Registry .reg files - a restore or a merge of keys?

[the_net_2.0]

Does anyone know what this does? Everything I see on the web says that double clicking these types of files merges current registry keys with the old ones that are in the file you're restoring. Is that true?

I back up the reg sometimes after using ccleaner. And now I'd like to restore it, but not if it simply merges keys. I want the old ones gone and the ones in the file to replace the current ones.

Can someone tell me how this works please? I'd appreciate it.

If it does actually merge the keys instead of replacing them, I would assume that a system restore point actually DOES replace items?? If someone can confirm this for me as well, i'd be greatful. Thanks!

 

[boblarson]

If the reg file has keys which don't exist, they are added. If it has keys which do exist the current ones are overwritten with the ones in your reg file. So, you need to be careful at what level you backup and then restore them.

 

[the_net_2.0]

what happens to the keys that are currently there, but not present in the backup reg file, bob? are they deleted?

what about the restore pt? how is that different?

thanks!

 

[Minkey]

what happens to the keys that are currently there, but not present in the backup reg file, bob? are they deleted?

No they will remain but please be careful you shouldn't really mess around with the registry unless your 100% confident because if you make a mistake you could completely mess up your PC.

I back up the reg sometimes after using ccleaner. And now I'd like to restore it, but not if it simply merges keys. I want the old ones gone and the ones in the file to replace the current ones.

I'm not sure why you would want to do that, ccleaner is designed to well clean up the registry and get rid of old entries so I would just run that every so often.

what about the restore pt? how is that different?

The system restore point is a snapshot of your system at a given time and contains additional information (user profile for example). I wouldn't use the registry as a backup tbh.

 

[Galaxiom]

Double clicking a file runs the default action. That is the one in bold in the context (right click) menu. The default for reg files is Merge.

If the reg file has keys which don't exist, they are added. If it has keys which do exist the current ones are overwritten with the ones in your reg file.

That is only half the picture. An add entry will act in this way but a reg file can also contain remove entries. The remove entries start with a minus sign.

[-HKEY_ etc

..... you shouldn't really mess around with the registry unless your 100% confident

I would like to reinforce this comment. Moreover it is not confidence, per se, that you need but knowledge of the registry structure. Misplaced confidence can be a disaster. If you can't look at a reg file and the targets in the registy and understand exactly what the entries are doing then you should not be messing with the registry.

Some registry values refer to other keys. Changing a reference can disconnect the values under the related key. A recent thread provided a link to a reg file that would do exactly that for mdb files leaving the unsuspecting registry meddler with no way to open mdb files from the context menu.

I am not a fan of registry cleaners. Generally they make no difference to the system performance although those who shelled out the cash to buy them would prefer to believe they did.

 

[the_net_2.0]

Galax,

Good info, for sure. But you might be missing one thing.

If perhaps, I DID sport some misplaced confidence and I restored the reg using a .reg file, would that matter at all if I could always resort to the BIOS and restore my machine to factory settings?

the reason I'm asking this is because, the machine I'm referring to in this thread specifically, don't really have anything on it that's important. Thus, restoring the machine to factory settings would not bother me one bit.

So, to answer my question, if it was a risk to restore via .reg, even if that WAS a ''disaster'' as you say, if the BIOS factory restore would always be available, why should I really care about that risk??

 

[Galaxiom]

So, to answer my question, if it was a risk to restore via .reg, even if that WAS a ''disaster'' as you say, if the BIOS factory restore would always be available, why should I really care about that risk??

The BIOS is the Basic Input/Output System. It is the firmware that allows the CPU to connect to the RAM, console and drives. It sets the boot order, ports and interupts for the integrated peripheral devices. You can revert that to factory settings if you like but that won't have any effect on a corrupted registry.

The registry is part of Windows. Reinstalling Windows can be required if the System and LocalMachine registy hive is too badly corrupted.

I didn't mean to dis you for playing around in the registry just warn you of the potential consequence. To be fair the only way to really get an understanding of the registry is to go delving. Doing on a machine that doesn't matter is a good place to experiment.

 

[the_net_2.0]

I wasn't going to respond, Galax, but I had to. I think it's kind of funny that you thought you offended me.

Man, I must work in a very rare industry. For some reason, everyone else but me right now lives and dies by being careful not to offend someone else. I just don't understand that. I know that everyone is scared of losing their job, but is there any particular reason why people say stuff like this, even on the web??

If I didn't have the strait forward and blunt attitude that I have, I would be absolutely nowhere, but then again I don't work in the corporate world right now. Is that what it's come to??

You don't have to answer....but that thought immediately came to me when I read your last post. Man...if that's the kind of pussy-foot attitude that Obama has ushered in with his presidency, we are in DEEP trouble.