August 18, 2008 at 12:18 pm
We're running an application developed by a contractor in Access 2003, it's an MDB split into a front-end and data files. It has three combo boxes that are used to look up records by name, address, or owner, all three are exhibiting the same behavior. Basically since installing XP SP3 and subsequent security updates, the boxes are blank. They still show the appropriate number of rows based on the size of the scrolling puck, and if you click on one, it takes you to the appropriate record.
The three combo boxes are populated from a query, they also pull multiple columns from their queries and the number of columns specified doesn't seem to make a difference. Other combo boxes on the form that are populated from a value list work fine.
Has anyone seen this and/or know of a fix? I haven't had much luck searching around for it, one thing on the Microsoft site didn't fit our situation.
-----
[font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]
August 18, 2008 at 2:15 pm
The only reference I've found is
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/945674
Applying the hotfix or
remove custom formatting/appending ""
August 18, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Thanks, Jo! I'll forward that to our help desk and we'll see what happens! I did some searching but didn't come across that link, I think my is weakening.
-----
[font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]
August 22, 2008 at 8:17 am
This is just a thought, but you mentioned multiple columns in the combo boxes. Do the # of fields match the column counts in the combos & are the column widths & display width set correctly? You've probably seen cases where those values don't match but it still works.
There's no logical reason for an XP service pack to change the behavior of Access, unless perhaps there was an update to MDAC.
August 22, 2008 at 8:25 am
The only time I have seen anything like this was in .NET 1.1 apps on PC's running McAfee. The McAfee Buffer OVerflow Protection was causing it. I thought that this had been fixed as I haven't had to turn that feature off since .NET 2.0, but the Service Pack could have changed something. It's something else to try anyway.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
August 22, 2008 at 8:47 am
Thanks for the replies, gentlemen. I double-checked the number of fields and width issue, and they correspond to the queries that they're pulling from. Each of the three combo boxes hides one field.
As far as anti-virus is concerned, we're running not running McAfee (thank Crom!), I've had some pretty horrible encounters with McAfee in the past.
I think Jo nailed it, the KB article describes exactly what is going on. Sadly I can't get our help desk to install the post-SP3 hotfix, they want to bounce the problem to the contracted developer.
-----
[font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]
August 22, 2008 at 8:53 am
Heh. It just occurred to me that I could install the hotfix on MY computer and see if it fixed the problem.
And it did.
I guess I'll apply a liberal amount of arm twisting and see if I can get 'em to patch the workstations that use this particular DB or who encounter it in the future.
Thanks, Jo! 🙂
-----
[font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]
August 22, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Interesting. I had the "Compact and Repair" problem & applied the hotfix, but it was due to Office, not XP, SP3.
Thanks.
(EDIT: it really was Office, not XP)
August 23, 2008 at 10:13 am
Glad to hear that the hotfix solves the problem.
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply