Mr. Ghisler: A Feature Suggestion

[RFNagel]

First of all, as a LONG time user of Total Commander (WAY back from the 16-bit Windows Commander days), I have to say that this is abolutely the BEST file manager in existance, and DWARFS any comparable Microsoft "feature" by comparison (Windows Explorer, "My Computer", etc...) -:)

As a lontime user of the old Norton
Commander for DOS (since version 2.0, circa 1989), Windows/Total Commander provided a nice file manager that was similar to the old Norton Commmander interface. Hehe, I even have my own custom Total Commander menu file that makes it look a act exactly like Norton Commander... I even adjusted the color scheme to match LOL! -:)

Anyhow, my suggestion:

Something that I'd *LOVE* to see in a future version of Total Commander. The "Synchronize Directories" feature leaves a bit to be desired for my purposes.

A small explanation:

I use Total Commander running under Windows 98 SE to do full/complete backups of my hard drive. I have the main hard drive mounted internally, while I use a removable mobile docking bay that houses the backup drive. My backup drive is already partitoned, formated, and bootable to match my main hard drive.

When I want to do a complete backup, I insert the backup drive into the mobile docking bay, and power up the PC. Then I delete all of the files on the backup drive using Total Commander.

Next, I select all of the files and directories on my main hard drive, and F5 (copy) them in verbatim to the backup hard drive in the mobile docking bay. After performing the backup, I power down the PC, remove the mobile docking bay, and store it in a safe place.

If disaster ever strikes, I would simply remove my main drive, and then install the backup hard drive (that's mounted in the mobile docking bay) internally. Power up the PC, and all is well with the world as it was the last time I performed a full/complete backup.

On to my suggestion:

It takes quite a while to delete/copy all of the files and directories using my old aging PC, especially with a large hard drive. The reason that I don't do some form of incremental backup is my sheer paranoia LOL! An incremental backup would save a massive amount of time though.

With the "Synchronize Directories" feature of Total Commander, it seems to ignore empty directories.

An example:

Many times I will have made numerous changes on my main hard drive... such as renaming directories, moving directories, deleting directories, including ones that may (or may not) be empty. Also, I adjust file dates quite a bit of the time, whereas the file on the main hard drive (that I want to back up) may be of an older file date than the one currently on the backup drive.

In other words, there isn't an easy way in Total Commander to incrementally copy the main hard drive to the backup hard drive in verbatim... including empty directories, and/or directories that have been renamed or moved, as well as files that have an older file date on my main drive (which are the ones that I wish to back up) compared to the existing files that were previously backed up on my backup hard drive.

Basically, it would be nice to have a feature where Total Commander would make a mirror image of my main hard drive to my backup hard drive (incrementally, *only* copying and/or deleting the necessary files on the backup drive), including any empty directories/subdirectories, as well as older files on the main hard drive... in other words, a mirror image of the directory tree as well.

I'm not concerned with actual file content (i.e. a binary file compare), only the filenames and directory tree, as well as the older files on the main hard drive.

Lastly, also have a file exclusion option (like the "Synchronize Directories" feature already has), as my backup drive has Windows swap files on it, and that would be the only file that I wouldn't want copied.

[ghisler(Author)]

Why not simply use the normal "F5 copy" function, and use the option "overwrite older"?

[RFNagel]

Why not simply use the normal "F5 copy" function, and use the option "overwrite older"?

Because this wouldn't synchronize the data on my backup hard drive (i.e. delete files that have been moved/deleted on the main system hard drive, etc...), as well as what I posted previously: occasionally the files on the main system hard drive have an older date than the files on the backup hard drive (although they are the same filesize), and these files on the main system hard drive would be the ones that I want copied to the backup hard drive.

Actually, since my last post, I've found work-arounds for the files in question, simply by clicking on the various "task mask" icons and then changing the various copy options for some of the files.

The directory copying/deleting that I mentioned previously would still be quite handy though. When selecting "remove all empty directories" when synchronizing my backup hard drive, TC deletes *all* of the empty directories and subdirectories (not only the ones that I have deleted files from), even though they still exist on the main system hard drive (which are ones that I want to keep).

In other words, it would be a nice option for the synchronize directories feature for TC to simply perform the required tasks to make the target backup hard drive an *exact mirror image* of the source main system hard drive in verbatim, irreguardless of file dates, file sizes, and empty directories, and such, on the main system hard drive.

