micky wrote:

> I guess I asked two questions along the way. What happens when you do
> what I do? and later, maybe only implied.. Can anyone do parallel to
> what I did and see the file?

if you want to use freecommander to see the hosts file, from the menu do
Folder / Goto Folder / %windir%\sysnative
then navigate down to drivers and etc as you normally would

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:27:18 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:

>In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Tue, 28 Nov 2023 23:18:20 -0600, Char
>Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 19:44:21 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 27 Nov 2023 20:40:05 -0500, Paul
>>><nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 11/27/2023 5:57 PM, micky wrote:
>>>>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 27 Nov 2023 17:47:57 -0500, micky
>>>>> <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 27 Nov 2023 22:55:37 +0100, "Carlos
>>>>>> E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2023-11-27 22:16, AllanH wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/27/2023 2:28 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>>>>>> micky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Will no one take the HOSTS challenge?  Use a 32-bit file manager
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which one?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IIRC, FreeCommander did not show the HOSTS file.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's the page to download FreeCommander's 32-bit file manager.
>>>>>>>> https://freecommander.com/en/downloads/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's the page to download the portable version.
>>>>>>>> https://freecommander.com/en/downloads-portable/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If this is something that happened with a particular file browser, then
>>>>>>> chances are it is not due to be 32 bit, but to some bug in that
>>>>>>> particular file browser.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's exactly why I tried 2 or 3 more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Otherwise, it would happen with all 32 bit file
>>>>>>> browsers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And it did.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More posts by 3 people and no one has accepted the HOSTS challenge!
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, one of the 3 did accept,
>>>>>
>>>>> Plus I'm waiting for Paul's image to load. Aha, he seems to have found
>>>>> it too with FreeCommander (and win7 Premium), even though Allen used it
>>>>> and didn't find it (with unknown OS). Could the OS make a difference,
>>>>> could Home vs. Pro?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Win7 test was Home Premium x86.
>>>
>>>So that's 32-bit and it doesn't count as a test of my question!
>>>
>>>The HOSTS Challenge has still not been fulfilled.
>>>
>>>I'm doubling the prize.
>>
>>I'm not sure what the challenge actually is, but here's what I just did.
>>
>>I fired up a 64-bit Windows 7 VM and used the native Explorer to go to
>>C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc and verified that the hosts file is there, as
>>expected.
>>
>>Next, I downloaded and installed FreeCommander XE 2023 Build 880 32-bit. Using
>>FreeCommander, I navigated to the same folder and verified that the hosts file
>>is there, as expected.
>>
>>Was that the challenge?
>
>Yes. You have met the challenge and you are eligible for the prize, but
>your results have been challenged by the judges. They have not yet made
>a decision and according to the rules of the Association, the prize
>cannot be awarded until the results are final.
>
>I feel bad about this and that you have to wait so, without using
>Association money, I'm redoubling the prize.
>
>In answer to your question elsewhere, when HOSTS is missing, the entire
>etc folder is missing, not just the contents but the folder too.

When you say the entire etc folder is missing, should I take that literally or
do you mean that it's just not displayed in that particular UI at that moment? I
mean, it can't actually be missing, so I assume you mean it's a display issue,
in which case you can probably display it by adding it to the current path.

I.e., if you were in Windows Explorer (aka File Explorer in later Windows) and
you navigated to C:\Windows\system32\Drivers and you saw no etc folder, you'd
just go to the top of the Explorer window and add "\etc" (no quotes) to the
current path in order to see the contents of the etc folder.

Likewise, if using FreeCommander, you'd go to the lower right of the FC window
and add "\etc" (no quotes) to the current path to see the contents of the etc
folder.

I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.

Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.

