the Sigil installer is trivial enough (and it will be in the next release), but I'd still like to know what's going on. Those who don't know enough about these things shouldn't have to worry about Sigil potentially breaking their existing runtime installations in the first place.

[RbnJrg]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Could you please tell me: 1) what version of Windows you're using, and 2) what the exact version of the runtime you have installed is?

As for the latter, look at the list of the installed applications in Add/Remove, Apps & Features (whathaveyou) and see what the version string is for the "Microsoft Visual C++ 2015 Redistributable"? You may need to click on the entry to see the exact details.

Of course! I'm using Windows 7 Ultimate x64 service Pack 1 and my installed version of the runtime (x64) is 14.0.23026, that is the last spanish version you can download from https://www.microsoft.com/es-ES/down....aspx?id=52685

[DiapDealer]

That explains why the Sigil installer wants to install its own version. That may represent the newest Spanish version, but overall, that's a fairly old version of the 2015 redistributable in general. In fact, it's the oldest version there is (not counting release candidates). Sigil ships with 14.0.24210 (soon to be 14.0.24215). I'm not sure why the sigil version fails to update your existing older one, but I can assure you that the only thing Spanish about your version are the UI options when installing/uninstalling it. Other than that, there is no functional difference between spanish 14.0.23026 and english 14.0.23026.

I would honestly uninstall yours and let Sigil install its newer version. I would be very, very surprised if doing so changed anything at all. All six versions of the 2015 redistributable (seven if you count VS2017's 14.10.25017) are binary compatible. Sigil and anything else that requires the VS2015 runtime should work with any of them.

Your call, of course. As I said, the next version of Sigil will allow you to skip the runtime installer check altogether.

[RbnJrg]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I would honestly uninstall yours and let Sigil install its newer version.

I did that experiment. I uninstalled my previous runtime, I uninstalled Sigil 0.9.10 and I installed it again but allowing that installs its runtime. It worked. So, it seems that the issue was due to the update of the runtime in my Windows. With a clean system, it didn't have problems.

As I said, the next version of Sigil will allow you to skip the runtime installer check altogether.

Maybe the next version could inform that detected a previous version (and its number), that Sigil has a newer version and then to ask the user if s/he wants to be installed.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by RbnJrg

Maybe the next version could inform that detected a previous version (and its number), that Sigil has a newer version and then to ask the user if s/he wants to be installed.

I don't really want to overly complicate the installer with lots of user options when most people never run into trouble. Especially when many people won't really know how to answer the question in the first place. Many might see language like "Visual Studio C++ Runtime Update" and panic a bit.

But I'll do some experimenting and decide how to best proceed. I'm really leaning toward bailing on the runtime redistributable install altogether if any binary compatible version of the runtime is detected as being installed already. The knowledgeable users can then decide if they ever want to manually update their runtime versions or not.

[Turtle91]

Isn't that the difference between a "Standard Install" or an "Advanced Options"??

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

Isn't that the difference between a "Standard Install" or an "Advanced Options"??

Yes. Except that Sigil's installer never really had any "Advanced Options" (other than clicking the box to associate .epubs with Sigil). And I'd sort of like to keep it that way.

So in the very near future, I believe Sigil's Windows installer roadmap is going to be something like:

1) check for a minimum of Windows 7SP1
(Sorry Vista users--myself included. The legacy version will still serve us adequately, though).
2) install Sigil
3) if no version of the VC++ 2015 runtime is installed; install one. If one is; don't.
4) The end.

It simplifies the process immensely at zero cost functionally (other than the loss of Vista - which was happening regardless of the Runtime issue). There's so much extra Inno Setup Pascal scripting going on to check for OS/SP-levels and registry queries to retrieve/compare redistributable versions that it's getting a bit silly. This will be a clean start.

I've never run into any scenario where a SIgil bug was tracked down to a specific version of the runtime. So I'm not entirely certain why we ever got into the business of updating runtimes on Windows in the first place (more than likely it was a much more ignorant past Me to blame--truth be told). Sigil will run equally well (in all my testing) with version 14.0.23026 - 14.15.xxxxx of the redistributable runtime. And if there DOES turn out to be any issues, we tell a user to uninstall their existing runtime and to reinstall Sigil which will then install the latest version of the runtime. Badabing.

[Turtle91]

Could there be an entry under "Help" for "Check for updates" and update the selected items if the user wants to be on the bleeding edge??

[DiapDealer]

There could ... but there probably won't be.

I'm pretty committed to not updating redistributables with the installer any more. There's no real need to do so, and updating them has really always been beyond Sigil's purview. If there's one installed that it can use, it should use it. If not, it should install one it can use. Simple. Doing anything else is over-complicating the process and introducing a potential failure point (as RbnJrg can attest to) for no real gain.

[JustinThought]

Good morning, DiapDealer and Kevin, just wanted to drop by and mention that the little discrepancy discussed in this thread, talking about how Sigil loses focus on the active page whenever it is moved, "popping" to the top in the Book Browser after the file is moved to a new location, is still occurring. You didn't commit to stopping this behavior, just said if it was possible you would.

But what I really wanted to talk about was something I'm really missing in the new release, that being the options below the replace line, including the "count all" button. If that was removed for reason, then I'll shut up, except to say that I (used to) use these functions a lot!

As always, for all your good work. This program is an essential in my day!

[theducks]

I use the count all button, all the time as a sanity check (is the number in the range expected:either direction ) before I use the Replace all button

[JustinThought]

Originally Posted by JustinThought

Good morning,

//snip!//

...including the "count all" button.

Originally Posted by theducks

I use the count all button, all the time as a sanity check (is the number in the range expected:either direction ) before I use the Replace all button

I probably should have said ESPECIALLY the "count all" button.

[DiapDealer]

Nothing has changed RE the Find & Replace UI in 0.9.10. I suspect you've accidentally hidden F&R's advanced options. In the bottom left-hand corner of the F&R widget, you'll see a button with two chevrons on it. Yours are likely pointing down (indicating that there's more to be shown). Just click it once with the mouse. The extra options (including the Count All button) will be visible (and the chevrons on the "Show/Hide Advanced Options" button will be pointing up).