rejetto forum

Software => HFS ~ HTTP File Server => Topic started by: rejetto on April 28, 2006, 05:19:24 AM

Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on April 28, 2006, 05:19:24 AM
this is about 2.1 beta testing

DOWNLOAD (http://www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta20.zip)

what's new
+ Menu -> "Accept connections on"
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Support DESCRIPT.ION"
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Adding folder" 
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Icon masks..."
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Enable recursive listing" 
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Support Link Fingerprints"
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Skip confirmation on deletion"
+ Menu -> Other options -> "Input comment on file addition"
+ Menu -> Other options -> "Show customized options"
+ Menu -> Other options -> "Use ISO date format"
+ Menu -> Other options -> "Browse using localhost"
+ Menu -> Other options -> "Add icons..."
+ Menu -> Dynamic DNS updater -> "Disable"
+ Menu -> Fingerprints
+ Menu -> URL encoding -> "Unreadable passwords in URLs"
+ Menu -> URL encoding -> "Include password in pages"
+ Log menu -> Log what -> "Only served requests" (enabled by default)
+ File Menu -> "Copy URL with fingerprint"
+ File Menu -> "Diff template" (overlap main template)
+ File Menu -> "Hide file extention in listing"
+ File Menu -> Restrict acces -> "@anonymous"
+ File Menu -> Restrict acces -> "New account"
+ File Menu -> Upload -> Upload for accounts -> "New account"
+ File Menu -> Icon -> "New icon"
+ Self Test distinguish between router and firewall problems
+ confirm on item deletion
+ Self-test now cancelable
+ improved file/folder hints
+ improved drag&drop scrolling on VFS
+ when no port is specified and port 80 is busy, port 8080, 280, 10080 are probed (then dynamic port is used)
+ Log menu: clicking "Address 2 name" automatically fills the IP field
+ total download counter works now also for real-folders
+ symbol ~nodefault to skip the default file
+ command line: -a <FILENAME> (load additional ini file)
+ support browser cache command (If-Modified-Since)
+ [file.<EXT>] sections in template
+ "Copy url" now works for multiple files
+ double clicking on download tray icon brings to HFS window
+ F8 key switches easy/expert
+ cancel folder reading if client disconnected (useful for big folders)
+ speed up folder sorting (useful for big folders)
+ template editor: customizable font and status bar
+ sort by hits
+ added ini-commmand to be used with -a parameter: "load-tpl-from=FULLPATH"
* template: changed default refresh time for progress frame, from 3 to 7 seconds
* removed feature: "Visible only to anonymous users"
* self test: clearer warning
* Set url: old value as default
* accept IP masks with less than 3 dots if wildcards are used
* %up% %host% in [upload] [upload-results]
* renamed items in "Restrict access"
* renamed "Get passworded URL" in "Copy URL with password"
* split "Copy URL" and "Copy URL with different address"
* Users renamed to Accounts
- shortcut to folders inside real-folders are unsupported, thus now are correctly not listed 
- eliminated the lnk2frame() error message
- using "Add to HFS" on many folders, many instances stayed open
- messages "Cannot open clipboard" now trapped
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on April 28, 2006, 05:29:12 AM
i'm thinking about making things like [file.jpg] and having a thumbnail shown, without using javascript.

in 2.0, %item-url% was an url with full path.
now it is relative thus you can do things like <img src='thumbs/%item-url%'>  ...hiding the thumbs folder.

there is also another way to do the job, like using thumb_%item-url% files and using a files filter to hide the thumbnails \thumb_*
you decide
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on April 28, 2006, 01:25:44 PM
Thankyou!!

Thumbnails would be great but make it an option for each folder whether or not to display thumbnails.

Also, just one sudgestion, could you please make 'Hide extensions in listing' available for individual folders instead of all of them so for example I could have one folder display the extension but the other folder does not display the extension.

Thanks again.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on April 28, 2006, 05:02:13 PM
Quote from: "ANTS"
Thumbnails would be great but make it an option for each folder whether or not to display thumbnails.
you can already do it...just use diff template

Quote
Also, just one sudgestion, could you please make 'Hide extensions in listing' available for individual folders instead of all of them so for example I could have one folder display the extension but the other folder does not display the extension.
hmm, sure i can... but are you sure you need it?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ~GeeS~ on April 28, 2006, 07:55:56 PM
rejetto,

1. the ~files.lst command of f.e. http://10.0.0.150/D/~files.lst displays only the host and misses /folder(s): http://10.0.0.150index.html
Did you change the %encoded-folder% symbol?
_______
~GeeS~
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on April 29, 2006, 12:10:31 AM
Quote
hmm, sure i can... but are you sure you need it?

Yes I'm sure many people would like it but for example just say you keep a folder for music you don't wan't the file extension shown but and other folder for just random files you may want the file extension shown so new people can see what type of file it is.

Also, what ~GeeS~ said is true. When you click 'File List' it misses the /folder(s) part.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on April 29, 2006, 01:24:34 AM
Quote from: "~GeeS~"
1. the ~files.lst command of f.e. http://10.0.0.150/D/~files.lst displays only the host and misses /folder(s): http://10.0.0.150index.html
Did you change the %encoded-folder% symbol?
no, i changed %item-url%
i will fix this problem
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on April 29, 2006, 01:27:19 AM
gees, wonderful job on the wiki... but i think it is better to not document features of 2.1 before it is released, or anyway specify what is 2.1-only
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: guest on April 30, 2006, 11:03:24 AM
hi

may I know what the bottom function does and how it works

+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Support DESCRIPT.ION"
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ~GeeS~ on April 30, 2006, 05:23:43 PM
rejetto wrote:
Quote
i will fix this problem
Thx!
Quote
wonderful job on the wiki... but i think it is better to not document features of 2.1 before it is released, or anyway specify what is 2.1-only
Please don't mention it. It's a honour to be able to contribute to such an important piece of free and opensource software.
You are right, the wiki should refer to version 2.0final. I've already marked the 2.1beta specific addons.

several users requested the option "Hide extensions" and ANTS wrote:
Quote
... could you please make 'Hide extensions in listing' available for individual folders instead of all of them so for example I could have one folder display the extension but the other folder does not display the extension.
I don't need "Hide extensions" or even want to use this option!
 
HFS is a tool for easy sharing of files, with some very nice and useful additional options. HFS therefore is more convenient than a ftp server and can also be used for serving webpages. In fact, it is a file- and webserver with an extremely easy setup, ideal for WIN users.
But we should distinguish between the filesystem and webpages part!
Why should we hide the extensions of the files in the filesytem we offer our visitors for download?
I always want to know, what the file is I download and don't want to see a file displayed as music.mp3  when i'm exploring the filesystem, which then in fact is music.mp3.bat.
Do you hide the file extensions in your windows explorer? That's one of the first options I switch of on every box i'm working with, because I want to know what's going on. Ok, ok, your intentions are good  ... you don't want to bore your visitors with the repeating .mp3 extension, but present with a nice "Artist - Title" list in your filesystem.
For this purpose webpages (webpage_with_hyperlinks.html as item in a filesystem = webserver) were invented. Webpages are the GUI of the underlying filesystem and the filesystem contains the raw items for the webpages.

Use a HTML editor for full customized & designed pages or just copy the html from your browser, edit the extensions away, comment them and link to your files for download and also put a link to the filesystem for vistors, who choose to look at all folders and files and want browse them in the filesystem.
With other words: you can share all your files with HFS without knowing any html, but if you want to display sophisticated customized pages, you should code/copy&modify them yourself with some basic knowledge of HTML or a HTML editor. Webpage design would exceed the scope of HFS.

This is not intended to have critics on this specific proposal, but just a reminder to implement options carefully. Many options of HFS are very useful and have been implemented thanks to proposals from this community.

rejetto wrote:
Quote
+ symbol ~nodefault to skip the default file
This is another example of an option, which imho deserves some rethinking:
When an HFS admin decides to show a webpage instead of the filesystem, the admin decides to serve "webpage_with_links_to_files.html" with the menu option "Default file". Only the HFS admin has the right to make this decision and also has to face the consequences for the design of the resulting webpages and filesystem. But with the new ~nodefault command, any client can overrule the admins decision by appending ~nodefault in the browser's address line!
____
~GeeS~
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 01, 2006, 07:24:25 AM
Quote from: "guest"
may I know what the bottom function does and how it works
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Support DESCRIPT.ION"
use the search, luke
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3162&highlight=descript+ion
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 01, 2006, 07:26:49 AM
Quote from: "~GeeS~"
But with the new ~nodefault command, any client can overrule the admins decision by appending ~nodefault in the browser's address line!
i get your point: it is important to disable listing if you want to.
but if you have this need you can always use the options hide/hide tree/let browse.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 01, 2006, 08:52:32 AM
I'm going to agree with ~Gees~ and although I get your point Rejetto, I think ~Gees~ is right and I believe the ~nodefult shouldbe removed.
Title: Bug ?
Post by: naunim on May 01, 2006, 06:26:27 PM
I think that there is a bug with the "New link" function.  
The link don't open correctly...
Do you have the same problem?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: guesttt on May 01, 2006, 11:00:23 PM
2.1 works like a charm!

it automatically finds out the external address AND port!!

thanks!
Title: Re: Bug ?
Post by: rejetto on May 02, 2006, 01:06:00 AM
Quote from: "naunim"
I think that there is a bug with the "New link" function.  
The link don't open correctly...
Do you have the same problem?
yes, fixed
i'm making several changes in the code, be patient :)
redownload now
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on May 02, 2006, 06:44:35 AM
Thanks for fixing the links but the 'File list' still doesn't work properly.
Title: My thoughts
Post by: Anonymous on May 02, 2006, 02:42:12 PM
I agrees with ~GeeS~ on all points above. I'd have no use for
hiding file extensions, and the ~nodefult is something I'm not
comfortable with. As mentioned elsewhere in the forum, HFS
is a great program, but please don't add features to do things
that can be done by other means.  :)
Title: Re: My thoughts
Post by: Martok on May 02, 2006, 04:11:59 PM
Quote
I agrees with ~GeeS~ on all points above. I'd have no use for
hiding file extensions, and the ~nodefult is something I'm not
comfortable with.
I agree partly. Hiding file extensions on a file server is useless. But the ~nodefault option is really good for me, so that my visitors can choose(via a link I place on my html) if they want to see my page or only the files. Maybe an option to dis/enable this? (See my comment on options below)
Quote
As mentioned elsewhere in the forum, HFS
is a great program, but please don't add features to do things
that can be done by other means.
I also agree. But features that can't be done by other means would be nice to have in HFS.
And on adding options to HFS: I also think that too much options would not be good. But on the other hand, I really love software I can fully configure. I suggest to collect the menu items (that are too much) and put them in a dialog for options. I know, this is in To-Do for the VFS settings, but can be also for the others and with a raised priority. Adding more options now would only make it more complicated to switch later.

Just my two cents.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ~GeeS~ on May 02, 2006, 05:17:14 PM
Martok wrote:
Quote
But the ~nodefault option is really good for me, so that my visitors can choose(via a link I place on my html) if they want to see my page or only the files.
I get the feeling, that you put your webpages in the same folder as your files, but maybe i'm wrong.
My design on file- and webpages would be like this:
root with folder_with_filesystem and (hidden)_folder_with_webpages_linking_to_folders_in_filesystem
The ~nodefault command option with this setup is not needed and the files- and webpages reside in separated trees, which is more usable and intuitive for me, but this is a personal preference.
Please let me know if I missed something.
______
~GeeS~
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Martok on May 02, 2006, 08:26:59 PM
Quote from: "~GeeS~"
Please let me know if I missed something.

No, you got it all  :D
I could make a structure like you have, but this would result in even longer paths than I already have (every project I host has its own subfolder).
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Mara on May 06, 2006, 08:37:29 PM
Please fix ~files.lst

server shows ->
http://85.217.202.73bg1.gif
http://85.217.202.73gallery.css
http://85.217.202.73search_row_back.gif
http://85.217.202.73winstyle_dlbut.gif

the true is
http://85.217.202.73/img/bg1.gif
http://85.217.202.73/img/gallery.css
http://85.217.202.73/img/search_row_back.gif
http://85.217.202.73/img/winstyle_dlbut.gif
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 06, 2006, 08:41:12 PM
mara

All links are DEAD.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on May 07, 2006, 08:07:59 PM
I think mara refers to the missing slash between the IP and the filename, not the link itself.

MarkV
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 14, 2006, 10:10:22 PM
i've been away for a while
redownload and you get the bug fixed and some input dialog resizable
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 16, 2006, 06:09:36 PM
redownload

beta4
+ login accepts only present user/password
+ Menu -> Other options -> "Browse using localhost"
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Adding folder"
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 16, 2006, 06:18:33 PM
about the ~nodefault
i think a good solution is to be optional, and OFF by default.
it would be used only by power users, so, better be OFF.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on May 16, 2006, 08:11:47 PM
The download link -> first post in this thread takes you to http://www.melauto.it/rejetto/hfs.test.exe .

