Allow cancel or log when merge produces an error

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Include a non-fatal error in one of your .part files (e.g. forget to close a 
"rules" tag)
2. Run CBloader
3. Do your best to read the error output in the command window before it closes

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
 It would be great if, when a non-fatal error occurs during the merge, to give the user the option to quit instead of going ahead and launching the CB. Failing that, at least drop an error log so the user can look up what the error was to fix it.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
 1.1.2, Windows 7

Original issue reported on code.google.com by sabre...@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2010 at 3:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I agree this is a good idea. I'll get it in there. Thanks for the suggestion!

Original comment by jeff.h...@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2010 at 3:44

• Added labels: Type-Enhancement
• Removed labels: Type-Defect

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by jeff.h...@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2010 at 3:44

• Changed state: Accepted

[GoogleCodeExporter]

note, as a short term workaround, if you run cbloader by typing
WinKey+R
cmd.exe
cd [Path to cbloader.exe]
cbloader.exe

it will not close after merging, and any error messages will be shown. I'm not 
sure how detailed the error messages currently are though. I can probably 
increase their quality as well.

Original comment by jeff.h...@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2010 at 3:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Due to continuing to have the 'Pipeline is not debugging' error, I don't have 
this exact issue - however, I would appreciate it if it were possible to get a 
full log of the errors in a given .part - currently AFAICT only the first error 
is recorded, then CBLoader gives up and moves onto the next one, which makes 
SAN-checking long files frustrating when you load it, fix one mistake, then 
reload only to be told there's another one, several times.

Would it be possible to add this facility to any logging capability?

Original comment by iamthesp...@gmail.com on 4 Dec 2010 at 10:34

[GoogleCodeExporter]

As nice as it would be, the first-only issue comes from the framework, and 
AFAIK, is not fixable short of writing our own parser (not a good idea), or 
complaining on Microsoft forums.

One question I have for everyone:  If you have a broken part, would you rather 
skip it and merge the rest of the parts, or keep the existing merged file?

Original comment by YeOldeSt...@gmail.com on 5 Dec 2010 at 2:11

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I for one would much rather have it skip the broken part and merge the rest.  
Especially if you could get a log of it after the fact so that you know what 
failed.

Original comment by sikorski...@gmail.com on 5 Dec 2010 at 1:51

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I have added a logfile, better log messages and pausing on errors in V1.1.3

Original comment by jeff.h...@gmail.com on 9 Dec 2010 at 3:16

• Changed state: Fixed