eanon

I finally waited. So, here is my empiric conclusion: it's not safe to cancel at stage about writing of random data considering the amount of operations done after it. Don't hesitate to tell me if I'm wrong, of course.

Hello, I'm expanding an encrypted NTFS partition, but the stage about writing of random data to fill-in new empty space sounds very long (8h). So, I clicked "Cancel", thinking the expansion stage was already done... But a message of confirmation tell me that it may result in a damaged volume! Does this message is true (and HAVE TO be considered seriously) or a simple warning to cover all cases, including exceptional ones? And thanks for VeraCrypt, of course ; I'm switching from TrueCrypt to VeraCrypt...

Hello, I'm expanding an encrypted NTFS partition, but the stage about writing of random data to fill-in new empty space sounds very long (8h). So, I clicked "Cancel", thinking the expansion stage was already done... But a message of confirmation tell me that it may result in a damaged volume! Does this message is true (and HAVE TO be considered) or a simple warning to cover all cases, including exceptional ones? And thanks for VeraCrypt, of course ; I'm switching from TrueCrypt to VeraCrypt curr...

Still declared as local variable in spite of 'store as attribute' option

Warning about missing markers for C++ event table

Dot after 'wx' in generated C++ code

Oops: a little bit tired, read .i (for interface) rather than.h of course...

Thanks, Carsten. I'm a "little" busy these days, but appreciated your smart support...