On 11/29/2023 1:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:27:18 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>
>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Tue, 28 Nov 2023 23:18:20 -0600, Char
>> Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 19:44:21 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 27 Nov 2023 20:40:05 -0500, Paul
>>>> <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/27/2023 5:57 PM, micky wrote:
>>>>>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 27 Nov 2023 17:47:57 -0500, micky
>>>>>> <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 27 Nov 2023 22:55:37 +0100, "Carlos
>>>>>>> E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2023-11-27 22:16, AllanH wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/27/2023 2:28 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> micky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Will no one take the HOSTS challenge?  Use a 32-bit file manager
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which one?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IIRC, FreeCommander did not show the HOSTS file.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's the page to download FreeCommander's 32-bit file manager.
>>>>>>>>> https://freecommander.com/en/downloads/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's the page to download the portable version.
>>>>>>>>> https://freecommander.com/en/downloads-portable/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If this is something that happened with a particular file browser, then
>>>>>>>> chances are it is not due to be 32 bit, but to some bug in that
>>>>>>>> particular file browser.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's exactly why I tried 2 or 3 more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Otherwise, it would happen with all 32 bit file
>>>>>>>> browsers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And it did.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More posts by 3 people and no one has accepted the HOSTS challenge!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, one of the 3 did accept,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Plus I'm waiting for Paul's image to load. Aha, he seems to have found
>>>>>> it too with FreeCommander (and win7 Premium), even though Allen used it
>>>>>> and didn't find it (with unknown OS). Could the OS make a difference,
>>>>>> could Home vs. Pro?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Win7 test was Home Premium x86.
>>>>
>>>> So that's 32-bit and it doesn't count as a test of my question!
>>>>
>>>> The HOSTS Challenge has still not been fulfilled.
>>>>
>>>> I'm doubling the prize.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the challenge actually is, but here's what I just did.
>>>
>>> I fired up a 64-bit Windows 7 VM and used the native Explorer to go to
>>> C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc and verified that the hosts file is there, as
>>> expected.
>>>
>>> Next, I downloaded and installed FreeCommander XE 2023 Build 880 32-bit. Using
>>> FreeCommander, I navigated to the same folder and verified that the hosts file
>>> is there, as expected.
>>>
>>> Was that the challenge?
>>
>> Yes. You have met the challenge and you are eligible for the prize, but
>> your results have been challenged by the judges. They have not yet made
>> a decision and according to the rules of the Association, the prize
>> cannot be awarded until the results are final.
>>
>> I feel bad about this and that you have to wait so, without using
>> Association money, I'm redoubling the prize.
>>
>> In answer to your question elsewhere, when HOSTS is missing, the entire
>> etc folder is missing, not just the contents but the folder too.
>
> When you say the entire etc folder is missing, should I take that literally or
> do you mean that it's just not displayed in that particular UI at that moment? I
> mean, it can't actually be missing, so I assume you mean it's a display issue,
> in which case you can probably display it by adding it to the current path.
>
> I.e., if you were in Windows Explorer (aka File Explorer in later Windows) and
> you navigated to C:\Windows\system32\Drivers and you saw no etc folder, you'd
> just go to the top of the Explorer window and add "\etc" (no quotes) to the
> current path in order to see the contents of the etc folder.
>
> Likewise, if using FreeCommander, you'd go to the lower right of the FC window
> and add "\etc" (no quotes) to the current path to see the contents of the etc
> folder.
>
> I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
> display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
> saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.
>
> Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
> the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.
>

The OS has made it not-accessible.

It is like when the computer architecture has
made it, so some of the RAM is not mapped into
any address space. The memory cells sit there,
the BIOS may have primed them with a data pattern,
but *nothing* in the OS can get in there and
read or write there.

Since the contents of SysWOW64 are being displayed,
instead of the contents of System32/drivers , then
you cannot see "etc" or "HOSTS" below it.

In this example, I'm booted on C: and I try to
traverse exactly the same path on C: and H: .
I cannot get to the HOSTS on C: , but I can get
to the HOSTS on H: . The SysWOW64 folder has
Roland Midi files in it, instead of etc.

https://i.postimg.cc/vmfBCxYg/access-HOSTS-foreign-partition.gif

What's interesting, is Notepad does not fall for this.
Just a naive application of GetOpenFileName() falls for it.
There must be some other path that Microsoft applications use.

Paul

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:42:19 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

>On 11/29/2023 1:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>
>> I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
>> display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
>> saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.
>>
>> Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
>> the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.
>>
>
>The OS has made it not-accessible.

What's your OS? I used a VM running Win 7 Pro and had no issues. By chance, is
this a Home v Pro issue? Is this a 7 v 8 v 10/11 issue? Am I using the wrong
version of FC?

<snip>

>Since the contents of SysWOW64 are being displayed,
>instead of the contents of System32/drivers , then
>you cannot see "etc" or "HOSTS" below it.