Reading through the thread indicates that you have made changes to the original hfs.test.exe which now looks like you are up to a beta 4 version.  I've downloaded this before but have no idea now what version  I have downloaded just by looking at the filename.

In the future would it be possible to change the filename to show the current version you are making public -> example hfs2.1beta4.exe instead of just leaving the same filename hfs.test.exe the same even if you make changes? ;)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Martok on May 16, 2006, 08:34:33 PM
What the hell is  the new self-tester doing?
Everyone can browse my site, but the self-test finds no connection. Then it goes through some ports while changing from my port to some others (in HFS main settings).
Why not a message as before (self test failed or something like this)?

And to the file names: versions in it would be great!
The automatic updateer still says beta1 is the current. Why this?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on May 16, 2006, 11:45:44 PM
Quote from: "maverick"
The download link -> first post in this thread takes you to http://www.melauto.it/rejetto/hfs.test.exe .

I would recommend to zip it, not everyone can download .exe files...
There are even people who don't download .exe for security reasons.

(offtopic: Currently I've nothing but problems to connect to this forum... :?)

MarkV
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 17, 2006, 02:38:55 AM
Quote from: "Martok"
What the hell is  the new self-tester doing?
Everyone can browse my site, but the self-test finds no connection.
it seems a bug, but i need some more info to debug it

Quote
Then it goes through some ports while changing from my port to some others (in HFS main settings).
Why not a message as before (self test failed or something like this)?
it is trying to fix your non-working settings.
the point should be noticing that your settings work!

Quote
And to the file names: versions in it would be great!
The automatic updateer still says beta1 is the current. Why this?
i just published last betas with not much care
i will rename and update info

Quote from: "MarkV"
(offtopic: Currently I've nothing but problems to connect to this forum... :?)
please post here http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3215
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 17, 2006, 02:43:12 AM
redownload

beta5
+ enable ~nodefault
- some settings were not saved
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Martok on May 17, 2006, 03:19:45 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
it seems a bug, but i need some more info to debug it

I have looked into server communication with Packetyzer, and after testing my dynDNS name, your server reports '6 server not replying' (not exactly, I have the packet log not here atm, but the code 6 is sure). Then it tries localhost, then my external ip, other ports. After my ext. IP is tested, your server reports '4 try slower'.

Maybe this helps?

To test, try this: http://underbyte.homeip.net:230/
If you see the user/pass dialog, it is working well.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on May 17, 2006, 06:42:44 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
Quote from: "MarkV"
(offtopic: Currently I've nothing but problems to connect to this forum... :?)
please post here http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3215
I'll do that, but today all is well.

MarkV
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 25, 2006, 02:50:52 AM
redownload

beta6
+ Menu -> Start/Exit -> "Run HFS when Windows starts"
+ load diff template from external files (hfs.diff.tpl)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 27, 2006, 12:20:20 AM
Hi rejetto is the 'Run HFS when Windows starts' option working because I clicked it and there is no tick next to it and nothing is entered into my msconfig list.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 27, 2006, 12:25:11 AM
well, i guess it is not working for you.
did you retry?
are you running a limited Windows user account?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 27, 2006, 02:54:21 AM
I don't know why some people are so lazy that they want a built-in HFS option to start HFS at windows start-up.

All that they have to do *ONCE* is include HFS in window's startup folder.  DONE!
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rol801 on May 27, 2006, 03:03:10 AM
"Run HFS when Windows starts" is not working

I put HFS in my 2003 server. but i click the option , it cant save !
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 27, 2006, 05:14:59 AM
yes, sorry, now fixed, and also added

+ Menu -> Start/Exit -> "Minimize to tray clicking the close button"
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 27, 2006, 02:06:33 PM
Thanks Rejetto! Great work.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: jack_2000 on May 28, 2006, 10:32:45 AM
soo where is the NEW New version
and why is the /temp/ folder forbiden for browsing...
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 28, 2006, 04:40:49 PM
Quote from: "jack_2000"
soo where is the NEW New version
there is a link in the first post of this topic
Quote
and why is the /temp/ folder forbiden for browsing...
because i don't want people to download ANY file in there
Title: quick clipboard copy button
Post by: mastabog on May 28, 2006, 05:38:02 PM
Hello,

First off, huge congrats for this wonderful piece of software ... simply amazing!

A suggestion towards making lazy users' (like me) life even easier. Could you add a small button that copies the URL of the selected file to the clipboard? It could be placed near the existing "Browse" button for instance. It would be nice if it handled multiple selections (which are enabled already in HFS) and construct a string of URLs separated by line feeds for instance and copy it to clipboard. It would make it easier to copy and paste multiple URLs in your IM chat window with your friends (just an example).

To push things even further, you could add a small "copy to clipboard button" next to each entry in the file/folder listing of HFS. That way you won't even have to select the respective entry, you would just click the "copy" button then to copy to clipboard.

My two cents worth of suggestions ... :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on May 29, 2006, 05:43:54 AM
Menu > Other Options > Auto-copy url on addition.

If you want a full file list just open up the directory where you want all the links to send and click 'File list' and it will list everyfile so you can copy it all.
Title: Re: quick clipboard copy button
Post by: rejetto on May 29, 2006, 06:03:25 AM
Quote from: "mastabog"
Could you add a small button that copies the URL of the selected file to the clipboard?
many users don't know that bold in menus is the standard way in Windows to tell that that is the default function.
this to say that if you just double click on a file, it will copy the url.

Quote
be nice if it handled multiple selections (which are enabled already in HFS) and construct a string of URLs separated by line feeds for instance and copy it to clipboard. It would make it easier to copy and paste multiple URLs in your IM chat window with your friends (just an example).
yes, interesting feature.
while i implement it, did you notice the "file list" feature, as adviced by ANTS ?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 29, 2006, 06:06:17 AM
redownload

beta8
+ Menu -> Other Options -> "Add icons..."
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Icon masks..."
* "Hide file extention" moved to file menu
- "Adding folder" was not working
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on May 29, 2006, 06:47:40 AM
rejetto hi ;)
Good addition "Add icons..."!  :^^:
It Remains to go with gif on png for full support colour XP =)
Title: Re: quick clipboard copy button
Post by: mastabog on May 29, 2006, 09:50:59 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
Quote from: "mastabog"
Could you add a small button that copies the URL of the selected file to the clipboard?
many users don't know that bold in menus is the standard way in Windows to tell that that is the default function.
this to say that if you just double click on a file, it will copy the url.
Fair enough. Exactly what I wanted. The fact that the bold entry is itself a sub-menu got me confused. Default actions in context menus usually are not sub-menus.

Quote from: "rejetto"
Quote
be nice if it handled multiple selections (which are enabled already in HFS) and construct a string of URLs separated by line feeds for instance and copy it to clipboard. It would make it easier to copy and paste multiple URLs in your IM chat window with your friends (just an example).
yes, interesting feature.
while i implement it, did you notice the "file list" feature, as adviced by ANTS ?
Yes, I know about the "file list" link. However, the "file list" link is something very different from what I described and it doesn't work in all cases: it has to be a directory and the directory has to be browsable in order to get the file listing and the "file list" link to click on. Then you'd have to open your browser, point it to that link, click on "file list" and copy the string to clipboard. I was talking about a multiple selection of random or all entries in HFS (may they be folders or/and files) with ctrl+click or shift+click and have the URLs corresponding to them copied to clipboard separated by LF or CR+LF. This could be achieved either by an entry in the context menu for the multiple selected entries or by a separate "copy" button that may reside next to the "browse" button that is already present.

Thanks for considering the suggestion :)
Title: Re: quick clipboard copy button
Post by: rejetto on May 29, 2006, 06:58:03 PM
Quote from: "mastabog"
The fact that the bold entry is itself a sub-menu got me confused. Default actions in context menus usually are not sub-menus.
yes, i know, do you have a suggestion about it?
Title: Re: quick clipboard copy button
Post by: mastabog on May 30, 2006, 09:53:41 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
Quote from: "mastabog"
The fact that the bold entry is itself a sub-menu got me confused. Default actions in context menus usually are not sub-menus.
yes, i know, do you have a suggestion about it?
I can't tell if you were sarcastic but in case you weren't then maybe it would be less confusing if the "Copy URL" bold menu entry was a command/action and there would be another entry below it, say, "Copy URL options" being the sub-menu that it is now.

You can also place the standard Ctrl+C keyboard shortcut next to the "Copy URL" menu command to make it really windows-like :).
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 30, 2006, 02:19:04 PM
no sarcasm.
your advice makes sense.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: curls on May 30, 2006, 03:01:44 PM
Quote from: "guesttt"
2.1 works like a charm!

it automatically finds out the external address AND port!!

thanks!
It doesn't do that here.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 30, 2006, 03:05:12 PM
Quote from: "curls"
Quote from: "guesttt"
2.1 works like a charm!
it automatically finds out the external address AND port!!
thanks!
It doesn't do that here.
it is a new feature of self test.
it makes several tries, and if one of this works, it set it.
but it can't always find the right settings, and sometimes the right settings don't exist at all (until you configure your router).
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: curls on May 30, 2006, 03:33:52 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
Quote from: "curls"
Quote from: "guesttt"
2.1 works like a charm!
it automatically finds out the external address AND port!!
thanks!
It doesn't do that here.
it is a new feature of self test.
it makes several tries, and if one of this works, it set it.
but it can't always find the right settings, and sometimes the right settings don't exist at all (until you configure your router).
Ah, ok, thanks. It's not finding the settings even though I've forwarded the port in my router. Still, if I use "Find external address" it works OK.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 30, 2006, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
but it can't always find the right settings, and sometimes the right settings don't exist at all (until you configure your router).
Is it a good idea to have a feature like "self-test" if it doesn't always give the correct information?  Getting wrong information isn't useful.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 30, 2006, 04:10:06 PM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
Quote from: "rejetto"
but it can't always find the right settings, and sometimes the right settings don't exist at all (until you configure your router).
Is it a good idea to have a feature like "self-test" if it doesn't always give the correct information?  Getting wrong information isn't useful.
It isn't giving any information. Apparently, if it works, it finds your external IP, but if it doesn't, it just tells you that it can't find it.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on May 30, 2006, 05:50:34 PM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
It isn't giving any information. Apparently, if it works, it finds your external IP, but if it doesn't, it just tells you that it can't find it.
I must have missed something in this thread and will have to look through it again.  But right now I can't see the point of having that self-test feature if it doesn't give the right information.  What good is it?  As far as finding the external IP there is already a option for that: Menu -> IP Address -> Find external address.  That feature works everytime (so far for me anyway).
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 31, 2006, 03:49:13 AM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
Quote from: "rejetto"
but it can't always find the right settings, and sometimes the right settings don't exist at all (until you configure your router).
Is it a good idea to have a feature like "self-test" if it doesn't always give the correct information?  Getting wrong information isn't useful.
information? i said it searches for the right settings.

if you don't understand what this feature is for, you can read the online documentation (menu -> help -> full guide)
Quote
Self Test
A test is made to verify the visibility of your HFS from the internet. It also tries to automatically solve some possible problems.

"find external address" won't tell you if your HFS is visible, and won't try to fix any problem
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 31, 2006, 05:32:17 AM
forgot to say that from beta8 "browse using localhost" is on by default
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: curls on May 31, 2006, 05:57:37 AM
How about an option for it to "find external address" on start up, instead of having to use the menu? Not that it's a probem using the menu, more that I keep forgetting.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 31, 2006, 06:21:15 AM
menu -> start/exit -> Find external address at startup

before asking a feature, ensure you also look in Expert mode
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on May 31, 2006, 06:59:42 AM
redownload

beta9
+ Menu -> "Accept connections on"
+ File Menu -> Restrict accces -> "@anonymous"
+ "Copy url" now works for multiple files
* renamed items in "Restrict access"
* renamed "Get passworded URL" in "Copy URL with password"
* split "Copy URL" and "Copy URL with different address"
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: curls on May 31, 2006, 10:01:37 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
menu -> start/exit -> Find external address at startup

before asking a feature, ensure you also look in Expert mode
Oops! I thought I'd looked in there. I'll blame my hangover. :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: curls on May 31, 2006, 11:04:58 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
redownload

beta9
If I try to open more than 1 file from the right click context menu, I get the error message pasted below. When I dismiss the error dialog, only the first file shows up in HFS. Opening them from within HFS works fine.

