Is there anyway to control the order of in which the [Run] entries are performed in the registry

[Leythos]

Path: news.astraweb.com!border5.newsrouter.astraweb.com!nlpi057.nbdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flph199.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com.POSTED!1244ae27!not-for-mail
From: "Tim Meddick" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
References: <[email protected]> <#[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <#[email protected]> <[email protected]> <#[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <scBSl.17658$%

In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Is there anyway to control the order of in which the [Run] entries are performed in the registry
Lines: 151
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 090525-0, 05/25/2009), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 76.198.93.184
X-Complaints-To: (e-mail address removed)
X-Trace: flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com 1243277742 ST000 76.198.93.184 (Mon, 25 May 2009 14:55:42 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 14:55:42 EDT
Organization: at&t http://my.att.net/
X-UserInfo1: OX[[B_SGABSUS^I]^JKBOW@@YJ_ZTB\MV@BNMRQIMASJETAANVW[AKWZE\]^XQWIGNE_[EBL@^_\^JOCQ^RSNVLGTFTKHTXHHP[NB\_C@\SD@EP_[KCXX__AGDDEKGFNB\ZOKLRNCY_CGG[RHT_UN@C_BSY\G__IJIX_PLSA[CCFAULEY\FL\VLGANTQQ]FN
Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 11:55:40 -0700

You're still violating your providers TOS/AUP by using a forged email
address and identity and by violating their posting standards.

 

[Tim Meddick]

I just think it's really sad that he can't have a proper wrangle with
someone rather that 'inventing' arguments to pursue.


==


Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.

 

[Tim Meddick]

The previous post was not sent by me.

If that person wasn't you why are you bothered by what I said to him?

But you can't get around the fact that you are using my name and, in that
respect, there is a similarity between the bloke who was impersonating
'Leythos' you will have to admit.

Because it really isn't on using someone else's name to make posts that
isn't your own to use.


==



Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.

You did too you stupid idiot. Someone named Leythos made a post and you
told everyone it was me, you said my software was bad and stolen and you
said that post was made by me when it was not. Do you want me to quote it
for you?

--
The Real Truth http://pcbutts1-therealtruth.blogspot.com/
*WARNING* Do NOT follow any advice given by the people listed below.
They do NOT have the expertise or knowledge to fix your issue. Do not
waste your time.
David H Lipman, Malke, PA Bear, Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Leythos.

The previous post was not sent by me.

I have never 'attacked' you. I don't know you. But I will respond to
any underhand behaviour displayed in response to legitimate posts by
myself or anyone I have any respect for. I repeat - how do you defend
using other peoples names? Ha, got you, you can't possible have a
legitimate answer to that because there isn't one. It's just something
that you don't do, not least because it's deceptive and gets people's
backs up.


==


Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.

That's what happens to idiots who attack me on a regular basis like
you've been doing. You now need to change your name or it will be ruined
like Leythos's is. I was here first the name is mine.


--
The Real Truth http://pcbutts1-therealtruth.blogspot.com/
*WARNING* Do NOT follow any advice given by the people listed below.
They do NOT have the expertise or knowledge to fix your issue. Do not
waste your time.
David H Lipman, Malke, PA Bear, Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Leythos.




The previous post was not sent by me.

Very, very, very, very funny indeed. Actually, I feel sort of
flattered that you think me worthy of impersonating!

But really, have you got nothing in your life more worthy of your
attention than being here doing this? At best, I think it's sad -
very, very sad.

==


Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.


But you think it is ok to stalk me?


--
The Real Truth http://pcbutts1-therealtruth.blogspot.com/
*WARNING* Do NOT follow any advice given by the people listed below.
They do NOT have the expertise or knowledge to fix your issue. Do not
waste your time.
David H Lipman, Malke, PA Bear, Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Leythos.




It is not the place of volunteers, who are professing to advise on PC
issues, to criticize, impugn, or otherwise make personal comments
about those who ask us for our help or their problems.


==


Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.


Randem wrote:
That's ok. It seems that Windows starts all the programs in the
[Run]
Section at the same time so the order that they load depends on
which
started first and how long it takes to run as well as how much CPU
time is
taken by the other programs so it is really a crap shoot.

It seems that this software that we are using needs to be the last
thing
loaded or it will start shutting down other things such as
permissions
etc...

That sounds like a pretty pathetic software design, IF that is
indeed the case (which sounds dubious).

Now if the other apps are running when this app start to shut
things
down it can affect the other apps. That is why I need to get it
started
last.


<...clipped...>


I need to control the order of in which the run entries are
run. There
is some software that absolutely needs to be run last after
all other
entries. How is the [run] section ordered in running? Is it
just a
whatever approach or is there an order to this method?
--
Randem Systems
Your Installation Specialist
The Top Inno Setup Script Generator
http://www.randem.com/innoscript.html
Disk Read Error Press Ctl+Alt+Del to Restart
http://www.randem.com/discus/messages/9402/9406.html?1236319938

 

[JS]

This key will list some but not all of the items
displayed in the Taskbar Notification area.
But unfortunately does not control which
application gets displayed/loaded first, second
or last.

Today my AV software grabbed first place,
yesterday it was the Audio (Sound) icon.

--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com

You mean, the order of the "Run" registry key determining the order that
Taskbar Notification area items are loaded?

==


Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.

Taskbar notification area.

--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com

js,
referring to what?


==


Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.


What make things even more interesting is
that you can always count on the same applications
loading in the same order every time you boot.

--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com



Randem,
you pretty much have the same idea of how the list in the
"Run" key works as I have. It does indeed depend on how long it takes
to load a given application in the list. Windows is a virtual-mode
operating system and that means here that the first app on the list
may still be attempting to load while the second has finished and the
third loads. Thus the order is not apparently being adhered to. So
that is why I said that it was probably not for you if it was vital if
your app is executed last and that the 'Startup Delayer' util was a
better bet.
But nevertheless, Windows will try load them in the order in
which they were added to the registry as that is how the list is
stored in the registry hive file and that is how they are read. I
only ever mentioned this in the first place because you did ask if the
'list' could be manipulated - and it can. Re-writing the list order
in the way I first described, does, even so, have a significant effect
on the way they are loaded at boot/logon.
I very much hope that you have a suitable solution to your
particular issue, though.

==


Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.



<...clipped...>




Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.


I need to control the order of in which the run entries are run.
There is some software that absolutely needs to be run last
after all other entries. How is the [run] section ordered in
running? Is it just a whatever approach or is there an order to
this method?
--
Randem Systems
Your Installation Specialist
The Top Inno Setup Script Generator
http://www.randem.com/innoscript.html
Disk Read Error Press Ctl+Alt+Del to Restart
http://www.randem.com/discus/messages/9402/9406.html?1236319938

 

[John John - MVP]

This is a list that is often used:


1. BootExecute
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\BootExecute

2. Services

3. User enters a password and logon to the system

4. UserInit
HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\UserInit

5. Shell
HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\Shell

6. All Users-RunOnce
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce

7. All Users-Run
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run

8. All Users-RunOnceEx

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnceEx

9. All Users-RunEx
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunEx

10. Current User-RunOnce
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce

11. Current User-Run
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run

12. Current User-RunOnceEx
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnceEx

13. Current User-RunEx
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunEx

14. Common Startup Folder

15. Startup Folder

But the list is by no means complete, scripts, for example, are nowheres
on the list (Machine Scripts would be #3, before the user logs on).

John