I haven't been able to duplicate that.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:34:24 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

>Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> I used Win11 (obviously has to be 64bit) and the hosts file was not there.
>>
>> Was that the only file missing from etc? Was the whole etc folder missing?
>
>Lots of stuff was missing from within drivers, the whole of etc for a
>start, it's easier to list what *wasn't* missing, folders in brackets
>
>[..]
>[en-GB]
>[en-US]
>[UMDF]
>17AA_LENOVO_Yoga_Slim_7_Pro_I4IHU5_82NC.MRK
>afunix.sys
>gm.dls
>gmreadme.txt
>
>> Dumb question, but were you looking at the right path?
>> C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc
>
>Come on, give me *some* credit, I've been using that folder for 30 years
>since WinNT 3.1 :-)

Actually, I know you well enough and that's why I said 'dumb question'. :-)

I'm just trying to understand why you and Paul and possibly micky are all
getting redirected. Everyone has a legitimate need to get to their hosts file,
so I'd like to know why it's hidden for some of you.

>>> So the question is, why *was* it there for you, when the smoke and
>>> mirrors ought not to work, and do not work for myself and Paul?
>>>
>>> Have you symlinked any of the system32/syswow64/sysnative folders?
>>
>> No, nothing like that. Is that part of the challenge?
>
>No, but symlinking is mentioned (unwisely I would say) in the
>freecommander help page as a way of "fixing" the folder redirection.

If I knew how to see the redirection it might become clear how you guys can
unsee it.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:21 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:

>In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 08:03:12 +0000, Andy
>Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>
>>micky wrote:
>>
>>> So that's 32-bit and it doesn't count as a test of my question!
>>> The HOSTS Challenge has still not been fulfilled.
>>> I'm doubling the prize.
>>
>>Don't you believe that I saw the same "lack of hosts file in the
>>expected place" as you did?
>
>I certainly do.
>
>I guess I asked two questions along the way. What happens when you do
>what I do? and later, maybe only implied.. Can anyone do parallel to
>what I did and see the file?
>
>Because I had concluded and you found that page that said that no 32-bit
>file manager would see it. So that created the second question above. I
>don't expect to test every combination of OS and FM, but Char thinks
>he's hit on one that works.

Which combination doesn't work? I'd like to join the redirection party.

On 11/29/2023 9:44 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:42:19 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 11/29/2023 1:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>
>>> I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
>>> display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
>>> saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.
>>>
>>> Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
>>> the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.
>>>
>>
>> The OS has made it not-accessible.
>
> What's your OS? I used a VM running Win 7 Pro and had no issues. By chance, is
> this a Home v Pro issue? Is this a 7 v 8 v 10/11 issue? Am I using the wrong
> version of FC?
>
> <snip>
>
>> Since the contents of SysWOW64 are being displayed,
>> instead of the contents of System32/drivers , then
>> you cannot see "etc" or "HOSTS" below it.
>
> I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>

It's a 32-bit versus 64-bit issue.

When you run 32-bit software on a 64-bit system,
that's when it seems to happen. Happens in Free Commander.
Happens in my GetOpenFileName() test program. Doesn't
happen in Notepad, as near as I can determine.

FreeCommander is 32-bit. Everything is fine if you run FreeCommander
on a 32-bit OS. Doesn't work right if FreeCommander 32-bit runs
on a 64-bit OS.

And my test shows, the effect is not a file system feature. Some
software is pulling a fast one. If I use FreeCommander to look
at C: then I can't see HOSTS. If I use FreeCommander to look
at the Windows 10 on H: , then I can see HOSTS as normal. And
that involves a booted C: which is 64-bit and the usage of a
32-bit FreeCommander.

I'm not running a full matrix for this bar bet. I just used
what I had sitting in my "fresh VM" pile.

Paul

Char Jackson wrote:

> Actually, I know you well enough and that's why I said 'dumb question'. 🙂

Fair enough

> I'm just trying to understand why you and Paul and possibly micky are all
> getting redirected. Everyone has a legitimate need to get to their hosts file,
> so I'd like to know why it's hidden for some of you.

64bit Windows knows that 32bit programs might not realise they are
fishes out of water, and could cause damage, especially if run with
admin rights, so it protects itself by putting the redirection in place
to fool the programs into looking at a sandpit, if the program damages
the sandpit, nobody cares.

It's documented behaviour, so it's strange that it doesn't kick-in for
your system.

Paul has shown it's not done by NTFS, it's only done by the running
instance of windows. I wonder if it's done by hooks at the windows API
level, or by NT kernel native API level?

Paul wrote:
>
> In this example, I'm booted on C: and I try to
> traverse exactly the same path on C: and H: .
> I cannot get to the HOSTS on C: , but I can get
> to the HOSTS on H: . The SysWOW64 folder has
> Roland Midi files in it, instead of etc.
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/vmfBCxYg/access-HOSTS-foreign-partition.gif
>
> What's interesting, is Notepad does not fall for this.
> Just a naive application of GetOpenFileName() falls for it.
> There must be some other path that Microsoft applications use.