Access violation at address 005010ED in module 'hfs.exe'. Read of address 0000000C
HFS 2.1 beta9
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stack list, generated 31/05/2006 11:57:48
 + $0[005010ED]{hfs.exe     } main.existsNodeWithName (Line 1445, "main.pas" + 4) + $0
 + $33[0040414F]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleAnyException + $33
 + $D7[0046A0A7]{hfs.exe     } Controls.TWinControl.DefaultHandler + $D7
 + $6[005111AE]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.addFilesFromString (Line 5218, "main.pas" + 12) + $6
 + $17[00519CDB]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.processParams_after (Line 7366, "main.pas" + 6) + $17
 + $A[0051DE31]{hfs.exe     } hfs.processSlaveParams (Line 48, "c:\code\mine\hfs\hfs.dpr" + 4) + $A
 + $C[0048053C]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 90, "monoLib.pas" + 10) + $C
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $10[00453078]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TCustomForm.CMActivate + $10
 + $12[0048051D]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 86, "monoLib.pas" + 6) + $12
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $A[004333EE]{hfs.exe     } Contnrs.TComponentList.GetItems + $A
 + $83[00456CC7]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.ProcessMessage + $83
 + $A[00456CFE]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.HandleMessage + $A
 + $147[00453B7B]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TCustomForm.ShowModal + $147
 + $5[0047FDF0]{hfs.exe     } ftmExceptionForm.TerrorHandler.ShowForm (Line 322, "ftmExceptionForm.pas" + 16) + $5
 + $5[0047FA52]{hfs.exe     } ftmExceptionForm.TerrorHandler.AppException (Line 265, "ftmExceptionForm.pas" + 10) + $5
 + $61[00456FE9]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.HandleException + $61
 + $69B[0045676B]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $69B
 + $D7[0046A0A7]{hfs.exe     } Controls.TWinControl.DefaultHandler + $D7
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $6[005111AE]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.addFilesFromString (Line 5218, "main.pas" + 12) + $6
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $17[00519CDB]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.processParams_after (Line 7366, "main.pas" + 6) + $17
 + $A[0051DE31]{hfs.exe     } hfs.processSlaveParams (Line 48, "c:\code\mine\hfs\hfs.dpr" + 4) + $A
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $C[0048053C]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 90, "monoLib.pas" + 10) + $C
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $12[0048051D]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 86, "monoLib.pas" + 6) + $12
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $A[004333EE]{hfs.exe     } Contnrs.TComponentList.GetItems + $A
 + $83[00456CC7]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.ProcessMessage + $83
 + $A[00456CFE]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.HandleMessage + $A
 + $147[00453B7B]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TCustomForm.ShowModal + $147
 + $5[0047FDF0]{hfs.exe     } ftmExceptionForm.TerrorHandler.ShowForm (Line 322, "ftmExceptionForm.pas" + 16) + $5
 + $5[0047FA52]{hfs.exe     } ftmExceptionForm.TerrorHandler.AppException (Line 265, "ftmExceptionForm.pas" + 10) + $5
 + $61[00456FE9]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.HandleException + $61
 + $69B[0045676B]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $69B
 + $D7[0046A0A7]{hfs.exe     } Controls.TWinControl.DefaultHandler + $D7
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $6[005111AE]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.addFilesFromString (Line 5218, "main.pas" + 12) + $6
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $17[00519CDB]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.processParams_after (Line 7366, "main.pas" + 6) + $17
 + $A[0051DE31]{hfs.exe     } hfs.processSlaveParams (Line 48, "c:\code\mine\hfs\hfs.dpr" + 4) + $A
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $C[0048053C]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 90, "monoLib.pas" + 10) + $C
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $12[0048051D]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 86, "monoLib.pas" + 6) + $12
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $A[004333EE]{hfs.exe     } Contnrs.TComponentList.GetItems + $A
 + $83[00456CC7]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.ProcessMessage + $83
 + $A[00456CFE]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.HandleMessage + $A
 + $147[00453B7B]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TCustomForm.ShowModal + $147
 + $5[0047FDF0]{hfs.exe     } ftmExceptionForm.TerrorHandler.ShowForm (Line 322, "ftmExceptionForm.pas" + 16) + $5
 + $5[0047FA52]{hfs.exe     } ftmExceptionForm.TerrorHandler.AppException (Line 265, "ftmExceptionForm.pas" + 10) + $5
 + $61[00456FE9]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.HandleException + $61
 + $69B[0045676B]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $69B
 + $D7[0046A0A7]{hfs.exe     } Controls.TWinControl.DefaultHandler + $D7
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $6[005111AE]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.addFilesFromString (Line 5218, "main.pas" + 12) + $6
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $17[00519CDB]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.processParams_after (Line 7366, "main.pas" + 6) + $17
 + $A[0051DE31]{hfs.exe     } hfs.processSlaveParams (Line 48, "c:\code\mine\hfs\hfs.dpr" + 4) + $A
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $C[0048053C]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 90, "monoLib.pas" + 10) + $C
 + $2A[004043FA]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleFinally + $2A
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $12[0048051D]{hfs.exe     } monoLib.Tmono.Hook (Line 86, "monoLib.pas" + 6) + $12
 + $51[00456121]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.WndProc + $51
 + $0[00428D24]{hfs.exe     } Classes.StdWndProc (Line 10565, "classes.pas" + 8) + $0
 + $A[004333EE]{hfs.exe     } Contnrs.TComponentList.GetItems + $A
 + $83[00456CC7]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.ProcessMessage + $83
 + $A[00456CE6]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.ProcessMessages + $A
 + $7[004BEF9F]{hfs.exe     } HttpProt.THttpCli.DoRequestSync (Line 2762, "HttpProt.pas" + 22) + $7
 + $7[004C01CE]{hfs.exe     } HttpProt.THttpCli.Get (Line 3396, "HttpProt.pas" + 1) + $7
 + $3[004DE0A6]{hfs.exe     } utilLib.httpGet (Line 1088, "utillib.pas" + 7) + $3
 + $8[004DE2A5]{hfs.exe     } utilLib.loadIPservices (Line 1122, "utillib.pas" + 2) + $8
 + $A[004DE38B]{hfs.exe     } utilLib.getExternalAddress (Line 1138, "utillib.pas" + 5) + $A
 + $11[0051C31B]{hfs.exe     } main.TmainFrm.finalInit (Line 7945, "main.pas" + 58) + $11
 + $7[0051E35A]{hfs.exe     } hfs.hfs (Line 65, "c:\code\mine\hfs\hfs.dpr" + 14) + $7
----------------------------------------------------------------
System   : Windows XP Professional, Version: 5.1, Build: A28, "Service Pack 2"
Processor: AMD, AMD Athlon(tm) XP 3000+, 2166 MHz MMX
Display  : 1280x1024 pixels, 32 bpp
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Product Versions

hfs.exe: Build: 0 31/05/2006 09:01:56
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Yves on June 01, 2006, 06:09:22 PM
Quote from: "Martok"
What the hell is  the new self-tester doing?
Everyone can browse my site, but the self-test finds no connection.
Exactly the same here with all versions from 2.0 (stable) up to 2.1beta9 (untested).
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3324
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 02, 2006, 01:24:46 PM
indeed the selftest problem has nothing to do with 2.1, thus lets discuss it in the other topic
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 02, 2006, 01:32:16 PM
redownload

beta10
+ improved file/folder hints
- bugfixes on @anonymous
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on June 02, 2006, 05:46:10 PM
well add request when removing folder  ;)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 02, 2006, 06:36:51 PM
Quote from: "tosha"
well add request when removing folder  ;)
this is truly a good point!
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Martok on June 03, 2006, 03:41:50 PM
It seems like there are problems loading or saving @anonymous from a VFS?
Am I missing something or do others also have this problem?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 03, 2006, 04:32:42 PM
yes, it is a bug, fixed in

beta11
+ confirm on item deletion
+ drag&drop scrolling on VFS improved
* removed feature: "Visible only to anonymous users"
* self test: clearer warning
- using "Add to HFS" on many folders, many instances stayed open
- reloading a VFS, @anonymous restrictions were lost
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: curls on June 04, 2006, 08:40:46 AM
I'm no longer getting the Access Violation message when adding more than one file via the context menu, but only the first file shows up in HFS
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on June 05, 2006, 02:44:45 PM
further to use in Comment "descript.ion" possible else try to use "Folder.jpg" (in folders with music), which uses WMP?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 06, 2006, 03:57:38 AM
Quote from: "tosha"
further to use in Comment "descript.ion" possible else try to use "Folder.jpg" (in folders with music), which uses WMP?
i didn't understand :?
Quote from: "curls"
I'm no longer getting the Access Violation message when adding more than one file via the context menu, but only the first file shows up in HFS
should be fixed in next beta
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 06, 2006, 04:00:00 AM
beta12
- "Add to HFS" was not working
- "file list" doesn't work for folders with single quotes (')
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on June 06, 2006, 04:27:12 AM
Quote
Quote from: "tosha"
further to use in Comment "descript.ion" possible else try to use "Folder.jpg" (in folders with music), which uses WMP?
i didn't understand :?

When WindowsMediaPlayer updates information on mp3 then drawing Folder.jpg appears in file, which keeps the scene of the album given mp3.
Possible use this file Folder.jpg in Comment for folder with mp3? ;)

p.s. sorry for my english %)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 06, 2006, 04:30:40 AM
comment is html, so you can do anything you can do with html/js/css
try something like <img src='Folder.jpg'>
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on June 06, 2006, 04:52:33 AM
ok, not shall more nag :))
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: mastabog on June 06, 2006, 05:18:24 PM
I have another small suggestion that is very easy to implement.

When using a separate tray icon for each connection, it would be nice if the per-connection tray icons responded to double clicks. Right now double-clicking on a per-connection tray icon does nothing. It would be nice if they brought up HFS main window (eventually highlighting the clicked connection in the connection info window area of HFS).

Not an important change but a welcome one nonetheless :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 06, 2006, 06:18:48 PM
accepted
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 06, 2006, 10:52:34 PM
beta 13
+ File Menu -> Restrict accces -> "New account"
+ File Menu -> Upload -> Upload for accounts -> "New account"
+ File Menu -> Icon -> "New icon"
+ double clicking on download tray icon brings to HFS window
+ F5 key switches easy/expert
* Users renamed to Accounts
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on June 07, 2006, 12:51:05 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
+ F8 key switches easy/expert
Strange, on my system it's F5. Was it a typo?

MarkV
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 07, 2006, 01:31:21 AM
yes a typo :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on June 07, 2006, 04:22:55 AM
It would be not bad to add registration of the user automatic (and accordingly an option to expose: to allow whether or not)  ;)
p.s. Though I understand, that it probably not simply to carry out

+ It is possible to make so that at addition of object asked a question on an attachment of the comment...
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 07, 2006, 04:44:20 AM
but HOW would such feature be useful?
or you suggested just because you see it in forums? :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 07, 2006, 06:21:50 AM
Just started testing betas again.  Gave v2.0 Final a good workout this last month.  Noticed some nice additions to the betas since I last looked at them (beta 4).  Keep up the good work rejetto. :^^:
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 07, 2006, 06:44:53 AM
When the template is first opened, it opens in a small window that has to be resized everytime for proper viewing.  Would it be possible for HFS to retain the resized window size and location in the ini?  BTW thanks for implementing the wordwrap feature.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: mastabog on June 07, 2006, 01:23:28 PM
A very small bug-like/unexepected behaviour report.

In the HFS window, when multiple entries are selected (say with ctrl+click or shift+click) single clicking on a selected entry does nothing, they all remain selected. Normal Windows behaviour would automatically deselect all selected entries and select the clicked one.

In HFS, in such a situation you have to either click an unselected entry or click somewhere outside the entries space in order to select just one of the multiple selected entries. It's nothing major, but mildly annoying :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 07, 2006, 03:16:35 PM
Just noticed a problem with beta 13.  Don't know when it started in v2.1 but there was no problem with v2.0 final.  

You must have made a change to the way Symbol - %parent-folder% works with Sub-Folders (both real & virtual).  Whatever change was made makes it incompatible with STunnel.  A https connection changes to a http connection if you go back to a previous page that has sub-folders.  Going back to a previous page at the root level isn't affected.

Would it be possible to change that symbol back to the way it was in v2.0 Final?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 07, 2006, 04:04:01 PM
what changed is %item-url%

what in 2.1 is %encoded-folder%%item-url%
in 2.0 was all in %item-url%
you can read the reason in first posts of this topic
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 07, 2006, 07:19:55 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
what changed is %item-url%

what in 2.1 is %encoded-folder%%item-url%
in 2.0 was all in %item-url%
you can read the reason in first posts of this topic
Is there anyway this problem can be fixed so it works like in 2.0 and still allow that thumbs option if anybody uses it?  the only url problem arises when going back to a previous page with sub-folders.  I would sure hate to see something like this affect the functionality of security feature.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 07, 2006, 11:18:23 PM
i can't just revert the code.
it is not a matter of delphi, it can only be http/html.
so i need to know what's the right html and what's the wrong html.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 08, 2006, 01:29:33 AM
Well, it is just to bad that there is no way around the problem introduced in 2.1 for thumbs.  IMHO a working SSL connection feature is much more important to me and my users.  By the way I introduced wallpaper thumbs  in my site about 2 years ago with just html.  I enjoyed testing some of the 2.1 betas.  Unfortunately, I find it necessary to put it in the bit bucket.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 08, 2006, 04:26:28 AM
why can't you just compare the 2 produced HTMLs and report what is changed?
I could do it myself, but i don't use stunnel, so i could not be sure about what is going to break it.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on June 08, 2006, 06:18:06 AM
I believe that SSL support is very important for HFS. Aswell as this, hopefully one day HFS will include server side support for things such as PHP.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 08, 2006, 09:14:16 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
why can't you just compare the 2 produced HTMLs and report what is changed?
Using the default templates of v2.0 final and v2.1 b13 and a page that has sub-folders:

v2.0 final
Working - <a class=big href="/Resources/"><img src="/~img14"> UP</a>

v2.1 b13
Not Working - <a class=big href="/Resources"><img src="/~img14"> UP</a>

That confirms what I was saying in my above posts.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 08, 2006, 11:28:07 AM
this is exactly what i needed to know

redownload beta13 and let me know
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 08, 2006, 01:33:54 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
redownload beta13 and let me know
The problem going 'back' from sub-directory to sub-directory seems to be fixed.