P.S. BTW, I just had a total hard drive failure two days ago, and luckily I had performed a complete backup (as described in my first post) the day before. To restore my PC, I simply removed my main hard drive and installed the backup hard drive, rebooted, and all was well with the world as it was the day that I had performed the backup -:) :phew:

[solid]

backup hard drive an *exact mirror image* of the source main system hard drive in verbatim, irreguardless of file dates, file sizes, and empty directories, and such, on the main system hard drive.

Then why you don't just use some hdd/partition imaging sofware?? It's way faster than file by file copying.

[RFNagel]

Then why you don't just use some hdd/partition imaging sofware?? It's way faster than file by file copying.

Actually, using TC to perform incremental backups (when performed on a regular basis) would be considerably faster than using something like that (such as Norton Ghost). Doing an incremental backup only requires copying files that have changed, whereas a utility such as Norton Ghost needs to completely repartition/reformat the hard drive, and then create the mirror image.

Not to mention, that's something else that needs to be bought and installed, been using WC/TC to do full system backups for years now -:)

[PastorMike]

Along this line, the one feature I'd love to see in TC, having used it for several years, is the ability to copy empty directories in Synchronize Directories.
I use empty folders to leave a note for myself in the filesystem from time to time. These are not copied during synchronization, so I have to run a second process to copy them (a DOS batch command like XCOPY "S:\Silly is as silly does" "T:\Silly is as silly does\" /W /T /E).
F5 Copy doesn't do all the other nifty things Synchronize can, of course, like asymmetric synch and binary compare.
This would be wonderful. Any thoughts?

[RFNagel]

Yep, that's exactly what I'm refering to... synchronize directories being able to copy empty directories (as well as deleting the ones on the target drive that don't exist on the source drive).

I myself many times will have several temporary subdirectories with downloads in them, and then will later move them to another directory (or combine all of the files/move the files to their repective directories where I want them), deleting the original directories. I also have several empty subdirectories to temporarily hold stuff (that many times are empty), as well as using them as placeholders/reminders like you describe.

P.S. Just recovered from a total hard drive failure last week, simply popped in my backup drive and was up and running in a matter of seconds -:) Thankfully I had just performed a full backup the day before(!) using TC, had a hunch that something was up with the old drive.

[ghisler(Author)]

Sorry, this is technically impossible. Imagine this: You have set *.txt as filter in the middle. Now you sync a tree of, say, 10'000 directories, and only two contain .txt files. Should TC really create all these 9'998 other directories too? Or what if the user has unchecked all files in a directory? Should the directory still be copied?

These are only two of the problems with configurable sync. I'm therefore considering to add a separate non-interactive "clone" function which would simply sync the two sides without user interaction.

[icfu]

You have set *.txt as filter in the middle. Now you sync a tree of, say, 10'000 directories, and only two contain .txt files. Should TC really create all these 9'998 other directories too?

Yep.

Or what if the user has unchecked all files in a directory? Should the directory still be copied?

Yep, but you don't have to care about that.

I'm therefore considering to add a separate non-interactive "clone" function which would simply sync the two sides without user interaction.

This is only a workaround and no fix for the problem that folders can't be synced. If you wanna do it right give the user an option to show empty directories on demand which he can check and uncheck for syncing just like files.

Icfu

[d]

>as well as files that have an older file date on my main drive (which are the ones that I wish to back up) compared to the existing files that were previously backed up on my backup hard drive.
>occasionally the files on the main system hard drive have an older date than the files on the backup hard drive (although they are the same filesize), and these files on the main system hard drive would be the ones that I want copied to the backup hard drive.

you should not copy files with exactly similar content and different only by date:
http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=17703&highlight=synchronizing+dates
(i have just writen about it and day after i.e. now have made search "synchronizing dates" and have found this topic)
i think reading to compare contents is less resourse using than overwriting, and often comparing will stop on the half of file.

>Should TC really create all these 9'998 other directories too? Or what if the user has unchecked all files in a directory?
i think directories should be "abeled" to check/uncheck also, i already have writen about it in one topic: "dir.s should be managed as files".

[PeterTBCarp2]

Post subject: Mr. Ghisler: A Feature Suggestion

[ Just as an aside, for the forum usage: -> RFNagel:- how usable would the forum be if everyone named their subject: ]

I've Written An Interesting Thought.

?

[AlleyKat]

Well, I'll just go out on a limb and post another feature request here...

My only (well almost, but isn't it always like that hehe) grief is that so much of the web stuff I work on, use UTF-8 - and the file compare can't handle UTF-8. Would this one feature be a possible addition in the near future?