There is a call to disable SysWoW64 redirection, maybe you could try it
with your test program, to check it allows you to see
system32\drivers\etc once you say the magic word?

Char, do you go browse down from c:\windows through system32 then
drivers to etc

or do you jump straight in to c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc ?

is your machine using "normal" NTFS (not ReFS or something funky?)

Andy Burns wrote:

> There is a call to disable SysWoW64 redirection

I'm sure you could find it, but here

<https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/wow64apiset/nf-wow64apiset-wow64disablewow64fsredirection>

On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 04:10:17 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

>Paul wrote:
>>
>> In this example, I'm booted on C: and I try to
>> traverse exactly the same path on C: and H: .
>> I cannot get to the HOSTS on C: , but I can get
>> to the HOSTS on H: . The SysWOW64 folder has
>> Roland Midi files in it, instead of etc.
>>
>> https://i.postimg.cc/vmfBCxYg/access-HOSTS-foreign-partition.gif
>>
>> What's interesting, is Notepad does not fall for this.
>> Just a naive application of GetOpenFileName() falls for it.
>> There must be some other path that Microsoft applications use.
>
>There is a call to disable SysWoW64 redirection, maybe you could try it
>with your test program, to check it allows you to see
>system32\drivers\etc once you say the magic word?
>
>Char, do you go browse down from c:\windows through system32 then
>drivers to etc
>
>or do you jump straight in to c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc ?
>
>is your machine using "normal" NTFS (not ReFS or something funky?)

Yes, I was just navigating one level at a time by clicking the mouse.

C:\ to windows to system32 to drivers to etc.
Using normal NTFS.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 22:40:09 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

>On 11/29/2023 9:44 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:42:19 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/29/2023 1:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
>>>> display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
>>>> saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.
>>>>
>>>> Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
>>>> the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The OS has made it not-accessible.
>>
>> What's your OS? I used a VM running Win 7 Pro and had no issues. By chance, is
>> this a Home v Pro issue? Is this a 7 v 8 v 10/11 issue? Am I using the wrong
>> version of FC?
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Since the contents of SysWOW64 are being displayed,
>>> instead of the contents of System32/drivers , then
>>> you cannot see "etc" or "HOSTS" below it.
>>
>> I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>>
>
>It's a 32-bit versus 64-bit issue.
>
>When you run 32-bit software on a 64-bit system,
>that's when it seems to happen.

For some people.

>Happens in Free Commander.

Again, for some people. I haven't been able to duplicate that.

>Happens in my GetOpenFileName() test program. Doesn't
>happen in Notepad, as near as I can determine.
>
>FreeCommander is 32-bit. Everything is fine if you run FreeCommander
>on a 32-bit OS. Doesn't work right if FreeCommander 32-bit runs
>on a 64-bit OS.

Odd that the behavior isn't consistent. It works fine here.

>And my test shows, the effect is not a file system feature. Some
>software is pulling a fast one. If I use FreeCommander to look
>at C: then I can't see HOSTS. If I use FreeCommander to look
>at the Windows 10 on H: , then I can see HOSTS as normal. And
>that involves a booted C: which is 64-bit and the usage of a
>32-bit FreeCommander.
>
>I'm not running a full matrix for this bar bet. I just used
>what I had sitting in my "fresh VM" pile.

Same here, I suppose. I booted a Win 7 Pro VM because it was at the top of the
list. I haven't tried any others.

On 11/29/2023 11:17 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> There is a call to disable SysWoW64 redirection
>
> I'm sure you could find it, but here
>
> <https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/wow64apiset/nf-wow64apiset-wow64disablewow64fsredirection>

To do that, it wasn't looking very good on MinGW32.
On MinGW32, the original program compiles like this.
The apiset needed, seems to be missing. There is one
instance of the string, in a static lib but that's all
I could find.

g++ -o getopenfix64.exe getopenfix64.cc -lcomdlg32 # needs libgcc_s_dw2-1.dll in the directory

I had to switch to MinGW64 on Linux, and have it compile
a 32-bit windows output there.

/usr/bin/i686-w64-mingw32-g++ -I/usr/i686-w64-mingw32/include
-o getopenfix64.exe getopenfix64.cc -lcomdlg32 # UB2310 disk
# needs libgcc_s_dw2-1.dll in the directory # Still needed!

The calls seem to be working. The returned result passes
an if-then-else check.