However, there is now a problem going back to the root. (with or without previous sub-directories).

This is what I see in the html:
<a href="/A"> which takes me to a 404 Not Found Error Page.  As you know that should be <a href="/">

That letter A is the first letter of the folder name at the root level.  I confirmed that with another folder name that started with the letter M.  In that case the html showed <a href="/M">.
Title: 404
Post by: Anonymous on June 08, 2006, 03:02:57 PM
I just posted something similar in the "Bug Reports" topic a few minutes ago. Of course my first letter file name is different.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 08, 2006, 05:48:56 PM
sorry guys, redownload
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 14, 2006, 08:45:42 PM
this is an experimental beta, with BIG NEWS
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta14.zip

beta14
+ tar archives
+ recursive file listing  
+ boosted startup download speed
+ cancel folder reading if client disconnected (useful for big folders)
+ speed up folder sorting (useful for big folders)



to get a tar archive of a folder, add ~folder.tar to the URL.
to get a recursive file list, add ?recursive to the URL of the file list.
if you want a tar archive that include subfolders, then use ~folder.tar?recursive ...
current template doesn't use such features, so you have to edit the template yourself, until it is included.
for now, just test the new tar and recursive features.
enjoy
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on June 15, 2006, 01:48:01 AM
Great work Rejetto!

The tar archive downloading works fine! I also tried ~folder.tar?recursive  and it worked great. However I'm not sure what this means:

Quote
to get a recursive file list, add ?recursive to the URL of the file list.

I did that and nothing happened.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on June 15, 2006, 01:50:15 AM
About the ?recursive, I understand it now :D It will be great when you can add it to the template rejetto. You should just put it under the File List text on the template! :D :D
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on June 15, 2006, 05:02:48 PM
There are many questions when use programs ReGet, etc. The Login and the password is entered through a browser, and to specify them ReGet not everyone think:)
Well to switch on URL with the password for files (for example http: // Igor:1487@host.net/smiles.avi)
;)

(sorry for my english %))
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on June 16, 2006, 01:56:13 AM
Rejetto I have founda big security flaw with this. If a folder is password protected and you use ~folder.tar?recursive the protected folder is included in the download even if the user doesn't enter a password. I love the feature of downloading files but this really needs to be fixed when you get a chance.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 16, 2006, 08:29:20 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
beta14
+ tar archives
Download tray icon doesn't show during download.  Downloads aren't counted.  Doesn't respect the 'Let Download' feature.  If 'Let Download' is disabled for a folder, the download is allowed anyway.  Needs to be fixed.  As 'Let Browse' is closely related to 'Let Download', that should be checked as well to ensure that downloads from non browseable folders aren't allowed for users that don't have access.  With beta14, an upload folder with [nofiles] can't be opened?  HFS would time out if I waited long enough.

Folder archives has been brought up many months ago as a suggested feature.  At that time it was also brought up to try and use an archive format that is more commonly used on the net.  You mentioned the zip format might be to hard to implement.  When the rar format was brought up, you said you would check into it.  The rar format is commonly used world wide.  Any chance of rar archives?

Tested OK with STunnel.

Quote from: "ANTS"
Rejetto I have founda big security flaw with this. If a folder is password protected and you use ~folder.tar?recursive the protected folder is included in the download even if the user doesn't enter a password.
I don't get the security flaw you mention you get.  If I password protect certain folders that are included within a sub-directory containing other folders, then use the ~folder.tar?recursive hfs  archiving method, all of the folders are archived 'except' the ones that I password protected which I would think is the expected behavior.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 16, 2006, 10:57:31 AM
Quote from: "maverick"
Download tray icon doesn't show during download.  Downloads aren't counted.  Doesn't respect the 'Let Download' feature.
...
thanks for mentioning, it will help.
as i said, this is an experimental version and was meant just for testing the archive streaming.


Quote
Any chance of rar archives?

 15/06/2006 01.35.43, Computer Guy
 heh still tar eh :)
 can't get PK to work?

 15/06/2006 01.38.39, rejetto
because you think the problem is only the format
it took many hours to make the tar, because you have to solve many other problems that have nothing to do with the format
if you face too many problems in a single shot, you just fail

 15/06/2006 01.39.24, Computer Guy
 libraries and stuff like that?

 15/06/2006 01.39.30, rejetto
no lib can help me
because none of them work in streaming


Quote
Tested OK with STunnel.
nice
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 16, 2006, 11:18:20 AM
Quote from: "ANTS"
Rejetto I have founda big security flaw with this. If a folder is password protected and you use ~folder.tar?recursive the protected folder is included in the download even if the user doesn't enter a password. I love the feature of downloading files but this really needs to be fixed when you get a chance.
yes, just noticed. as i said above, it was just to test if the stream works. that's why i didn't updated the first post with this version. i will now work on the rest to get a complete beta.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: mastabog on June 16, 2006, 11:44:04 AM
Another suggestion well worth looking into in my opnion: link fingerprints (http://mdhashtool.mozdev.org/lfinfo.html) to automate file verification.

It started being supported by download managers (e.g. GetRight), browser extensions (e.g. mdhashtool for firefox) and others. It would be nice if this was an option in HFS so that URLs are copied with the hash anchors but also available in directory file listings.

I was thinking of adding a command in the right click menu, say, "Copy URL with MD5 hash", or a checkbox option so that whenever the user double-clicks the MD5 hash is computed and added to the link (both in clipboard and in HFS's address bar). You might even redesign a "Copy URL options" submenu and add the option in there.

Here is what i was thinking of:

(http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/9642/linkfing35ya.png)  or  (http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/2053/linkfing10ec.png)

or (http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/2708/linkfing27rl.png)

Being a link anchor (#), it doesn't create problems for browsers or download managers that do not support link fingerprints. However, I don't think it's a good idea to have this enabled at all times as large files will cause heavy disk activity and cpu usage. You could also have a global option for this, like the ones in the global "Menu > IP address" menu ... some users sharing smaller files might want it globally enabled (not my case though).

Many of the friends I share large files with could benefit from this as they have slow connections and I have to use external tools to create separate md5 files and have them download those as well in order to verify the files locally on their machines using other 3rd party tools. With link fingerprints and the firefox extension or getright for instance they could do it all in one click and at the download finish they would get prompted if the file hash verification failed ... no more thirt party tools and separate files to be hosted and downloaded by neither me or my users.

I think this would make a great addition to HFS and it would probably be one of the first web servers (if not the first ever) to support link fingerprints natively ;)

Anyway, thanks for reading :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 16, 2006, 11:45:46 AM
Quote from: "maverick"
I don't get the security flaw you mention you get.  If I password protect certain folders that are included within a sub-directory containing other folders, then use the ~folder.tar?recursive hfs  archiving method, all of the folders are archived 'except' the ones that I password protected which I would think is the expected behavior.
it happens only if you have "list protected items..." disabled. i guess you have it enabled.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 16, 2006, 12:32:37 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
it happens only if you have "list protected items..." disabled. i guess you have it enabled.
Yes I have it enabled.  That's the behavior I want. The only folders my users see are the one's pertaining to their access level.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on June 17, 2006, 12:27:55 AM
Quote from: "maverick"
With beta14, an upload folder with [nofiles] can't be opened?  HFS would time out if I waited long enough.

I just tested that myself.
Rejetto, folders in the VFS that have no files in them cannot be opened. It just times out.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 17, 2006, 04:31:20 AM
i fixed many things and added initial support for link fingerprints

redownload if you want, or wait for the final beta14
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ANTS on June 17, 2006, 06:33:38 AM
Thanks rejetto.

However, tar downloads doesn't seem to be working for Virtual Folders. It's just a 512 byte damaged file.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 17, 2006, 09:26:56 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
i fixed many things and added initial support for link fingerprints
Quote from: "ANTS"
However, tar downloads doesn't seem to be working for Virtual Folders. It's just a 512 byte damaged file
I confirm that the new beta14 archiving isn't working at all.  Just get a damaged file like ANTS said.

Support for 'link fingerprints' - I might have missed it, but I saw nothing at all pertaining to this in the new beta14 menus.  Question - If no mirrors are involved, why would link fingerprints be necessary?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: mastabog on June 17, 2006, 10:20:04 AM
link fingerprints was my suggestion (i wrote a long and detailed post above in this thread, here (http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1016834#1016834))

File verification through md5 or sh1 checks are not linked to mirror downloading but to broken downloads. When downloading big files or when having a slow connection, disconnection problems can lead to broken downloads. md5/sha1/sfv/etc files are necessary means to verify the download was ok.

A lot of websites provide md5 files in the same directory as the files to download (check any linux distro, apache, etc). Link fingerprints automates this process without the need for additional files. It just adds the md5 hash as a link anchor to the link of the original file. If you want to understand file verification better then please refer to http://microformats.org/wiki/hash-examples. Link fingerprints is a new idea and it is getting popular. You can read about it more in my post above.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on June 17, 2006, 10:44:52 AM
I have posted a lot and now I am registered :D :D

Anyways, thanks for the link mastabog, I never quite understoof what md5 and sh1 were about.

Moving on, and maverick, have you tried tar downloads with real folders? It works for me and now password protected/restricted directories are now not downloaded unless the user has logged in or supplied the password which is great. I'm not sure if the file is counted as a download though.

EDIT: However, I have 2.36gb in the root folder (just a single 'Real' folder) and the download box comes up as 2.36gb however when I download it, its only a 512 byte damaged file.

EDIT 2 *Just tested*: ~folder.tar?recursive does not work with over 2gb worth of files. If I have under 2gb it works (Internet Explorer 7.0 Beta 2)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 17, 2006, 04:48:43 PM
Quote from: "ants"
Moving on, and maverick, have you tried tar downloads with real folders?
No.  There is a problem with this beta.  It shouldn't matter if the files were in virtual or real folders.

Quote
However, I have 2.36gb in the root folder (just a single 'Real' folder) and the download box comes up as 2.36gb however when I download it, its only a 512 byte damaged file.
I'm not bothering to test this beta any further.  Will wait until rejetto checks things out and does some fixing.

Quote
EDIT 2 *Just tested*: ~folder.tar?recursive does not work with over 2gb worth of files. If I have under 2gb it works (Internet Explorer 7.0 Beta 2)
Don't forget about the limitations of the browser.  IE=2gb, Opera=2gb, Firefox=4gb.  Workaround=use good download manager
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 18, 2006, 08:36:53 AM
i need to know what's the *.MD5 file format
found nothing
anyone knows?
for now i only support single <filename>.md5 files
don't know if there are other grouping formats
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 22, 2006, 10:49:02 AM
i think it is better to move archives feature to next version
2.1 has already many news
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on June 22, 2006, 12:54:24 PM
Are there new many new things for beta 14 that havn't been released yet?

If so, and you want to remove archives, I think you should finish off 2.1 then release a major version of HFS 3.0 which includes:

Inbuilt SSL
Multiple file upload
Archive (if you don't include it in 2.1, I think it should be in 2.1 but its up to you.)
Server side support (eg. php)
Remote Directory creating and remote file deleteing
File search

and release just those as a version 3 of HFS. Again, the choice is yours Rejetto.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Martok on June 22, 2006, 02:41:57 PM
Quote from: "ants"
Inbuilt SSL

Why? HFS is a simple file server, it would make it too complicated to use. Besides, this would require a second port and by this it would require changes in the core code. STunnel is easier. Maybe HFS might write the INIs that STunnel uses. This makes it easier, just install STunnel, tell HFS where it is and use.
Quote from: "ants"
Multiple file upload

:?: :?: I think I missed your point, the default template allows to upload multiple files.
Quote
Server side support (eg. php)

Would be nice, (I am also really waiting for this), but this is a file server, so not definitively neccessary.
Quote
Remote Directory creating and remote file deleteing
File search

Ack!
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 22, 2006, 09:41:01 PM
Quote from: "ants"
Are there new many new things for beta 14 that havn't been released yet?

nope... just that long list you see in the first post
Quote from: "ants"
and release just those as a version 3 of HFS. Again, the choice is yours Rejetto.

with such feature list you will see HFS 3 in 2008 ;)
step by step bro
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on June 23, 2006, 01:47:52 AM
Quote from: "Martok"

Why? HFS is a simple file server, it would make it too complicated to use. Besides, this would require a second port and by this it would require changes in the core code. STunnel is easier. Maybe HFS might write the INIs that STunnel uses. This makes it easier, just install STunnel, tell HFS where it is and use.

