CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

vnoga · Unread post by **vnoga** » 2014-08-19, 16:58

Currently CCleaner cleans Pale Moon just as if it were Firefox. When you update PM to version 25 will CCleaner still work the same? If not, can you work it out to do so? Maybe you will need to contact CCleaner.

Parsifal · Unread post by **Parsifal** » 2014-08-19, 17:14

Interesting. In the same way I have Pale Moon recognized by the SpywareBlaster application. Interesting topic as for the implications of browser recognition by 3d party applications.

fred8615 · Unread post by **fred8615** » 2014-08-19, 17:22

It does Cyberfox as a separate program from FF, so it shouldn't be to hard to get them to add PM.

Parsifal · Unread post by **Parsifal** » 2014-08-19, 17:31

fred8615 wrote:It does Cyberfox as a separate program from FF, so it shouldn't be to hard to get them to add PM.

OK. Nice to know. But are you sure Cyberfox has its own GUID ?

Unread post by **Moonchild** » 2014-08-19, 17:50

Most of these programs (if not all of them) just use known profile locations - they won't even look at the GUID.

vnoga · Unread post by **vnoga** » 2014-08-19, 18:11

Moonchild wrote:Most of these programs (if not all of them) just use known profile locations - they won't even look at the GUID.

So are you saying CCleaner will still work with PM 25?

Parsifal · Unread post by **Parsifal** » 2014-08-19, 18:16

Moonchild wrote:Most of these programs (if not all of them) just use known profile locations - they won't even look at the GUID.

I didn't know that. You learn every day. Well, those programs will just carry on with Pale Moon 25+ if that's the scope. Great.

x-15a2 · Unread post by **x-15a2** » 2014-08-19, 21:26

vnoga wrote:
Moonchild wrote:Most of these programs (if not all of them) just use known profile locations - they won't even look at the GUID.
So are you saying CCleaner will still work with PM 25?

Sure, because the profile location won't move.

buggy · Unread post by **buggy** » 2014-08-22, 09:41

Moonchild wrote:Most of these programs (if not all of them) just use known profile locations - they won't even look at the GUID.

x-15a2 wrote:Sure, because the profile location won't move.

That is not a question of simply the profile location but also the cache location: CCleaner v4.08.4428 (25 Nov 2013) "Added Firefox 27 new cache location cleaning." I hope contrary to some add-ons like for ex Eraser or Empty Cache Button, the new versions of CCleaner will continue with FF to work properly with the old cache and not only with the new cache V2 ...
That's why i asked for Pale Moon what it was envisaged about this new cache http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5214.

Edit (wrong post author for the second quote)

Parsifal · Unread post by **Parsifal** » 2014-08-22, 10:59

As far as I remember I think Moonchild is not in favor of this new cache V2 ...

Unread post by **Moonchild** » 2014-08-22, 22:50

I can confirm parsifal's statement; cache v2 is not something that is on the list if things to implement, since v1 works just fine, and is tried&tested.
In addition, the v2 cache, when looking at metrics for performance is terribly underwhelming and has additionally spawned a lot of new bugs. I see no reason to include incomplete or experimental routines when they provide no significant benefit and are wrought with issues.

Pale Moon forum

CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25

Re: CCleaner and Pale Moon 25