download folder check is working, the file was extracted correctly, but after deleting the folders and the file the new files couldn't be replaced.
Have to thank you, Sir . Your testing gave me the hint where to look (the missing variable in the path in updater script).
@s1ave77 I do not like: uup\16288.1\AiO\cs-cz\amd64\ uup\16288.1\Core\cs-cz\amd64\ uup\16288.1\Professional\cs-cz\amd64\ uup\16288.1\Enterprise\cs-cz\amd64\ ... I like: uup\16288.1\cs-cz\amd64\ for all editions files. Download all? Download all. Download next edition? No download files, exists files. Download one edition? Download one edition. Download next edition? Download only differential edition files. There will be no duplicate files. There is no duplicate download.
@dhjohns - Have both the folder you are running it from and the folder you specify for download open and watch after you choose replace and PRESS ANY KEY. You should see the project folders/files get deleted from where you're running it, then the new ones re-appear there? @s1ave77 worked through a similar scenario with me back from post #887, any help there for you?
The command file gets deleted. I have never had it update. All it ever does is delete the command file.
@s1ave77 - Maybe for later consideration. Simplifying the check for update, user input, download and replace thing. Just a thought. [P] Check for project update. Update found. Update or Skip. If Skip return to main menu. If Update then eliminate any/all user input now and do update routine. They chose to update so eliminate asking for download folder and if they want to replace or skip afterwards, and just update it all now. Download to system temp, unpack there, copy to users folder and prompt them to restart new script. Possibly tidy up at system temp folder? Also does away with some of the options, specifying download folder, and replace or skip - because the user chose to update anyway. Something along those lines, is it feesible?
You two now have the same problem I had through several previous versions. IMO the update routine may need simplifying, see post #926 above.