Yes that sounds like a good idea for now :D
Quote from: "Martok"

:?: :?: I think I missed your point, the default template allows to upload multiple files.

Yes but you have to select a file one by one. If you have 100's of files to upload it can be extremely time consuming.
Quote from: "Martok"

Ack!

You don't like this feature? I think it would be very useful and has been sudgested many times. People could delete and create directories with the right privledges. It's even on Rejetto's to-do list.

Anyway, your the man Rejetto so you make the decisions  B)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 23, 2006, 06:14:57 AM
ack stands for "acknowledge"

www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta14.zip
what's new
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Enable recursive listing"  
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Support Link Fingerprints"
+ Menu -> Other options -> "Input comment on file addition"
+ File Menu -> "Copy URL with fingerprint"
+ boosted startup download speed
+ cancel folder reading if client disconnected (useful for big folders)
+ speed up folder sorting (useful for big folders)
* "Support DESCRIPT.ION" is now enabled by default
- "copy url with password" was not working for inherited user/pass
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 23, 2006, 06:26:55 AM
further discussions on fingerprints should be redirected to
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3398
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on June 23, 2006, 09:30:30 AM
Rejetto why did you remove the archive downloading?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Martok on June 23, 2006, 11:12:44 AM
Quote from: "ants"

Yes but you have to select a file one by one. If you have 100's of files to upload it can be extremely time consuming.

Ok, now I understood.
Quote from: "ants"

Quote from: "Martok"

Ack!

You don't like this feature?

I meant "Ack" as a short form for acknowledgement. So I agree with you.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 23, 2006, 11:36:20 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta14.zip
what's new
+ File Menu -> "Copy URL with fingerprint"

Where do I find "File Menu" and the "Copy URL with fingerprint" option?   I looked around and don't see it.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on June 23, 2006, 02:09:33 PM
Quote from: "Martok"
Quote from: "ants"

Yes but you have to select a file one by one. If you have 100's of files to upload it can be extremely time consuming.

Ok, now I understood.
Quote from: "ants"

Quote from: "Martok"

Ack!

You don't like this feature?

I meant "Ack" as a short form for acknowledgement. So I agree with you.


Ahh ok. I never new Ack means Acknowledged. Thanks ;)

Maverick, I think when Rejetto says 'File Menu' it is the menu when you right-click and item in the VFS.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 23, 2006, 04:15:01 PM
Quote from: "maverick"
Quote from: "rejetto"
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta14.zip
what's new
+ File Menu -> "Copy URL with fingerprint"

Where do I find "File Menu" and the "Copy URL with fingerprint" option?   I looked around and don't see it.

it is visible only when a fingerprint is supplied
refer to the fingerprint topic for more information
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 23, 2006, 04:19:31 PM
Quote from: "ants"
Rejetto why did you remove the archive downloading?

because it takes time to make it stable.
no sense in working on 1000 features at time.
we want to get stable versions.
i thought it would take less time to make stable such feature, but i was wrong.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ledufe on June 23, 2006, 04:41:25 PM
Quote from: "maverick"
Quote from: "rejetto"
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta14.zip
what's new
+ File Menu -> "Copy URL with fingerprint"

Where do I find "File Menu" and the "Copy URL with fingerprint" option?   I looked around and don't see it.


hi maverick, how about the info on this post?
i think it will help you...
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1016908#1016908
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 23, 2006, 07:42:59 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
Quote from: "maverick"
Quote from: "rejetto"
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta14.zip
what's new
+ File Menu -> "Copy URL with fingerprint"

Where do I find "File Menu" and the "Copy URL with fingerprint" option?   I looked around and don't see it.

it is visible only when a fingerprint is supplied

Ok.  You should have mentioned that with the announcement.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 24, 2006, 05:09:23 AM
since "fingerprint" is little complex i opened a whole topic where to explain it
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on June 24, 2006, 03:47:31 PM
is there such features already exist in HFS 2.1 beta 14

Upload
- file filter, if an extension is selected the file will not be uploaded into the folder. ( during uploading I wish there's an unauthorized file format shown)

- folder filter, if extension is selected the file will not be uploaded into the folder.

Currently
---------

when uploading the filtered extension file, it does not show up on the upload folder section but the raw source is already added into the upload folder internally. Is there a way to prevent anything that is filtered to stop uploading the file into the upload folder ???
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on June 30, 2006, 12:36:46 AM
Any news Rejetto on the progress of HFS?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 30, 2006, 12:35:47 PM
i made some changes but no new features
i can't release as stable a modified version until it is tested
but i think people is unhappy to test a new beta if it has no new features
so i'm waiting to add features, let test, and then publish as stable


well... since most changes are about the template, would someone mind about testing the new one? no new features, just improved html/css code
www.rejetto.com/temp/default.zip
thank you :)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 30, 2006, 02:30:21 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
well... since most changes are about the template, would someone mind about testing the new one? no new features, just improved html/css code
www.rejetto.com/temp/default.tpl
thank you :)

Maybe zip up that template.  I got the following below in the first part of the template.  Not sure if it is intended to be part of your template or not.
Please let me know.  Thanks.

Code: [Select]
<!--//--><script>var PrxLC=new Date(0);var PrxModAtr=0;var PrxInst; if(!PrxInst++) PrxRealOpen=window.open;function PrxOMUp(){PrxLC=new Date();}function PrxNW(){return(this.window);} function PrxOpen(url,nam,atr){ if(PrxLC){  var cdt=new Date();  cdt.setTime(cdt.getTime()-PrxLC.getTime());  if(cdt.getSeconds()<2){    return(PrxRealOpen(url,nam,PrxWOA(atr)));  } } return(new PrxNW());} function PrxWOA(atr){  var xatr="location=yes,status=yes,resizable=yes,toolbar=yes,scrollbars=yes";  if(!PrxModAtr) return(atr);  if(atr){    var hm;    hm=atr.match(/height=[0-9]+/i);    if(hm) xatr+="," + hm;    hm=atr.match(/width=[0-9]+/i);    if(hm) xatr+="," + hm;  }  return(xatr);}window.open=PrxOpen;</script>
<!--//--><script> function NoError(){return(true);} onerror=NoError; </script>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 30, 2006, 02:35:33 PM
zipped
that code may have been added by your antivirus/firewall
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on June 30, 2006, 03:24:06 PM
Just checked it.  The only changes I noticed were to the style sheet where you included new div id's and abbreviated color codes.  Did you make any other changes?   I didn't notice any errors  when using the default template.  (p.s. how do those color codes work so that the proper color is displayed)?
 
I notice that you use the following code for a long time.  What is it for?
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico" />
If the purpose is only to display the favicon.ico, it is not needed.  All I do is include the favicon.ico file in the VFS root and hide it.  It is used automatically.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on June 30, 2006, 03:45:25 PM
yes, just simple changes, but you know, i can't release as stable if it is not tested

about the favicon: i think IE needs it, maybe older versions
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ledufe on June 30, 2006, 03:57:02 PM
new bug or error on the beta 14, testing this version with your alt-template

posted up in here, here are the code that hfs showed:

and it happened when i was trying to browse some real folder.

Code: [Select]
HttpFileServer 2.1 beta14
Servertime: 30/6/2006 12:05:36
Uptime: 00:37:31
Build-time: 0,031


Code: [Select]

Access violation at address 004AEE1C in module 'hfs.exe'. Read of address 01520008
HFS 2.1 beta14
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stack list, generated 30/6/2006 12:05:13
 + $6[004AEE1C]{hfs.exe     } WSocket.TCustomWSocket.WndProc (Line 3193, "WSocket.pas" + 23) + $6
 + $33[0040414F]{hfs.exe     } System.@HandleAnyException + $33
 + $25[0047DED9]{hfs.exe     } JclDebug.TJclStackBaseList.Create + $25
 + $4[004B00F3]{hfs.exe     } WSocket.TCustomWSocket.ASyncReceive (Line 4096, "WSocket.pas" + 36) + $4
 + $25[0047DED9]{hfs.exe     } JclDebug.TJclStackBaseList.Create + $25
 + $6[004AED42]{hfs.exe     } WSocket.TCustomWSocket.WndProc (Line 3174, "WSocket.pas" + 4) + $6
 + $6[004B5F4D]{hfs.exe     } WSocket.TCustomLineWSocket.WndProc (Line 6533, "WSocket.pas" + 12) + $6
 + $8[004AEEC0]{hfs.exe     } WSocket.XSocketWindowProc (Line 3225, "WSocket.pas" + 14) + $8
 + $A[0043325A]{hfs.exe     } Contnrs.TObjectList.GetItem + $A
 + $A[004333EE]{hfs.exe     } Contnrs.TComponentList.GetItems + $A
 + $83[00456CC7]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.ProcessMessage + $83
 + $A[00456CFE]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.HandleMessage + $A
 + $96[00456F1E]{hfs.exe     } Forms.TApplication.Run + $96
 + $2[0051FB15]{hfs.exe     } hfs.hfs (Line 67, "C:\code\mine\hfs\hfs.dpr" + 15) + $2
----------------------------------------------------------------
System   : Windows Server 2003 Enterprise, Version: 5.2, Build: ECE, "Service Pack 1"
Processor: Intel,               Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz, 2790 MHz MMX
Display  : 1024x768 pixels, 32 bpp
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Product Versions

hfs.exe: Build: 0 23/6/2006 08:14:14
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: mastabog on July 02, 2006, 01:42:28 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta14.zip
what's new
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Support Link Fingerprints"
+ File Menu -> "Copy URL with fingerprint"


I've posted some feedback on the new fingerprints support here: http://www.rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1017055#1017055

Thanks again for looking into it.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on July 03, 2006, 04:58:47 AM
rejetto hi:)
I think, that it is necessary to correct such thing:
"restrict access - all accounts"
When I add new account new user it is not included in "all accounts"
:(
It is necessary to click manually anew item "restrict access - all accounts"...
To correct it ;)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 03, 2006, 05:50:13 AM
so...  should i rename to "all existing accounts" ?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on July 03, 2006, 05:52:46 AM
Quote from: "rejetto"
so...  should i rename to "all existing accounts" ?

yes ;)
Title: Username and password in download url
Post by: ruudboek on July 04, 2006, 07:52:30 PM
Quote from: "tosha"
There are many questions when use programs ReGet, etc. The Login and the password is entered through a browser, and to specify them ReGet not everyone think:)
Well to switch on URL with the password for files (for example http: // Igor:1487@host.net/smiles.avi)
;)

(sorry for my english %))


Petty that no one responded to this terrific remark. Let's face fact, HFS supports resuming, so everybody who uses IE6 is going to need a download manager to use that function. However, since the username and password are not transferred to the download manager a download will simply stop.
Must users simply don't have a clue what's going on and think the site that they are on probably has some kind of defect and move on to get the downloads from somewhere else.
I really would like to see some function that can be enabled so that username and password are parsed into the download url.
Title: Thumbnail view for a folder full of photo's
Post by: ruudboek on July 04, 2006, 07:58:20 PM
Quote from: rejetto
Quote from: "ANTS"
Thumbnails would be great but make it an option for each folder whether or not to display thumbnails.

you can already do it...just use diff template

Ok, i am new at this and i found the diff template option for a folder full of jpg's. So what exactly should i put in the diff template to see thumbnails of the jpg's?

Ruud
Title: Re: Username and password in download url
Post by: rejetto on July 05, 2006, 12:03:52 PM
Quote from: "ruudboek"
I really would like to see some function that can be enabled so that username and password are parsed into the download url.

it was introduced in version 1.5, year 2003
maybe you just need to switch to expert mode
Title: Username and password in download url
Post by: ruudboek on July 05, 2006, 04:36:28 PM
Well i was already in Expert Mode. Where can i find the option to enable this then?

Ruud
Title: Re: Username and password in download url
Post by: Anonymous on July 05, 2006, 09:51:40 PM
Quote from: "ruudboek"
Well i was already in Expert Mode. Where can i find the option to enable this then?

Right Click on a file in your VFS and make your selection.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on July 05, 2006, 10:59:00 PM
OK,

i presume you are referring to the option "Copy URL with password", well that's not what i am looking for.

I want my friends to be able to logon to HFS with their user accounts. Then if THEY click on any file, i want their download manager to start downloading the file without the need to put in the username and password into their download manager.
Basically i want HFS to be able to transfer the username and password the user initially logged with to the dowload manager by default.

Wouldn't it be a better idea for the actual download url of a file to be something like this : http://johnny:pass15@myhfsserver.com/shared/myfile.zip ?

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on July 05, 2006, 11:07:36 PM
Quote from: "ruudboek"
i presume you are referring to the option "Copy URL with password"

Yes.  What happens if you "paste" that url with password into your download manager?

