|
What happened yesterday to Bob's ANZAC Day uniform?
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Damn. I missed ANZAC day.
I'll pay my respects today.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 26-Apr-16 8:10am.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 26-Apr-16 8:10am.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 26-Apr-16 8:10am.
|
|
|
|
|
My VM running Windows 7 just went crazy.
A Svchost.exe started running some code which using SysInternals ProcExp I was able to determine was the nsisvc.dll. It was eating 50% of my processor on my VM which was terrible.
You can see a snapshot SysInternals, Regedit, etc which shows details here:
http://raddev.us/images/sysinternals/nissvc1.png[^]
Then I noticed that the places it was writing was into the URLCryptCache directory... What!?
What's going on?
http://raddev.us/images/sysinternals/nissvc2.png[^]
Seems kind of nefarious, doesn't it?
Anyone? Anyone?
Has anyone else seen this crazy behavior?
I shut it down and I'll restart to see if that starts running again.
EDIT
I restarted and the TrustedInstaller is running now. It's probably Nadella installing Win10 on my VM.
Thanks! 
EDIT 2
The svchost running that same nsisvc.dll is running at 50% again.
If it's Microsoft -- they really are a VIRUS. Resistance is futile!!!
If it's a virus, it might be Microsoft.
modified 25-Apr-16 15:03pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm assuming that you actually mean nsisvc.dll in which case, yes. Microsoft has pages and pages on problems with it. Google is now and always has been your friend!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, nsisvc.dll and there are pages of Google and there are actually a bunch of pages on Spider Monkeys too.
However, I'd like the exact info I need on spider monkeys, not just billions of search results.
Also, if you read the first few pages of results from Google you'd see that there aren't any on it eating the CPU. There are quite a few on issues with nsisvc.dll missing or whatever.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
There are many references if you use the right search term. I went for Quote: nsisvc.dll cpu use
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes Google reports there are "About 24,200 results..." for your search.
However, notice that the first page (the only one anyone ever reads -- if they even read those) is filled with those sites which report generic info for every dll you put there.
Let me know when you've read the 24,200 and you've found the right one. 
thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I just used words from your own posting, and got precisely the results you were looking for:
nsisvc.dll eating the CPU
Don't blame your lack of common sense on other people, and don't get snarky at other people because you're incapable of doing something.
[edit] It's 39,900 results, by the way, but, because I wasn't stoopid, and I used a logical search string, I don't need to read them all.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
In a recent post you answered your own question (within hours of this post):
Mark_Wallace wrote: When did googling become preferable to sharing expert knowledge?
Here's where you made that statement, in case you forgot:
The Lounge - CodeProject[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, so Imparted some expert knowledge to you on how to google.
I did not google that knowledge.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
What is the first thing comes to mind when you hear requirement and specification? Do you see them as separate thing or are they one and the same?
|
|
|
|
|
I have always thought that Requirements is what the software needs to do and Specifications is the beginning of how it should do that. The software should be responsive is a requirement. All screens will either respond within 5 seconds or set the wait cursor, is a specification.
Pat O
|
|
|
|
|
I agreed.
The next question is would you create the requirement separately from the specification or they goes together?
|
|
|
|
|
Think of it as...
The Requirement is a description of what "the customer" wants (and is sometimes written by the customer representative, sometimes by the development team, sometimes both). It describes what the stakeholders want to pay for.
The Specification is how the developer(s) will do it (and is almost without exception written by the development team). It likely includes platform description, architectural details, technologies used, development benchmarks and milestones, and a timeline.
The Requirement describes "what" (and perhaps a little "why"). The Spec describes "how", "when" and "who".
Both documents are agreed on by both parties but are clearly from different points of view. If the project is small, the two documents might be merged into one, but the resulting document will likely see multiple versions as the project details emerge.
I'm retired. There's a nap for that...
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
I've been to a few companies in my 30 years development that actually maintain the two documents separately aside from the design document. They are usually doing it for government regulations for example in health care industries.
|
|
|
|
|
Place I worked at attempted to merge these documents ... it was disastrous. Let the business (customer, whatever) define the requirements (with input/advice from Dev if need be - "no, you can't have a green widget with shiny bits"), but the specification is the nitty-gritty of how the software will fulfil the requirements - and you really don't want much influence from the business on that beyond agreeing that the UI fits with what they want.
Or perhaps I'm just too jaded 
|
|
|
|
|
Requirements are one thing; their "feasibility" is another; i.e. Requirements are usually followed up with a "feasibility study" that paint some broad costs and solutions / alternatives which require go / no-go decisions (from management / sponsors).
Creating "specifications" otherwise is premature.
|
|
|
|
|
The requirements are WHAT. The specification is one HOW out of many possible HOWs. The docs should be kept separately because they are conceptually separate. There might be two ways to do something.
Suppose you are building cars, and the customer wants to go 0-60 in six seconds. There are many ways to do this. One way is to built a 4,000 lb car with a turbo-charged six liter V12 producing 700 horsepower. Another way is to build an enclosed four-wheeled bicycle with a 2-stroke engine developing 30 hp. Still a third is motorcycle leathers and a pair of roller skates, plus a small rocket.
The collection of requirements may limit you to a single solution of all the solutions you can imagine, but it may not. The organizations that really want to solve problems (like NASA for instance, allow their engineers to explore multiple possible solutions. This doesn't happen much in the software biz, but as competition gets fiercer, it will probably happen more.
|
|
|
|
|
Your question beautifully illustrates a problem with requirements. I read
The software should be responsive
and was expecting the specification to be "adapts to screen widths from 2048px down to 320px". Just goes to show that even especially as early in the process as requirements collection, it's important to clarify terminology and ensure that all statements are set in an appropriate context that everyone understands. 
|
|
|
|
|
2 things.
a: I have a requirement.
b: Write a spec to cover that requirement.
|
|
|
|
|
I like your answer. Though there are fewer company that practice the difference discreetly. I wondered is it because either developers
1. don't understand the difference
2. no allow the opportunity to proper practice
3. Time to market not allows it
From my 30 years experience, the more rigorous a well managed team follow process, the faster we can get a product out the door closer to allocated budget.
|
|
|
|
|
Requirements are Gathered (From the customer/consumer)
Specifications are Written (for the developers)
But the lack of either or both, is a MANAGEMENT problem IMO. Now it is either the problem of a bad manager, or a poorly managed process.
Tiny projects. You can be a little sloppy.
But lets say you are trying to replace the FAA Radar/Plane Tracking systems?
(An upgrade that has failed more than once)
You get to the point where the exactness of the Requirements "feel" like Specifications, but they are really not. Because they should not be "specifying HOW to get the job done" just what the result is Required to be!
These two are separate by definition, IMO
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