But, the redirection continues on. It didn't succeed in
changing the results.

My normal experience with efforts like this, is it should be
"blowing errors all over the place", if the interface work
I'm doing is sketchy. What is weird, is the damn thing
is obedient as can be, and nothing I do seems to throw errors.
Yet I can't get it to disable the redirect. This is the
essence of the code change.

PVOID OldValue = NULL;

if( !Wow64DisableWow64FsRedirection(&OldValue) ) return -1;
GetOpenFileName( &ofn );
if( !Wow64RevertWow64FsRedirection(OldValue) ) return -1;
MessageBox ( NULL , ofn.lpstrFile , "File Name" , MB_OK);

Paul

In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:15:51 -0500, micky
<NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:

>
>According to what follows that Allan has found, it's not the OS. Still
>have to resolve what Paul posted. Does that win7 was Premium mean it
>was 64-bit?
>
>>> My original OS was Win8.1 (64-bit). I upgraded to Win10 over a year ago.
>>> FreeCommander's 32-bit version is limited with 64-bit versions of
>>> Windows, according to this.
>>>
>>> https://freecommander.com/en/faq-freecommander/#using-32-on-64
>
>Aha. Just what I've been saying.
>
>>There are solutions to those problems on this page.
>>
>>https://freecommander.com/en/version-summary/
>
>For people who have not gone to the link:
>
>FreeCommander XE on Windows X64
>The actual version of FreeCommander XE is a 32 bit program. For this
>reason FreeCommander is (like all 32 bit programs on Windows X64)
>subject to the following restrictions:
>
>----ALL, it says! My emphasis. ----
>
> 32 bit programs (e.g. FreeCommander) have not full access to the
>control panel.
> In the context menu, entries of 64 bit programs will not be visible.
> The folder “%windir%\system32” and its sub folders show different
>contents under 32 bit programs (e.g. FreeCommander).
>
>Notes: %windir% is a system variable that points to the Windows
>installation folder – often: c:\Windows
> 32 bit programs are redirected from “%windir%\system32” to
>“%windir%\SysWOW64” automatically.
>
>For more detailed information see: Microsoft: File system Redirector
>
>----At the webpage, these last 4 words are a link, maybe the same one
>Paul posted. Or at least the same information.
>>
>>I don't remember seeing those solutions when I was using the 32-bit version.
>
>It's sort of impressive that they post solutions at all, since they'd
>really prefer you buy the 64-bit version. OTOH, even if you won't rely
>on believing they are generous, I'm sure their own programmers looked
>into it and when they found these solutions, they wanted to share them.
>
>I didn't fully understand the solutions. I understood the context menu
>part and it's complicaed,

I retract saying I understood the context menu part. How can you even
bring up a context menu for a file that is not listed?

I'm referring here still to the FreeCommander suggestion for fixing the
problem, from the link higher up on this post.

> but it seemed solving the file missing from
>the list part was also complicated and had to be done one file at a
>time. Maybe if you only ever need one file, someone would do that, but
>it seems like buying Free Commander for 64 bits, or using another FM is
>what everyone would do.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:03:51 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

>On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 22:40:09 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 11/29/2023 9:44 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:42:19 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/29/2023 1:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
>>>>> display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
>>>>> saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
>>>>> the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The OS has made it not-accessible.
>>>
>>> What's your OS? I used a VM running Win 7 Pro and had no issues. By chance, is
>>> this a Home v Pro issue? Is this a 7 v 8 v 10/11 issue? Am I using the wrong
>>> version of FC?
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Since the contents of SysWOW64 are being displayed,
>>>> instead of the contents of System32/drivers , then
>>>> you cannot see "etc" or "HOSTS" below it.
>>>
>>> I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>>>
>>
>>It's a 32-bit versus 64-bit issue.
>>
>>When you run 32-bit software on a 64-bit system,
>>that's when it seems to happen.
>
>For some people.
>
>>Happens in Free Commander.
>
>Again, for some people. I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>
>>Happens in my GetOpenFileName() test program. Doesn't
>>happen in Notepad, as near as I can determine.
>>
>>FreeCommander is 32-bit. Everything is fine if you run FreeCommander
>>on a 32-bit OS. Doesn't work right if FreeCommander 32-bit runs
>>on a 64-bit OS.
>
>Odd that the behavior isn't consistent. It works fine here.
>
>>And my test shows, the effect is not a file system feature. Some
>>software is pulling a fast one. If I use FreeCommander to look
>>at C: then I can't see HOSTS. If I use FreeCommander to look
>>at the Windows 10 on H: , then I can see HOSTS as normal. And
>>that involves a booted C: which is 64-bit and the usage of a
>>32-bit FreeCommander.
>>
>>I'm not running a full matrix for this bar bet. I just used
>>what I had sitting in my "fresh VM" pile.
>
>Same here, I suppose. I booted a Win 7 Pro VM because it was at the top of the
>list. I haven't tried any others.