Seems to me that you want HFS to automatically bypass the name/password setup requirements of the download manager. This is not a HFS issue.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on July 06, 2006, 06:37:29 AM
It is a HFS issue, because this is a problem with ALL download managers, unless you know of a download manager (for IE6) that can figure out what the username/password should be?

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on July 06, 2006, 07:01:38 AM
Use a better browser - Opera, Firefox, or Netscape and you won't have to use a download manager.

It is not a HFS issue.  All good download managers ask for input of username and password when going to a protected site.  Name and password only has to be entered once and is definitely not a big job.  Good download managers will even save that user info for future use so you wouldn't have to manually re-enter that info the next time you go to the protected site.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 06, 2006, 01:10:53 PM
so, this problem would be bypassed with an option to include full url in folder pages. right?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on July 06, 2006, 05:37:18 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
so, this problem would be bypassed with an option to include full url in folder pages. right?


Exactly. But it would be a security problem as the password would be clearly visible in plain text in the browsers' statusbar/adressbar.

MarkV
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on July 06, 2006, 06:01:29 PM
Quote from: "MarkV"
Quote from: "rejetto"
so, this problem would be bypassed with an option to include full url in folder pages. right?


Exactly. But it would be a security problem as the password would be clearly visible in plain text in the browsers' statusbar/adressbar.

MarkV


but this security problem could be optional, well, it could be a option to enable/disable the include full url....
just a idea
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on July 06, 2006, 06:22:29 PM
@guest,

well, i use FDM and yes you are right i can fill out the username en password, but the thing is, i won't forget that, but all my friends simply look over that setting, which in practice leads to and faulty download.
Is it really such a big deal to create an option for this?
It is only matter of adding the "username:password@" to the actual download url.
It will prevent a lot of headaches caused by users reporting the same problem time after time.
Also let's face fact, 90% of all users use IE6. IE6 does not support resuming, so most users get a download manager for that.
One of the best features of HFS is it resuming capability.
Therefore by ignoring downloadmanagers incapabilities is like ignoring HFS's resuming capabilities, for most users it just means that HFS will not work ALL the time, which would be totally unjustified.

Also improvements to compatibility with download managers have already been implemented by adding the option "specific HMTL for download managers" so then why not perfecting that option by making it  add "username:password@" also?

@rejetto

Well i started FDM, then went to Downloads/Create new download.
Then i put in the full url with "username:password@" included and disabled the option "User name and password are required".
Fdm went downloading the file right away, so to answer your question, yes, the problem would be bypassed with an option to include full url.

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on July 06, 2006, 06:28:21 PM
Quote from: "MarkV"
Quote from: "rejetto"
so, this problem would be bypassed with an option to include full url in folder pages. right?


Exactly. But it would be a security problem as the password would be clearly visible in plain text in the browsers' statusbar/adressbar.

MarkV


Can you not simply make it add "username:password@" at the point that HFS is triggered to start serving a download?

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: BowflexMaster on July 06, 2006, 08:02:39 PM
i think you'd be surprised...

of all of the users who have visited my website 44 have used Firefox and 54 have used IE6. There aren't as many ninnies out there as one might think. :)

Heck, most of friends don't even know what a download manager is, so I personally don't think this feature is particularly necessary.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on July 06, 2006, 08:38:55 PM
I agree with BowflexMaster.  (I like that word - ninnies :))

There was a time when a good majority of users used Internet Explorer mainly becuase they didn't know better.  To buggy and far to many security issues.

This is the breakdown of browsers use at my site - 55% Firefox, 24% Opera, 21% IE.  

I have found over the years that the more experienced user uses something else instead of IE that came with their computer.
Title: php
Post by: dadada on July 06, 2006, 08:40:11 PM
hfs really needs cgi/php. Yes, it is a file sharing software first, but without it you can't use port 80 to both web pages and files and it is a huge problem for firewalled,proxied etc. people.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 07, 2006, 12:42:09 PM
the point is not about having 50% or more users using that feature.
it is actually a sensible usability improvement.
of course it will be an option.
anyway, feature accepted.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on July 07, 2006, 02:03:36 PM
@rejetto

I really appreciate this :D

What it your point of view on making HFS only add "username:password@" at the point that HFS is triggered to start serving a download?
That should then not make "username:password@" visible in the address bar or status bar.
Do you think that that is technically achievable?

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 07, 2006, 04:11:09 PM
impossibile. the link is in the page. the page is generated and displayed before you know what the user will download.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on July 07, 2006, 11:01:12 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
anyway, feature accepted.

If username and password is visible in plain text, you are creating a HFS security issue.  Without encryption of some sort, the information can be seen by other people while it is in transit.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on July 07, 2006, 11:56:36 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
impossibile. the link is in the page. the page is generated and displayed before you know what the user will download.


Is then maybe possible to add "username:password@" during the generation of the page, so that all links to files will include "username:password@"?

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 08, 2006, 02:26:27 PM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
Quote from: "rejetto"
anyway, feature accepted.

If username and password is visible in plain text, you are creating a HFS security issue.  Without encryption of some sort, the information can be seen by other people while it is in transit.

1. it is optional
2. many people have the computer in a room with enough privacy

usability and security are often conflicting, anyone who studied security knows it.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 08, 2006, 02:27:22 PM
Quote from: "ruudboek"
Quote from: "rejetto"
impossibile. the link is in the page. the page is generated and displayed before you know what the user will download.

Is then maybe possible to add "username:password@" during the generation of the page, so that all links to files will include "username:password@"?

yes, that's what i meant saying "accepted"
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on July 08, 2006, 10:17:00 PM
@rejetto: Do you have the possibility to use obfuscation of username and password by using the "%" values? Just a thought.

All modern browsers/dl managers convert it by itself.

The most famous example for such a "%" value is the %20 which represents a space.

Makes it harder to spy passwords fast...

MarkV
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 09, 2006, 11:54:56 AM
yes, it works, i tested with IE+DAP.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on July 17, 2006, 03:13:19 PM
Any progress news Rejetto?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 19, 2006, 01:49:29 AM
no, been busy with my exam.
now done.
i have some maintenance to do to forum and wiki.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: segosa on July 19, 2006, 06:43:51 PM
I can't find where to disable the feature whereby the username/password is embedded in the page's urls... where is it?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 19, 2006, 06:59:08 PM
if you are referring to what we are discussing about, it is a thing to come, there is nothing you should disable
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: segosa on July 20, 2006, 06:12:30 AM
If I visit the URL with the password embedded into it, for example http://user:pass@localhost, all links on the page will also have user:pass embedded into them. There's no way to disable that? Reading the past few pages it seems you've been discussing that exact feature and you said it was optional. Or do you mean that the ability to disable it is what's to come?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on July 20, 2006, 07:36:03 AM
Quote from: "segosa"
If I visit the URL with the password embedded into it, for example http://user:pass@localhost, all links on the page will also have user:pass embedded into them. There's no way to disable that?

If you manually input that kind of url in the location field of your browser, that is the normal behavior.  If you want to stop that behavior, login properly. Using your example, login using only http://localhost as the url (with of course HFS running).  You will be prompted for username and password and they won't show up in the url.

Quote
Reading the past few pages it seems you've been discussing that exact feature and you said it was optional. Or do you mean that the ability to disable it is what's to come?

Yes, that type of scenerio has been discussed, but rejetto didn't implement it.  You didn't finish reading the thread.  It would be an optional feature, iF[/i] it was implemented.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on July 20, 2006, 01:20:02 PM
i want to say one more thing
Quote from: "segosa"
If I visit the URL with the password embedded into it, for example http://user:pass@localhost, all links on the page will also have user:pass embedded into them.

if you look in the source, there is no user:pass.
it is your browser that simulate it.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: segosa on July 20, 2006, 09:07:28 PM
Quote from: "rejetto"
i want to say one more thing
Quote from: "segosa"
If I visit the URL with the password embedded into it, for example http://user:pass@localhost, all links on the page will also have user:pass embedded into them.

if you look in the source, there is no user:pass.
it is your browser that simulate it.


Ah, sorry, I should have probably checked first.

Thanks.
Title: User Account 'Comment' Section
Post by: maverick on July 26, 2006, 09:49:23 PM
rejetto,

Would it be possible to add a 'Comment' section to each user account?  There is quite a bit of empty space in the existing user account window where this section could go.  The admin could then manually add new info about a user into their respective comment section.

For example, for a user to get increased access on my site, they have to register.  Part of the registration process is to get their email address which I would then respond to.  In an 'Comment' section for the user I could add their email address.  That way there is less of a chance I would lose it or get it mixed up with another user's email address.  That's just one example of what that section could be used for.  

What do you think?
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: HFS_user on July 31, 2006, 04:46:49 PM
I’m only asking,

is there an option in HFS that prevents people from using HFS ?

coz people r killing my PC with those accelerators even though I have limited the number of downloads from a single IP to 1
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: HFS_user on July 31, 2006, 05:24:20 PM
Quote from: "HFS_user"
I’m only asking,

is there an option in HFS that prevents people from using HFS ?

coz people r killing my PC with those accelerators even though I have limited the number of downloads from a single IP to 1



sorry, i meant to say: "to prevent people from using download accelerators"
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on July 31, 2006, 06:31:32 PM
Quote from: "HFS_user"
sorry, i meant to say: "to prevent people from using download accelerators"

First of all I doubt your pc is being killed.  By selecting max simultaneous downloads from a single address to 1, you are actually preventing people from using a download accelerator the way it was intended to be used for different file multiple downloads at the same time.  I setup mine the same way for the same reason.  You will still see the connection hits from the accelerator in your logs but don't worry about that.  If you do worry about that, you could reduce those hits by selecting Limits -> max connections from a single address -> and put whatever you like in there.  But be advised that you don't want to put a low number in there as it could affect how the user will access your pages.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on July 31, 2006, 08:15:19 PM
Quote from: "maverick"
First of all I doubt your pc is being killed.  By selecting max simultaneous downloads from a single address to 1, you are actually preventing people from using a download accelerator the way it was intended to be used for different file multiple downloads at the same time.  I setup mine the same way for the same reason.  You will still see the connection hits from the accelerator in your logs but don't worry about that.  If you do worry about that, you could reduce those hits by selecting Limits -> max connections from a single address -> and put whatever you like in there.  But be advised that you don't want to put a low number in there as it could affect how the user will access your pages.


Even the requests exceeding the limit will slow down my pc.. Coz I’m not using a powerful PC ... I’m sharing the files on a local area connection only

So just imagine that one person is setting his DL accelerator to 10-streams and every 5 seconds it try to connect another 9-streams … it WILL kill my pc
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on July 31, 2006, 08:55:44 PM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
I’m sharing the files on a local area connection only

Well then tell them to stop using a accelerator!
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on August 01, 2006, 04:56:19 AM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
Quote from: "Anonymous"
I’m sharing the files on a local area connection only

Well then tell them to stop using accelerator!


the local area connection is inside the college campus, so its not that easy to tell everyone. PLUS, people never listen ... i already wrote a comment about it

Anyway, that is not my point ... i just asked if there was such option in HFS or not... but after those replies, i guess there isn't.

Thanks all
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on August 02, 2006, 11:59:29 AM
I think you mean an 'anti hammer feature'. Maybe that could be done. I've seen it in FTP servers...

Code: [Select]
People using download accelerators and creating too much connections in a short time will be IP banned for X minutes

@rejetto

Just a small bug report: If you want to save the log with 'Save as...', it is saved as a *.tt file instead of a *.txt file. There could be a typo in the code. :roll:

MarkV
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: mastabog on August 02, 2006, 02:58:56 PM
A small bug report:

When "Add to HFS" is used from within the operating system's context menu (right click) and multiple files are selected then all files are added correctly into HFS but only the last file's URL is copied into clipboard. The expected behaviour is for all urls to be copied to clipboard. Right now one has to open HFS, manually select all files in question and then either press ctrl-c or select "Copy URL" from within the context menu of HFS. Not a killer but annoying nonetheless.

Thanks
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: traxxus on August 04, 2006, 10:04:40 PM
Hm no more updates ? Its a "long" time since the last update  :P
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on August 05, 2006, 01:51:30 PM
Quote from: "traxxus"
Hm no more updates ? Its a "long" time since the last update  :P

http://rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3567
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on August 06, 2006, 09:34:42 AM
Quote from: "MarkV"
I think you mean an 'anti hammer feature'. Maybe that could be done. I've seen it in FTP servers...

