KVR Audio

mgw38 · Post by **mgw38** » Mon May 08, 2017 9:32 pm

mcbpete wrote:
aMUSEd wrote:Vertigo> Plugin: Cannot find valid license file at /Users/st_ephen/Documents/discoDSP/Vertigo/License.dat.txt...
Vertigo> Plugin: Running as Unregistered Licensed...
Vertigo> Plugin: Closing plugin...
Wait ... Why's it looking for License.dat.txt .... it should just be Licence.dat. However in which case this might be the solution .... add .txt to the license filename and see what happens

Tried that. Did not work. The strange thing is that the license worked for a couple of month and then simply stopped working from one day to the next with no way to resurrect it. I am guessing a software bug in the licensing system that causes some sort of expiration.

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Mon May 08, 2017 9:33 pm

mcbpete wrote:
aMUSEd wrote:Vertigo> Plugin: Cannot find valid license file at /Users/st_ephen/Documents/discoDSP/Vertigo/License.dat.txt...
Vertigo> Plugin: Running as Unregistered Licensed...
Vertigo> Plugin: Closing plugin...
Wait ... Why's it looking for License.dat.txt .... it should just be Licence.dat. However in which case this might be the solution .... add .txt to the license filename and see what happens

For some reason it reports the extra extension if it doesn't find the file. From what I can tell, it really does just want License.dat.

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Mon May 08, 2017 9:33 pm

mcbpete wrote:
aMUSEd wrote:Vertigo> Plugin: Cannot find valid license file at /Users/st_ephen/Documents/discoDSP/Vertigo/License.dat.txt...
Vertigo> Plugin: Running as Unregistered Licensed...
Vertigo> Plugin: Closing plugin...
Wait ... Why's it looking for License.dat.txt .... it should just be Licence.dat. However in which case this might be the solution .... add .txt to the license filename and see what happens

I already tried that - this is probably the reason it's not working though

JonSolo · Post by **JonSolo** » Mon May 08, 2017 10:12 pm

Copy it and put both there.

wagtunes · Post by **wagtunes** » Mon May 08, 2017 10:37 pm

glokraw wrote:
wagtunes wrote: he had enough presence to put "temporary" on the site
You're assuming that only George could do that?
Cheers

George or somebody in authority or who has access to the site with authority. Unless you're suggesting the site was hacked. I mean somebody who had the power to put that message up on the site, whether it was George, his wife, his partner or just somebody assigned to do it, did it. And if that's the case, you have to assume that temporary means temporary until we find out something more definite.

Sheesh, people will freaking argue anything around here.

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Mon May 08, 2017 11:44 pm

thejonsolo wrote:Copy it and put both there.

Doesn't work either

glokraw · Post by **glokraw** » Tue May 09, 2017 5:19 am

wagtunes wrote:
glokraw wrote:
wagtunes wrote: he had enough presence to put "temporary" on the site
You're assuming that only George could do that?
Cheers
George or somebody in authority or who has access to the site with authority. Unless you're suggesting the site was hacked. I mean somebody who had the power to put that message up on the site, whether it was George, his wife, his partner or just somebody assigned to do it, did it. And if that's the case, you have to assume that temporary means temporary until we find out something more definite.

Sheesh, people will freaking argue anything around here.

You're reading a lot into the point of a simple question. Circumstances
can spin out of control, normality gets lost in chaos, and only
those involved really know. My guess is, when the post went up,
the people involved had, and still have, more urgent matters to deal with.
Cheers

mcbpete · Post by **mcbpete** » Tue May 09, 2017 8:48 am

Gamma-UT wrote:What is your UID on the Mac? (Type "id -u" into Terminal and hit return, it will give you a three digit number that is normally 501). I've tried it on another machine that I thought might give me trouble, where the admin user UID is 504, and it didn't disappoint, so I'm wondering if the cause is the same. It doesn't see to be a regular permissions issue.

Ah good shout. Does the Mac OS have permissions a la *nix? Is it maybe the file has been saved with only the user as having permission and not other applications. Is there a chmod for Mac ... like you can do this from the terminal:

chmod 777 license.dat

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Tue May 09, 2017 9:01 am

Mine's 501 - is that good or bad?

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Tue May 09, 2017 9:04 am

Just tried setting permissions for the dat file to 'everyone' but it still gets rejected

mcbpete · Post by **mcbpete** » Tue May 09, 2017 9:10 am

The 3 digits correspond to permissions of (1)User (2)Members of Group (3)Others (i.e people outside the group)

In this instance:
5 - You as a user can read, not write, and execute
0 - Members people in your group can't read, write or execute
1 - Others can execute the file

If you have the facility, change to 555. Meaning 'everyone' can read and execute the file

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Tue May 09, 2017 9:20 am

I already tried changing it to everyone can read and write in the permissions tab in 'get info' but it doesn't make a difference - not sure if there's a way to enter the 555

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Tue May 09, 2017 9:22 am

aMUSEd wrote:Mine's 501 - is that good or bad?

Well, it rules out one theory. The machine that's acting up is 504 (it's an artefact of using Migration Assistant in this case). It's just that I've had some issues with copy protection on that one before and traced it back to some oddities about permissions, file accesses and security changes on OS X. Not this time though by the looks of it.

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Tue May 09, 2017 9:31 am

aMUSEd wrote:Just tried setting permissions for the dat file to 'everyone' but it still gets rejected

On the machine that works, the plugin seems to have set permissions to 775 (basically only one step down from 'let anyone mess with the file'). However, changing it to that on the non-working machine does nothing useful. The plugin appears to be able to access the .dat file but it's barfing on it after that. However, I haven't run a detailed dtrace on it to see if it's triggered some error in the filesystem that doesn't happen on a working installation. I need to put Xcode onto that machine to make that happen (and it might prove to be fruitless as it's possible there is some weird date checking behaviour in the plugin that only gets triggered through some combination of events such that the working installation is on borrowed time).

mcbpete wrote:The 3 digits correspond to permissions of (1)User (2)Members of Group (3)Others (i.e people outside the group)

This is the UID rather than the permissions setting. Sorry, it was a red herring by the looks of it. It was just triggered by my suspicion that one machine I've got would have trouble (which it does, but not for this reason it seems).

wagtunes · Post by **wagtunes** » Tue May 09, 2017 10:29 am

glokraw wrote:
wagtunes wrote:
glokraw wrote:
wagtunes wrote: he had enough presence to put "temporary" on the site
You're assuming that only George could do that?
Cheers
George or somebody in authority or who has access to the site with authority. Unless you're suggesting the site was hacked. I mean somebody who had the power to put that message up on the site, whether it was George, his wife, his partner or just somebody assigned to do it, did it. And if that's the case, you have to assume that temporary means temporary until we find out something more definite.

Sheesh, people will freaking argue anything around here.
You're reading a lot into the point of a simple question. Circumstances
can spin out of control, normality gets lost in chaos, and only
those involved really know. My guess is, when the post went up,
the people involved had, and still have, more urgent matters to deal with.
Cheers

Where did I say that they didn't have more pressing matters and what the hell does that have to do with the question you asked me anyway?

Maybe if you were more clear with your question I would have answered it differently. You asked me if I assumed George did it. Well, somebody did it for whatever reason. That's all I said. And then you come back at me with this crap?

Do you just like to argue for the sake of arguing? I get that's a thing around these parts but sheesh, I'm getting tired of it.

Nobody knows anything for certain other than there's a sign on the web site that says temporarily closed. That's it. Until something else is said, all of this is just speculation.

Discovery Pro synthesizer 6.4 to 8.0