Are we leaving this without a final resolution?

I was hoping someone would provide a 32-bit file manager that falls into the
redirection trap and is unable to navigate to the usual location for the hosts
file.

The *one* that I tried, FreeCommander XE 2023 Build 880 32-bit has no issues
with that task. Does anyone have a 32-bit file manager that doesn't work?

Char Jackson wrote:

> Are we leaving this without a final resolution?

I think mickey may have to donate the betting pot to charity

> I was hoping someone would provide a 32-bit file manager that falls into the
> redirection trap and is unable to navigate to the usual location for the hosts
> file.

I think everyone else has sort of decided that there's something unusual
about your machine? The redirection does its thing for all our 64bit
machines running 32bit programs, it's just yours that is misbehaving ...
but not in a way that upsets you.

> The one that I tried, FreeCommander XE 2023 Build 880 32-bit has no issues
> with that task. Does anyone have a 32-bit file manager that doesn't work?

That's the only one I tried and it has "the issue" i.e. the defined
behaviour.

On 2023-11-28 21:39, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 11/28/23 8:53 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-11-28 16:58, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 11/28/23 3:07 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

....

>>>> Xtree?
>>>
>>> Could be, but it looked like MC rather than a 'tree' display.  XTree
>>> sounded familiar, though.  I hunted for a while but couldn't find
>>> anything that stood out.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XTree
>
> I'm pretty sure that's not it, especially since it cost $40.  I just
> used free stuff then -- except for Ventura Publisher.  I really coveted
> that, but there was no way the company was going to buy it for me so I
> could make pretty proposals.  Marketing, fortunately, had an unlimited
> budget so I traded some juicy corporate gossip for a copy.  Something
> like 10 floppy disks, and to save your work to a floppy you had to
> export it using the VP facility.
>
> Looking back, it was needlessly complex and painful to use.  I switched
> to Word Perfect when it became capable of producing proportional-font
> text on a dot-matrix printer.  Not fast, of course...

As graphics, slow as molasses in a 9 pin printer. I could not afford a
24 pin printer.

Although some printers did have proportional fonts natively, no software
made use of it because they did not have the kerning table of all
printers (I think that was the name).

So at the time people started to switch to the then expensive inkjets,
which could print graphics at a reasonable speed and made sleeping room
mates / neighbours happy.

> There was a big fat book with a disk of MSDOS utilities.  I still have a
> copy, even though I haven't looked at it for decades and am not sure
> where it is.  It was a better DOS manual than the DOS manual itself.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-12-02 05:41, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:03:51 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 22:40:09 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/29/2023 9:44 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:42:19 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/29/2023 1:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
>>>>>> display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
>>>>>> saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
>>>>>> the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The OS has made it not-accessible.
>>>>
>>>> What's your OS? I used a VM running Win 7 Pro and had no issues. By chance, is
>>>> this a Home v Pro issue? Is this a 7 v 8 v 10/11 issue? Am I using the wrong
>>>> version of FC?
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> Since the contents of SysWOW64 are being displayed,
>>>>> instead of the contents of System32/drivers , then
>>>>> you cannot see "etc" or "HOSTS" below it.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's a 32-bit versus 64-bit issue.
>>>
>>> When you run 32-bit software on a 64-bit system,
>>> that's when it seems to happen.
>>
>> For some people.
>>
>>> Happens in Free Commander.
>>
>> Again, for some people. I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>>
>>> Happens in my GetOpenFileName() test program. Doesn't
>>> happen in Notepad, as near as I can determine.
>>>
>>> FreeCommander is 32-bit. Everything is fine if you run FreeCommander
>>> on a 32-bit OS. Doesn't work right if FreeCommander 32-bit runs
>>> on a 64-bit OS.
>>
>> Odd that the behavior isn't consistent. It works fine here.
>>
>>> And my test shows, the effect is not a file system feature. Some
>>> software is pulling a fast one. If I use FreeCommander to look
>>> at C: then I can't see HOSTS. If I use FreeCommander to look
>>> at the Windows 10 on H: , then I can see HOSTS as normal. And
>>> that involves a booted C: which is 64-bit and the usage of a
>>> 32-bit FreeCommander.
>>>
>>> I'm not running a full matrix for this bar bet. I just used
>>> what I had sitting in my "fresh VM" pile.
>>
>> Same here, I suppose. I booted a Win 7 Pro VM because it was at the top of the
>> list. I haven't tried any others.
>
> Are we leaving this without a final resolution?
>
> I was hoping someone would provide a 32-bit file manager that falls into the
> redirection trap and is unable to navigate to the usual location for the hosts
> file.
>
> The *one* that I tried, FreeCommander XE 2023 Build 880 32-bit has no issues
> with that task. Does anyone have a 32-bit file manager that doesn't work?