Code: [Select]
People using download accelerators and creating too much connections in a short time will be IP banned for X minutes



yeah, i'm looking for something like this .. it would help a lot
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on August 12, 2006, 10:06:52 PM
care with new features, it was not tested throughly

www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta15.zip

what's new
+ Menu -> Dynamic DNS updater -> "Disable"
+ Menu -> Fingerprints
+ Menu -> URL encoding -> "Unreadable passwords in URLs"
+ Menu -> URL encoding -> "Include password in pages"
+ Self-test now cancelable
+ Log menu -> Log what -> "Only served requests" (enabled by default)
* now able to create fingerprints
- authentication didn't work for URLs http://user:pwd@host/folder (no trailing slash)
- messages "Cannot open clipboard" now trapped
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on August 13, 2006, 05:33:17 AM
Quote from: "tosha"
rejetto hi:)
I think, that it is necessary to correct such thing:
"restrict access - all accounts"
When I add new account new user it is not included in "all accounts"
:(
It is necessary to click manually anew item "restrict access - all accounts"...
To correct it ;)


=)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on August 13, 2006, 05:38:01 AM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
Quote from: "tosha"
rejetto hi:)
I think, that it is necessary to correct such thing:
"restrict access - all accounts"
When I add new account new user it is not included in "all accounts"
:(
It is necessary to click manually anew item "restrict access - all accounts"...
To correct it ;)


=)



I this has written %)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on August 13, 2006, 08:28:09 PM
hfs2.1beta15

after Login the page,the link have show LOGIN NAME & PASSWORD is

NOT SO GOOD!!!
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on August 14, 2006, 12:22:20 AM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
after Login the page,the link have show LOGIN NAME & PASSWORD is NOT SO GOOD!!!

i made a test and was not able to reproduce such condition.
check to see if the password is in the page source or not.
read this post http://rejetto.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1017342#1017342
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on August 14, 2006, 07:09:44 PM
I experience the same problem with "Unreadable passwords in URLs" also.
Right after i logon i can see the username and password in plain readable text in the addressbar. Only when i then proceed to another folder, the password in the addressbar gets unreadable.

I tested with Internet Explorer 6.0.

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on August 14, 2006, 07:22:15 PM
Also i would like to report another bug:
When i logon nothing happens. The page remains the same (logonscreen).
Only when i then refresh the page all the folders appear.
This bug is not related to the latest beta, it existed in the previous beta also.

I tested with Internet Explorer 6.0

Ruud
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: MJ21 on August 14, 2006, 10:43:35 PM
Quote from: "ruudboek"

This bug is not related to the latest beta, it existed in the previous beta also.

I haven't tried beta 15 yet to see if what you say occurs.  But, I can tell you that doesn't happen with older betas.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Anonymous on August 16, 2006, 03:08:04 AM
I'm using beta 13 and have seen a similar problem,
but I don't think some of the previous betas were this way?
 If a user visits my website, then enters the server, they
are in a "public" area/folder. If they log in at that point
everything works OK. If they go one folder deeper in the
public area and then log in they don't see the folders set for
their use. They can move up, all the way back to the web page,
with out their folders being visable. The log  in button doesn't
show any one is logged in. If they click the log in button again
the folders appear.
 I don't know if this is expected behavior or not, but I don't think
HFS has always worked this way.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: Shingles on August 16, 2006, 06:16:15 AM
Quote from: "Anonymous"
I'm using beta 13 and have seen a similar problem,
but I don't think some of the previous betas were this way?
 If a user visits my website, then enters the server, they
are in a "public" area/folder. If they log in at that point
everything works OK. If they go one folder deeper in the
public area and then log in they don't see the folders set for
their use. They can move up, all the way back to the web page,
with out their folders being visable. The log  in button doesn't
show any one is logged in. If they click the log in button again
the folders appear.
 I don't know if this is expected behavior or not, but I don't think
HFS has always worked this way.

If that's the behavior you are seeing, I think it is definitely a bug.  Must be the way HFS is configured that's causing it.  I don't see that behavior and never did.  I don't have a public area/folder.  I protect the vfs root - restrict access to all.  People must log-in right from the start.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: hlloyge on August 16, 2006, 08:42:46 AM
When will Windows Authentification be implemented? You know, the VNC thingie? ;)
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on August 16, 2006, 10:39:51 AM
v2.1 beta 15

Fingerprints:

I'm having problems with fingerprints.  The files are within the KB limits I set.  HFS calculates the md5 on file addition and the resulting md5 file is included with the other files in my hard drive folder.  

The problem is a lot of the time HFS isn't reading the fingerprint - the  fingerprint isn't included in the url even though the md5 file is available.  The strange thing is that sometimes it is included in the url and other times it isn't.  I tried to find the cause of the problem but was unsuccessful.

Also, if I include the same file in two different vfs folders, and get HFS to calculate the md5 on file addition, the resulting md5 file is included in the hard drive folder where the actual file is located as it should be, but HFS will only read the fingerprint and include it in the url from just one of the vfs folders in error.  If HFS can read the fingerprint and include it in the url for the file from one vfs folder, it should be able to read the fingerprint and include it in the url for the very same file located in the other vfs folder.

Any ideas?
Title: v2.1 beta 15
Post by: Quester on August 20, 2006, 05:00:00 PM
Dear Massimo,

I have been using HFS for some time now ... really love it for its simplicity and compactness ... GREAT piece of work.

I have been testing v2.1 beta 15 since last Friday ... I think there is a problem with authentication ...

I keep getting page not found after I have login correctly.

I have verify this by restoring v2.1 beta 14 .... problem disappear.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on August 20, 2006, 06:55:39 PM
Quote from: "maverick"
v2.1 beta 15
Fingerprints:

fixed in next beta
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: CBB on August 21, 2006, 01:38:36 AM
There is a problem with authorization in last versions - 2.0a, 2.1b14 and 2.1b15. The directories with restricted access are not seen after authirization. Previous versions - 2.0 and 2.1b13 work fine.
Title: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on August 22, 2006, 12:16:50 AM
yes, i saw it, i'm searching for a solution
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on September 11, 2006, 06:03:28 AM
So is HFS dead?
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 11, 2006, 09:19:11 AM
Nope.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on September 13, 2006, 02:34:29 AM
Good to hear. Havn't herd anything in weeks.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 13, 2006, 03:51:11 AM

Sorry, but I should have offered a little more detail above...

This should explain it:
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php?topic=3704.0
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 17, 2006, 06:42:28 PM
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta16.zip

what's new
+ when no port is specified and port 80 is busy, port 8080, 280, 10080 are probed (then dynamic port is used)
+ Log menu: clicking "Address 2 name" automatically fills the IP field
+ total download counter works now also for real-folders
- "Paste" was working but not shown
- sometimes md5 files were not used in folder pages
- no menu right-clicking in template editor
- problem with Login and IE
- diff template was not applied to error/upload/progress pages
Title: v2.1 beta 16 %total-size% folder error
Post by: maverick on September 18, 2006, 11:32:55 AM
v2.1 beta 16

From the default template:
[files]
<div class=little>%number-folders% folders,  %number-files% files - Total: %total-size%</div>

For example: (mixture of virtual and real folders in the root)

1. In HFS root there are 7 folders, 0 files, Total: x
%total-size% is producing the wrong amount.  In this example it shows amounts like 20.00 GB when it should be 0

2. If there are 0 folders, 3 files, Total: x
%total-size% seems to produce the correct amount.

3. If there are 2 folders, 5 files, Total: x
%total-size% is producing the wrong amount.

The problem with %total-size% appears to be with folders

EDIT
Checking this further, the problem seems to be only with virtual folders.

Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 18, 2006, 08:19:05 PM
was not able to reproduce this bug.
try to add more details.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 18, 2006, 10:57:12 PM
was not able to reproduce this bug.
try to add more details.

(http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/6333/rejetto1jn8.th.jpg) (http://img131.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rejetto1jn8.jpg)

(http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/5914/rejetto2sl6.th.jpg) (http://img131.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rejetto2sl6.jpg)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 19, 2006, 01:28:21 AM
that screenshots are exactly what you described in your previous post.
i'm still not able to reproduce the problem.

anyway, i made some changes that may help, in next beta.
if you don't want to wait, you can contact me privately to test the new code.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 19, 2006, 02:45:52 AM
Details, Details... can't think of anymore details on this one.  :D

I checked the page source and it's basically the same as what I mentioned above.    I just noticed the problem with this beta16 and can reproduce it all of the time.  I just loaded beta14 and there is no problem there.  I just loaded beta15 and there is no problem there.  Therefore, the problem was introduced somewhere in beta16.   Strange you can't reproduce it.  Any idea what else to check?

E D I T
As I mentioned above, I loaded both betas 14 and 15 to see if there were problems in those versions.  There wasn't any.  Now I loaded beta16 back and the problem disappeared!  It is now showing the correct totals.
???

I was running beta14 before trying beta16 for the first time.  The only thing I can think of is that something must have happened when beta16 was loading the vfs for the first time that caused the error.  After I loaded beta 14 & 15 to test, using the same vfs, the problem seemed to have corrected itself when I re-loaded beta16. 


E D I T   A G A I N

Shutdown beta16 then started it again about 3 hours later and the same identical problem mentioned before shows up again.  I think it definitely has something to do with beta16 and the loading of the vfs.  Maybe there is some kind of problem saving the vfs when hfs is shutdown.  I don't know if anything else is affected - haven't noticed anything yet.
 
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 19, 2006, 04:01:43 PM
ok, test the version i sent you and report if it working ok
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 19, 2006, 08:38:17 PM
ok, test the version i sent you and report if it working ok

No.  Same behavior as beta16.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 20, 2006, 03:57:08 PM
ok, test the version i sent you and report if it working ok

No.  Same behavior as beta16.

Problem fixed in v2.1beta18
http://www.rejetto.com/forum/index.php?topic=3195.msg1018246#msg1018246
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on September 20, 2006, 04:37:37 PM
form
[file.ace]
...
no working in beta 16  :-[
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 21, 2006, 11:39:45 AM
tested and working here.
please describe all the steps, or give me your vfs file so that i can reproduce the bug.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 22, 2006, 12:40:16 PM
ok, the [file.ace] bug is fixed in next beta
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: anarkhy on September 22, 2006, 01:04:56 PM

how stop hfs from changing defaul port?

i have set port 8080 but sometimes my computer resets its internet connection and when i check hfs is working at port 7000
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 22, 2006, 03:51:14 PM
set the port manually
save options

nothing else
if it doesn't work it may be a bug or your fault
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 22, 2006, 04:02:59 PM
http://www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta17.zip

what's new
+ template editor: customizable font and status bar
* switched back to the old template editor, with wordwrap
- item related %symbols% were not available in comments
- word-wrap setting was not saved
- [file.EXT] was not working anymore
- template editor: help was not working anymore
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Edward on September 22, 2006, 06:16:59 PM
ok, how should i discribe this !!! i'm using beta 17

i can browse folders but when i click on a folder containing files to download, the browser STUCK and give me "Page was not found"

i tried it with IE & Firefox

when i switched back to beta 14, everything was working fine
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ~GeeS~ on September 22, 2006, 06:34:42 PM
same here, can't open folder with files!

Thx for changing back to old tpl editor.  :)

Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 22, 2006, 06:42:08 PM
whooops
a stupid error
please redownload beta17
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Edward on September 22, 2006, 07:23:15 PM
thanx bro  ;)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: BrianP on September 22, 2006, 08:07:01 PM
Beta 17 doesn't seem to be using the Diff Templates correctly. I had a Diff Template set up for a picture folder to show thumbnails in Beta 15 with no problems. Now I just get a JPEG file listing with no thumbnails. I even tried inserting improper code to see if HFS would show a error while trying to list the JPEGs and thumbs but I still just get the JPEG file list as if the Diff template doesn't exist.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 22, 2006, 08:10:39 PM
template loading has been totally reprogrammed.
please brianp furnish me the non-working templates, so that i can reproduce the problem.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 22, 2006, 08:14:36 PM
v2.1beta17

Good job on the editor.  It's nice to have word-wrap back.  The customizable font and status bar is nice feature.  :)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: BrianP on September 22, 2006, 08:20:00 PM
Thanks rejetto. Message sent.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 23, 2006, 03:48:44 AM
v2.1 beta 17

1. Fingerprints - Create fingerprints on addition - setting is not saved.
2. Loading VFS on startup - progress bar removed.  Was there a reason for this?  It was nice to see that something was happening especially for the loading of the larger vfs.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: tosha on September 23, 2006, 07:17:55 AM
vfs now became faster to be loaded (in my opinion)  ;)
thank  :)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 23, 2006, 10:52:47 AM
1. Fingerprints - Create fingerprints on addition - setting is not saved.
2. Loading VFS on startup - progress bar removed.  Was there a reason for this?  It was nice to see that something was happening especially for the loading of the larger vfs.
1. it is saved, and loaded, but there is a graphical glitch
2. just another graphical glitch

vfs now became faster to be loaded (in my opinion)  ;)
i don't remember any modification that may affect it :/
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 23, 2006, 02:03:02 PM
BrianP, the diff tepmplate bug should be fixed now
test the next beta please
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 23, 2006, 02:16:31 PM
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta18.zip

what's new
- graphical glitch on progress bar
- graphical glitch on "create fingerprint on addition"
- sometimes total size was wrong with virtual folders
- diff template was not working anymore
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: BrianP on September 23, 2006, 02:40:21 PM
Good job rejetto. Everything seems to be working great.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Albert on September 24, 2006, 04:04:51 AM
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta18.zip

what's new
- graphical glitch on progress bar
- graphical glitch on "create fingerprint on addition"
- sometimes total size was wrong with virtual folders
- diff template was not working anymore


Thnaks for the good job, HFS was a very usefl app
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 25, 2006, 06:41:58 PM
v2.1 Beta18 Logs

When a file is downloaded nothing shows in the logs until the download completes.
The Fully downloaded size @ KB/s shows up first then followed by the Requested GET filename.  Isn't that backwards?

