It doesn't start when a multiplex start is prevented.

Eiji Sakumura

unread,

Dec 11, 2002, 8:10:34 PM12/11/02

to

This is Eiji Sakumura.

It has the following problem though a multiplex start is prevented.

It can't start any more unless that process is removed with being
finished unusually last time and being left in the process.

Can't you do the matter that it is made to finish it and it starts
it an inn stance to start last time?

Please reply.
Best regards,
--------------------------------------------------
Eiji Sakumura
esak...@projecti.co.jp
　　　　　　　　　　

Wei Mao [MSFT]

unread,

Dec 17, 2002, 12:32:15 AM12/17/02

to

Hello Eiji,

It seems that there is no reply to your post so far. Maybe they (including
myself) are not clear about what your question is. Are you talking about
that you cannot start a second instance of your application?

thanks
wei

--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Got .Net? http://www.gotdotnet.com

Eiji Sakumura

unread,

Dec 17, 2002, 11:44:52 PM12/17/02

to

> It seems that there is no reply to your post so far. Maybe they
(including
> myself) are not clear about what your question is. Are you talking about
> that you cannot start a second instance of your application?

Thank you for the advice. It explains again.

I am making the application which isn't started when the second instance
tries to start.

A problem sometimes comes out in this way of doing it.

It can't start any more when an instance is left though it seems that
for example application was finished. (It seems it can't be done.)

(In other words, though it isn't indicated in the task bar, it is
indicated in the process of the task manager.)

It stops starting when it started again and a way was done. It is
because the last process is left.

Is there a structure of the double prevention of a start to have this
problem avoided?

Won't you teach though you must prevent an instance from of course not
leaving?

arkadyf

unread,

Dec 18, 2002, 5:22:53 AM12/18/02

to

Look at Msdn's article "Limiting 32-Bit MFC SDI/MDI Applications to a Single
Instance"

Q141752

Arkady

"Eiji Sakumura" <esak...@projecti.co.jp> wrote in message
news:usOGyClpCHA.2384@tk2msftngp13...

Sam Ple

unread,

Dec 18, 2002, 4:28:30 PM12/18/02

to

It is also possible that if the application is in task manager but not on
the task bar that some kernel object (like a semaphore or a critical
section) has not been released.

S.

"Eiji Sakumura" <esak...@projecti.co.jp> wrote in message
news:usOGyClpCHA.2384@tk2msftngp13...

Wei Mao [MSFT]

unread,

Dec 18, 2002, 10:18:06 PM12/18/02

to

Agree. If a program refuses to exit completely, it might caused by
misbehavior of kernel mode component. It might not easy to trace out the
root cause of the problem as kernel debugging is a little bit difficult.

Eiji, you might want to check out the following KB article:

286350 HOWTO: Use Autodump+ to Troubleshoot "Hangs" and "Crashes"
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=286350

Sam Ple

unread,

Dec 19, 2002, 9:41:09 AM12/19/02

to

Right. In my case I was starting a thread, calling EnterCritialSection then
terminating the thread on error without calling LeaveCriticalSection. This
caused all kinds of problems.

Helpful link Wei.

Sam