Being modern, they might have patched it so that it works.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 20:52:32 -0600, Char
Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

>On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:21 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>
>>In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 08:03:12 +0000, Andy
>>Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>micky wrote:
>>>
>>>> So that's 32-bit and it doesn't count as a test of my question!
>>>> The HOSTS Challenge has still not been fulfilled.
>>>> I'm doubling the prize.
>>>
>>>Don't you believe that I saw the same "lack of hosts file in the
>>>expected place" as you did?
>>
>>I certainly do.
>>
>>I guess I asked two questions along the way. What happens when you do
>>what I do? and later, maybe only implied.. Can anyone do parallel to
>>what I did and see the file?
>>
>>Because I had concluded and you found that page that said that no 32-bit
>>file manager would see it. So that created the second question above. I
>>don't expect to test every combination of OS and FM, but Char thinks
>>he's hit on one that works.
>
>Which combination doesn't work? I'd like to join the redirection party.

I'm sorry. Other responsibilties kept me away from this thread for a
couple days, and even now, and i've lost track of it.

AFAIK no 32-bit FM works with any 64-bit OS except for the combination
you found.

At least I pointed out the issue/

In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sat, 2 Dec 2023 09:29:02 +0000, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

>Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> Are we leaving this without a final resolution?
>
>I think mickey may have to donate the betting pot to charity

That seems fair.

But I should admit when I said I wasn't using Association money, I
didn't claim to be using my money either.

The pot originally was kudos. Now it is 4 kudos. kudoses? 4 measures
of kudos.
>
>> I was hoping someone would provide a 32-bit file manager that falls into the
>> redirection trap and is unable to navigate to the usual location for the hosts
>> file.
>
>I think everyone else has sort of decided that there's something unusual
>about your machine? The redirection does its thing for all our 64bit
>machines running 32bit programs, it's just yours that is misbehaving ...
>but not in a way that upsets you.

Yes.

>> The one that I tried, FreeCommander XE 2023 Build 880 32-bit has no issues
>> with that task. Does anyone have a 32-bit file manager that doesn't work?
>
>That's the only one I tried and it has "the issue" i.e. the defined
>behaviour.

In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sat, 2 Dec 2023 11:36:46 +0100, "Carlos E.
R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

>On 2023-12-02 05:41, Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:03:51 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 22:40:09 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/29/2023 9:44 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:42:19 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/29/2023 1:47 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know that the folder can't actually be missing, so I'm assuming it's simply a
>>>>>>> display issue, but I don't know how that relates to what Paul and Andy are
>>>>>>> saying about redirection to sysWOW. I don't see that here, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do I need to try your challenge with an older version of FreeCommander? I used
>>>>>>> the latest one, Build 880, I believe. Older versions are available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The OS has made it not-accessible.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's your OS? I used a VM running Win 7 Pro and had no issues. By chance, is
>>>>> this a Home v Pro issue? Is this a 7 v 8 v 10/11 issue? Am I using the wrong
>>>>> version of FC?
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Since the contents of SysWOW64 are being displayed,
>>>>>> instead of the contents of System32/drivers , then
>>>>>> you cannot see "etc" or "HOSTS" below it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's a 32-bit versus 64-bit issue.
>>>>
>>>> When you run 32-bit software on a 64-bit system,
>>>> that's when it seems to happen.
>>>
>>> For some people.
>>>
>>>> Happens in Free Commander.
>>>
>>> Again, for some people. I haven't been able to duplicate that.
>>>
>>>> Happens in my GetOpenFileName() test program. Doesn't
>>>> happen in Notepad, as near as I can determine.
>>>>
>>>> FreeCommander is 32-bit. Everything is fine if you run FreeCommander
>>>> on a 32-bit OS. Doesn't work right if FreeCommander 32-bit runs
>>>> on a 64-bit OS.
>>>
>>> Odd that the behavior isn't consistent. It works fine here.
>>>
>>>> And my test shows, the effect is not a file system feature. Some
>>>> software is pulling a fast one. If I use FreeCommander to look
>>>> at C: then I can't see HOSTS. If I use FreeCommander to look
>>>> at the Windows 10 on H: , then I can see HOSTS as normal. And
>>>> that involves a booted C: which is 64-bit and the usage of a
>>>> 32-bit FreeCommander.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not running a full matrix for this bar bet. I just used
>>>> what I had sitting in my "fresh VM" pile.
>>>
>>> Same here, I suppose. I booted a Win 7 Pro VM because it was at the top of the
>>> list. I haven't tried any others.
>>
>> Are we leaving this without a final resolution?
>>
>> I was hoping someone would provide a 32-bit file manager that falls into the
>> redirection trap and is unable to navigate to the usual location for the hosts
>> file.
>>
>> The *one* that I tried, FreeCommander XE 2023 Build 880 32-bit has no issues
>> with that task. Does anyone have a 32-bit file manager that doesn't work?
>
>Being modern, they might have patched it so that it works.

