Windows XP, several users and Avast 4 Home update

[Cilli]

I have Windows XP and 3 users. When one of them was logged on Avast updated it self. After that Avast wanted to restart the computer but he answered no. After that he logged off and when I tried to log on my profile was not enabled to log the normal profile but took a local profile. After the computer was restarted the profiles worked normally. Hope this isn’t a way to force a restart of the computer. It took a while to scan for virus and updating every security program I have in case. If we had knew that we really have to restart the computer that minute we would have done it. This can be a problem on some computers.

[drahnier]

I had a similar experience:

http://www.avast.com/forum/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=1815


I hope we get some answers from the developers.

________________
drahnier

[techie101]

Cilli,

No, this is not a way to get you to reboot.  Avast seeks an update, whenever it senses an internet connection.  Sometimes, as part of the update, a reboot is necessary.  This will normally be required when the "program" is updated.

As for the user profiles, I would recommend that when Avast asks for a reboot, allow it to do so.  This way you know that the download and installation has been completed.
Truthfully, I am at a loss to explain why that happens with the profiles.
I have 2 users on my XP machine and have not experienced such behavior.

If not, then when the "user" who was signed on finsihes, have them do the reboot.

The profiles will remain as they were originally.

techie

[kubecj]

But, you know, this was not the intent. We simply ask, you refuse and that should be all (it's not good, that you refuse, but it should work anyway). But for some reason, windows play the trick.

We'll investigate.  

[Lisandro]

But, you know, this was not the intent. We simply ask, you refuse and that should be all (it's not good, that you refuse, but it should work anyway). But for some reason, windows play the trick.

We'll investigate.  

As you could see for my setup files (ini and log), I did the same: refuse to the immediatly boot... The next boot was ok, no troubles... I just continue to work. Maybe I must reboot at the first time but, as you say, the user wants to continue working... If there is no other way, the message box should say so (as suggested by Cilli): You must restart your computer! Otherwise, the system could not work correctly and you should experience weird behaviors or answers. What do you think kubecj?  

[techie101]

Technical,

I agree with you.  The pop up should say that a reboot is necessary to complete the installation.

This is the common language for most programs that have update capability.

In some cases as we have heard, NOT rebooting when asked can have mysterious consequences.

It should only take a few minutes to change the wording and in the long run will pay off!

techie

[Vlk]

Well in fact this is something we wanted to avoid. The whole update procedure is designed so that if the user opts not to reboot immediately, everything should continue to work exactly the same way as it did before the update... This is especially important requirement for server deployment where immediate restart might be impossible but planned, scheduled restart may not be a problem... That's why all the new files are initially placed to a temporary location even if they're not locked at the time of updating etc.

I think we'll rather focus on fixing the issue then on rephrasing the prompt... Anyway, thanks for your suggestions.

Vlk

[Lisandro]

I think we'll rather focus on fixing the issue then on rephrasing the prompt... Anyway, thanks for your suggestions.

I'm totally agree with you. Rephasing the message box will be enough.
The update by a temporary folder (waiting for the next boot) is quite a good solution and works perfectly.  

[techie101]

VLK,

Yes, if you look at it your way...then fixing is certainly better, but until the "fix" is in, "rephrasing" may be an interim solution.  Locating the new files in a temporary location should have worked.  Any reason yet why it did not?

To me, it doesn't matter.  I normally reboot when requested....
the mind is older and gets cloudy fast.  

techie