#1
|
|||
|
|||
Better filehoster's mirrors support
Last edited by Arioch1; 29.10.2011 at 23:42. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
A better mirror support will come with the next major update and concerning your problem with the stop button: that's why we have the button "Stop after current downloads". You're probably right that it should be possible to simply stop some downloads without deactivating them but a lot of things will change with the next major update. So hang out there for a while.
Greetz
__________________
Bitte die Regeln lesen! | Please read the forum rules!
REGELN: Bugreports | RULES: Bugreports Erste Schritte & Tutorials | Self Help Index | Read Me | JD 2 Beta - FAQ Support Chat Keep smiling, it's simple! Last edited by Think3r; 30.10.2011 at 14:56. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
@Arioch1
1) The automatic file renaming methods of hosts aren't known as the hosts don't publish them. RS replaces some characters by underscores. You need to know all the details before anyone can implement an antidote. It's possible your final file name might read like ___________-________. That's why I've always insisted that customers should indicate the mirror files manually. See also , which is one of the oldest outstanding requirements and 4) jD doesn't support resuming downloads from another link/host. |
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
Quote:
Quote:
Microsoft Office formats were not published, yet people managed to open 90% of documents. You need some idea about name mangling, then you can made some implementation. And later you can always learn more and do better. I think many Hosters plugins are not based on published APIs but rather on HTML page parsing - and while they break sometimes, they work for most time. Though they do not possess complete API specification Quote:
But not always, yes ? You can do Bayesian probability here, with underscores here just not counting neither pro nor against the match, only accounting for invariant letters. There is also metadata, like file length, file timestamp, md5 - which may be or not be available for matcher algorithm, which always be based on probabilities rather than certain knowledge. Quote:
Quote:
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
There are two approaches to this replacement issue :- 1) Trial and error like you propose. 2) Systematic analysis: collect all possible replacement options and prepare a set of small files that contain all these possible characters. Upload them and see what happens with the file names. I think this approach is useful when you limit it to the most important hosts. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
> that hired more people analysing these M$ formats than to develop their own product
Yes, yes. Run after moving target. There qwwas an article, describing in details why Microsoft every 2 years dropped its own standards and proclaimed next Great Silver Bullet :-) Don't remember the link and anyway offtopic here. 1st is not trial and error. It is between "iterative approach" of maths and "worse is better" of programming :-) You just settle the interface, and allow hoster plugins to implement it if they choose to. Let them jump the wagon at their own pace. 2nd approach, "the Right Thing", sound good if you can "hire more programmers, than..." Obviously this is not the case. That would never end. New hosters would appear more often, and old hosters would change mangling more often, than that proposed standard would ever be finished. Not saying about "implemented" And if that sounds disgusting, then consider 1st approach as a mere field experiment, as a way to collect data for later systematic analysis :-) Last edited by Arioch1; 30.10.2011 at 15:51. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Wouldn't it be useful to know why hosts are renaming the files of their uploaders? Is it because these file names aren't supported by their own platform?
1) Is there any difference between Windoze, Linux and Mac OS file naming standards? 2) Is it because they can't store standard file names in their databases? 3) Is it because they haven't adopted a Universal Character Set or Unicode? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Even on same Linux, depending on used charset (~ windows codepage) there must be different restrictions on national-specific letter.
Apart from files, there may be restrictions on HTTP URLs I think frankly it would not be useful - hosters are just blackboxes to their users |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Do you suggest these hosts should store the original file names in a database/file that can handle all types of characters in file names and then replace the modified file names again with the original file names when downloaded? Would this be technically possible?
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I would not suggest anything to filehosters.
One reason - this is useless, they only would hear for their marketing team, not technical stuff. Another - those hosters are inevitable evil. Inevitable for now. IMHO there are much better hosters like DropBox/LiveKive w/o all that hastle. IMHO there are much more modern technologies, than HTTP/FTP, i mean p2p and RSYNC - at least integral hash codes and ability to re-load particular broken piece rather than whole file. That is surely possible, if both client and server support UTF8-encoded filenames in HTTP 1.1 or FTP 3.0 or WebDAV protocols. For example - this is exactly what happening on this and 95% other forums. There is no HTML file showthread.php - but rather a program that assembles HTML from pieces and give it like it was a real file. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_web_page |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|