0 Replies Latest reply on Oct 24, 2008 11:10 AM by (Jack_W)

    Reader 8/Reader 9 hang when called from a ShellOpen

      We are having an interesting issue with Reader 8 and Reader 9, opening pdf documents from an application we wrote. Here is the scenario using Reader 9 running on Windows XP, computers running Svc. Packs 2 or 3.

      I have Reader 9 installed, Windows File Types specifically call for the extension .pdf to open with Reader 9. If I click on a pdf file in Explorer, the document comes up in 9. If I use either IE or Firefox and call a pdf file from HTML code, Reader 9 opens the file without fail.

      If I attempt to open a pdf document from a ShellOpen, the reader does not appear on the screen. Task Manager/Processes shows the reader actually running. Each time you click on the document, the reader spawns a new process. If I open Reader then attempt to start the program? The Title Bar will show the file name? But lock up. Reader's screen is white. Have to kill the process.

      So I began installing older versions of reader. Reader 8? Does the same thing. Reader 7? It works as expected! Opens the document called from a ShellOpen command. Next? Loaded the same scenario on a Vista box. Result? The code works perfectly running under Vista. Reader 9 opens the document without fail. So either Reader 9 is having a conflict with the operating system or the operating system is having conflict with Reader 9.

      The code that is used to start the process of opening the pdf document is:

      procedure TfMainForm.pdfManualClick(Sender: TObject);
      strPath := extractFilePath( paramStr( 0 ) ) + '../help/lib/';
      shellOpen( strPath + 'at60_manual.pdf' );

      Again? this works great with Reader 7 under XP so we know the code is correct.

      Is there any sort of a setting within Reader 9 that is not being set right? I did make sure Reader 9 has the latest patch.

      My alternative, which I don't like is to call a browser with html code that allows the user to click and start Reader. Thats two steps, not the one step we intended the function to be.

      Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. I need to get this solved before we ship over 1000 installs in the next 30 days.

      Thank you!