Shouldn't the Requested GET filename show first when the download starts then the Fully downloaded size @ KB/s show next when the download completes?

Uploading looks correct in the logs.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 26, 2006, 02:00:38 AM
ops... fixed in next beta
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Flame on September 26, 2006, 02:31:07 PM
If I remember right, some time ago there was different type of "delete" behaviour. I could simply click unnecessary VFS item and press Delete, now I am forced to answer "Delete? Yes/No" question. Will there be some option to turn that off? Because while I need to delete many items at once, it is better to point to some (first or last) one, then just press Delete several times.
Or maybe you can implement multiple mouse selection?  ;)
Sorry if the subject was talked about already, I just had not enough time to search through.  ::)
And of course, you are doing a really great job, keep that up! Thank you!  :)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 26, 2006, 06:22:36 PM
Or maybe you can implement multiple mouse selection?  ;)
that's already there!
use shift or ctrl while clicking, the usual stuff.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: CeltiX on September 27, 2006, 01:53:42 AM
Any idea on when there is going to be support for all tags in comment files? (item-name and such...)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 27, 2006, 11:14:02 AM
Any idea on when there is going to be support for all tags in comment files? (item-name and such...)
did you try? it should already be there!

it is clearly reported in the what's new of beta17 (some post ago)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: CeltiX on September 27, 2006, 03:02:15 PM
I guess I hadn't updated in a while, my bad.

Would it be overly difficult to include support for wildcards or a "default" comment for all files? That way, one comment could apply to several files (very useful if using HTML in comments)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 27, 2006, 03:27:21 PM
select all the files you want, and then click comment
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: CeltiX on September 27, 2006, 04:04:32 PM
Unfortunately, that doesn't work well for my purposes. Here is the situation:

I have a real folder, filled with subfolders of pictures that change frequently. Using HTML code in the comment file, I've been able to display a thumbnail for each of these subfolders (all stored in the same place, all named with the same structure). However, every time I add or remove a folder, I need to update the comment file. If there was one generic comment for all these folders, There would be no need.

At the moment, my comment file looks like this:
Code: [Select]
Folder1=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">
Folder2=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">
Folder3=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">

All the comments are the same, and I have to manually add/delete a line every time I add, remove or change a subfolder
if there was a default comment tag or if wildcards were supported, I could simply have one line in my comment file that says something like
Code: [Select]
*=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">
Which would apply to all items in the folder. There may need to be some handling and verification, like to see if there's a comment set for a cpecific file (which would override the default), but I think this could be a defenite improvement.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Rafal C. on September 28, 2006, 04:49:10 PM
I have a little suggestion, when it isn´t to much / hard. File management like rename or delete files. It were perfect.
But HFS is already very good, good job.

Sorry for my english, I am polish/german.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 28, 2006, 05:17:36 PM
I have a little suggestion, when it isn´t to much / hard. File management like rename or delete files.

Rename and delete (remove) files is already in HFS.  Right click on the file in the HFS virtual system and make your selection.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 28, 2006, 05:57:36 PM
I have a little suggestion, when it isn´t to much / hard. File management like rename or delete files.
Rename and delete (remove) files is already in HFS.  Right click on the file in the HFS virtual system and make your selection.
i guess he wants remotely accessible features
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 28, 2006, 08:25:00 PM
At the moment, my comment file looks like this:
Code: [Select]
Folder1=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">
Folder2=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">
Folder3=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">

All the comments are the same, and I have to manually add/delete a line every time I add, remove or change a subfolder
if there was a default comment tag or if wildcards were supported, I could simply have one line in my comment file that says something like
Code: [Select]
*=<img src="thumbs/%temname%.jpg">

you will find it working in next beta.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on September 28, 2006, 08:27:57 PM
Yeh, i really would like see those delete and rename options for users too.
That would make HFS behave more like most ftpservers do, only much better ofcourse, since it is http  8)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: maverick on September 28, 2006, 08:55:02 PM
Quote from: rejetto
i guess he wants remotely accessible features

Maybe so.  He didn't say.

Yeh, i really would like see those delete and rename options for users too.
That would make HFS behave more like most ftpservers do, only much better ofcourse, since it is http  8)

Only mis-configured ftp servers would allow such things for users.  I wouldn't want users to be able to delete or rename my files. 
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: MarkV on September 29, 2006, 12:23:27 AM
A misconfigured HFS is dangerous as well...  :P

I don't think he wants it as default for all users, but for himself to clean things up.

MarkV
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ants on September 29, 2006, 04:16:32 AM
Quote from: maverick
Only mis-configured ftp servers would allow such things for users.  I wouldn't want users to be able to delete or rename my files. 

Right Click...

Restrict Renaming To > Select Users.
Restrict Deleting To > Select Users.
Restrict Renaming & Deleting To > Select Users.

Would be good :D :D

Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Flame on September 29, 2006, 01:54:48 PM
Or maybe you can implement multiple mouse selection?  ;)
that's already there!
use shift or ctrl while clicking, the usual stuff.
Oh, I misleaded you, sorry.  ::)
I mean multiple mouse selection, "drag and select" style.  :)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 29, 2006, 03:40:24 PM
Oh, I misleaded you, sorry.  ::)
I mean multiple mouse selection, "drag and select" style.  :)
it won't be available in 2.1, for sure.
maybe in 3.0
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on September 30, 2006, 07:55:06 AM
Right Click...

Restrict Renaming To > Select Users.
Restrict Deleting To > Select Users.
Restrict Renaming & Deleting To > Select Users.

Would be good :D :D

That sounds good, but i would also like to be able to apply renaming and deleting to specific folders.

How about giving users the option to create folders, wouldn't that be something very usefull aswell?

Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on September 30, 2006, 10:37:09 AM
stop asking, it is already in the to-do list
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ruudboek on October 02, 2006, 06:09:59 PM
ok, how should i discribe this !!! i'm using beta 17

i can browse folders but when i click on a folder containing files to download, the browser STUCK and give me "Page was not found"

i tried it with IE & Firefox

when i switched back to beta 14, everything was working fine

With beta 18 i am still experiencing this problem also, but only when the option "Include password in pages (for download managers)" is enabled.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 04, 2006, 03:07:00 PM
Quote
With beta 18 i am still experiencing this problem also, but only when the option "Include password in pages (for download managers)" is enabled.
yes, this feature cannot work with IE. i will include a warning for users who click on it.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 04, 2006, 03:18:32 PM
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta19.zip

what's new
+ sort by hits
+ incompatibility warning for "Include password in pages"
- request logging was made too late
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 04, 2006, 03:26:52 PM
i would rather say 2.1 could be published as stable by the end of the week.
anyone contrary?
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Busta on October 04, 2006, 03:27:22 PM
www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta19.zip

what's new
+ sort by hits
+ incompatibility warning for "Include password in pages"
- request logging was made too late


link dosent work :S
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 04, 2006, 03:31:44 PM
whooops
fixed
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: imon9 on October 04, 2006, 06:01:56 PM
hi rejectto...

thanks a lot for the super super program...it is like blood to me now :)

just a small request: can the upload progree bar be fused to the upload page??? instead of user to open another window just to see it??

perhaps use AJAX to refresh?? :p if it is at all possible...
else, just use a less graphical, but still informative way to show the percentage of upload so far...
perhaps reduce the auto-reload to slightly bigger interval... ( coz the repeatingly refreshing webpage just doesnt suite my taste)...

heheh...sorry for being so demanding...

hope u can give it a bit of free time...thanks
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 04, 2006, 06:16:34 PM
i'm not an ajax programmer, and moreover, many people complaint about using javascript in the template.
i think in the future we'll have 2 templates, one plenty of javascript, and one with none.
at the moment i'm working on the server itself, not on the template.
there are other people who are working on the template in the specific forum.
in the while, you can edit the template and change this line to fit your needs:
Code: [Select]
<meta http-equiv="Refresh" content="3;URL=/~progress">
anyway you are right, 3 seconds it's a short time, good only in LAN.
it will be 7 seconds in 2.1 final.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: somhairle on October 04, 2006, 11:19:13 PM
testing: "testing 2.1 b19"

hi Massimo!

great program man! I'm loving it!

i'm having a prob sending files over 100mb (seems to stop uploading at 100mb+/-). anything under it works perfect. anyone else have this problem...i'm still testing.

S.
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 04, 2006, 11:25:20 PM
hi... what software is used for downloading?
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: somhairle on October 04, 2006, 11:42:11 PM
that was fast! my friend is using default FF browser. both of us were letting it upload/download in idle time (no screen savers or anything)

i'll test more in the morning.
Title: Pb with drag and drop in 2.1 beta 19
Post by: chroda on October 05, 2006, 03:59:32 PM
Hi rejetto,

drag and drop does not work for me in the virtual file system of the beta 19  ???
it works fine in the beta 18

can you check that ?

Thanks, ;)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 05, 2006, 04:17:18 PM
sorry, fixed in next beta
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Flame on October 05, 2006, 05:45:23 PM
What about option to enable quick VFS item deletion (without confirmation)?
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 05, 2006, 08:05:40 PM
ok, in next beta
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 06, 2006, 01:49:12 AM
http://www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta20.zip

what's new
+ added ini-commmand to be used with -a parameter: "load-tpl-from=FULLPATH"
+ Menu -> Virtual File System -> "Skip confirmation on deletion"
* template: changed default refresh time for progress frame, from 3 to 7 seconds
- command line paramter -a could misconfigure some settings
- drag&drop in vfs was not working anymore
- solved some progress bar problems (especially in self-test)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ledufe on October 06, 2006, 02:06:29 AM
link not working for the beta20
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: CeltiX on October 06, 2006, 03:25:16 AM
Has the syntax changed for the Files/Folders filter? I can't seem to get items to stay hidden.

EDIT:
http://www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs2.1beta20.zip <-- working
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 06, 2006, 03:34:18 AM
i just tested files filter and it works to me.
ensure you are using the right logic: you tell to the filter what to show, not what to hide.
you can always invert the logic by prepending a \ to the filter
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: chroda on October 06, 2006, 07:15:20 AM
testing 2.1 beta20
when one adds a file in VFS using the contextual menu (HFS in SystemTray), the file is well added in VFS but one obtains the windows pop-up (see attachment), the firewall being activated or not activated.
that doesn't occur with beta18
chroda ;)


[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 06, 2006, 01:21:56 PM
ops, sorry, please redownload beta20
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: ledufe on October 07, 2006, 01:57:49 AM
rejetto, could explain something?

Quote
what's new
+ added ini-commmand to be used with -a parameter: "load-tpl-from=FULLPATH"
hpw can i do this? i tryed:
hfs.exe -a load-tpl-from=d:\ledufe.tpl with and without coats and not worked
tryed also to include this line on the ini generated and also didn´t work

Quote
- command line paramter -a could misconfigure some settings
this too, well i couldn´t make this work at all....
but this should work like this:
i change something on the ini and the hfs would "instantly read this config" and aplied it?
or should i fire some command to make it happen like:

on the wiki page
http://rejetto.com/wiki/index.php?title=HFS:_Command_line_parameters

you mentioned that if we want to load a ini we should do this
hfs.exe -i M:\P4-SERVER\Rejetto-HFS\hfs.ini
after this command the prompt should auto close?
because mine keep opened after the hfs open and load vfs


Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: Flame on October 07, 2006, 12:34:54 PM
You are so responsive! Thank you very much!  :D
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 07, 2006, 04:04:29 PM
i improved that page.
please refer to it now http://rejetto.com/wiki/?title=HFS:_Command_line_parameters
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: chroda on October 29, 2006, 05:23:49 PM

Quote
hpw can i do this? i tryed:
hfs.exe -a load-tpl-from=d:\ledufe.tpl with and without coats and not worked

Hi ledufe,
(2.1 build #053)
I have the same problem :-[
Have you a solution ?
Thanks ;)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 29, 2006, 05:34:49 PM
the solution is on the link i furnished
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: chroda on October 29, 2006, 05:46:43 PM
Hi rejetto,

Yes, Yes, but i don't understand how to proceed after many wrong tests ! ???

Is it possible to have a concret example ?
Thanks ;)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: chroda on October 29, 2006, 06:26:26 PM
Fix !

"load-tpl-from=FULLPATH" is a command to use IN the ini file and NOT a command-line for hfs.exe to use with the -a parameter

I think it's confused ??? in the description :

Quote
HFS: Command line parameters
. . . . . . .
a <FILENAME>
       Load an additional ini file, which . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . .
From version 2.1, there is an additional command:
     •
        load-tpl-from=FULLPATH
            loads a template from the specified path.

 ;)
Title: Re: testing 2.1
Post by: rejetto on October 29, 2006, 06:32:50 PM
you are right.
perhaps now it is clearer.