Anyone still offerring a 32-bit FM on their webpage ought to have either
found a patch that would make it work, or include a warning that it
wouldn't find all directories or files. Surely most of the people in
the business of writing FMs know about this issue.

On 12/2/2023 12:24 PM, micky wrote:

> Anyone still offerring a 32-bit FM on their webpage ought to have either
> found a patch that would make it work, or include a warning that it
> wouldn't find all directories or files. Surely most of the people in
> the business of writing FMs know about this issue.

This stuff is entirely too flaky for words.

I ran my 32-bit test program on my W11x64 Home, and
"navigating" to the path fails, but typing the path
into the path box, works. Grrr. I ran the program
as administrator (which probably should not be
making a difference to this indirection trick).

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/zDPRbnS4/a-strange-case-of-redirection.gif

Paul

On 12/2/2023 12:13 PM, micky wrote:
> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 20:52:32 -0600, Char
> Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:21 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 08:03:12 +0000, Andy
>>> Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> micky wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So that's 32-bit and it doesn't count as a test of my question!
>>>>> The HOSTS Challenge has still not been fulfilled.
>>>>> I'm doubling the prize.
>>>>
>>>> Don't you believe that I saw the same "lack of hosts file in the
>>>> expected place" as you did?
>>>
>>> I certainly do.
>>>
>>> I guess I asked two questions along the way. What happens when you do
>>> what I do? and later, maybe only implied.. Can anyone do parallel to
>>> what I did and see the file?
>>>
>>> Because I had concluded and you found that page that said that no 32-bit
>>> file manager would see it. So that created the second question above. I
>>> don't expect to test every combination of OS and FM, but Char thinks
>>> he's hit on one that works.
>>
>> Which combination doesn't work? I'd like to join the redirection party.
>
>
> I'm sorry. Other responsibilties kept me away from this thread for a
> couple days, and even now, and i've lost track of it.
>
> AFAIK no 32-bit FM works with any 64-bit OS except for the combination
> you found.
>
> At least I pointed out the issue/
>

But there is something you can try for us.

If FreeCommander has a box to enter the path as a string,
try entering a string and see if you can "get past ETC" that way.

C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc

Paul

Paul wrote:
> But there is something you can try for us.
>
> If FreeCommander has a box to enter the path as a string,
> try entering a string and see if you can "get past ETC" that way.
>
> C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc

It does (Folder / Go to folder...) and you can.

That's why I asked char if he'd browsed down from the root to the
drivers folder, or gone direct to it (the folder redirection
documentation says specifically that the etc folder is excluded, but
intermediate paths to reach it are included).

Paul wrote:

> This stuff is entirely too flaky for words.
>
> I ran my 32-bit test program on my W11x64 Home, and
> "navigating" to the path fails, but typing the path
> into the path box, works. Grrr.

That's how it's meant to work.

I ran the program
> as administrator (which probably should not be
> making a difference to this indirection trick).
>
> [Picture]
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/zDPRbnS4/a-strange-case-of-redirection.gif

"Certain subdirectories are exempt from redirection. Access to these
subdirectories is not redirected to %windir%\SysWOW64:

%windir%\system32\catroot
%windir%\system32\catroot2
%windir%\system32\driverstore
%windir%\system32\drivers\etc
%windir%\system32\logfiles
%windir%\system32\spool"