Facts about R6025 errors

[TechguyMaxC 516]

Today, while working on a customer's machine I encountered one of the dreaded R6025 error messages upon closing the program.  Was it P3D, you ask?  No.  It was Quickbooks.  What?  The purpose of this thread is to establish that R6025 error messages are independent of P3D itself.  If you read the error message, you will see that it actually cites MS Visual C++ Runtime Library as the source.  

 

So does this mean there's nothing in P3D causing these errors?  Not necessarily.  However, it does indicate the possibility that these errors may be due to a difference in the Visual C++ Runtime Library that the LM developers run on their PCs vs. what many users may run.  According to Lockheed Martin, the P3D SDK is compatible with Visual Studio 2010.  It is safe to assume, therefore, that P3D itself is developed on the same platform.  So, if you receive these errors, go update your MS VC++ Runtime Library.  

 

Start here: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=5555

grab this next if you have a 64-bit machine: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=14632

 

 

After you have updated, reboot if prompted, or do it anyway just to be safe.  Then fire up P3D and start testing!  If you continue to receive these errors, it will then be possible to present P3D with significant, relevant information that may allow them to track down the cause of these seemingly pervasive errors.  

Edited August 26, 2014 by n4gix
Removed incorrect information per request of the OP.

[TrafficPilot 121]

Downloaded these files. The first two already had latest versions installed. The third is a service pack for Visual Studio 2010 which I don't have. Does this come as standard with Windows 7? I cannot find a download for Visual Studio 2010.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

If you've got the latest versions already then there's nothing else to do.  At the very least, you can now report your errors to LM with confidence knowing that you've already done some troubleshooting.  Hopefully that will help them get to the bottom of the issue.  

[denali 74]

UNINSTALL, then reinstall them. not only is it hit or miss whether or not you have the right version installed on your machine, these files are also notorious for having been originally obtained from all manor of places on the Internet.who knows where they have been and what they've gone through. By the time some get them that one particular function you need has a bit flipped in its file and you're accusing some innocent developer of being corrupted.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

UNINSTALL, then reinstall them. not only is it hit or miss whether or not you have the right version installed on your machine, these files are also notorious for having been originally obtained from all manor of places on the Internet.who knows where they have been and what they've gone through. By the time some get them that one particular function you need has a bit flipped in its file and you're accusing some innocent developer of being corrupted.

 

denali, if you've got this version already installed I agree with your suggestion, otherwise it's not necessary to uninstall first since the newer installer will automatically overwrite the files from the previous version.  

[sbclark 55]

Hi,

 

I believe I have all the ones necessary, however, if you could provide the final version number of all these C+++ Runtime Libraries, then it will be easy to check?

 

Bill Clark

[jimmy64 43]

I just got the error. I downloaded the files but I already had later versions than the download link provides. What I have installed came from the same place. Not sure that I want to roll back just yet, perhaps if it's persistent.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

I believe the files are version 10.0.40219 but those could have been updated by Windows Update at some point and these downloads may actually be older.  In that case, go ahead and try the uninstall/install procedure.  

[jimmy64 43]

Start here: http://www.microsoft...ls.aspx?id=5555

 

grab this next if you have a 64-bit machine: http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=14632

 

finish with this: http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=23691

The third item here, SP1, will not load due to not finding a compatible version of Microsoft visual 2010. I just loaded them. I can see that they're installed. The known issues page mentions nothing about this...I want to dump an ice bucket on someone at Microsoft!!!!

 

Might be fixed. I had used a system optimizer which only seems to cause problems...so these optimizing programs are the devil, got it, the devil!

 

No, still getting the error. I've used both versions mentioned in this thread. I'm going to take this to LM for support.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

The third item on the list can be removed, I mis-read it when doing the initial research for this thread.  

 

Need a mod to edit the OP.  

[jimmy64 43]

Problem Solved

 

I did a system restore prior to the first occurrence of the error. I ran the registry fixer portion of a system optimizer only. Updated the driver to 340.xxxx and deleted the P3D cfg. 

[sbclark 55]

The files suggested by TechguyMaxC are of this vintage:

 

MS Visual C++ 2010 x86 = 10.0.30319.01

MS Visual C++ 2010 x64 = 10.0.30319.01

 

The current version on my system are:

 

MS Visual C++ 2010 x86 = 10.0.40219 ----------- These are newer versions

MS Visual C++ 2010 x64 = 10.0.40219

 

So it doesn't make sense to me to have to go "backwards" to an older version by uninstalling.....we have to move forward. Attempting to manage a variety of patches from Microsoft would be overwhelming for most people........it is already too complex as it is.

 

If LM is doing something special, and we need to have the same thing they have, we need to be told about it?

 

By the way, all my modules are from Microsoft.

 

So what is next?

 

Bill Clark

[jimmy64 43]

The current version on my system are:

 

 

 

MS Visual C++ 2010 x86 = 10.0.40219 ----------- These are newer versions

 

MS Visual C++ 2010 x64 = 10.0.40219

These are the versions I am using. I now believe that registry errors are the culprit...if you do what I did above, your error may go away. I am no longer seeing it.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

The files suggested by TechguyMaxC are of this vintage:

 

MS Visual C++ 2010 x86 = 10.0.30319.01

MS Visual C++ 2010 x64 = 10.0.30319.01

 

The current version on my system are:

 

MS Visual C++ 2010 x86 = 10.0.40219 ----------- These are newer versions

MS Visual C++ 2010 x64 = 10.0.40219

 

So it doesn't make sense to me to have to go "backwards" to an older version by uninstalling.....we have to move forward. Attempting to manage a variety of patches from Microsoft would be overwhelming for most people........it is already too complex as it is.

 

If LM is doing something special, and we need to have the same thing they have, we need to be told about it?

 

By the way, all my modules are from Microsoft.

 

So what is next?

 

Bill Clark

 

Ok, I've been able to track down an update to version 10.0.40219 from 10.0.30319.  

 

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=26999

 

This is something that would normally only be delivered via Windows Update and that is why most of you are seeing a different version than the version I linked to.  You still need to have that version installed in order to apply this update.  

[sbclark 55]

TechguyMaxC,

 

I'm a little confused?

 

Are you saying, we need to have update 10.0.40219 installed (which I have) before upgrading to 10.0.40219.325 (version you get if you download from the link you just posted)? So those out there who are still at 30319, or some other vintage version, what are they supposed to do?

 

Are you also sure that the LM developers are at 40219.325 for the x86 and x64 versions?

 

Bill Clark